The Science Work
Site is for sale:
Category: History

To a question of a social legal status of the dependent population in the Shapsug society at the end of XVIII - the first half of the 19th century

UDK 94 (470+571) & #34; 17/1917"


© 2011 of I.Z. Sukhanov

Sochi branch Sochi Branch

Peoples' Friendship University of Russia, of Russian Peoples& Friendship University,

st. of Kuibyshev, 32, Sochi, 354340, Kuybishev St., 32, Sochi, 354340,

The social legal status of the dependent population of Shapsugs during an era, critical for ethnic group, at the end of XVIII - the first half of the 19th century is investigated. Transformational processes considerably affected a social and legal system. Special attention in work is paid to specifics of application of adats concerning peasants - "pshitly" and to determination of the social status of slaves to "unaut". Change of a social status of the dependent population of Shapsugs was influenced strengthening of political activity of the Russian Empire in the Caucasus, by creation of the Russian power institutions and social and legal reforms of Russia in the Caucasus on the second half of the 19th century

We research the social and legal status of dependent Shapsug & s population at the end ofXVIII - in the first half of the XIX century. Changes in Shapsug&s society of this period were connected with social-and-legal status. The author pays attention to the using of adats in relation to peasants - "pshitlys" and to the definition of the social status slaves - "unauts". The reasons of changing the social status of dependent Shapsug&s population were: strengthening ofpolitical activity the Russian Empire in the Caucasus, organization of Russian power institutions and social and legal reforms in the Caucasus in the second half of the XIX century.

Keywo rds: pshitl - serf, unaut - slave, social and legal status, political Russian activism, social cultural space, patriarchal controls shap-sughs.

The problem of social and legal development of the Northwest Caucasus of the first half of the 19th century is one of debatable in Caucasus studies and a domestic historiography in general. According to a number of researchers, the social order of Shapsugs during the studied period is considered as a transitional stage from patrimonial to the feudal relations.

Studying social and legal structure of the Shapsug society is impossible in a separation from studying history of the Adyghe people. The special importance is made by compositions of historians, ethnographers, travelers,

ambassadors and military leaders of the 19th century. Deeply studied life and life of the Adyghe tribes and gave an ambiguous assessment to development of society: K.F. Stal, F.F. Tornau, L.Ya. Liu league [1 - 3]. With life of the Adyghe society Tebu de Mariñi who in the 30th of the 19th century traveled around the Caucasus became quite closely acquainted, and then published the traveling notes [4]. Insufficiently objectively N. Karlgoff lit a social order of Adyghe, placing emphasis on its besklassovost and attaching great value to patrimonial communications [5]. In turn S.M. Bro Nevsky [6] and L.Ya. Lyulye [3] determined by the leader fak-

to Torahs not economic development of the Adyghe society, and accurately organized, hierarchical structure and extent of feudalization. The significant contribution to Caucasus studies was made by works of the famous Adyghe scientist and public figure S. Khan-Girey who, being bzhedugy by origin, knew the social and legal organization of the Adyghe society from within. He points to traditions and customs which were valued by Adyghe [7]. In the first half of the 19th century, owing to strengthening of the Russian influence in the Caucasus the western powers actively directed the agents who in researches paid considerable attention to social system and class division of the Adyghe society, indicating at the same time incompatibility of the Russian policy and outlook of mountaineers [8, 9].

F.I. Leontovich analyzes common law of Adyghe and reveals the mechanism of realization of adats of rather dependent population [10]. L.I. Lavrov, M.V. Pokrovsky, V.K. Gar-danov give characteristic of a social order of Adyghe and the description of a system of the Adyghe feudalism [11 - 13].

From modern scientists-historians and jurists I.L. Babich, L.G Svechnikova, A.Yu. Chirg made the significant contribution to development of this direction. [14 - 16].

Proceeding from relevance and readiness of a problem, we investigate a social legal status of the dependent Shapsug population in the first half of the 19th century and we will define a role of the Russian Empire in its release.

At the end of the 18th century. The northwest Caucasus was populated with the Adyghe tribes of which slow development of the feudal relations at preservation of remnants of a communal system is characteristic.

As M.V. Pokrovsky noted, "the Adyghe community was based upon not developed relations of land property, transitional from the general to a private property. Constraint and restriction of the community member in the right to dispose of the earth belonging to it, delayed development of institute of a private land property and ripening of elements of feudalism in the Adyghe society, entangled the arisen feudal relations numerous patriarchal and patrimonial remnants, but could not stop their forward development...." [17, page 138].

Most distinctly lines of the ancient patrimonial relations acted at tribes of Shapsugs, abadzekh, Natukhais. In the first half of the 19th century the Shapsugs had no established feudal relations, the patriarchal tribal relations and legal customs defined existence of the society. Class division of Shapsugs in XVIII - the first half of the 19th century looked as follows: noblemen, free farmers, or free community members (tfokotl), serfs (pshitl), servants (unauta). The Shapsug nobility was presented by "three degrees" - "tlekotlesham", "shouting-kishkhami" and "ork-shautlugusami". S. Khan Weight calls a number of surnames Shapsug tlekotleshy: Abbot, Vykho, Horkozh, Sheretlyko, Nemere. "Free farmers, - he writes, - in the tribes having national board (Shapsugs, Natukhais, abadzekh), without knowing

over themselves any power of other class, use perfect freedom" [7, page 205].

The number of serf families at the Shapsug owners reached several hundred. The most extensive is the layer "pshitly" which were qualified in official documents as ritual (adatny) lackeys, or as barrier peasants. The legal status of serfs was enshrined in articles of adats: "At the Caucasian mountaineers everyone of what it would be estates can have serf people was, is only able to get them purchase or to whom will reach by inheritance" [10, page 135 - 136]. According to provisions of adats, serf people worked for themselves and the owners and from the developed bread and hay defined a half for owners, and another for keeping of by family and the cattle breeding, and from the part of bread and hay to nobody neither to sell, nor had no right to present without the consent of the owners.

Performance of duties of "pshitlyama" was carried out in the form of an otrabotochny and grocery rent. Certain researchers believe that also monetary rent took place in this case [18, page 47]. However the adat not only established duties "pshitly" in relation to the owner, but also protected their rights in certain cases. For example, if the owner did not provide "pshitly" with means of livelihood, or demanded performance of work, not provided by custom, then the last could find during certain time for itself(himself) the new owner wishing to buy it with all family. If the former owner interfered, then business understood public court and at legitimacy of requirements "пшитля" was solved in its advantage. At will of the owner of the serf could receive freedom, but at the same time he remained in estate of the simple people. According to adats, the freedman, having studied the Turkish diploma and the Quran, could pass into the clergy [10, page 136] that reflected strengthening of positions of Islam in the Caucasus.

Marriage "пшитля" was allowed with the owner's permission on the serf of the same owner, at the same time it was not necessary to pay a bridewealth. Considering "pshitly" property, the owner is obliged to buy wives to adult peasants, but at extradition in marriage of girls and widows "pshitly" the bridewealth received for them in own favor. Adats allowed acquisition of brides for serf men from simple estate in the consent of parents, relatives or tutors for whom from 25 to 60 heads of a cattle were paid to them [10, page 137]. For the crimes committed by serfs the penalties were paid by the owner, however if the serf was an incorrigible criminal, he could be sold to Turkey or deprive of life. The Shapsug owners valued the serfs and tried not to recruit them in attacks to gain through them bigger income.

"Og" were other category of serfs. They had fuller personal and property rights, than "pshitl", and lived the certain yards out of the domonical estate, having own

economy. The grocery rent was the cornerstone of dependence of "og", they had also otrabotochny duty.

As traditional way of the Circassian feudal society at the end of XVIII - the first half of the 19th century at Shapsugs and Ubykhs the slavery which in essence had house character remained. House slaves were "unauta", most the lowest category of the population at Shapsugs: "these people an essence real slaves, will obey the owners, blindly execute all works and on their order transfer patiently their oppressions, say, bear all burdens of life, have no opportunity in simplification of the state to bring someone the complaints to owners; because these what they would be estates were, own and use them absolutely on some rights" [10, page 135 - 136]. In sources they are called usually bezobryadny or bezadatny because norms of an adat did not extend to them. Unlike "pshitly" "unauta" had neither no property, nor personal, nor property rights, the law did not protect them [19. page 130]. All free inhabitants could own slaves. In spite of the fact that work of "unaut" was not a production basis, it played a significant role in economy Shapsug "tfokot-pour". Slaves were engaged mainly in homeworks. At the same time they were used also for participation in field works and in care for the cattle.

Unauta completely were at the disposal of the owners. All the time and all things of the slave belonged to his mister who had in relation to him the right of life and death. The reward for the offenses or mutilations put to "unaut" was received by the one who owned it. Murder of the slave was considered only as causing property damage to his owner [20, page 266 - 267]. Blood feud did not extend to murder of the slave - the cost of the killed was paid to the owner.

Paid by slaves a tribute, a judicial penalty fee, a bridewealth. Unauta had no right voluntarily and to the choice to marry, and illegitimate communications were quite widespread. "All faces of this estate are deprived of the right to enter marriages as the man cannot demand to himself from the owner of the wife, and girls and women of delivery them in a marriage, the sexual intercourses at them are very free" [20, page 266 - 267]. In turn children of "unaut" were at the full disposal of those who possessed their parents. Owners of slaves in every possible way sought for expansion of the illegitimate intercourses of "unaut" to receive new slaves whom they could sell to the Ottoman Empire. "Selling prices on & #34; унаутов" there was following: in Labinsk, Urupskon, Psekupsky and Sze-lenchuksky districts without distinction as to sex, but judging by age, beauty and physical ability to work, craft activity and other circumstances & #34; унауты" from 100 to 300 rubles were estimated" [20, page 266 - 267]. Unauta and their children made the main, main source of a slave trade at Shapsugs.

The most important source of slavery were internal wars. The people captured during the war were turned into slaves, they were sold as slaves. Captured the captive in fight became its half of

the nopravny owner. A source of slavery and a slave trade were also attacks and sea robbery. Replenishment of the contingent of "live goods" happened also at the expense of the criminals turned into slavery according to the court verdict. The faces sold for debts became slaves. There was also it that turned serfs for perfect offenses into slaves. Unauta were quite often got by a purchase and exchange [21, page 169].

Pre-revolutionary authors note existence at Shapsugs of such phenomenon as sale in slavery parents of the children [22; 23, page 30]. However the similar facts were not widespread among mountaineers. However, to the middle of the 19th century at Shapsugs the trend of gradual eradication of slavery [24, by page 21 - 22.24 was observed; 18, page 40].

Change of position of serfs and slaves was influenced by strengthening of policy of the Russian Empire in the Caucasus from the moment of signing of the Andrianopolsky world on September 14, 1829 after which the tsarist government began active conquest of the Northwest Caucasus. Since 1831 more than ten strengthenings, in particular in an area of accommodation of Shapsugs and Ubykhs were founded on east coast of the Black Sea: Velyaminovskoye - to Tuapse, Lazarevskoye - to Psezuapse, Golovinskoye - on Shah, Navaginskoye - to Sochi and St. Spirit - on Adler [25; page 290]. Strengthening of military operations created danger of hit in slavery of any person who appeared without protection in the Caucasus. As F. Dubois de Monpere notes, "any foreigner who is let in a travel on these edges, not able to call the friend or the owner who accepted it, risks to fall into a state of the slave..." [26, page 37 - 38].

With strengthening of exploitation of serfs and slaves escapes of the Shapsug serfs and slaves on the Russian territory became universal. "These Circassians, as announce, taking cover from oppressions and slavery of their owners, ask about acceptance them in citizenship to the Russian throne" [27]. Fear of sale to Turkey was one of the reasons of escape of serfs. The phenomenon of sale of close relatives separately was especially cruel. Runaway peasants supplied with the following information of the Russian administration: "My owner wanted to sell the wife and my children as slaves to Turks, and I not to be separated from family decided to indulge forever under protection of Russians" [28]. Serfs could not find protection in community, for example in 1842 "pshitl" Shapsug "тфокотля" pinned up Tsiok his daggers as the owner coveted their wives [12, page 183].

Having seized power, "foremen" and "tfokotl" at Shapsugs appropriated the main part of serfs, but at the same time did not adhere to usual and legal tradition and tried not to connect themselves with serfs the contract.

Besides, the policy of Russia in relation to runaway Shapsug peasants and slaves was rather contradictory. On the one hand, Russia, being the state with the developed serfdom, kept the existing class relations in the Caucasus. In the leaflet of the general Yermolov

specified: "About serfs of a request are useless....

Subject which will accept Christian belief will remain in the same as before dependences and will not be selected" [10, page 267]. However for strengthening of the positions of 1840 the government disposed to send all serfs from strengthenings of the Black Sea coastline to Don and to enlist in the Cossack army [12, page 194].

The Russian administration in the Caucasus tried to find to itself allies acting through owners and gave them runaway serfs and slaves in case of the peace relations with Russia.

Thus, serfs and slaves in the Shapsug society were in complete social and economic dependence. Being steady social category, slavery began to become obsolete only in the second half of the 19th century that was promoted by an abolition of serfdom. For dependent estates of the Caucasus rules of carrying out this reform were developed by the special act of November 1, 1868 under which mountain peasants of the Kuban region appeared released.

From the third quarter of the 19th century. The northwest Caucasus began to enter cultural and political and legal space of the Russian Empire. Patriarchal governing bodies were reorganized and the authorities authorized by the Russian government were created. It was the reformist way of transformations calculated for decades.


1. K.F. steel. Ethnographic essay of the Circassian people. Tiflis, 1900. T. 21.
2. F.F. Tornau. A secret mission to Circassia the Russian intelligence agent baron F.F. Tornau. Nalchik, 1999.
3. L.Ya. Lyulye. Historical and ethnographic articles. Krasnodar, 1990.
4. Tebu de Mariñi Zh. V.-E. Trips to Circassia. Nalchik, 2008.
5. N. Karlgoff. About political system of the Black Sea tribes inhabiting the Northeast coast of the Black Sea//the Russian bulletin. M, 1960. T. 28, prince 2.
6. S.M. Bronevsky. The latest geographical and historical news of the Caucasus. M, 1823.
7. S. Khan Weight. Notes about Circassia. Nalchik, 2008.
8. Monpere F.D. A travel around Caucasus. Sukhumi, 1937.
9. D. Bell. The diary of stay in Circassia within 1837 - 1839//Adyghe, Balkars and Karachays in news of the European authors of XSh-XIX (ABIKEA). Nalchik, 1974.
10. F.I. Leontovich. Adats of the Caucasian mountaineers. Issue 2. Odessa, 1883.
11. L.I. laurels. Historical and ethnographic essays of the Caucasus. L., 1978.
12. Pokrovsk M.V. From history of Adyghe at the end of XVIII - the first half of the 19th century: social and economic essays. Krasnodar, 1989.
13. V.K. Gardanov. Social order of the Adyghe people. M, 1967.
14. I.L. Babich. Legal pluralism in the Northwest Caucasus. M, 2000.
15. L.G. Svechnikova. Family law of mountaineers in XIX - the beginning of the 20th century. Historical and legal research: yew.... edging. east. sciences. M, 1994.
16. Chirg A.Yu. Social and political system of Adyghe of the Northwest Caucasus: yew.... Dr.s east. sciences. Maykop, 2003.
17. Pokrovsk M.V. The Adyghe tribes at the end of XVIII - the first half of the 19th century//Kavk. ethnographer. sb.: Tr. Inta ethnographies of Academy of Sciences of the USSR. M, 1958.
18. B.M. Dzhimov. Social and economic and political position of Adyghe in the 19th century Maykop, 1986.
19. N. Dubrovin. Circassians (Adyghe). Krasnodar, 1927.
20. The set of information about dependent estates in the mountain population of the Kuban region//Precepts of law of Adyghe and balkaro-Karachays in the XV-XIX centuries Maykop, 1997.
21. Shamray V.S. The historical information to a question about yasyryakh in the North Caucasus and in the Kuban region and the documents relating to this question//the Kuban collection. Ekaterinodar, 1906. T. 12.
22. Kamenev N. Basseyn Psekupsa//Kuban army sheets. 1867. No. 28.
23. F.A. Shcherbina. History of Armavir and cherkeso-gayev. Ekaterinodar, 1916.
24. A.I. Robakidze. Some lines of mountain feudalism in the Caucasus//the Soviet ethnography. 1978. No. 2.
25. Kuban and Black Sea coast//Old Circassian gardens. A landscape and an agrikultura of the Northwest Caucasus according to the Russian sources of 1864 - 1914 / sost. S.H. Hotko. M, 2005. T. 2.
26. Monpere F.D. History of the Circassian nation. The 19th century//Precepts of law of Adyghe and balkaro-Karachays of the XV-XIX centuries Maykop, 1997.
27. State Archive of Krasnodar Krai (SAKK). T. 249. Op.1. 689. L. 167.
28. In the same place. 1882. L. 96.

Came to edition On April 21, 2010

Geraldine Regina
Other scientific works: