4. social rebellion + religious descent 1613-89

aleksei Mickhailovich +17th century

• Some called him a saint

• Some called him 'Barbarously cruel'

• Pets reflect their owner: his cat’s face is stern (primary source)

Soviet historiography: called the 17th century = rebellious century

• Saw rebellions in Muscovite as an Ebryonic revolution which turned into the 1917 communist revolution

• Marxist approach: exploitation of the peasantry, class struggle, emphasis upon conflict, unrest, change

• Peasant wars in Russia (Bolotnikov), similar to the ones in Europe, which were exacerbated by peasants

 Modern interpretations:

• Unrelated rebellions sparked by different circumstances - doubt there was one single class ideology.

• Emphasises the complex combination of consensus and conflict in the 17th century

• Problem with Marxist interpretation: not horizontal, there is a vertical division in society -> influential people at the top

• Peasants didn’t think in terms of class struggle - shared popular monarchism:

  • Tsar (little father)

  • Evil boyars corruption (like Judas in Christs disciples)

  • People

general reasons for discontent

• Nobility of the capital + province:

  • Not happy about some personalities in the royal administration

  • Unhappy about the arrangement of the discovery of runaway peasants (they were the income for these people)

  • Noblemen from the south complained about rich landowners stealing their peasants

• Peasants and urban communities: concerned about runaway members of their communities as the central gov imposed taxes on particular communities (would have certain amounts of taxes, what if for example, 1/3 of peasants disappear in a town, and the third left would have to pay more)

• Merchants: uneasy about the privileges given to some foreigners

• Musketeers: received their money late (gov. tried to reduce the budget deficit by withholding the allowance of officials + musketeers)

1648 Moscow Salt Riot – Causes, Events, Significance

Causes:
High taxation and rising food prices; unpopular salt tax and replacement taxes. Tax burden worsened by elite tax exemptions. Growing petitions from townspeople.

Events:
Riot after Tsar Aleksei refused petitions; the crowd targeted unpopular boyars Pleshcheev (lynched) and Morozov (exiled, later returned); fires in Moscow.

Outcome & Significance:
Led to the Assembly of the Land and Law Code of 1649 – codified full serfdom, tied townsmen to residence, strengthened social hierarchy and state authority. Laws issued by the tsar and boyars to be obeyed, not interpreted. tightened control over people.

Law & Petitioning in Muscovy (after 1649)

Law:
No professional legal class; laws issued by tsar and boyars and meant to be implemented, not interpreted.

Petitioning Changes:
After the 1649 Law Code, direct petitions to the tsar were banned → petitions submitted through state bureaucracies.

Significance:
Petitioners still used traditional language appealing to the tsar’s mercy and justice, preserving the symbolic ruler–people relationship.
The gentry adapted to bureaucratisation, petitioning the state mainly for enforcement of serfdom and more regular administrative paperwork.

Religious Dissent & Nikon’s Reforms (17th-c. Muscovy)

Zealots of Piety:
Reformist parish priests (Volga region) sought moral discipline in society (fasting, confession, anti-drunkenness, banning “devilish” music). Supported by court figures like Boris Morozov.

Patriarch Nikon & Reforms:
Powerful patriarch who styled himself “Great Sovereign.” Introduced reforms to align Russian Orthodoxy with Greek practice:

• Sign of the cross with three fingers (not two)

• Changes to vestments

• Five loaves for communion (not seven)

• Revised liturgical books and spelling of Christ
  Goal: unify Orthodoxy under Russian leadership.

Reaction – The Schism (Raskol):
Old Believers rejected reforms as corrupt innovations influenced by the West; ritual practices were central to faith. Resistance led by Avvakum and Ivan Neronov.

Outcome:

• 1655: Church council backed Nikon (Greek support).

• 1658: Tsar Aleksei curbed Nikon’s power; Nikon renounced patriarchate and was later exiled.

• Result: lasting schism in Russian Orthodoxy.

Politicisation of the Religious Schism (1660s–1680s)

State Enforcement:
After Patriarch Nikon’s removal, Tsar Aleksei became the main supporter of reforms. The Great Moscow Councilconfirmed Nikon’s reforms; those rejecting them were declared outlaws and harshly persecuted.

Spread of Old Belief (1667–1682):
Old Believer texts spread widely—written in accessible language, supported by women (including elites), and expressing broader social grievances. Religious change became a catalyst for protest against political reform.

Significance:
Old Believers gained support across Muscovite society and often fled to remote frontier regions (northern forests, areas beyond state control). The movement reflected wider social discontent with the expanding Muscovite state, though leadership remained largely elite-led rather than purely mass-based.

Why was there more unrest in Russia (1648–1682) than in the earlier Romanov period (1613–1648), according to Valerie A. Kivelson?

Kivelson argues unrest grew because state centralisation and bureaucratisation disrupted traditional Muscovite political culture.

Earlier Muscovite rule was based on a moral relationship between tsar and people, where subjects could petition the ruler for justice. By the 1640s the state expanded dramatically: bureaucracy multiplied, decrees were printed, and governance became impersonal and rule-based rather than personal and paternal.

At the same time, social and economic tensions intensified:

• rising inequality between small landowners and powerful magnates

• resentment of tax-exempt “white lands” owned by elites while ordinary townspeople paid taxes

• emergence of new social groups (wealthy merchants and non-noble officials) that disrupted traditional hierarchies

• growing state regulation of daily life and mobility.

The immediate trigger was the Moscow Uprising of 1648, caused by fiscal reforms of Boris Morozov, including a salt tax, unpaid wages, and corruption by officials such as Levontii Pleshcheev.

Kivelson argues the rebellion was not irrational mob violence. Protesters believed the tsar was just but misled by corrupt advisers (“the devil stole his mind”), and rebellion aimed to restore the traditional moral order of a just ruler protecting his people

Alice Stone Nakhimovsky Kahn (and others) → How did the Church Schism influence Russian literature?

The Raskol transformed Russian religious writing and literary culture. The schism began when Patriarch Nikonintroduced reforms to align Russian rituals with Greek Orthodox practices. Many believers, later known as Old Believers, saw this as heresy and resisted.

Persecution of dissenters led to the development of new forms of religious literature, especially autobiographies, confessions, and polemical texts defending the old faith. Because they distrusted the state-controlled press, these writings often circulated secretly in manuscript form.

The most famous example is The Life of the Archpriest Avvakum, written in exile by Avvakum Petrov. The work blends autobiography, religious confession, and martyr narrative, presenting Avvakum as a persecuted defender of the true faith.

Literarily, the Schism encouraged new Russian prose styles, mixing Church Slavonic with vernacular Russian and foreign linguistic influences, creating a more personal and expressive religious literature. Scholars argue the Raskol therefore produced a new religious and literary consciousness in Russia.