Religion and Identity in Russia and the Soviet Union: A Festschrift for Paul Bushkovitch

Giving Voice to the Voiceless: Expressions of Non-Elite Identity and Perspectives in Pre-Petrine Russia

Religion and Identity in Russia and the Soviet Union: A Festschrift for Paul Bushkovitch. Nikolaos A. Chrissidis, Cathy J. Potter, David Schimmelpenninck van der Oye, and Jennifer B. Spock, eds. Bloomington, IN: Slavica Publishers, 2011, 25–41.       Giving Voice to the Voiceless: Expressions of Non-Elite Identity and Perspectives in Pre-Petrine Russia Jennifer B. Spock “I,  Patrikei,  and  Terentei  Ivan’s  sons,  have  given…,”  “I,  Ivan  Zinov’ev’s  son  of   Varzuga,   have   sold…,”   and   “a   certain   man   named   Feodor   reported…”   are   familiar   formulas   introducing   texts   that   express   personal   intent,   deliberate   activity,   and   personal   experience   among   Russia’s   non-­‐‑elite.   Yet,   because   of   the   formulaic   nature   of   many   economic   and   pious   sources   where   non-­‐‑elite   activity  can  be  found,  a  standard  refrain  in  the  scholarly  historical  literature  of   the  pre-­‐‑modern  age  bemoans  the  difficulty  of  accessing  the  thought  processes   of  the  non-­‐‑elite.  This  essay  examines  some  of  the  problems  and  possibilities  of   scholarly  attempts  to  grasp  the  lives  and  perspectives  of  the  non-­‐‑elite  social   groups  in  pre-­‐‑Petrine  Russia’s  northern  society  by  employing  the  sometimes   rich,  sometimes  scanty,  and  often  frustrating  documents  and  texts  extant  for   the   16th   and   early   17th   centuries   as   crafted   or   collected   within   a   monastic   community.  It  is  a  pleasure  to  present  this  piece  to  honor  the  academic  work   and  academic  guidance  of  Paul  Bushkovitch,  who  has  consistently  practiced   what  he  preached  and   made  primary   sources  the  point   of   departure  for  all   historical  research.   Social  history  developed  in  the  19th  century  in  Russia  as  in  the  rest  of  Eu-­‐‑ rope  and  the  United  States,  and  largely  characterized  much  of  the  scholarly   discussion  of  Russian  culture  in  the  pre-­‐‑Petrine  era.  Early  social  history  natu-­‐‑ rally  looked  for  trends  among  the  peasant  masses  of   Russia  and  among  the                                                                                                                             Research  for  this  article  was  supported  in  part  by  a  grant  from  the  International  Re-­‐‑ search  &  Exchanges  Board  (IREX),  with  funds  provided  by  the  National  Endowment   for  the  Humanities,  the  United  States  Information  Agency,  and  the  U.  S.  Department   of  State.  Also  contributing  was  a  grant  from  the  Joint  Committee  on  the  Soviet  Union   and   its   Successor   States   of   the   Social   Science   Research   Council   and   the   American   Council  of  Learned  Societies  with  funds  provided  by  the  State  Department  under  the   Russian,   Eurasian,   and   East   European   Training   Program   (Title   VIII).   None   of   these   organizations  is  responsible  for  the  views  expressed.  Other  funding  was  provided  by   the  Henry  Rice  Scholarship,  Center   for   International  and  Area  Studies,  Yale  Univer-­‐‑ sity;   John   F.   Enders   Research   Assistance   Grant,   Yale   University;   Hilandar   Research   Library  and  the  Resource  Center  for  Medieval  Slavic  Studies,  The  Ohio  State  Univer-­‐‑ sity;  University  Research  Committee  Grant,  Eastern  Kentucky  University.  I  would  also   like  to  thank  Charles  Halperin  and  Nikolaos  Chrissidis  for  their  helpful  comments.   26 JENNIFER B. SPOCK elite.  Yet  the  study  of  “great  men”  continued  to  craft  the  parameters  for  peri-­‐‑ odization  as  well  as  the  interactions  of  the  peasantry.  Social  upheavals  were   still  linked  to  charismatic  leaders  such  as  the  cossack  Stenka  Razin  or  the  First   False  Dmitrii,  and  the  reigns  of  tsars  persisted  as  the  chronological  parame-­‐‑ ters  of   Russian  history.1  In  the  20th  century,  Soviet  historians  embraced  the   “scientific”  study  of  history  and  not  only  characterized  periods  of  history,  but   periods  of  historiography,  partly  in  terms  of  social  class  and  political  affilia-­‐‑ tion:   feudal,   bourgeois,   bourgeois-­‐‑democratic,   and   socialist.   This   approach   naturally  changed  the  dialogue  within  Russian  history  from  the  study  of  per-­‐‑ spective  to   the  perspective  of   those   who   study,  and  simultaneously  created   both  official  and  tacit   guidelines  for  how,  and   which,  sources   could  be  em-­‐‑ ployed.  Moreover,  investigations  of  peasant  life  usually  studied  tax  collection,   crop   production,   manufacturing   or   artisanal   production,   and   land   owning.   Only  rarely  did  investigations  pursue  the  daily  life  or  perceptions  of  the  peas-­‐‑ antry  and   other  groups  low   on   the  social  ladder,  and  even   then,   they   were   usually   reflected   through   the  lens   of  class  struggle  and   opposition   to  estate   owners.     As  private  collections  and  church  archives  were  consolidated  by  the  Bol-­‐‑ shevik  regime,  many  of  the  libraries  and  archival  collections  of  episcopal  and   monastic  courts  (dvory)  were  transferred  to  large  repositories  along  with  state   documents   of   the   pre-­‐‑Petrine   and   imperial   periods.   Suddenly,   access   to   sources  became  logistically  easier  but  politically  more  difficult  for  the  individ-­‐‑ ual  scholar.  As  Western  historians  began  to  “revise”  traditional  thinking  and   approaches  to  Russian  history,  they  also  began  to  use  methodologies  devel-­‐‑ oped  by  Western  historians  of  medieval  Europe,  anthropologists,  sociologists,   and  other  groups  in  the  social  sciences...