5,669
edits
Difference between revisions of "Kormlenie (Pre-Soviet Russia)"
no edit summary
(Created page with "{{infobox | nameofpractice = ''kormlenie'' | location = pre-Soviet Russia | imagemap = USSR map.png | imageflag = USSR flag.png | authorofpiece = Sergei Bogatyre...") |
|||
| Line 24: | Line 24: | ||
[[File:The town governor Voyevoda arrives to a provincial town.jpg|400px|thumb|left|Description: Faithful photographic reproduction of the two-dimensional "The Town Governor (Voyevoda) Arrives to a Provincial Town" work of art done by Sergei Vasilievich Ivanov (1864–1910).Source: Wikimedia Commons.]] | |||
As for the general nature of ''kormlenie'', Marxist scholars see it as a form of feudal rent (Enin 2000: 315<ref>Enin, G. P. 2000. ''Voevodskoe kormlenie v Rossii v XVII veke''. St. Petersburg: Rossiiskaia natsional’naia biblioteka. 9</ref>). Revisionist studies treat ''kormlenie'' in the context of anthropological theories of generalised exchange in traditional societies like ''kula'' in Papua New Guinea (see entry in this volume) and ''dan'' in Northern India. These theories assume that gift presentation and exchange established solidarities and mutual obligations (Mauss 1966: 71-72<ref>Mauss, M. 1966. ''The Gift. Forms and Functions of Exchange in Archaic Societies''. London: Cohen and West Ltd. </ref>). ''Kormlenie'' was therefore similar to assigning fiefs and fee benefices in pre-bureaucratic societies (Davies 1997: 39<ref>Davies, B. 1997. ‘The Politics of Give and Take: Kormlenie as Service Remuneration and Generalized Exchange, 1488-1726’, in A. M. Kleimola, G. D. Lenhoff, ''Culture and Identity in Muscovy, 1359-1584''. Moscow: ITZ-Garant: 39-67</ref>). ''Kormlenie'' was originally anything but a sinecure, since ''kormlenie''-holders were the only local agents of princely power charged with responsible administrative, fiscal and military duties who did not receive any salary for their work (Veselovskii 1947: 267<ref>Veselovskii, S. B. 1947. '' Feodal’noe zemlevladenie v Severo-Vostochnoi Rusi, '' vol. 1. Moscow, Leningrad: Izdatel’stvo AN SSSR. </ref>). | As for the general nature of ''kormlenie'', Marxist scholars see it as a form of feudal rent (Enin 2000: 315<ref>Enin, G. P. 2000. ''Voevodskoe kormlenie v Rossii v XVII veke''. St. Petersburg: Rossiiskaia natsional’naia biblioteka. 9</ref>). Revisionist studies treat ''kormlenie'' in the context of anthropological theories of generalised exchange in traditional societies like ''kula'' in Papua New Guinea (see entry in this volume) and ''dan'' in Northern India. These theories assume that gift presentation and exchange established solidarities and mutual obligations (Mauss 1966: 71-72<ref>Mauss, M. 1966. ''The Gift. Forms and Functions of Exchange in Archaic Societies''. London: Cohen and West Ltd. </ref>). ''Kormlenie'' was therefore similar to assigning fiefs and fee benefices in pre-bureaucratic societies (Davies 1997: 39<ref>Davies, B. 1997. ‘The Politics of Give and Take: Kormlenie as Service Remuneration and Generalized Exchange, 1488-1726’, in A. M. Kleimola, G. D. Lenhoff, ''Culture and Identity in Muscovy, 1359-1584''. Moscow: ITZ-Garant: 39-67</ref>). ''Kormlenie'' was originally anything but a sinecure, since ''kormlenie''-holders were the only local agents of princely power charged with responsible administrative, fiscal and military duties who did not receive any salary for their work (Veselovskii 1947: 267<ref>Veselovskii, S. B. 1947. '' Feodal’noe zemlevladenie v Severo-Vostochnoi Rusi, '' vol. 1. Moscow, Leningrad: Izdatel’stvo AN SSSR. </ref>). | ||