52 Muscovite Roots, 1462-1689
What then of the widespread absenteeism among deti boyarskiye: is this not
evidence of alienation and a desire to lead a civilian life as landlords? Tempt-
ing as this conclusion is, it must be rejected.^77 That is to say, there is no sign
that they resisted or opposed the service state as such; they want~ an easement
of their lot, but hoped that this could be achieved 'within the system'. as we
would say. In this their attitude did not differ radically from that of peasants
or other commoners, who likewise sought to secure sectional adVantages-
although they used more violent means, which gentry servitors abandoned
after participating in the Moscow riots of 1648. Absenteeism was characteristic
of the lower servitors, too-as it was of armed forces throughout Europe at
the time. Nevertheless its incidence among the gentry was certainly high. For
example, in 1671 Yu. A. Dolgorukiy reported that of senior nobles on the
Moscow roll 188 were present but 304 absent; for junior ones the figures were
respectively 399 and 1,787, while only 'very few' provincial gentry appeared.
No doubt most of them were busy defending their estates from Razin's rebel
bands.^78 When the summons was issued for the 1687 campaign, 6,112 metro-
politan nobles responded, whereas 711 excused themselves and another 719
were absent without explanation.^79
The authorities at first dealt with offenders (and their sureties) by 'cruel
punishment, beating in public without mercy', and sometimes even death; but
later, as the rigour of the system slackened, by fines or confiscation of property,
which was to be distributed among those of their comrades who did their
duty.^80 But such menaces had lost much of their ..deterrent effect, and probably
helped to make the problem worse. By fleeing from the colours gentry ser-
vitors expressed their discontent at the unfair and inefficient way in which the
levy was run. They did not reach the point of openly questioning its necessity.
Although they continued to submit collective petitions over specific grievances
(for example, for a land survey),^81 their capacity for co-ordinated action was
feeble. A century or so would pass before they realized that their corporate
interests could be advanced by winning from the Crown guarantees of certain
rights, notably exemption from corporal punishment^82 and other demeaning
treatment.
To appreciate this deferential attitude we must remember that the provincial
gentry servitor had no formal education and as likely as not could scarcely sign
his name. A recent study of the Belgorod polk in 1669-71 shows that 22 per
cent of its officers signed in Russian.^83 These were, however, mostly men in the
11 This point has now been clarified in magisterial fashion by Torkc, 'Adel und Staal'.
78 Ibid., p. 287. In 1679 the proportion of absentees in various formations mobilized for active
service was 17 per cent (14,156 out of 83,477): Brix, Geschichte, p. 377.
(^79) Hellie, Enserfment, p. 369 n. 173; cf. DR V xvi. 405-6 for their regional distribution; PSZ i.
489.
80 DRV xvi. 363 (1676); Rozengeym, Ocherki, pp. 17-22; Shakhmatov, Kompetentsiya,
pp. 184-5; Torke, 'Adel und S1aat', pp. 285-9.
81 Keep, 'Muse. Elite', pp. 223-6.
82 Even a voivode might be beaten in public: AMG ii. 1013 (16.58).
SJ Stevens, 'lielgorod', p. 123; on p. 119 the author makes lhe figure 23 per cent.