Noble family in a secular society. A. Ryazanov. Noble family at the turn of the 18th-19th centuries The basis of family education is motherhood
WEDDING FAMILY IN SEARCH OF SOVEREIGNTY
Previously, early marriages were typical for Russia. Historians noted that in the 16th-17th centuries, “Russians got married very early. It happened that the groom had from 12 to 13 years ... It rarely happened that a Russian remained unmarried for a long time ... ". Gradually, the age of marriage increased. By a decree of 1714, Peter I forbade noblemen to marry before they were 20, and to marry before they were 17, and by decree of Catherine II (1775) it was forbidden for all classes to marry men under 15, women under 13; in case of violation of the decree, the marriage was dissolved, and the priest was deprived of his dignity. Later, the lower limit of marriageable age increased even more. In accordance with the imperial decree of 1830, the minimum age for marriage was raised to 16 for the bride and 18 for the groom. However, the peasants and the lower strata of the urban population often turned to the spiritual authorities for permission to marry off their daughter at an earlier age. The main motive was the need to have a worker or mistress in the house. Even by the beginning of the 20th century, marriage in Russia remained quite early. More than half of all brides and about a third of grooms in European Russia were under 20 years old.
Even at the turn of the 19th and 20th centuries, marriage in Russia was almost universal. According to the first general census of the population in 1897, at the end of the 19th century. by the age of 50, almost all men and women were married, the proportion of the population who had never been married in the age group of 45–49 years was significantly lower than in Western Europe.
Pre-revolutionary Russia almost did not know divorce, the marriage union was concluded for life and practically could not be terminated. Divorce was considered by the church as the gravest sin and was allowed in exceptional cases. The only grounds for divorce could be the "unknown absence" and "deprivation of all rights of state" of one of the spouses. Nevertheless, as social conditions changed, the gradual emancipation of women, already in pre-revolutionary times, views on the values of matrimony and attitudes towards divorce changed. But these changes affected mainly the elite segments of the population, official divorces were very rare. In 1913, out of 98.5 million Orthodox in Russia, only 3,791 marriages were annulled.
At the turn of the 19th and 20th centuries (1896–1905), the share of remarriages in the total number of marriages was approximately 14% for men and 8% for women. As a result, every man and every woman who lived to marriageable age and married (one or more times) lived in marriage for an average of a quarter of a century.
What was this quarter-century of marriage?
S. Solovyov in his “History of Russia from Ancient Times”, describing the ancient Russian family order, noted that “the relationship of a husband to his wife and parents to children in ancient Russian society was not particularly soft. A person who did not leave the tribal guardianship became a husband, that is, they united with him a being that was not familiar to him before, with whom he was not used to meeting before as a free being. The young man after the crown met for the first time with a weak, timid, silent being, who was given to him in full power, which he was obliged to teach i.e. to beat, even if politely according to the rule of Domostroy.
Russia has long tried to somehow limit forced marriages. Solovyov cites a 17th-century patriarchal decree instructing priests to “strongly interrogate” grooms and brides, as well as their parents, “whether they marry each other out of love and consent, and not out of violence or bondage.” Lomonosov urged "crowning priests to firmly confirm that they, having heard somewhere about an involuntary combination, would not allow it." But in fact, even in the 19th century, young people very often entered into marriage at the choice of their parents. Moreover, although marriage has always been understood as an intimate union of a man and a woman, when concluding a marriage, economic and social considerations most often came to the fore.
In a patriarchal family, a woman was seen primarily as a family worker - the ability to work was often the main criterion when choosing a bride. There was no going back after the marriage, it remained to live according to the old formula: "be patient - fall in love."
The family was not the environment in which an independent, individualized human personality could develop. Man for the family this is the principle on which patriarchal family relations have been based from time immemorial.
But something shifted in the second half of the 19th century. Habitual family relationships ceased to satisfy people, family members began to "rebel". It was then that the hidden conflict of a large and small family, "work" and "life" came to the surface. The patriarchal family is in crisis.
This crisis first of all affected the urban strata of Russian society, which previously also built their family relations according to models close to peasant ones. Russian literature of the second half of the 19th and early 20th centuries is filled with references to this crisis - from L. Tolstoy's "Anna Karenina" or A. Ostrovsky's "Thunderstorm" to articles by unknown or forgotten authors in scientific and journalistic publications.
The confrontation between the old and the new split Russia more and more, and the line of this split went through every family.
Today the large family rather, an exception, and in pre-revolutionary Russia, most families had large families. Our grandmothers and great-grandmothers raised, as a rule, at least three (or even five) children. True, not everyone survived to adulthood. There were several reasons for the phenomenon of having many children, and the notorious inability to family planning had nothing to do with it.
The economic reason for having many children
Climatic conditions left their mark on the family well-being of the peasant family. It was quite difficult for one family to support elderly parents, since having 2.5 acres, according to Prince Shcherbakov, average family lived starving. Therefore, parents could be sure of a guaranteed piece of bread in old age only if they raised several children to their feet - the future of their breadwinners.
God gives children - will give for children
In those days, the average life expectancy was small, and therefore a girl could get married at 13, and a boy had the right to marry at 15. Such restrictions were established from the 18th century by the Pilot Book - a set of church rules.
One should not exaggerate the religious canons associated with the birth of children, but at that time it was believed that "it is a sin to try to decide for God who will be born." It was this rule that guided Russian families before the revolution.
Sons and daughters
If the first child in the family was a daughter, the father treated her indifferently, and at home they spoke about it with regret. Will the grandmother add: "Nothing, the nanny will be." And the young father, whose first-born daughter was born, other men in the village had the right to beat - "why gave birth to a girl." It happened that the young father had a great time, but he was silent, endured, but because "it has been like this for a long time."
The basis of family education is motherhood
Today it is interesting to read “Notes of a Russian Peasant”, in which Stolyarov, a native of the village of Karachun, Zadonsky district, Voronezh province, talks about the role of a mother in a peasant family. According to him, it was the mother who solved all the everyday problems of the children, including grocery planning and making clothes. And the mother had no less authority in Russian families than her father.
“It was amazing to see how the children clung to their exhausted mother,” the doctor Davydova wrote in her memoirs. - And she did not forget anyone, she stroked everyone's head, even the eldest almost adult son, who was located a little further from the flock of girls and boys. The younger the child was, the closer he sat to his mother. And this rule was not disputed by anyone.
grandfather and grandmother
Do not forget that parents in peasant families almost always worked. Even a pregnant woman did all the housework - threshing, weeding, planting and dripping potatoes until the very birth. “Others will give birth in the field, others in a shaking cart (feeling the approach of childbirth, other women are in a hurry to get home). Another woman, with the onset of labor pains, runs home, "like a sheep" - wrote ethnographers of that time.
The history of Dilyar Latyshin in the book "History of Pedagogy" writes: " In the villages it was often possible to meet on the street a child barely stepping barefoot in one short shirt. With a crust of bread in his hand, he paced under the window of the hut, near which his mother sat with work, occasionally glancing at him.».
Therefore, the role of grandparents, who not only looked after children, but also passed on useful knowledge to them, was great in the upbringing of children. This often happened through fairy tales, which dealt with the dangers lurking in forests and rivers. Fear of the water, gray wolf or other "evil heroes" was a kind of psychological brake for the ubiquitous village boy, often presented to himself. But from the age of 10 you could meet him alone in the forest, in the field, he went to the neighboring village and sometimes returned late at night without any fear.
Continuing the theme, 20 more photographs of the beginning of the 20th century, which depict.
Lapshina Z.S.Family in the Russian Empire
By the beginning of the twentieth century. The Russian Empire occupied the 1st place in terms of territory and came in 3rd place in the world in terms of population, yielding to India and China. Its population in 1901 was 134.6 million people, on the territory of modern Russian Federation in 1897, 67.5 million people lived. If we evaluate the demographic potential not in terms of population, but in terms of its absolute annual growth, then at the beginning of the 20th century Russia was the undisputed leader (yielding to China) with an annual population growth of 2.02 million people. in year. Next came the USA, India, Germany, Great Britain, Germany, Japan. V XX Russia entered the century, having a significant margin of stability in terms of its demographic potential, with a high ethno-cultural homogeneity of the population of its geographical core - the Russian people. Demographers of the beginning of the century predicted: the population of Russia by the 90s of the twentieth century. should cross the line of 400 million people. However, this did not happen.
What was the family that provided such a high natural increase? It was a large patriarchal family, or a small family of two generations. Due to historical traditions, the role of the breadwinner of the family was performed by a man. The tradition of relying on the male breadwinner was rooted in Russian culture. Only male souls were given land in the peasant community. The boy was always considered the future support of the family, while the daughters left the parental home for the family to her husband. Hence the differences in relation to the birth of sons and daughters: the former were more desirable, since they could later support their parents. (This is the saying - " feed your son for the time being, then he will feed you"). Peasant families were large: the average family consisted of 8-10 children, families of 19 children were not uncommon, a family of 5 children was considered small and atypical. Peasant culture was a rather closed world of the community with its own rules, which were based on the family. Each new generation repeated the life cycle of its parents.
Family in the post-revolutionary years.
However, the turbulent events of the 20th century violated the patriarchal tradition. The new social system of Bolshevik Russia at first defined the family as a relic of the past. The church wedding was cancelled. Youth families appeared in the cities on the rights of cohabitation. By the mid-1930s, this area was somewhat streamlined: there were bodies for public fixing of marriages called the "Registration of Civil Status Acts" (ZAGS), as they are still called. This meant a radical break in the traditional Russian family, consecrated by the Church and with the decisive role of the parental choice of the spouses.
Social roles have changed in the new Soviet family. Both husband and wife became breadwinners equally. Women were actually forced to work: it was not easy for the family to live on one salary of her husband. At the same time, the role of the breadwinner was partly performed by the state, providing families with kindergartens, vouchers to sanatoriums, housing, etc. Thus, a situation of a “double breadwinner” was created in the Soviet country: a man played the role of the main one (men's earnings were always higher by 30-35%), while a woman was a secondary one. True, "women's money" was more reliable. Very often, giving money to the family with one hand, the husband took it with the other, using it for cigarettes, alcohol, and entertainment. Skillfully getting out with small means, women became true heads of households. The number of children in a family has dropped sharply: an urban family - up to 4 children, a rural one - up to 6 children.
An economic prerequisite has been formed for a woman to go beyond the family and become a socially active person. The image of a woman doing a man's job was replicated as the highest form of women's social activity, consciousness and commitment to socialist ideals. This is the meaning and significance of the image of P. Angelina and women like her in the 1930s, who overfulfilled production standards at factories. It was very useful during the war. The rear in the Great Patriotic War, especially in the countryside, was provided by women. But now the war has died down, ended recovery period. However, even in post-war life, the active involvement of women in social production on an equal basis with men was clearly indicated. The asexuality of the concept of "worker" made itself felt more and more clearly and tangibly. Doctors sounded the alarm, sociologists timidly doubted, specialists in the field of family pointed out the alarming dynamics, etc.
Statistics show that in the 1960s the proportion of women in the total number of specialists with higher and secondary education exceeded that of men and was constantly increasing. Thus, in 1960 it was 59% and remained at the level of 60% until 1985.
Family in the postwar years.
In the post-war years, the role of the mother in the family is gradually played by the grandmother: she brings up children, prepares food for the family. The mother plays the role of the main breadwinner and head of the family, that is, the father in the patriarchal sense. Finally, the father plays the role of another child in addition to the real children. Thus, a Russian woman is accustomed to either playing the role of a breadwinner on an equal footing, or becoming a breadwinner involuntarily in situations where her husband suffered from alcoholism.
There was a sharp decline in the population of the country. This reduction took into account military casualties and the loss of potentially unborn children from the deaths of men of childbearing age. However, the main reason for the sharp decline in population growth was urbanization, the breaking of the traditional model of the patriarchal family, and the introduction of medical abortions into the mass practice since the mid-1950s.
The government of N. S. Khrushchev pursued a policy of medical reduction in the birth rate. This was how the problem of the housing crisis in cities, associated with the massive destruction of the housing stock during the war and rapid urbanization, was solved.
If in 1939 the urban population of the RSFSR was 36.3 million people, then in 1950 it grew to 43.7 million people, and by 1960 - up to 63.7 million. urban housing crisis, free up additional labor resources and increase per capita income by reducing the number of dependents per worker. The moral and ethical side was ignored.
By the beginning of the 1960s, Khrushchev's demographic policy led to the fact that in just a decade in cities, especially in central Russia, the most typical family was one or two children, with the number of abortions exceeding the number of births. Central Russia suddenly faced the threat of extinction, and extinction in peacetime. The demographic losses in Russia associated with the policy of encouraging abortion from 1960 to 1985 amounted to about 100 million people, and to the present time - at least 140 million people.
In the mass consciousness, ideas were developed about the advantages of a small family. The country was actively housing construction. In total, during the years of Soviet power (1918-1980), more than 3.5 billion square meters were built. m. area of dwellings. In the period from 1961 to 1980 alone, more than 44 million apartments were built. In the post-war period, small-sized apartments were built - the so-called "Khrushchev", then "Brezhnevka". The dimensions of the apartment suggested a family of three, maximum four people, including parents. It is easier to raise one or two children on low parental salaries, and then to educate them.
Women strive for higher education and prestigious professions. The heroine of the post-war era is Valentina Tereshkova, the first woman - an astronaut, who came out of the weavers. This is a good prospect for hardworking women. Such examples led women even more away from the family and childbearing into science, art, education, and production. Cinema provided excellent examples of how to keep up with the times: the films Come Tomorrow, about a rural Siberian girl who aspired to learn to sing; "Queen of the gas station" - about a girl who did not go to college, but does not give up her dream; “Moscow Does Not Believe in Tears” is about a girl who became the director of a plant, and even a small child did not interfere with her career. These films showed that the family for the girl has ceased to be the main goal of life. The heroines succeed outside the family. The family remained on the periphery of their vital interests. In the last film, the heroine yearns not for the fact that the family itself could not be created, but for the fact that there is no loved one nearby. Her dream is not about a full-fledged family, but about a beloved man.
Family in the post-perestroika period.
The 1990s marked a new page in the life of the country. Demographic statistics provide a qualitative assessment of the changes. Since 1993 depopulation of the Russian ethnic group was recorded in the country. The annual depopulation in Russia is about 0.6%, i.e. Every year the population of the country is decreasing by 800-900 thousand people, in recent years by more than 700 thousand people. The main blow of depopulation had to endure primordially Russian regions. In the central regions: Novgorod, Pskov, Tver, Yaroslavl, Tula, Leningrad, the annual depopulation is twice as high as the national average, and the population in these regions decreases by 1-1.5% annually. The most able-bodied part of the people, young and middle-aged people, is dying out. So, in the regions around Veliky Novgorod, these categories greatest growth mortality: for the age of 20-39 years it was 75%, for 40-44 years - 100%. The leading role in depopulation belongs to the decrease in the birth rate.
In 1993-1996, excess deaths amounted to 2.9 million people, and the deficit of births was 4.4 million. Demographers predict that by the middle of the 20th century I century Russian will remain 25 million people. Sociologists are already saying that if such dynamics continue, they can calculate with an accuracy of up to a year when the last Daria will be born to the last Ivan and Marya, who will be able to marry anyone, but not Ivanov and Stepanov, who are already It won't happen... So, according to the State Statistics Committee, the current young generation of women of reproductive age plans an average of 1.2-1.3 children throughout their lives, which guarantees the rapid extinction of the Russian population, combined with its further aging.
During the perestroika period, a “change of milestones” took place: the old prestigious professions were no longer prestigious or highly paid, and new ones were just emerging. In this situation, many men found themselves in a situation of loss of both work and professional status, which, in addition, eliminated their position as a breadwinner - even among those who still retained it. A keen sense of responsibility to the family led to the fact that many women of the perestroika generation became "involuntarily breadwinners." Women were able to flexibly change the profile and status of their work and increasingly became the main earners of money for the family. For them, the status of the job offered was not important, but it was important to provide for the family. In a significant part of Russian households, it was women who unconditionally assumed responsibility for the family and children.
At the same time, many men were unable to sacrifice their status. Employees of the "lying" enterprises eked out a miserable existence, not receiving a salary for 6-9 months, but sought to maintain their professional status. As a result, men paid dearly for their lack of flexibility. Indirect indicators of their poor adaptation in the labor market were a huge number of suicides, deaths from cardiovascular diseases, heart attacks, and alcoholism.
The woman not only adapted, but also occupies a higher position than before perestroika. This is evidenced by a higher level of education: according to the latest census, women aged 16-29 years old, living in the city and having higher and incomplete higher education, by 16 % more than their male peers with the same status. Women who received Soviet time education, were able to get new professions, a second higher education.
The new generation of women also provides examples of more flexible adaptation: they more often receive two educations at the same time, that is, two professions. It's very difficult: The pain from combining family and professional responsibilities manifests itself, in particular, as follows: 76% of Russian women agree that “the whole family life suffers if a woman works full time,” and women who combine two jobs actually exist outside the family.
The image of a modern family.
With the help of the media in society, the image of a woman of the new time is created: this is a successful business woman or a beautiful blonde, a potential wife of a successful person. Our society remembers the value of the family, but only for the wealthy. The series creates the image of a woman-mother who finds a wealthy person who is tired without a family. Family as an expensive pleasure, inaccessible to everyone! And the second image of a woman - the ex-wife of a wealthy man, who successfully applies her profession acquired in her youth, and becomes an independent and independent person from her despot husband. In these films, the weakest and most ill-conceived link is the family itself. In the best cases, the action revolves around the fact of the child's existence or his salvation. Family as a theme contemporary art unfortunately not developed.
Young girls are brought up by glossy magazines with articles by type: “How to marry a cool man?” Specific advice, specific attempts to follow them. The model of success in life is the image of a woman, who is required, to a large extent, to have talents and skills that are realized in the family sphere, and not outside it: the ability to look good, create comfort in the house, match the image of her husband, etc. But a high social status husband - this is his personal capital, and not acquired together, which does not always strengthen the family.
In general, the active socialization and independence of women in the world leads to the fact that in developed countries the age of childbearing is growing rapidly - in Germany it has risen to 40 years, and in Israel it is not uncommon for women to have a child at the age of about 50 years. In our country, more than 10% of women in labor are over 35 years old. And this number is growing every year. According to some reports, up to 40% of working women in Germany simply refuse to have children. In Russian families, the birth of an only child has become the norm. Thus, the process of the extinction of the nation becomes a reality.
Even a weak attempt by the government to solve the problem of demography with “maternity capital” will not stop the process of extinction of the Russian people, because the slight increase in the birth rate observed now is associated with the generation that has entered childbearing age and is only a partial reproduction.
Conclusions: both in the world and in Russian culture the value of the family is forgotten, the image of a strong family is not brought up. The media creates an image of a family that cannot be sustainable because its values are not defined.
The new generation does not know what a family should be and what its value is. VIn this regard, the result of a survey of students is indicative 1-3 courses KhGIIK:
1. How do you see your future family?
14 people - "big, happy, prosperous"; "big, friendly and strong"; “reliable strong relationships based on trust and mutual respect”; “complete mutual understanding, trust and love”, “to create a family you need to mature morally and spiritually, and the material side is secondary”; 1 - civil marriage; 3 - did not think.
2. Do you consider family a (spiritual) value?
17 people -Yes ;1 -dash
3. What do you see as the purpose of marriage?
7 - "v living together and upbringing of children; “in creating a new cell of society, procreation, well, just a pleasant fact”; 7 - they don’t see any goals, i.e. marriage as a result of the love of two; 1 - "raising the status in society"; 1 - “confidence in life, knowing that someone needs you”; 2 - dash.
4. Do you think that the institution of the family is in crisis? If yes, what are its reasons?
10 - Yes; 6 - No; 2 - dash: “many have a negative and dismissive attitude towards the family, they consider it a burden, although this is mutual support and reliability”; “many do not want to go to the registry office”; "cynicism, prudence" "drug addiction, alcoholism, the problem of housing", "high taxes, but a small salary"; “Most marriages are now breaking up due to the fact that our Russian men have become insolent. We have a lot of beautiful, smart, kind, interesting, stylish girls in Russia who will become wonderful housewives and caring mothers in the future. But there is no one to marry. There are only alcoholics, gays, drug addicts or morally disabled people around, and those who are normal are womanizers.
5. If you plan to have children in your family, how many?
7 - "two or three"; 5 - "one-two"; 1 - "the bigger, the better".; "as God wills"; 1 - “two boys, two girls”; 4 - do not plan.
6. Are you planning a division of roles in the family?
8 - No; “both should fulfill their duties with love and observe traditions, consistency in business”; 9 - “Yes, a man provides materially, and a woman runs a household and raises and educates children; although it is possible on an equal footing”; 1 - I do not know.
7. What qualities should a husband have?
17 - “kind, calm, not cruel, courageous, honest, not a womanizer, smart”; "courageous as in the old days"; purposeful, interesting interlocutor, spiritually strong, patient, active; financially independent"; responsibility and devotion, caring, loving; 1 - I do not know.
8. What qualities should a wife have?
15 - “economic, calm, loving, attentive, smart”; “willingness to take turns in life, fidelity, be hardworking and sensitive”; patience, spiritual and physical strength, loving, optimistic; “devoted, kind, sympathetic, purposeful, educated”; “wise, economic, able to compromise, the desire to be well-groomed and interesting to her husband”, “kind, smart, beautiful”; “support, care, interlocutor, devotion”; 1 - "brave, beautiful and thin"; 2 - dash.
9. Have you met a family in your life that you would consider an example for yourself? 10 - “No, I just read about them”; “in my understanding, a family is not something that I have met in my life”; 8 - yes; (1: "yes, my parents - best example for me")
10. How do you feel about cohabitation without registration of relations in the registry office?11 - positive; 4 - neutral, 2 - negative; 1 - undecided “People can check their relationship and just live, but still I am a supporter of marriages”; “A stamp in the passport is not required”; “In my opinion, marriage does not give people anything”; “It is more convenient for men: they are washed, stroked, watered, fed, but at the same time they do not have any obligations that would be after registering with the registry office. Personally, I consider civil marriage simply as a way to learn household chores.
11. How do you feel about getting married in a church? Justify your answer.
13 - positively "it's just a beautiful tradition"; "This is wonderful! This is a union before God, but this step must be taken after many years of living together, already with proven feelings ... after all, the union before God cannot be terminated ”; "This is a very serious step. If you get married in a church, and then divorce or change, then this will be a great sin. To get married, you need to trust each other 100%. In our time, this is a rarity ”; “But for this you need to find a person with whom you really want to spend your whole life, this is a big responsibility. But I’m not baptized”; “if they got married in a church, fewer families would fall apart”; “For me, a wedding in a church is something more than formalizing relations in the registry office. Marriage is forever. And there are always more stamps in the passport…”; "positively, in the Baptist church"; 3 - negatively “as an unbeliever”; "it's not that important, it's redundant"; 1 - indifferently, as if not Orthodox; 1 - I do not know
The survey showed that young people who have entered adulthood do not seriously think about what a family should be like. Therefore, the answers are conflicting. One gets the impression that they have the most general idea, inspired by cinema or a book. And this despite the fact that 8 people have a positive example of a family, according to which they are ready to build their own.
More than half of the respondents present civil marriage, or rather, cohabitation, as the most possible prospect, but in their ideas about the family, only one respondent called his future family as such. Recognizing cohabitation as the norm (more than 50%), only one third recognized the existence of a crisis in the institution of the family. It turns out that they do not perceive cohabitation as a family crisis, they consider it as a form of marriage. There is a serious attitude towards the church registration of marriage, but they accept it as a distant possible prospect after the experience of cohabitation.
A small sociological study showed an urgent need to form among young people a correct understanding and attitude towards the family, its values, and the upbringing of children.
Zoya Stepanovna Lapshina, candidate historical sciences, senior researcher of the scientific department of the Khabarovsk State Institute of Arts and Culture.
Report at the seminar "The Family as a Spiritual Value", Khabarovsk Theological Seminary, March 19, 2010.
Nobility. In the first half of the 19th century, the topic of the wealth of the nobles turned out to be closely... In the first half of the century, the children of the nobility were educated at home. ... Strict subordination was maintained in the houses, similar to the instructions 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 the turn to look at the noble family through the eyes of its members.
For this purpose, I have selected sources of personal origin, namely the diaries and memoirs of noblemen, covering both the first and second half of the 19th century in time frames.
Family way is a style of family behavior. The family structure depends on the position of the family, its class affiliation and the level of well-being. The family way of life 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 common features of the noble family structure?
In the first half of the 19th century, the noble family was dominated by: patriarchy and hierarchy.
The father has always been recognized as the head of the family - through whose efforts the family lived, provided in many respects precisely by his efforts in financial and moral relations.
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 name and patronymic, she, in turn, treated him with respect and followed him everywhere.
At that time, while he disappeared in the service, his wife took care of the house and children.
They had two children - a boy and a girl. As P.I. Golubev:
“I worked only with my son, my mother with her daughter.” In the evenings, the family liked to arrange conversations, they also went to church, diligently invested their strength and resources in the future life of their children - their son was given a university education, their daughter was married.
The division of the family into male and female hierarchies can be traced in women's memoirs. M.S. Nikolev and A.Ya. Butkovskaya in her memoirs constantly mention that their social circle was always 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 assigned to them always meant "the female half" and were distant from the men's quarters.
But this does not mean at all that they avoided male relatives, brothers and cousins also made up their circle of friends, but to the smallest extent. It's all about the role of men - they were engaged in business, or were absent on duty. Brothers M.S. Nikolaeva spent quite a long time away from her family, as they were in the army and fought against the French. A similar situation developed with other relatives of Nikolaeva. Here is what she writes about her aunt's son, cousin Pyotr Protopopov:
“Peter Sergeevich, having spent 30 years in the service, lost the habit of female society and therefore seemed like a savage and an original. Until the age of 45, he only occasionally ran into his family for a short time. “The second brother, Nikolai Sergeevich, served in St. Petersburg at the ministry, 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 engineer lieutenant general as director of the naval Construction Department, suddenly died of apoplexy. Of course, in the past years we also 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. In the Hungarian campaign, the eastern war, two of my sons were in the active troops, 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' house, in the care of their mother, or older relatives or companions, nannies, governesses. And only after marriage did they throw off such severe shackles of excessive guardianship, although they passed under the wing of the mother-in-law or relatives of the spouse.
Patriarchy in relation to women had its own exceptions to the rules. If a man is the head of the family, then after his death this headship passed, as a rule, to his widow, or to his eldest son, if he was not employed in the service.
“More free was the behavior of widows, who were entrusted with the duties of the status of the head of the family. 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 governor-general Prince D.V. Golitsyn, even in small things, should ask for the blessing of his mother Natalya Petrovna, who continued to see a minor child in the sixty-year-old military leader.
Apart from 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 his mother. This originated from the very first days of a baby's life, when, for reasons of decency, the mother did not dare to breastfeed her child, this duty fell on the shoulders of the nurse.
P.I. Golubev, wrote that because of the custom of weaning a child from the mother's breast, he and his wife lost two babies. The first daughter died from improper feeding while they were looking for a nurse, the second son died, having contracted a disease from his nurse.
Taught by bitter experience, they departed from the custom and, contrary to decorum, his wife herself fed the subsequent children, thanks to which they remained alive.
But the custom of weaning children from their mother's breasts persisted until the end of the 19th century.
Cooling to the child, as a person, was determined by his social role in the future. The son was estranged from his mother, as he was prepared to serve the motherland and the range of his interests, occupations, acquaintances, was in her jurisdiction only until he was seven years old, then he went to his father. The mother could only follow the progress of her son. The girl was seen as a future wife and mother, and this resulted in a special attitude of the family 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 in order to bloom at the age of seventeen with a lush flower and get married.
From this comes another characteristic the noble, family way of the first half of the 19th century is a chilled relationship between children and parents. The generally recognized goal of the family is to prepare their children for the service of the fatherland or the spouse's family. For this purpose, the relationship between parents and children was built. Duty to society became more important than parental feelings.
In the families of wealthy nobles, leading a secular lifestyle, where spouses were found either at court, or the spouse held a high-ranking position, and at all, dates with children became a rare occurrence. Such children remained either in the care of nannies, or went to prestigious educational boarding schools.
A. Kh. Benckendorff writes in his memoirs about how his parents (his father is a prime minister, his mother is a former courtier) first sent him to a boarding school in Prussia, then, dissatisfied with his academic success, sent him to a private boarding school already in St. Petersburg. 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 one's child to relatives was quite common among the nobility. This happened according to different reasons- orphanhood, secular life, or the plight of parents.
M.S. Nikoleva described the following incident in her aunt's family:
“Among the relatives of the Protopopovs was a certain Kutuzov with nine daughters and a son. The daughters were all good-looking. The mother, a capricious, self-willed woman, left a widow, did not love one of her daughters, Sofya Dmitrievna, and did not give her shelter, except for the girl's, where, in the company of servants, she sat at the window and knitted a stocking. My aunt, seeing the mother's dislike for the child, took her to her house. The cousins fell in love with her very much, they began to teach, each of which they could ...
When brother Peter retired, he found Sonechka, 15, who had been living in his family for years, like his own ...
Her mother completely forgot her and did not see her, so even after the death of her aunt she remained in the house of the Protopopovs.
It can be concluded that in the period of time we are considering, the essence of noble children consisted in the inevitable service in the social hierarchy. Patriarchy dictated what unwanted and unworthy of special attention the child's emotions should be suppressed. "Not a single emotion - fear, pity, even maternal love - were considered reliable leaders in education"
Therefore, the marriage between the nobles was concluded, both for love and for convenience. The fact that marriage is controlled by parents, guided only by practical advantage, and not by the feelings of their children, was unchanged. 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 at twenty-nine, and the bride at twelve.
M.S. Nikoleva writes that her cousin Peter strong love married their mother's pupil Sofya, who was only fifteen years old, 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 the noble culture, marriage was considered a natural need, and was one of the semantic structures of life. A celibate life was condemned in society, they looked at it as an inferiority.
Parents, especially mothers, approached with all responsibility the upbringing of their daughter, both in matters of behavior and in matters of marriage.
Countess Varvara Nikolaevna Golovina wrote in her memoirs about her daughter Praskovya Nikolaevna:
“My eldest daughter at that time was almost nineteen years old, and she began to go out into the world ...
Her tender and sensitive affection for me protected her from the passions so characteristic of youth. Outwardly, she was not particularly attractive, was not distinguished by either beauty or grace, and could not inspire a dangerous feeling, and firm convictions of morality protected her from everything that could harm her.
Countess M.F. Kamenskaya, recalling her cousin Varenka, wrote:
“I loved Varenka very much, and we were very friendly with her for many years in a row, but I didn’t like the shy, distrustful manner of my aunt in dealing with her daughter. Ekaterina Vasilievna kept Varenka close to her as if on a string, didn’t let go a step away from her, didn’t allow anyone to speak freely with anyone, and didn’t stop training her in a high-society manner for days on end.
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 - a destiny to be a household penate, a comforter to a chosen friend, a mother to his children, to live the life of loved ones and march with a proud brow and a bright soul to the end of a useful existence. »
If the attitude of women to marriage changed, then for men it remained unchanged throughout the 19th century. A man started a family in order to find heirs and a mistress, a cordial friend or a good adviser.
The fate of Lieutenant General Pavel Petrovich Lansky is noteworthy. Their first marriage was concluded in 1831 with ex-wife colleague, Nadezhda Nikolaevna Maslova. Lansky's mother was categorically against this union and after the wedding she broke off relations with her son. And already ten years later, having given birth to two children, the dearest wife ran away from him, with her lover to Europe. It is known that the divorce proceedings dragged on for about twenty years. And having become free, Pavel Petrovich marries a second time to a poor relative of his ex-wife, the elderly Evdokia Vasilievna Maslova. The motive for the marriage was the noble heart of Lansky, who wished to brighten up the loneliness of the old maid.
A.S. Pushkin, in a letter to Pletnev, wrote after his marriage to Natalia Nikolaevna Goncharova, the famous lines:
“I am married and happy; my only desire is that nothing in my life has changed - I can’t wait for the best. This state is so new to me that it seems I have been reborn.”
No less eloquently described his feelings in connection with the marriage of A. Kh. Benckendorff:
“Finally, nothing more interfered with my plans to marry, I had time to think them over well during those eight months while I was separated from my betrothed. I often hesitated, fear of losing the freedom to choose the love that I used to enjoy, fear of causing misfortune wonderful woman whom I respected as much as I loved, doubts that I possessed the qualities required of a faithful and reasonable husband - all this frightened me and fought in my head with the feelings of my heart. However, a decision had to be made. My indecision was explained only by the fear of doing harm or compromising a 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 hearty friend” - they addressed their wives in letters, S.P. Trubetskoy and I.I. Pushchin.
If you do not take into account matters of the heart, then for a man it is a family, which 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 proper surroundings. That was his duty, in the eyes of society.
Therefore, parents always preferred a wealthy candidate with a good reputation.
M.A. Kretschmer in his memoirs just describes a similar incident that happened to his father and mother in his youth:
“... I got acquainted with my mother's family, people of a good family name, Massalsky, and, moreover, very rich. 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 the same way. My father planned to marry, but since he led the most wasteful and not entirely laudable life in Krakow, my mother's parents flatly refused him.
Relations in the family were rarely built on mutual respect, they mainly relied on the subordination of the younger to the elders and the veneration of these very elders.
The father was the eldest in the family, followed by the mother, we must not forget about the authority of grandparents, aunts and uncles, as well as godparents children have always been the youngest. The disposition of the fate 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, leave their father's home for training, then girls in the first half of the 19th century did not have such a chance. Until the last, they remained in the care of their parents and did not dare to oppose 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, besides his wife, the eldest daughter Alexander was inseparable. She did not leave her father day or night, and if she went out for a minute, the patient would begin to cry like a child. This went on for many years, and my poor cousin did not see youth (uncle died when she was already thirty-five years old) ”
“Of the five Protopopov sisters, not one married; although the appropriate suitors were coming up, they preferred not to part and live together as one family, and when Pyotr Sergeevich (their brother - approx. S.S.), being a retired colonel, got married, they devoted themselves to raising his children "
The family structure of a noble family was built not only on patriarchal foundations, but also on respect for traditions. So any self-respecting family attended church, was distinguished by religiosity, arranged family celebrations and gatherings, and also quite often visited relatives living far away, staying with them for months at a time.
Patriarchy, hierarchy, traditionalism, submission to elders and authorities, the sanctity of marriage and family ties - this is what formed the intra-family relations of the nobility in the first half of the 19th century. The dominance of duty prevailed over feelings, parental authority was unshakable, like that of a spouse.
But what happens to the family structure in the second half of the 19th century?
The memoirs of the nobleman S.E. Trubetskoy vividly depict this junction at the turn of the 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, which is 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, new views on marriage and children developed, humanism penetrated the sphere of family relations.
Natalya Goncharova-Lanskaya (widow of A.S. Pushkin), in a letter to her second husband, writes about the marital fate of her daughters:
“As for giving them in marriage, we are more prudent in this respect than you think. I completely rely on the will of God, but would it be a crime on my part to think about their happiness. There is no doubt that one can be happy without being married, but that would mean missing one's calling...
By the way, I prepared them for the idea that marriage is not so easy to do and that it is impossible to look at it as a game and connect it with the idea of freedom. She said that marriage is a serious obligation, and one must be very careful in choosing.”
Noble women began to actively engage in the upbringing and education of their daughters, to encourage them to move away from the traditionally destined role of a wife, closed in an environment of family relations, aroused in them an interest in social and political life, and instilled in their daughters a sense of personality and independence.
As far as parenting in general is concerned, society has come out in favor of
Partnership, humane relations between parents and children.
The child began to be seen as a person. Corporal punishment began to be condemned and prohibited.
O. P. Verkhovskaya wrote in her memoirs:
“The children no longer experienced the former fear of their father. No roses
There were no punishments, let alone torture. Obviously, the serf reform 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, went into conflict with the new generation - their own children, who adopted advanced European ideas:
“... during this period of time, from the beginning of the 60s to the beginning of the 70s, all the intelligent strata of Russian society were occupied with only one issue: family discord between the old and the young. What noble family you don’t ask about at that time, you will hear the same thing about everyone:
The parents quarreled with the children. And not because of any material, material reasons, quarrels arose, but only because of questions of a purely theoretical, abstract nature.
Freedom of choice influenced the foundations of the noble society - the number of divorces and unequal marriages. During this period, women have 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 get out of parental care, travel abroad, lead the desired life, without being burdened by marital responsibilities.
Dvoryanka E.I. Zhukovskaya, in her memoirs, notes that both she and her sister got married by calculation, 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 appear.
The crisis of the contradiction of generations also gave rise to three types of parental attitudes - "old parents", "new ideological" and "new practical".
It can be concluded that the second half of the 19th century is characterized by a crisis of the patriarchal family. The noble family evolves, is divided into "new" and "old". With the modernization of life, new ideological currents shook the traditional foundations, forcing the majority of society in family relations to move away from patriarchal norms.
The nobility served society, and the family was a means to serve the fatherland. The personality of one family member was lower than the family in the hierarchy of values. The ideal throughout the 19th century was self-sacrifice in the name of the interests of the family, especially in matters of love and marriage.
For many centuries in Russia, detailed rules of etiquette for girls did not exist. The basic requirements could be summed up 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 domestic relations, the main requirements for ensuring the proper behavior of the girls were assigned to the father and, to a much lesser extent, to the mother.
“Domostroy” demanded from the head of the family: “If you have a daughter, and direct your severity at her, you will save her from bodily troubles: you will not shame your face if your daughter walks in obedience, and it’s not your fault if she foolishly violates her virginity, and your acquaintances will be known to mockery, and then they will shame you before people. For if you give your daughter blameless - as if you will do a great deed, in any society you will be proud, never suffering because of her.
Even during the period of transformations carried out in the country by Peter I, there were no fundamental changes in the formation of etiquette requirements for girls. In the instruction for young nobles, “An Honest Mirror of Youth, or an Indication for Worldly Behavior,” prepared and published by order of Peter in 1717, recommendations on 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 the innovations of Peter, the girls received immeasurably more freedoms than they had a few years ago. They dressed in fashionable European dresses with a neckline, learned to dance, and began to actively attend various entertainment events and assemblies. Naturally, they have much more opportunities to communicate with gentlemen.
Perhaps, it was during the Petrine period that the girls were most liberated, since they had not yet come up with new rules for the behavior of girls in society, they were just beginning to emerge, and the fathers of the families were obliged to take their daughters out into the world, otherwise it was possible to seriously suffer - the king did not tolerate when he orders were not followed, and was quick to reprisal. Age restrictions did not yet exist at that time, Berchholtz, describing the St. Petersburg society of Peter's time, noted that girls of 8-9 years old took part in assemblies and amusements on an equal basis with adults.
Young gentlemen were undoubtedly pleased with the innovations in the behavior of women and girls. But the older generation met them warily. 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 been almost slaves in their homes until now, to enjoy all the pleasures of society, adorn themselves with robes and attire that increase the beauty of their face and render them good. camp ... wives, before not feeling their beauty, began to know her power, began to try to multiply it with decent robes, and more than their ancestors spread luxury in adornment.
For girls, imitating the European rules of behavior was an exciting game, since significant remnants of patriarchal mores still remained in the home circle. Only after escaping from the domestic circle to a secular reception or assembly, the girl could behave as required by European rules. Although in an exaggerated form, but very accurately, this is noticed in the film "The Tale of How Tsar Peter the Black Married".
Since behavior in society has become a kind of game for girls and ladies, it was filled with actual game elements. For communication, "languages" of fans, flies, bouquets, poses appeared, a lot of various small conventions that were not regulated by generally accepted rules, but which everyone knew about and tried to fulfill. It is worth noting that they did not particularly seek to officially regulate the behavior of women and girls in society. These rules evolved largely spontaneously in imitation of European etiquette. This was especially active during the reign of the Russian empresses. It is curious that European courtesy and Russian patriarchy were nevertheless intertwined in these rules.
Count L.F. Segur, who spent several years in Russia during the reign of Catherine II, wrote that Russian “women went further than men on the path of perfection. In society, one could meet many smart ladies, girls, remarkable for their 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.
In noble families, they now began to pay considerable attention to preparing their daughters for adulthood. This required not so much - to learn to speak fluently at least one or two foreign languages, to be able to read, preferably in French or English, to dance and keep up small talk. Mothers practically did not do this, leaving governesses and bonnes to take care of their daughters. TO family life purposefully girls were rarely prepared, but to communicate with future suitors - in detail.
If in the time of Peter the Great 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, less often from the age of 15. It was at this age that the girls began to be officially taken out into the world. Before that, girls were taken to visit, 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 - the first official departure to the world at a ball, theater or reception.
As a rule, the girl was brought into the world for the first time 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), simple hairstyle. They tried to start going out into the world with a ball or a reception, when the girl can 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, the girl was accepted in accordance with the rank of her father, which was enshrined in the "Table of Ranks". If the father had the rank of the 1st class, the daughter received a “rank ... over all the wives who are in the 5th rank. Maidens whose fathers are in the II rank are above the wives who are in the VI rank, etc.
By the beginning of the 19th century, the procedure for the behavior of a girl 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 yourself, 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 go out into the world only 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 (there were rules for widows and divorcees) could not host men or visit them without the presence of an older relative, even if they were good for her grandfathers.
Matchmaking and the behavior of the girl in communication with the groom after the engagement were surrounded by a mass of conventions. Actually, the girl’s opinion about a potential groom was not often asked, usually the parents made the decision. But it was considered desirable that the groom was introduced to the potential bride in advance and had 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 her soul, is not an easy task. Involuntarily, you will become tongue-tied, but you need to conduct an elegant secular conversation, and even allegorically confess your love.
Even after the engagement, the groom could not stay 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 care and be with her inseparably, the status of the engaged allowed this. But the bride left home only with relatives, if the groom was invited to accompany her, he rode in a separate carriage.
After the betrothal, the girl entered into new life, now many of the conventions of girlish behavior could be forgotten. Her secular relationships began to lead her husband. The behavior of married ladies in society had many of its own characteristics, but about them in the next article.
For the first time the book, "Domostroy" appeared in the 15th century. Under Ivan the Terrible, the book was revised and supplemented by the clergyman Archpriest Sylvester. It was written in a harmonious style, with frequent use of sayings. The book described ideal relationship in family, home life, recipes, social and religious issues, norms of behavior.
The book "Domostroy" was popular among the boyars, Russian merchants, and then the nobles, who sought to create a certain way in their home in order to somehow streamline the meal, drinking drinks suitable 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 carry out all this point by point. Domostroy also described in detail the rules for going to church, wedding ceremonies, wedding and funeral ceremonies. And not only Russia used this kind of "Domostroy". In many other European countries, thick volumes of advice and affirmations on housekeeping and family life were distributed.
Fashion for "Domostroy" began to gradually fade in the 19th century, personifying something ancient, useless and patriarchal. Writers of that time used the images from Domostroy to more colorfully ridicule the petty-bourgeois, ossified way of life in medieval Russia.
In modern life, there are still similar books with descriptions of old Russian recipes from the royal kitchen and with recommendations for 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 the capital nobleman of 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, keep tact, follow etiquette, was revered as 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, keep tact, follow etiquette, was revered as 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 inculcated from childhood. But it often happened that a person, due to a lack of aesthetic education, could himself master secular etiquette, imitating its skillful bearers or referring to the relevant rules.
It is known that the basis of peaceful, respectable cohabitation of people is love, mutual respect and courtesy. A disrespectful attitude towards someone close in the first place causes moral damage to that person and adversely affects the reputation of someone who unreasonably neglects the rules of etiquette. In the book “Good Tone”, published in St. Petersburg in 1889, it is written on this occasion: “We must never forget that the laws of a hostel, 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.” Whatever feelings people have for each other, they must in any case observe external propriety.
An important source of rules of conduct in the family and society as a whole in the pre-Petrine period was the so-called. Domostroy is a set of ancient Russian rules of life based on the Christian worldview. The head of the family according to Domostroi is certainly a man who is responsible for the whole house before God, is a father and teacher for his household. The wife is to take care of the household, both spouses are to raise their 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 behavior for secular youth “An honest mirror of youth, or an indication for worldly behavior, collected from various authors.” This essay shows the norms of etiquette in a conversation - with superiors, with a confessor, with parents, with servants - and a style of behavior in various situations. A young man should rely on himself and respect others, honor his parents, be polite, courageous, courageous. He should avoid drunkenness, extravagance, slander, rudeness, etc. Particular importance was attached to the knowledge of languages: the youths must speak among themselves in a foreign language - "so that they can get used to it." Along with general instructions for living in this book, specific bonton rules of conduct at the table and in public places are given, as well as some hygiene standards.
The final part of this book is devoted to the special norms of behavior for girls, which, moreover, are strictly determined by church morality. These instructions are obviously close to the 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, cleanliness of the body, temperance and sobriety, frugality, generosity, fidelity and truthfulness. In public, a girl should keep herself modest and humble, avoid laughter, chatter, coquetry.
In general, the monument reflects both the general ethical norms of behavior and the specific features of education related to the period of the most active perception by Russian tradition, Russian culture, and the peculiarities of the lifestyle of Western Europe.
In the 19th century, the importance of tradition was still exceptionally great. The wife should certainly honor her husband, please his relatives and friends. This is how the layman teaches the book “Life in the Light, at Home and at Court”, published in 1890. However, unlike the recommendations of Domostroy, the spouses often lived separately. Aristocratic families that owned large mansions equipped 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 the book “Memories of the Past: From the Family Chronicle 1770–1838” describes the house of his grandfather, Prince P.N. Obolensky in Moscow: “A large two-story building, between the street and the house is a courtyard, behind the house 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, people in the house, that is, footmen, coachmen, cooks and maids, as well as horses, carriages, were called princely and maid of honor. There was always a parade in my grandmother's half; she had the best part of the house at her disposal, she always had visitors. Grandfather had his own small chambers, over which a mezzanine was arranged for 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 orders that exist in the parental family are perceived by a person as a kind of ideal, which he strives to follow at all costs. But since in the parental families of a husband and wife these orders could not be at all similar, such thoughtless adherence to them can ultimately lead to serious complications in relationships between spouses.
Prince V.P. Meshchersky considered the behavior of his parents - both in the family and in society - to be standard. The father “was, without exaggeration to 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 contented, he lived the life of all those around him; I read everything I could, was interested in everything and, like my mother, never touched, even in passing, either lies, or swagger, or 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 with natural death or the deprivation of all rights of state.
Until at least half of the 19th century, a respectful attitude towards parents was a phenomenon, as they would now say, with no alternative. However, some "free-thinking", which arose, in particular, under the influence of sentimental and romantic works, appeared. So the main character of the novel by D.N. Begichev "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.
In the Khomyakov family, a legend has been preserved that when both sons - Fedor and Alexei - "came to age", Marya Alekseevna called them to her and solemnly explained her idea of \u200b\u200bthe relationship between a man and a woman. “By today's standards,” she said, “men seem to enjoy freedom. And in a Christian way, a man should keep 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 an affair with any woman until you enter into marriage, choosing your only one. Swear." 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 when Masha is ten years old, 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, reverence, which is reinforced in addition to general education in the spirit of the Law of God also with positive examples from the lives of some familiar parents. Parents themselves never raise their voice to the child. And if Masha deserves punishment, for example, they oblige Masha not to leave the room anywhere. According to the author, his fairy tale should teach children and their parents to follow this pattern without fail.
Emperor Nicholas I wrote to his son Nicholas in 1838: “Love and honor your parents and elder brother and resort to their advice always and with full power of attorney, and then our blessing will always be over your dear head.”
The first set in the upbringing of a noble child was that he was oriented not to success, but to the ideal. He should have been brave, honest, educated, not in order to achieve anything - fame, wealth, high rank - but because he is a nobleman, because he has been given a lot, because he should be just like that.
Brothers and sisters should be respectful towards each other, and the eldest son had some authority over the younger children. Boys up to 15 years old, and girls up to 21 years old, went ahead of their parents, who “spoiled” them. The girl was completely dependent on the will of her parents, while the young man did not submit 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 even more enviable happiness - eighty years old, for “what will mothers say?”
At the beginning of the 19th century, the traditions and customs adopted in the previous century and distinguished by a certain patriarchy begin 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 fulfilled everything and according to the proverb: “love to count kinship and honor him” - they were considered to be kinship and, when one of the relatives died, they wore mourning for him, depending on proximity or remoteness 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, in ceremonial occasions, it was possible to wear a silver mesh on a dress, not gold. This one was worn at the end of three years, and black dress widows did not take pictures, especially the elderly. Yes, and the young would not have been praised if she hastened to remove the mourning. They wore mourning for their father and mother for two years: the first - wool and crepe, on big holidays it was possible to wear something woolen, but not too light. ... When weddings took place in a family where there was deep mourning, the black dress was removed for a while, and they wore purple, which was considered mourning for brides, ”wrote D.D. Blagovo in "Grandmother's Tales". But over time, this standard of behavior begins to disappear.
The behavior of the nobles in Moscow and in St. Petersburg was different. As the same D.D. Blagovo, with reference to the memoirs of his kind grandmother, “who is more significant and richer - all in St. Petersburg, and who lives out his life in Moscow, or is outdated, or impoverished, they sit quietly and live poor, not in a lordly way, as they used to , but in a petty-bourgeois way, about themselves. ... The names are good, maybe they exist, but there are no people: they don’t live by their names.
E.A. Sushkova, being at a ball in Moscow for the first time, 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 girlfriends." They address each other with “you”, they 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 easier. Yu.N. Tynyanov says that Nadezhda Osipovna Pushkina, for example, could sit uncombed in her bedroom for days on end. And Yu.M. Lotman wrote that “war events brought Moscow and the province of Russia closer together. The Moscow population "splashed 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 provinces, 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 that connected St. Petersburg with the country.
Unlike the capitals, as V.A. Sollogub in his “Memoirs”, “biblical calm prevailed 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 diverse rights. However, one should also distinguish between villages and cities in the provinces: the distances between neighbors who lived in their villages were generally huge and therefore they saw each other much less often than in cities. So, the heroine of the novel by Fan Dima (E.V. Kologrivova) "Alexandrina" complained that the time of Christmas time was the only opportunity to "go crazy" for girls who saw each other extremely rarely, and they had fun for the entire period of separation, while in the capitals the number of boring visits increased several times.
Obviously, family relations 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 the traditional way of life at its core, which was combined with the norms of behavior brought from Europe, which were becoming more and more rooted in the nobility. Therefore, the ideal of behavior changes over the course of half a century from a more traditional one, carefully preserved by people of the 18th century, to a more “enlightened” one, facilitated by the abundance of foreign tutors, the constant conversation in a foreign language, mainly French, and admiration for the West in general.
Marchenko N. Signs of sweet antiquity. Morals and life of the Pushkin era. - M.: Isographus; Eksmo, 2002. - P.92.
Aleshina Yu.E., Gozman L.Ya. Dubovskaya E.M. Socio-psychological research methods marital relations: Special workshop on social psychology. - M.: Publishing House of Moscow. un-ta .. 1987. - P.35.
Koshelev V. Aleksey Stepanovich Khomyakov, biography in documents, reasoning and research. - M., 2000. - S. 163.
Odoevsky V.F. Motley tales. Tales of grandfather Iriney / Comp., prepared. text, intro. Art. and comment. V. Grekov. - M.: Artist. lit.. 1993. - S.190-223.
Nicholas I. Husband. Father. Emperor / Comp., Preface. N.I. Azarova; comments n.I. Azarova, L.V. Gladkova; per. from fr. L.V. Gladkova. - M.: WORD / SLOVO, 2000. - P.330.
Internet source:
http://www.pravoslavie.ru/arhiv/051006163916
For merchants, the family was not only a personal matter - it formed an idea of how influential, firm, and authoritative its head was. And this, in the final analysis, largely determined success both in business and in social activities. Therefore, it was so important to create a strong “cell of society”, based on the patriarchal norms accepted in society.
Shall a wife be afraid of her husband?
The roles in the merchant family were distributed very clearly: the husband was engaged in trade, was in charge of finances, paid taxes, and was also an “intermediary” between his household and the trade guild and, of course, the state. In a word, he was responsible for the well-being and social status of his relatives. The wife “provided the rear”: she took care of her husband and children and created comfortable living conditions for them.
Nikolai Nevrev "Everyday scene of the 17th century (Merchant and goods)" (early 1890s)
All this was spelled out in Russian legislation: by law, a woman was dependent on her husband. After the wedding, she accepted the title and estate of her husband, and was obliged to obey him in everything. The man, however, remained the owner of all movable and immovable property, and only he had the right to make important decisions for the family: from trade investments to issues of raising children. Even the merchant's wife could straighten her passport only with the permission of her husband. Add here the fact that in merchant unions the husband was usually, as a rule, older than his other half, and, therefore, more significant - and the picture loomed more gloomy. But was it really so?
Contemporaries note that even in the first half of the 19th century, in wealthy merchant families, mothers no longer took care of the household themselves, they were rather stewards of a considerable staff of servants. This freed them enough time for themselves and for creativity: as the Siberian memoirist Avdeeva-Polevaya wrote, they “Especially engaged in various needlework: they embroidered with silk, gold, foil, tambour and satin stitch; embroidered different patterns towels."
If the head of the family went on a business trip, the wife often replaced him: she watched how things were going in the shop or store, made the necessary payments, etc. Such mutual assistance was a very common thing and testified that the merchants were by no means illiterate and helpless.
The fact that the position of merchant wives was not deprived of rights is also evidenced by the fact that the dowry or property acquired by the wife on her own was considered her property according to the law. True, in case of problems with her husband or with her father-in-law and mother-in-law, the merchant's wife sought help and support from her parents or other relatives. But this only says that in this environment it was customary to “not wash dirty linen in public” so as not to undermine the reputation of the family.
The practice of inheritance is also interesting: very often the head of the family bequeathed all the property to his wife, even in the presence of adult sons. Often the widow took over the family business and skillfully increased her capital: for example, as Varvara Alekseevna Morozova, director of the Association of the Tver Paper Manufactory. She was widowed at 34, raised three sons alone, and was able to build a real textile empire in Russia. In addition, she was actively involved in charity work.
Konstantin Makovsky "Portrait of Varvara Morozova" (1884)
"Dark Kingdom" or reasonable severity?
Thanks to the books of some pre-revolutionary and Soviet writers, we imagine the life of the merchant class as a real "dark kingdom", not only in relation to women, but also in the upbringing of children. However, reality has little to do with this negativity.
First of all, we should not forget that the majority of merchants came from peasants - if not in the first, then in the second or third generation for sure. Just like the famous Pavel Mikhailovich Tretyakov, philanthropist and collector, founder of the Tretyakov Gallery, whose near ancestor was a serf in the Maloyaroslavets district. This means that in the merchant environment, the basic values of the common people were inherited: children were raised in strictness, they were not spoiled too much and were not allowed to be lazy. From the heirs, they prepared the successors of the family and support in old age. Very great importance was attached to religious and moral education: reverence for elders, loyalty to one's word, mercy for the orphans and the poor - all this was not an empty set of words in a merchant society. At the same time, parents day and night took care of the physical and moral well-being of their children.
Here is what Tomsk merchant S.S. Prasolov in his spiritual instruction to children: “I bequeath to live in love and harmony, to show due obedience and respect to my mother, and equally to brothers and sisters to show mutual sincere disposition to each other.” And such instructions worked - this is what can be read in the notes of a 19th-century traveler: “In general, Siberian merchant families are strong in mutual love and respect for their members. Family strife, especially between brothers and sisters, is the most unrealizable phenomenon. The younger generation looks to the older ones as experienced guides.”
Perov Vasily "Arrival of a governess in a merchant's house" (1866)
How was this education expressed in practice? The Russian merchants would consider the Soviet slogan “All the best for children” as savagery. Firstly, because there should not be “best pieces” in the family in principle. The first and largest piece went to the father - not exactly the "best", but the first and largest. The second piece is smaller - mothers, and then everyone else - grandfathers, grandmothers and, finally, children. And this rule applied to all spheres of life.
Secondly, all members of the family had to work for her well-being. Especially business successors. Even in very wealthy families, sons were “put to work” at a very early age: boys began to engage in petty trade in a shop at the age of 6-7. They were gradually brought up to date, and by the age of 15-16, merchant offspring began to independently travel to other cities on company business, kept account books, bought and sold small quantities of goods. The fathers gave them a certain freedom of action, but at the same time demanded strict accountability.
Girls from the tenderest age were accustomed to housekeeping, obliged to help their mother keep order and look after younger brothers and sisters. In addition, merchant daughters were engaged in needlework, and they themselves often prepared a dowry for themselves, just like ordinary peasant women. In a word, zealous merchants from childhood prepared their daughters for the role of mother and wife. Often, the home education of girls was reduced only to the ability to read, write and count, but since the middle of the 19th century, a network of women's educational institutions has been developing in Russia, where the daughters of merchants receive a deeper education.
Vasily Pukirev "Receiving a dowry in a merchant family by painting" (1873)
“Yes, Russian merchants loved victory and won!”
A stereotype has developed about the Russian merchant: an ignorant tyrant, a despot who pushes his loved ones around, while at the same time a drunkard, a reveler, a glutton and a gambler. Of course, there were such characters among the merchants. But they didn’t stay afloat for a long time: completely different people, who were the majority, achieved success.
The merchants attached great importance to the observance of religious traditions: families in full force certainly took part in religious rites and holidays, making generous donations. In any family there were adopted children or pupils - it was considered quite common to take an orphan into upbringing. It is difficult to overestimate the social role of the merchants: in the 19th century, as a rule, it was the merchants who organized shelters, hospitals, free canteens, almshouses and rooming houses for the poor at their own expense. They also sponsored public libraries, people's houses and various educational institutions. In addition, they organized many useful events - from city holidays to meetings of the sobriety society.
One can talk about merchant patrons for a long time: many achievements of Russian culture and art would simply not have taken place without such figures as the Shchukin brothers, Savva Mamontov, Morozovs, Bakhrushins, Tretyakovs and others. Perhaps Fyodor Chaliapin wrote about this best in his autobiography.
Ilya Repin "Portrait of Savva Mamontov" (1878)
And the great singer knew what he was talking about - it was the support of the merchant Mamontov that helped him become a star of the first magnitude: “A Russian peasant, having escaped from the village from an early age, begins to cobble together his well-being as a future merchant or industrialist in Moscow. He sells sbiten at the Khitrovy market, sells pies on stalls ... cheerfully shouts out his comrade and cunningly watches the stitches of life with a slanting eye ... And there, looking, he already has a shop or a small factory. And then, go, he is already the 1st guild merchant. Wait - his eldest son is the first to buy the Gauguins, the first to buy Picasso, the first to take Matisse to Moscow. And we, the enlightened ones, look at all the Matisses, Manets and Renoirs, which are still incomprehensible to us, and critically say: "Samodur". Meanwhile, the petty tyrants, meanwhile, quietly accumulated wonderful treasures of art, created galleries, museums, first-class theaters, set up hospitals and shelters. Yes, Russian merchants loved victory and won.
