'·
The Noble Servitor and the Petrine State 123Another edict that had unforeseen social consequences was designed to pre-
vent the fragmentation of noble estates.^30 Landowners were recommended to
bequeath their property to a single heir; those who died intestate had it attri-
hntf'cl to their elclf'st son. A c;11hc;kli;iry ;iim of this measure was to encourage
those sons who were excluded, and inherited only movable goods, to join the
service. Later Peter tried to establish the rule that only one third of the males in
any noble family should join the civil bureaucracy, 'so that there shall be no
shortage of serving men on land or at sea'.^31 Positive inducements of this kind
were probably less effective in achieving the ends desired than the standard
coercive devices.
The task of organizing periodical inspections and registration of gentry ser-
vitors was given first to the Senate, and in 1721-2 to one of its subordinate
agencies, the Heraldmaster's Office (Gero/'diya), headed by S. A. Kolychev.3 2
His instructions required him to 'know', and keep lists of, all such persons by
name and by rank, as well as all their male children and the assignments
held by each. If this was indeed done-which is uncertain, since this archive
had yet to be properly explored-it would have made the control mechanism
more thorough and efficient than it had been in the seventeenth century. The
Gero/ 'diya inherited the functions and records of the old Razryad. Two
innovations were that it devised coats of arms (gerby) for noble families and
registered separately those who worked their way up into the privileged class
by becoming officers.
The principle that promotion to officer rank conferred nobility was enun-
ciated in two decrees of 1719 and 1721 and repeated in article 15 of the so-
called 'Table of Ranks' (24 January 1722).^33 The latter was one of the most
important pieces of social legislation in Imperial Russian history. It has been
the subject of much scholarly discussion, but it is only in recent years, thanks
to archival research by a Soviet historian, that it can be evaluated correctly. 34
It is now clear that: (a) the ranking system that was destined to govern the lives
of civil officials (as well as officers) until 1917 was modelled on that previously
existing in the armed forces; (b) Peter took account of prevailing sentiment
among officers in shaping the reform as it applied to civilians; (c) the War Col-
lege and Admiralty brought their influence to bear in the deliberations held in
private before the decree was issued; (d) western European influences on the
reform, most evident in a preliminary draft compiled by A. I. Osterman, came
to be overlaid by native traditions, so that the measure may justly be regardedlO PSZ v. 2789 (23 Mar. 1714), also in Lebedev, Reformy. pp. 73-4; for discussion or the wider
context, Klyuchevsky, Soch., iv. 87-91 (Peter the Great, pp. 106-11).
ll Voskresensky, Zak. akty, 368 (p. 355).
12 PSZ vi. 3877; Voskresensky, Zak. akty, 368 (pp. 352-6); Troitsky, Abso/yuti;.m, p. 103;
B&E xvi. 546-7.
Jl PSZ v. 3265 (I Jan. 1719); vi. 3705 ( 16 Jan. 1721 ), 3890; Beskrovnyy, 'Voyennye shkoly', p.- For an English transla1ion or the Table: Vernadsky et al. (eds.), Source Book, ii. 344.
l4 Troitsky, Abso/yutizm, pp. 3-118. Bennell ('Evolution') makes liule use or Troitsky's work
and is not always accurate.