Why did Russian peasant women refuse to marry and what did this lead to?

2024 Author: Richard Flannagan | [email protected]. Last modified: 2023-12-15 23:55

Anthropologists argue that all forms of kinship that are considered traditional by modern science are based on the exchange of childbirth by women. Yes, in the light of progressive views, this is difficult to take for granted, but throughout history, women have played a role. This affected her position in the family and society. John Bushnell, in his book, describes a situation that can be regarded as a woman's rebellion, because Russian peasant women refused to marry, disagreeing with their gender role.

The idea that pre-revolutionary Russia is a stronghold of patriarchal and traditional values is firmly rooted in history. Russian peasant women married early and devoted their whole lives to serving their husbands, housework, giving birth to children, it was assumed that a woman unquestioningly obeys and obeys her husband, performs the overwhelming majority of housework, and works in the field.

But this was not always and not everywhere. Historian John Bushnell, in his research, proves that women, realizing the very dubious benefits of marriage, began to abandon it en masse, thereby shaking the established foundations, or rather even undermining the patriarchal canons. We are talking about peasant women of the Old Believers of the Spasov Consent, in the 19th century their number reached a million, and they lived along the Volga. Their way of life significantly influenced the demography, economy and life of a huge region, because the woman's revolt led to the fact that the nobles began to interfere in the private lives of their serfs. But more on that below.

Who is John Bushnell and why is he so knowledgeable about Russian peasant women

Bushnell, a professor at Northwestern University in the United States, himself explained the interest in this topic in the preface to the book "The Epidemic of Celibacy among Russian Peasant Women." He became interested in this topic after he made two unexpected discoveries for himself. The confession sheets caught his eye - lists of parishioners who came or did not come to confession. These were the standards for keeping records in churches. In them, one could see that in some villages at the end of the 18th century, a lot of adult women remained in "girls".

For a Russian village of that time, a figure of 1-2 unmarried women would have been normal, but so that without exception, the whole village! In addition, in the works of Russian historians one can find the assertion that marriage, albeit unsuccessful, was inevitable for a peasant woman. For example, in the village of Sluchkovo, 44-70% of women (according to various sources) were unmarried. At the same time, the men were married, and their wives were brought from other villages. As a rule, the bride was chosen from settlements no further than 10 kilometers, at least by the beginning of the period of rejection of marriage, which falls on 1970, the radius of the search for a suitable candidate was exactly that.

However, it later expanded as the problem only worsened. Often the bride had to be redeemed from serfdom, for that the girl even appeared in the house.

Traditional relationships assumed that there was an exchange of daughters between courtyards and families. However, if an impressive number of women drop out of the number of brides, then the emerging imbalance leads to conflicts. For example, families with sons were outraged by the fact that those with daughters do not give them in marriage. There were appeals to the landowners, with a request to assist in the formation of new units of society. Of course, by pressure on families with daughters.

It is generally accepted that all decisions for girls in Tsarist Russia were made by their fathers, and then by their husbands. If we take into account that in some regions they were given in marriage starting at the age of 12, then this is quite justified. But as the marriageable age rises, the decisive role of the future spouses themselves also grows.

In the settlements in which there was a bias towards unmarried women, there were no registers of births, so it is impossible to say unequivocally at what age it was customary to marry the Spassovites. But on the other hand, it is known that within the framework of the same family, some daughters got married, and some did not. This argument speaks in favor of the independence of the decision made by the female side.

This makes the most likely resistance to marriage on the part of girls, moreover, supported by society and family. Simply put, girls were not afraid to go against traditions and refused to marry of their own free will. If they had this right, then, more likely, they also had the right to choose a groom (especially since there are more of them than potential brides).

It has been ordered to marry! Why didn't they go?

Emperor Paul in 1799 presented the estate with peasants to the nanny of his children, Countess Charlotte Lieven. A year later, an order was prepared, which contained very unusual recommendations and even threats. So, the fathers were ordered to give the girls in marriage. And the girls were told to go to this very "marriage". This could have ended, but the situation was too critical, the landowners could not count on an increase in the number of their peasants, an increase in prosperity, if new families were formed with such difficulty.

The previous owner of the estate allowed parents to independently decide the fate of their children, so mothers were in no hurry to give the girls in marriage, leaving them in their father's house. Firstly, a grown-up girl is a full-fledged household helper, and when there are several of them, then the economy can be expanded. Especially if the families did not have sons who could bring daughters-in-law (and where did they get them from). Secondly, the human factor should not be ruled out, because they are well aware of the full weight of a woman's burden that will fall on the shoulders of their beloved daughter immediately after marriage.

Another reason for refusing to marry is the too expensive price for the wedding, which was set by local priests, for most peasants this was an unaffordable amount. Since all the guys from 20 to 35 and girls from 18 to 25 were ordered to break up in pairs and get married until the next Maslenitsa, a loan was also provided, which could be forgiven if the fathers of the spouses had a good reputation.

The girls were also ordered not to go over and not abuse their right to choose (or they will take this right inadvertently) and agree to proposals. If the girl, having several offers, rejected them and remained unmarried by the indicated date, then they threatened to send her to St. Petersburg, to receive a useful craft (so-so threat, it is worth noting). The older ones will be sent to the master's house for fieldwork. If at the same time they also have a bad reputation, then they could be expelled along with the men.

Such recommendations were by no means uncommon by that time. After 1750, landowners were forced to interfere in the private life of their peasants, establishing rules and punishments for their violations. Their interest is understandable, the earlier the girls get married, the faster the tax is formed. The landowners' decisions were also provoked by complaints from the grooms, who were forced to look for brides far from their estates, which created additional costs.

The landowners' policy regarding the marriage issue was nowhere simpler - the more people, the more he would collect quitrent, because the more families in his possessions, the stronger his capital. Although, if we go deeper, then in this respect the interests of landowners and peasants coincided. For a peasant, a large and strong family is a guarantee of a strong economy, because at that time all work was physical and required more workers. Often, the master himself bought a woman from another estate, if he was contacted directly with this question, because he himself was interested in forming a new family.

Why did peasant women ignore the institution of marriage?

But if the landowners and heads of large peasant families had their own interests and embodied them in life, then the girls had some convictions of their own, following which they shook the foundations of the landlord's and landlord's way of life. It is ironic given the fact that de facto women, and especially young women, were the most vulnerable in this system of relationships.

Bushnell cites many figures and facts, excerpts from registers of births, but underneath this lies a certain power of conviction, for example, the historian is convinced that it is mainly Spassov's women who belong to one of the Old Believers' currents who refuse marriage. If you plunge into history, then after the reforms, the Old Believers are conventionally divided into two camps, those who accepted the church hierarchy and accepted the refusal of marriage only in the form of monasticism and those who opposed them - non-popovtsy.

The latter were sure that the Antichrist had reigned, and even saw him in the face of the king, moreover, they were sure that only a priest could give a blessing to a marriage, and since it is not there, then there is no marriage. In addition, many fall into a kind of existential crisis, in which there is no time for reproduction and procreation. All the sacraments have lost their relevance, there is no connection with God, and therefore a marriage concluded without his consent is a sin.

Perhaps it was precisely because of religious beliefs that fathers did not oppose their daughters, who deliberately refused to marry and reduced everything to nihilism. However, the question that arises for the reader of the book: why the desire to resist the Antichrist arises exclusively in women, and in men is absent, practically remains unanswered.

A wedding in Russia was an important holiday not only for the young, but for the entire village. A huge number of traditions and customs associated with this event surprise with originality and some tactlessness..