Hostname: page-component-586b7cd67f-r5fsc Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-20T18:38:36.753Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Was There Private Property in Muscovite Russia?

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  27 January 2017

George G. Weickhardt
George G. Weickhardt*
Affiliation:
The law firm of Adams, Duque and Hazeltine, San Francisco
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Extract

Richard Pipes's contribution to our understanding of Russian history has been substantial and my own interest in Russian history dates from taking his course on imperial Russia in college some thirty years ago. It is thus only with great reluctance that I would disagree with him. Nevertheless, I respectfully submit that his response to my article suffers not only from insufficient evidence but also from serious conceptual flaws.

Type
Response
Information
Slavic Review , Volume 53 , Issue 2 , Summer 1994 , pp. 531 - 538
Copyright
Copyright © Association for Slavic, East European, and Eurasian Studies. 1994

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

1. (New York: Scribner's, 1974), see, for example, p. 85.

2. “Due Process and Equal Justice in the Muscovite Codes,” The Russian Review, 51 (October 1992): 463–64.

3. For an account of one such bill of attainder, see Thomas (Fortescue) Claremont, Lord, “Life of Sir John Fortescue” in John Fortescue, A Treatise in Commendation of the Laws of England (Cincinnati: Robert Clarke & Co., 1874)Google Scholar.

4. Hurst, Willard, “Treason in The United States,” Harvard Law Review 58 (1945): 226–72Google Scholar, see, in particular, 268–72.

5. Kabuzan, V. M., Izmeneniia v razmeshchenii naseleniia Rossii v XVIII-pervoi polovine XIX v. (po materialam revizii) (Moscow: Nauka, 1971, 59–118 Google Scholar.

6. Indova, E. I. “K voprosu o dvorianskoi sobstvennosti v Rossii v pozdnii feodal'nyi period” in N. I. Pavlenko, Dvorianstvo i krepnostnoi stroi Rossii XVI-XVIII vv. (Moscow: Nauka, 1975 Google Scholar.

7. Stashevskii, E. D., Zemlevladenie Moskovskago dvorianstva v pervoi polovine XVII veka (Moscow: Tip. S.P. Iakovleva, 1911) 39–237 Google Scholar. For complaints by the landowners listed that their land had been taken without just cause, see nos. 1, 35, 217, 219, 346, 360, 428, 433, 468, 490, 529, 535, 563, 566.

8. Robert Crummey, Aristocrats and Servitors (Princeton: Princeton University Press, 1983), 107–34.

9. S.V. Veselovskii, Istoricheskie zapiski, no. 10 (1941).

10. Printout of “real estate commodities” furnished to the author by Professor Hellie.

11. For some examples, see Dewey, H. W. and Kleimola, A. M., Russian Private Law XIV-XVII Centuries, Michigan Slavic Materials, No. 9 (Ann Arbor: University of Michigan Dept. of Slavic Languages and Literature, 1973), 41–212 Google Scholar.

12. PSZ, nos. 441 and 700.

13. For a summary of these decrees and other enserfment legislation, see Hellie, Richard, Enserfment and Military Change in Muscovy (Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1971, 77–123 CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

14. Such wills have been extensively analyzed in Daniel Kaiser, “Women's Property in Muscovite Families, 1500–1725,” unpublished manuscript, 1988.