Boyars of Moldavia and Wallachia

Last updated
Vornic Serban Gradisteanu wearing an islic, an indication of his boyar rank Gheorghe Tattarescu - Portretul Vornicului Serban Gradisteanu.jpg
Vornic Șerban Grădișteanu wearing an işlic, an indication of his boyar rank

The boyars of Moldavia and Wallachia were the nobility of the Danubian Principalities of Moldavia and Wallachia. The title was either inherited or granted by the Hospodar, often together with an administrative function. [1] The boyars held much of the political power in the principalities and, until the Phanariote era, they elected the Hospodar.

Contents

As such, until the 19th century, the system oscillated between an oligarchy and an autocracy with power concentrated in the Hospodar's hands. [2]

History

A boyar's wife; drawing of 1729 Trachten-Kabinett von Siebenburgen - Nevasta unui boier.jpg
A boyar's wife; drawing of 1729

Origins

During the Middle Ages, Romanians lived in autonomous communities called obște which mixed private and common ownership, employing an open field system. [3] The private ownership of land gained ground In the 14th and 15th centuries, leading to differences within the obște towards a stratification of the members of the community. [3]

The creation of the feudal domain in which the landlords were known as boyars, was mostly through danii ("donations") system: the Hospodars gave away whole villages to military servants, usurping the right of property of the obște. [4] By the 16th century, the few remaining still-free villages were forcefully taken over by boyars, [5] while some people were forced to agree to become serfs (see Serfdom in Moldavia and Wallachia) due to hunger, invasions, high taxes, debts, which further deteriorated the economic standing of the free peasants. [6]

Apart from the court boyars and the military elite, some boyars ("countryside boyars") arose from within the villages, when a leader of the obște (usually called knyaz ) swore fealty to the hospodar and becoming the landlord of the village. [7]

Feudal era

The Hospodar was considered the supreme ruler of the land and he received a land rent from the peasants, who also had to pay a rent to the boyar who owned the land. [8] The boyars were generally excepted from any taxes and rents to be paid to the Hospodar. The boyars were entitled to a rent that was a percentage of the peasants' produce (initially one-tenth, hence its name, dijmă) in addition to a number of days of unpaid labour (corvée, locally known as clacă or robotă). [9]

However, not all landlords who owned villages were boyars, a different class existed of landlords without a boyar title, called cneji or judeci in Wallachia and nemeși in Moldavia. [7] They were however not tax-exempt like the boyars. [10] The upper boyars (known as vlastelin in Wallachia) had to supply the hospodar with a number of warriors proportional to the number of villages they owned. [11]

Some boyars were court officials, the office being called dregătorie, while others were boyars without a function. Important offices at the court that were held by boyars included vistier (treasurer), stolnic (pantler), vornic (concierge) and logofăt (chancellor). [12] While early the court officials were not important and often they were not even boyars, with time, boyars started to desire the functions, in order to participate in the government of the country, but also to get the incomes that were afferent to each function. [13]

While the era is often called "feudal" in the Romanian historiography, there were some major differences between the status of the Western feudal lords and the status of the Romanian boyars. [14] While a hierarchy existed in Wallachia and Moldavia just like in the West, the power balance was titled towards the Hospodar, who had everyone as subjects and who had the power to demote even the richest boyar, to confiscate his wealth or even behead him. [14] However, the power for the election of the hospodar was held by the great boyar families, who would form groups and alliances, often leading to disorder and instability. [14]

Hospodar Nicholas Mavrogenes and the boyar council Mavrogheni tron.jpg
Hospodar Nicholas Mavrogenes and the boyar council

Phanariote era

Boyar Iordache Filipescu, dressed in the Phanariote boyar fashion, sitting on a divan Bas-boier Iordache Filipescu, 1843.jpg
Boyar Iordache Filipescu, dressed in the Phanariote boyar fashion, sitting on a divan

After the Phanariote regime was instated in Moldavia (1711) and Wallachia (1716), many of the boyar class was made out of Constantinople Greeks who belonged to the Phanariote clients, who became officials and were assimilated to the boyar class or locals who bought their titles. [15] When coming to Bucharest or Iași, the new Phanariote Hospodars came with a Greek retinue who were given the most important official jobs; many of these Greeks married into local boyar families. [16] In order to consolidate their position within the Wallachian and Moldavian boyar class, the officials were allowed to keep their boyar title after the end of their term. [16]

The official functions, which traditionally were given for a year, were often bought with money as an investment, since the function would often give large incomes in return. [17] While the official functions were often given to both Romanians and Greeks, there was an exception: throughout the Phanariote era, the treasurers were mostly local boyars because they were more competent in collecting taxes. [16] When the descendants of a boyar were not able to obtain even the lowest function, they became "fallen boyars" (mazili), who nevertheless, kept some fiscal privileges. [18]

Many of the newly bestowed local boyars were wealthy merchants who paid in order to become boyars, in some cases they were even forced by the Hospodar to become boyars (and thus pay the Hospodar a sum). [17] The princely courts of Bucharest and Iași kept title registers, which included a list of all the boyars (known as Arhondologia ). [17] Since the Hospodar wanted to maximize his income, it was in his interest to create as many boyars as possible (and receive money from each), leading to an inflation in the number of boyars. [17]

The economic basis of the boyar's class was land ownership: by the 18th century, more than half of the land of Wallachia and Moldavia being owned by them. For instance, according to the 1803 Moldavian census, out of the 1711 villages and market towns, the boyars owned 927 of them. [19] The process that began during the feudal era, of boyars seizing properties from the free peasants, continued and accelerated during this period. [18]

The boyars wore costumes similar to those of the Turkish nobility, with the difference that instead of the turban, most of them wore a very large işlic. [20] Female members of the boyar class also wore Turkish inspired costume. [21] Many boyars used large sums of money for conspicuous consumption, [22] particularly luxurious clothing, but also carriages, jewelry and furniture. [23] The luxury of the boyars' lives contrasted strongly not only with the squalor of the Romanian villages, but also with the general appearance of the capitals, this contrast striking the foreigners who visited the Principalities. [24] In the first decade of the 19th-century, female members of the boyar class started to adopt Western fashion: in July 1806, the wife of the Hospodar in Iași, Safta Ipsilanti, received the wife of the French consul dressed according to the French fashion. [21] Male boyars, however, did not reform their costume to Western fashion until around the 1840s. [21]

The Public assembly of Boyars, 1837 Obsteasca Adunare, 1837.jpg
The Public assembly of Boyars, 1837
The burning of Regulamentul Organic and of the register of boyar ranks during the 1848 revolution Arderea Regulamentului Organic si a Arhondologiei.jpg
The burning of Regulamentul Organic and of the register of boyar ranks during the 1848 revolution

The opening towards Western Europe meant that the boyars adopted the Western mores and the luxury expenses increased. While the greater boyars were able to afford these expenses through the intensification of the exploitation of their domains (and the peasants working on them), many smaller boyars were ruined by them. [25]

Modern Romania

Starting with the middle of the 19th century, the word "boyar" began to lose its meaning as a "noble" and to mean simply "large landowner". [1] Cuza's Constitution (known as the Statut) of 1864 deprived the boyars from the legal privileges and the ranks officially disappeared, but, through their wealth, they retained their economic and political influence, [26] particularly through the electoral system of census suffrage. Some of the lower boyars joined the bourgeoisie involved in commerce and industry. [26]

A number of 2000 large landowners held over 3 million hectares or about 38% of all arable land. [27] Most of these boyars no longer took any part in managing their estates, but rather lived in Bucharest or in Western Europe (particularly France, Italy and Switzerland). [27] They leased their estates for a fixed sum to arendași (leaseholders). Many of the boyars found themselves in financial difficulties; many of their estates had been mortgaged. [27] The lack of interest in agriculture and their domains led to a dissolution of the boyar class. [27]

Organization and Ranks

The Boyars of Wallachia and Moldavia were divided into three primary classes, the most prestigious of which was the first rank. Vitally important to boyar identity and class stratification was costume. Boyars wore richly embroidered and expensive oriental costumes with many expensive furs, complemented by tall işlic hats of varying sizes and shapes. The quality, type, and color of material used in boyar costumes and headwear was indicative of one's rank in the social hierarchy. [28] Members of the first rank were called Great Boyars and occupied the most important posts of the Wallachian and Moldavian administrations, including the Great Ban and the Great Logofăt. Great Boyars were the only class entitled to wear beards, and wore sable gugiuman hats with red tops (white tops were reserved for the Prince). [29] After reforms made by Prince Constantine Mavrocordatos, descendants of Great Boyars were known as neamuri and descendants of small boyars were known as mazili. [30]

Boyars of the second rank, much more numerous than Great Boyars, occupied posts in the administration such as Clucer, Paharnic, and Stolnic. Second and third rank boyars were not entitled to having beards, but wore mustaches instead. Small boyars wore smaller işlic hats than those of Great Boyars, and third rank boyars often had their hats adorned with large square cushions. These hats were not made of sable felt, but rather polecat, marten, fox, or lamb. In 1829, Great Boyars, second rank boyars, and third rank boyars occupied 59, 612, and 562 named administrative posts in Wallachia, respectively. [31]

Many boyar families did not originate in Romania and came to the Danubian Principalities as retainers of the Phanariots. These families are identified by some scholars as Greco-Levantine owing to the varied ethnic origins of the families (including Greek, Venetian Slav, Albanian, and Bulgarian) and their self-identification and religious and cultural association with the Fanar, and their preference for speaking Greek. [32] Tensions frequently mounted between native boyars and their Greek counterparts, but the ethnic admixture of both groups was complex. Many boyar families considered native had Greek or distant Greek origins, such as the Cantacuzino family, and both groups were primarily Grecophone. In 1821, native Wallachian families were among the many boyars of the so-called 'Greek party' who went into exile in Kronstadt. Conversely, many families which constituted the 'native' boyar nobility that remained in Wallachia were of Greco-Levantine descent. [33]

Legacy

The movement surrounding the Sămănătorul magazine lamented the disappearance of the boyar class, while not arguing for their return. [34] Historian Nicolae Iorga saw the system not as a selfish exploitation of the peasants by the boyars, but rather as a rudimentary democracy. [35] On the other side of the political spectrum, Marxist thinker Constantin Dobrogeanu-Gherea thought that the reforms didn't go far enough, arguing that the condition of the peasants was a neo-serfdom. [36]

Notes

  1. 1 2 Djuvara, p.131
  2. ↑ Djuvara, p.135
  3. 1 2 Costăchel et al., p. 111
  4. ↑ Costăchel et al., p. 112
  5. ↑ Costăchel et al., p. 113
  6. ↑ Costăchel et al., p. 114
  7. 1 2 Costăchel et al., p. 177
  8. ↑ Costăchel et al., p. 174
  9. ↑ Pascu et al., p. 139
  10. ↑ Costăchel et al., p. 179
  11. ↑ Costăchel et al., p. 189
  12. ↑ Costăchel et al., p. 184-185
  13. ↑ Costăchel et al., p. 193
  14. 1 2 3 Djuvara, p.133
  15. ↑ Ionescu, p.63
  16. 1 2 3 Ionescu, p.64
  17. 1 2 3 4 Ionescu, p.65
  18. 1 2 Djuvara, p.136
  19. ↑ Djuvara, p. 137
  20. ↑ Djuvara, p.109
  21. 1 2 3 Amila Buturovic & Irvin Cemil Schick: Women in the Ottoman Balkans: Gender, Culture and History 2007 page 210-213
  22. ↑ Djuvara, p.145
  23. ↑ Djuvara, p.119
  24. ↑ Djuvara, p. 120
  25. ↑ Djuvara, p.146
  26. 1 2 Hitchins, p.9
  27. 1 2 3 4 Hitchins, p.158
  28. ↑ Vintilă-Ghiţulescu, Constanţa (2011). From Traditional Attire to Modern Dress: Modes of Identification, Modes of Recognition in the Balkans (XVIth-XXth Centuries). Cambridge Scholars Publishing. p. 125. ISBN   978-1443832632.
  29. ↑ Aust, Corlenia; Klein, Denise; Weller, Thomas (2019). Dress and Cultural Difference in Early Modern Europe. Walter de Gruyter GmbH & Co KG. ISBN   9783110632385.
  30. ↑ Florescu, Radu (2022). The Struggle Against Russia in the Romanian Principalities: A Problem in Anglo-Turkish Diplomacy, 1821-1854. Histria Books. ISBN   978-1592112371.
  31. ↑ Taki, Victor (2021). Russia on the Danube: Empire, Elites, and Reform in Moldavia and Wallachia, 1812–1834. Central European University Press. pp. 332–337. ISBN   9789633863831.
  32. ↑ Vintila, Constanta (2022). Changing Subjects, Moving Objects: Status, Mobility, and Social Transformation in Southeastern Europe, 1700–1850. Brill. pp. 60–104. ISBN   9783657704873.
  33. ↑ Bracewell, Wendy (2009). Balkan Departures: Travel Writing from Southeastern Europe. Berghahn Books. p. 64. ISBN   978-1845452544.
  34. ↑ Hitchins, p.68
  35. ↑ Hitchins, p.69
  36. ↑ Hitchins, p.77

Related Research Articles

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Moldavia</span> Historical region and former principality in Central and Eastern Europe

Moldavia is a historical region and former principality in Central and Eastern Europe, corresponding to the territory between the Eastern Carpathians and the Dniester River. An initially independent and later autonomous state, it existed from the 14th century to 1859, when it united with Wallachia as the basis of the modern Romanian state; at various times, Moldavia included the regions of Bessarabia, all of Bukovina and Hertsa. The region of Pokuttya was also part of it for a period of time.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Wallachia</span> Historical and geographical region of Romania

Wallachia or Walachia is a historical and geographical region of modern-day Romania. It is situated north of the Lower Danube and south of the Southern Carpathians. Wallachia was traditionally divided into two sections, Muntenia and Oltenia. Dobruja could sometimes be considered a third section due to its proximity and brief rule over it. Wallachia as a whole is sometimes referred to as Muntenia through identification with the larger of the two traditional sections.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Phanariots</span> Powerful Ottoman Greeks from Constantinople

Phanariots, Phanariotes, or Fanariots were members of prominent Greek families in Phanar, the chief Greek quarter of Constantinople where the Ecumenical Patriarchate is located, who traditionally occupied four important positions in the Ottoman Empire: Voivode of Moldavia, Voivode of Wallachia, Grand Dragoman of the Porte and Grand Dragoman of the Fleet. Despite their cosmopolitanism and often-Western education, the Phanariots were aware of their Greek ancestry and culture; according to Nicholas Mavrocordatos' Philotheou Parerga, "We are a race completely Hellenic".

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Alexander Ypsilantis (1725–1805)</span> Greek Voivode of Wallachia and Moldavia

Alexander Ypsilantis was a Greek Voivode (Prince) of Wallachia from 1774 to 1782, and again from 1796 to 1797, and also Voivode of Moldavia from 1786 to 1788. He bears the same name as, but should not be confused with, his grandson, the Greek War of Independence hero of the early 19th century. The Ypsilantis were a prominent family of Phanariotes.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Tudor Vladimirescu</span> Romanian politician (1780–1821)

Tudor Vladimirescu was a Romanian revolutionary hero, the leader of the Wallachian uprising of 1821 and of the Pandur militia. He is also known as Tudor din Vladimiri or, occasionally, as Domnul Tudor.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Constantine Mavrocordatos</span> Prince of Wallachia and Moldavia

Constantine Mavrocordatos was a Greek noble who served as Prince of Wallachia and Prince of Moldavia at several intervals between 1730 and 1769. As a ruler he issued reforms in the laws of each of the two Danubian Principalities, ensuring a more adequate taxation and a series of measures amounting to the emancipation of serfs and a more humane treatment of slaves.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Alexander Mourouzis</span> Prince of Moldavia and Wallachia

Alexander Mourouzis (Greek: Αλέξανδρος Μουρούζης; Romanian: Alexandru Moruzi was a Grand Dragoman of the Ottoman Empire who served as Prince of Moldavia and Prince of Wallachia. Open to Enlightenment ideas, and noted for his interest in hydrological engineering, Mourouzis was forced to deal with the intrusions of Osman Pazvantoğlu's rebellious troops. In a rare gesture for his period, he renounced the throne in Wallachia, and his second rule in Moldavia was cut short by the intrigues of French diplomat Horace Sébastiani.

The Early Modern Times in Romania started after the death of Michael the Brave, who ruled in a personal union, Wallachia, Transylvania, and Moldavia – three principalities in the lands that now form Romania – for three months, in 1600. The three principalities were subjected to the Ottoman Empire, and paid a yearly tribute to the Ottoman Sultans, but they preserved their internal autonomy. In contrast, Dobruja and the Banat were fully incorporated into the Ottoman Empire.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">John Caradja</span> Phanariote Greek Prince of Wallachia

John George Caradja, also known by his regnal name Ioan Gheorghe Caragea, was a Phanariote Greek Prince of Wallachia, who reigned between August 1812 and September 1818. He was the second, and last, member of the Karatzas or Caradja family to ascend to the Wallachian throne, but one of several to have also held office as Great Dragoman of the Ottoman Empire. Caradja, whose life is relatively obscure up to that point, held two terms as Dragoman. Before 1800, he also embarked on a literary career, participating in the spread of Enlightenment literature throughout the Rum Millet, and becoming noted for his translations from Carlo Goldoni. His progeny included Rallou Karatza-Argyropoulos, who was famous in her own right as a pioneer of modern Greek theater.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Gheorghe Bibescu</span> Romanian prince

Gheorghe Bibescu was a hospodar (Prince) of Wallachia between 1843 and 1848. His rule coincided with the revolutionary tide that culminated in the 1848 Wallachian revolution.

Ionică Tăutu was a Moldavian low-ranking boyar, Enlightenment-inspired pamphleteer, and craftsman.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Constantine Hangerli</span> Prince of Wallachia from 1797 to 1799

Constantine Hangerli, also written as Constantin Hangerliu, was a Prince of Wallachia between 1797 and the time of his death. He was the brother of Alexander Hangerli, who served as Prince of Moldavia in 1807.

<i>Regulamentul Organic</i> Quasi-constitutional organic law in Moldavia and Wallachia

Regulamentul Organic was a quasi-constitutional organic law enforced in 1831–1832 by the Imperial Russian authorities in Moldavia and Wallachia. The document partially confirmed the traditional government and set up a common Russian protectorate which lasted until 1854. The Regulamentul itself remained in force until 1858. Conservative in its scope, it also engendered a period of unprecedented reforms which provided a setting for the Westernization of the local society. The Regulamentul offered the two Principalities their first common system of government.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Wallachian uprising of 1821</span> Social and political rebellion in Wallachia

The uprising of 1821 was a social and political rebellion in Wallachia, which was at the time a tributary state of the Ottoman Empire. It originated as a movement against the Phanariote administration, with backing from the more conservative boyars, but mutated into an attempted removal of the boyar class. Though not directed against Ottoman rule, the revolt espoused an early version of Romanian nationalism, and is described by historians as the first major event of a national awakening. The revolutionary force was centered on a group of Pandur irregulars, whose leader was Tudor Vladimirescu. Its nucleus was the Wallachian subregion of Oltenia, where Vladimirescu established his "Assembly of the People" in February.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Nicholas Mavrogenes</span> Prince of Wallachia

Nicholas Mavrogenes, was a Phanariote Prince of Wallachia. He was the great-uncle of Manto Mavrogenous, a heroine of the Greek War of Independence.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Slavery in Romania</span>

Slavery existed on the territory of present-day Romania from the founding of the principalities of Wallachia and Moldavia in 13th–14th century, until it was abolished in stages during the 1840s and 1850s before the Romanian War of Independence and the formation of the United Principalities of Moldavia and Wallachia in 1859, and also until 1783 in Transylvania and Bukovina. Most of the slaves were of Romani ethnicity. Particularly in Moldavia there were also slaves of Tatar ethnicity, probably prisoners captured from the wars with the Nogai and Crimean Tatars.

The Moldavian Revolution of 1848 is the name used for the unsuccessful Romanian liberal and Romantic nationalist movement inspired by the Revolutions of 1848 in the principality of Moldavia. Initially seeking accommodation within the political framework defined by the Regulamentul Organic, it eventually rejected it as imposed by foreign powers and called for more thorough political reforms. Led by a group of young intellectuals, the movement was mostly limited to petitioning and constitutional projects, unlike the successful uprising taking place later that year in neighbouring Wallachia, and it was quickly suppressed. This was despite the fact that the Moldavian revolutionaries were more moderate and willing to compromise in their demands for reforms than their Wallachian counterparts, as Moldavian political and social life continued to be dominated by a landed, conservative aristocracy, with the middle class still embryonic.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Nicholas Mavrocordatos</span> Phanariote Prince of Wallachia, Grand Dragoman of the Gate

Nicholas Mavrocordatos was a Greek member of the Mavrocordatos family, Grand Dragoman to the Divan (1697), and consequently the first Phanariote Hospodar of the Danubian Principalities, Prince of Moldavia, and Prince of Wallachia. He was succeeded as Grand Dragoman (1709) by his brother John Mavrocordato (Ioan), who was for a short while hospodar in both Wallachia and Moldavia.

Serfdom was widespread in Moldavia and Wallachia between 15th and 18th centuries, replacing the obște which were common before the founding of the medieval states of Wallachia and Moldavia. Initially, the serfs were allowed to change the estate on which they lived, although restrictions were introduced over the decades.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Paharnic</span> Paharnic

The Paharnic was a historical Romanian rank, one of the non-hereditary positions ascribed to the boyar aristocracy in Moldavia and Wallachia. It was the local equivalent of a cup-bearer or cześnik, originally centered on pouring and obtaining wine for the court of Moldavian and Wallachian Princes. With time, it became a major administrative office and, in Wallachia, also had a lesser military function. The retinue of such boyars, usually called Păhărnicei, was in both countries also a private army.

References

This page is based on this Wikipedia article
Text is available under the CC BY-SA 4.0 license; additional terms may apply.
Images, videos and audio are available under their respective licenses.