New-Model Army and Questions of Cost 91
receipts). Such levies, usually amounting to one-tenth and sometimes even
one-fifth of annual income, were imposed seven times during the early years of
Tsar Michael's reign and eight times between 1654 and 1680. They fell most
heavily Oii the townspeople, w hu wc1 c u1.:1.:asionaiiy assessed on their capital
assets as well as their income.^63 The rest of the state's revenue came from
indirect taxes (customs dues and proceeds of the alcohol trade), minor direct
taxes, and fees.
Of this money most went on the armed forces, whose costs could not be
covered from the revenue sources specifically assigned to the purpose. In the
1679/80 estimates these disbursements came to about 700,000 roubles, or 62.2
per cent of total anticipated expenditure. The Musketeers' chancellery received
250,000 roubles, the Cavalrymen's 110,000 roubles, and the Razryad 82,000
roubles.^64 This may be compared with a figure of 275,000 roubles for military
expenditure in the 1630s (when total state disbursements are unknown).6S In
1663, at the height of the Russo-Polish war, the active army alone (that is,
excluding garrison troops) cost more than it did in 1679/80: about I million
roubles.^66
Of course much of the military burden on the population cannot be express-
ed in monetary terms. Peasants had to perform construction and cartage
duties as and when required, and also to supply provisions for the troops.
Kotoshikhin, referring to this practice, says nothing about any payment; and
Lappo-Danilevsky takes the view that 'usually no compensation was made'.6^7
Some commanders did, however, try to fix prices for cereals in the locality
under their control when effecting requisitions. Like other European armies at
this time, that of the tsar lived to a large extent 'off the land' at home and
abroad, althoug_h the rudiments of a central supply system existed. From the
1650s onwards low-grade provincial gentry in the south-presumably those
who were not mobilized for active service-had to provide grain at the rate of
I chetvert · ( = 182 lb.) each of rye and oats per homestead;^68 this was evidently
regarded as a tax in kind rather than a commercial operation.
Last but not least, the central treasury kept no account of the payments
which the population made to their local commanders, the voivodes, of which
part went on their maintenance (and enrichment!) and part on military-
oriented as well as civilian projects. The irony was that all this expenditure did
63 Veselovsky. 'Sem· sborov', p. 87; Stashevsky, 'Byudzhet', p. 413.
64 Milyukov, Gos. khoz. Rossii, p. 75; cf. Stashevsky, 'Byudzhet', p. 417; Ustyugov, 'Finansy',
in Novosel' sky and Ustyugov (eds.), Ocherki, p. 438; Chernov, Voor. sily, p. 179.
65 Milyukov, Gos. khoz. Rossii, p. 36.
66 Plus over 70,000 quarters ( = 6,720 tons) of grain: Stashevsky. 'Smeta', as cited by Hellie,
Enserfment, p. 227; id., 'Byudzhet', p. 416; for cereal measurements, Hellie, op. cit., p. 371. In
negotiations with the Poles in 1656 the Muscovites put their military expenses during the first two
years of the war at 1.3 million roubles: S. M. Solov·yev, /st. Rossii s drevneyshikh vremen,
Moscow, 1959-64, v (1961), 660.
67 Kotoshikhin, 0 Rossii, pp. 136-7; cf. PSZ i. 139; Lappo-Danilevsky, Organizatsiya, p. 410;
Brix, Geschichte, pp. 430, 551.
68 Chernov, 'Voor. sily', pp. 452-3; Zagorodsky, Belgorodskaya cherta, p. 245.
wang
(Wang)
#1