Contents

List of Maps List of Tables Preface Notes on Contributors Glossary of Technical Terms 1 Introduction: The Evolution of Service Nobilities H. M. Scott 2 The Swedish Nobility, 16001772 A. F. Upton 3 The Rise and Fall of the Danish Nobility, 16001800 Knud J. V. Jespersen 4 The Nobility of the Early Modern Reich, 14951806 Peter H. Wilson 5 The Junkers of BrandenburgPrussia, 16001806 Edgar Melton 6 The Nobility in the Bohemian and Austrian Lands, 16201780 James Van Horn Melton 7 The Early Modern Hungarian Nobility Peter Schimert 8 The Nobility of Hungary in the Eighteenth Century R. J. W. Evans 9 The Nobility of PolandLithuania, 15691795 Robert I. Frost
v

vii viii ix x xiii 1

13

43

74

118

171

210

249

266

vi

Contents

10 The Russian Nobility in the Seventeenth and Eighteenth Centuries Isabel de Madariaga 11 Conclusion: The Continuity of Aristocratic Power H. M. Scott Guides to Further Reading Index

311

377

400 421

1
Introduction: The Evolution of Service Nobilities
H. M. Scott
University of St Andrews

The second volume of this collection is devoted to Northern, Central and Eastern Europe. The development of this regions nobilities during the seventeenth and eighteenth centuries broadly corresponded to that evident further West. The main themes of the essays which follow are exactly those which dominated the first volume: a visible consolidation of noble power, the central importance of land as a source of income and social authority, a growing stratification within the nobility and the crucial role played by the State in the evolution of these lites. All four developments were linked. There were differences, both between the eastern and the western halves of the continent and between individual nobilities, and such variations were important. Yet they were less striking than the similarities evident all across Europe. In important respects, the period c 16001800 saw the development of greater uniformity between all of Europes lites. It was achieved by the convergence of nobilities in the eastern half of the continent with the broad pattern evident in Southern and Western Europe. This was particularly apparent in Russia, where changes around 1700 produced a nobility which for the first time began to resemble those found elsewhere on the continent. To a considerable extent these built on an earlier evolution, and it may be that, where the nobility at least was concerned, Russias chronological development simply lagged behind that of other continental countries. In the seventeenth century, Russia was distinct in important ways, as Professor Isabel de Madariaga makes very clear (Chapter 10). The origins of the Muscovite nobility were to be found less in military service than in its traditional role at the rulers court, demonstrated by the Russian term for this lite: dvoryanin, from dvor meaning court. Russias nobility was distinctive in a second respect. The sole hereditary native title was that of prince, which could only be acquired by birth (as the descendant of the princes who had exercised authority under the Grand Prince of Kievs overlordship) and could not be awarded by the ruler. All other titles were functional, that is to say they described a rank or position and, unlike
1

The Evolution of Service Nobilities

their western equivalents, were not hereditary. The princes together with the boyars reproduced in a sociological sense the aristocrats of the West. The second element in Russias future nobility mainly comprised the Tsars military servitors, who formed a cavalry force and in return received lands, thereby reproducing in a sociological sense, the knights of the West, the men on horseback.1 By comparison with the situation in many other countries, the seventeenth-century Russian aristocracy had few privileges, and those they did enjoy were customary rather than legal in nature.2 This underlined one central point about Russias evolution before the eighteenth century: that the Western concept of Orders and Estates, rooted in the ideology of the Roman Catholic Church and subsequently transferred to lay society, did not exist in Orthodox Muscovy. Russias lite was transformed by some remarkable social engineering forced through by Peter I (the Great, 16891725), whose policies affected every area of Russian life. His reforms began to make the nobility what it had not been hitherto: an Estate in the Western sense, that is to say a distinct legal order or Stand which possessed precise and substantial juridical, social and political privileges. These were far fewer than other European nobilities had long enjoyed. The eighteenth-century Russian nobleman could still be tortured, while his property could be and was confiscated by the ruler. His position was to be ameliorated under Catherine the Great (176296), who in 1785 issued a charter to the nobility, which finally secured for the Russian lite the wide-ranging rights and privileges which their European counterparts had long possessed. The development of a European-style nobility in Russia had also been advanced by Peter Is introduction of a limited number of hereditary titles. This evolution was incomplete, however, in one crucial respect. Though the Emperor attempted to implant the legal device of entail into Russia through his Law of Single Inheritance (1714), his efforts were widely unpopular and proved unsuccessful: the measure was repealed after the coup of 1730.3 The Russian nobilitys enduring adherence to the partible inheritance, which was traditional, prevented the hereditary transmission of wealth and power, and so inhibited the full emergence of the kind of aristocracy emerging in many European countries at this period. It was one reason why, though there were many great nobles, no full-blown aris lite ever developed in eighteenth and nineteenth-century Russia tocratic e (Chapter 10). This was unusual in the context of the countries examined in this volume, though certainly not unique. BrandenburgPrussia was an exception to this trend (Chapter 5), and so was the Reich. There, as Professor Peter Wilson makes clear (Chapter 4), the singular constitutional and political structure and the persistence until 1806 of a framework established at the end of the Middle Ages, militated against the emergence of the kind of aristocratic lite coming into existence in many continental countries. So too did the e operation of partible inheritance across large areas of Germany. Elsewhere,

H. M. Scott

however, the general evolution in Northern, Central and Eastern Europe was clear. The early modern period was characterised by the elaboration of the kind of hierarchy of wealth, power and (usually) titles found throughout much of Western and Southern Europe. It exemplified the way developments in the two halves of the continent were coming together during the seventeenth and eighteenth centuries. Around 1600, the nobilities examined in this volume were usually less stratified, reflecting their shorter, less complex historical evolutions. An elementary hierarchy existed, but there were rather fewer intervening levels between the mass of petty nobles and the great lords. The relative infrequency of titles throughout Northern, Central and Eastern Europe before the end of the sixteenth century was one symptom of the simpler structure of these lites. By 1800, however, they were noticeably more stratified, with the emergence of several distinct levels between the aristocracy and the lesser nobility. This was recognised, and to some extent advanced, by the spread of titles during the early modern period, both numerically and by degree. One important reason why this took place is that titles cost next-to-nothing to bestow and might even generate income: further research is needed on the extent of the sale of honours by hard-pressed monarchs. This made the granting of a title, or an advancement in rank, a cheap and therefore attractive way of rewarding State servants, particularly for rulers in the eastern half of the continent whose financial resources were significantly less than their western counterparts. Their incomes lagged behind the escalating expenditures they had to support from revenues which were often scanty. The new ranks and designations were equally appealing to the noble recipients, engaged as they were in an endless competition for status, prestige and advancement, and were an economical and efficient way of satisfying the needs of both donor and recipient. In Sweden and Denmark, titles made their appearance with the introduction of the ranks of baron and count. Such designations were first granted in 1563 in Sweden. During the next century very few were created. In 1626 when the structure of the Swedish nobility was formalised, there were only twelve barons and counts. They were all members of the magnate lite which increasingly dominated Swedens government and society. The council aristocracy, as it became known, was sharply differentiated through its wealth and political influence as well as its monopoly of titles, from the remainder of the nobility, who resented its dominance. Though seventeenth-century Sweden was unusual for the absence of serious social conflicts, these divisions were certainly evident at the time. Not until the reign of Karl XI after 1680 was there a significant expansion of the Swedish titled nobility (Chapter 2). On the other side of the Sound, the titles of baron and count were introduced in 1671 as part of the new absolute monarchys reorganisation of Denmarks nobility. Their appearance finally undermined the cherished principle of noble equality, though this had already been seriously weakened in practice (Chapter 3).

The Evolution of Service Nobilities

The inflation of honours was also evident elsewhere. In the Bohemian and Austrian Lands, the Habsburgs awarded the prized title of prince which at this period could only be granted by the Holy Roman Emperor and had hitherto been reserved for members of ruling families to a handful of major Houses during the seventeenth and eighteenth centuries. The first to be so honoured was the Liechtenstein in 1608, and before 1700 it had been followed by the Lobkovic, Dietrichstein, Wallenstein (temporarily: the celebrated condottiere was prince of Friedland by 1623 and its duke by 1625), Eggenberg, Auersperg, Portia and Schwarzenberg, while the Hungarian family of Eszterhzy also secured the princely dignity; other Houses followed in the course of the eighteenth century.4 The same process of differentiation was also underway throughout the middle and lower levels of the nobility. Viennas powers of ennoblement were evident in the way in which selected families in the Austrian and Bohemian territories, invariably Catholic and loyalist, were granted a higher title usually that of baron or count and with it admission to the Herrenstand (Estate of Lords). This furthered the social and political rise of the Herrenstand and thus the decline of the lesser nobility in the Ritterstand (Estate of Knights). It also advanced the stratification of the Second Estate as a whole (Chapter 6). The same process can be seen in Hungary, where inherited titles were rare until they were introduced by the new Habsburg rulers who took over in 1526, shortly before the Ottoman conquest of much of the Kingdom. Its reconquest and the growth of Viennas control during the seventeenth century saw the rapid spread of these ranks. Only two Hungarian families the Eszterhzy in 1687, the Batthny in 1764 secured the coveted status of prince before 1800. But the dignities of baron and especially of count were distributed much more freely by the Habsburgs and even sold by them, and they contributed to the marked stratification of the Hungarian nobility which took place during the seventeenth and eighteenth centuries, when the aristocracy was marked out partly by its monopoly of titles and partly by its distinct legal privileges (Chapter 7). Two countries diverged from this general pattern, though in different ways. In the Polish-Lithuanian Commonwealth, the only titles were and always remained those which either had originated in the Grand Duchy of Lithuania before the Union of Lublin with Poland in 1569 or were foreign in origin. The early modern period did see the development of an elementary hierarchy within the Commonwealths nobility, with State office filling the role played elsewhere by formal titles, but the process did not advance either as far or as fast as in most other countries. The strong tradition of szlachta equality, and the system of partible inheritance which supported it, inhibited the full development of the kind of stable aristocracy which was evolving elsewhere. The lite which emerged in early modern PolandLithuania was notable for the relatively frequent changes in its composition, with the continuing rise and fall of individual families, something which was quite unusual (Chapter 9).

H. M. Scott

Developments in BrandenburgPrussia were also distinct (Chapter 5). During the seventeenth and eighteenth centuries an lite did evolve within the nobility and at certain points exercised considerable political influence, particularly during the reign of Frederick William, the Great Elector (164088). Its titles and sometimes even its social origins, however, lay outside the territories of the Hohenzollerns. The Elector exactly like his fellow German rulers could ennoble his subjects, but only to the level of simple nobility (Adel). Within the Reich, the higher titles of baron, count and prince could only be conferred by the Holy Roman Emperors, and this monopoly was jealously if not entirely successfully defended against inroads after 1648 by the Austrian Habsburgs, for whom it was an important source of power, patronage and income. The majority of noblemen throughout the scattered Hohenzollern territories remained simple Adel. During the second half of the seventeenth century, the Great Elector encountered significant opposition to his centralising policies from the territorial nobilities, and in order to circumvent this he built up and worked through a new lite. This imperial or Aulic nobility was loyal, usually Calvinist (in contrast to the Lutheranism of most Junkers) and often recruited from outside his own lands. It was also distinguished by the higher titles of nobility which a grateful Elector secured for his favourites and officials from the Habsburg Emperor. The eclipse of the Junkers did not prove to be permanent. During the eighteenth century they retrieved their position, forming a partnership with the ruling family and contributing much to Prussias emergence as a major European power during the reign of Frederick the Great (174086). Yet the Hohenzollern State long possessed a number of separate territorial lites rather than one unified nobility, which only emerged after 1800. It inhibited the kind of stratification which was underway elsewhere. This was also the effect of the Junkers adherence to partible inheritance. Though family agreements to keep the landed properties together were common, the revenues would often be divided among the sons, and this militated against the development of a hierarchy among the nobility of BrandenburgPrussia (Chapter 5). The national essays which follow underline that the nobilities of Northern, Central and Eastern Europe, like their Western and Southern counterparts, were primarily landed lites. The one partial exception to this generalisation was the nobility of the Reich (Chapter 4). Elsewhere, the lands which they owned or leased provided essential income in cash and/or kind together with considerable influence over other social groups. Russia was once again an exception to this pattern (Chapter 10). The Romanovs granted serfs rather than estates to their servants and favourites, a practice which was essential in a country where many regions were underpopulated, while landholding was in any case much less stable; noblemen could have their estates confiscated by the monarch in a way which was highly unusual elsewhere. Successive

The Evolution of Service Nobilities

rulers also sought to prevent any consolidation of landed power by granting properties away from the region where a nobleman was already entrenched. The result was that very few members of the Russian lite were able to build up the kind of regional power bases found in other countries, which rested upon the consolidation of lands together with the social and political influence which accrued from this. It did not, however, prevent noble exploitation of peasants being a central feature of Russias development, as it was all across Europe. The way in which the nobilities examined in this volume exploited their estates was distinctive in one respect. This was the emergence and consolidation of a system which can loosely, if not altogether accurately, be styled serfdom, but should more accurately be known as the second serfdom, within which peasants were tied to the land and legally subject to their lords. By second serfdom is meant a massive growth in landlord power over the rural population during the early modern period.5 This was a distinctive feature of early modern agrarian developments to the north of the Bohemian Forest and to the east of the river Elbe, and on a small scale in a few regions of the Reich, to the west of the Elbe also (Chapter 4). Throughout these areas, the peasantry had emerged in a much-weakened position from the agrarian crisis of the Later Middle Ages.6 This was apparent in the development, from the sixteenth century onwards, of the system of Gutsherrschaft (manorial lordship). It had two principal characteristics: a nobleman had a relatively large demesne, which he farmed directly, while the peasants were in a dependent position and were forced to provide the essential and often unpaid labour for the lord to exploit his own lands. The serfs were tied to their lords estate and subjected to a range of social, economic and legal disabilities. They might not be able, for example, to marry themselves or their children, or to move to another estate without his permission. The transmission of a peasants property from father to son was likely to involve payment to the lord. The distinguishing characteristic of Gutsherrschaft, in its classic form, was that the peasant was legally unfree. This system was attractive, and may even have been essential, because of the relatively poor soil and low yield ratios throughout the eastern half of the continent, which obliged nobles to minimise their labour costs in order to make the exploitation of their estates economically viable. All over Europe nobles were farming part of their own lands, rather than renting them out. What was unusual about Central and Eastern Europe was the high proportion of these which the lord was cultivating directly, together with the peasantrys unfree status. The rise of serfdom was assisted by the widespread political upheavals in many countries, and by the opportunities in some areas for the profitable seaborne export of grain and grain-based products to Western Europe, especially between the mid sixteenth and the later seventeenth centuries. It was facilitated and even accelerated by the State which was also anxious to extract resources from the serf, primarily conscript soldiers and taxation, to build up its military forces.

H. M. Scott

This, in outline, is the traditional view of serfdom and the reasons for its development. Though its origins lie in much earlier periods of historical writing, this very negative view of social developments was strongly reinforced by the scholarship produced in Soviet-dominated Eastern Europe between the end of the Second World War and its fracturing during and after 1989.7 It was shaped by the assumption that peasants were everywhere downtrodden and exploited by the seigneurs. Agricultural production was, as a consequence, inefficient and the whole system was the source of the regions backwardness, both then and in later centuries. This approach obviously has had considerable impact upon our view of the nobilities surveyed in this volume. Traditionally, scholarship on agrarian developments has been dominated by statements about the divisions between the continents western and eastern halves, with the river Elbe as a convenient if inexact dividing line. In East Elbian Europe, social developments have tended to be reduced to a few crude generalisations, which indict every nobleman as an oppressor and portray every peasant as a downtrodden serf. Since 1989, however, the break-up of Soviet Eastern Europe has led to an infinitely more nuanced and sophisticated view of agrarian developments becoming established.8 The essays in this volume underline that serfdom was less important to contemporaries than it has seemed to later historians, in keeping with the reassessment now under way. The national surveys suggest that not only was Gutsherrschaft far from universal, but also where it became established, social developments were much less uniform than often supposed and could also be much less oppressive. In Russia, for example, around 50 per cent of the population seem to have been serfs, but up to 90 per cent can be classified as peasants until the later nineteenth century.9 A similar situation seems to have existed across all the countries where Gutsherrschaft became established, though the proportions may have differed. The chapters which follow emphasise that serfdom was only one important dimension, rather than a defining characteristic, of the evolution of the regions nobilities during the early modern period. This was especially so for Sweden and, to a lesser extent, Denmark. Sweden is in any case a clear exception to the pattern which prevailed across much of Northern, Central and Eastern Europe, since serfdom never became established there. Swedish peasants had always been and remained free men, and though they were certainly exploited by the nobility, they were never reduced to a state of unfreedom. In the mid-seventeenth century, during a period of acute social tension, there had been some talk of the peasantry being depressed into a Livonian servitude. In other words, there was a fear that the kind of agrarian system which prevailed on the southern shores of the Baltic would be transplanted into Sweden by noblemen who had become familiar with Gutsherrschaft through military service in these areas lite, the council during the wars which ended in 1660. Many of the Swedish e

The Evolution of Service Nobilities

aristocracy, had secured large donations of lands from a grateful Crown, for their role in the conquest of a trans-Baltic empire, and on these estates were perfectly happy to exploit the labour services which were established in these regions.10 Such impositions, however, were never a serious threat to the position of the Swedish peasantry. On the contrary, noble demesnes remained relatively small in Sweden itself, and were more likely to be leased out than farmed directly (Chapter 2). Developments in neighbouring Denmark followed a rather different path during the eighteenth century. A relatively mild form of peasant servitude was formalised there in 1733, the so-called stavnsbnd or bond of adscription, which in its final form tied all male peasants between the ages of four and forty to the manor where they had been born. This was primarily concerned with the system of military recruitment and was of limited duration: it was undermined by a reorganisation of the armed forces, and was abolished by the Danish reformers (most of whom were themselves noblemen) at the end of the eighteenth century. Though the unpaid work which this provided was an important element in the Danish nobilitys prosperity during the mid-eighteenth century, it fell some way short of the system of Gutsherrschaft (Chapter 3). The traditional picture of serfdoms importance for the nobilities of Central and Eastern Europe receives only qualified support from the national surveys in this volume. These demonstrate that, though it was widespread, it was far from universal and could be far less burdensome than for long believed. Some noble estates, even in the heartland of serfdom, were leased to tenants in part and even in whole, rather than farmed as demesne. It is also evident that all peasants in this region were not equally oppressed. Throughout Central and Eastern Europe, the peasantry was as stratified as the nobility itself.11 At the apex of agrarian society there was usually an lite of relatively rich peasants, who were themselves landowners, farmed these properties with the help of hired labour, marketed any surpluses which might be produced and might be personally free. Below this there was a complex and changing hierarchy of smallholders and agricultural workers: farmhands, servants, stablehands, maids and so forth. Labour services were normally performed by these hired labourers, who were often employed by the richer peasants to discharge their own dues to the lord. Within the system of Gutsherrschaft, wage labour by serfs for lords and by serfs for other peasants was far more common and certainly more significant than previously realised. Far from Gutsherrschaft being uniform, moreover, there was considerable variation, both between individual regions and whole countries, and between particular estates. Many established generalisations were based on studies of larger properties, where the surviving records enabled detailed investigations to be undertaken. Yet these landholdings were not necessarily typical.12 Though some impressive latifundia were to be found in Central and Eastern Europe, many noble estates were either medium-sized or, in

H. M. Scott

many instances, quite small. Such landowners, it can be argued, might be better masters, more interested in the economic and social welfare of their lands and peasants, and less oppressive than the agents or bailiffs who often ran the larger estates for an absentee aristocratic landlord. It has also been plausibly suggested that in some respects seigneurial peasants were forced to be more efficient than their free counterparts, contrary to the classical theory of Gutsherrschaft.13 The extra burdens imposed on a serf meant that he had to produce more grain and also hire labourers to fulfil his personal obligations to the noble lord. One important implication is that serfdom as a whole was economically less backward and more efficient than often supposed. These arguments seriously qualify rather than completely overturn the established emphasis on the importance of Gutsherrschaft for the nobilities of Central and Eastern Europe. It would in any case be wrong to see this region as a land of large estates and a dominant landholding nobility. Some noblemen owned no land at all, and their numbers may have increased during the early modern period. Those who did often possessed relatively little property: the practice of partible inheritance across large parts of this region particularly Russia, PolandLithuania and BrandenburgPrussia (Chapters 5, 9 and 10) militated against the creation and survival of extensive estates. These did exist in certain countries: the power of a handful of families at the apex of the noble pyramid was immense, particularly in the Bohemian and Austrian Lands and for rather different reasons in Hungary (Chapters 6 and 7), while a handful of substantial landowners were to be found in parts of PolandLithuania and especially its eastern regions (Chapter 9). These latifundia were considerably less common, however, than some generalisations have suggested. One reason why rulers had been willing to sanction and assist the consolidation of serfdom had been their own reliance upon their noblemen as paid or unpaid agents of their own power. In every country covered by this volume, the nobility had consolidated its hold on the State apparatus by the second half of the eighteenth century, and in one Sweden it was actually ruling in partnership with the bureaucracy between 1720 and 1772 (Chapter 2). Even more than in Western and Southern Europe, rulers faced an acute shortage of available personnel, already trained or capable of being so, in order to fill posts in central and local government and to officer their armies, at a period when monarchs were expanding their administrations and building up their military forces across most of the region. At the same time, the number and complexity of the tasks which fell upon a State official or an army officer were increasing. Both developments demanded more and more specialised personnel, and the nobility was the main reservoir of such talent. While the importance of a rising professional middle class in Western Europe has been much exaggerated, it remains true that a French or Spanish King had a broader range of potential State servants on whom to

10 The Evolution of Service Nobilities

draw than his counterpart in Denmark or Russia. Central and Eastern Europe was a less advanced region, and lacked a sizeable professional or commercial middle class. One solution to this shortage was the widespread employment of nonnatives, individuals who came from outside the country in question, though they might speak the same language. BrandenburgPrussia recruited many administrators from neighbouring territories within the Reich, Denmark employed Germans in its government, while eighteenth-century Russia gave employment to numerous Baltic Germans, who were now under her own rule after Peter the Greats territorial annexations at the end of the Great Northern War (170021). A significant number of foreigners were ennobled during Swedens seventeenth-century Age of Empire (Chapter 2). The Austrian Habsburgs drew most widely of all, giving employment to officials and especially military commanders drawn from a wide variety of countries. Many of these itinerant soldiers or administrators secured admittance to the nobility of their adopted homelands, some being ennobled for the first time by a grateful ruler. One consequence was that many of the lites examined in this volume became noticeably diverse in composition during this period. The extension of Viennas control over the Kingdom of Hungary at the end of the seventeenth century saw a significant infusion of outsiders (often from other Habsburg territories) into the Kingdoms nobility (Chapter 7). Two generations earlier this had been even more evident in the Bohemian and Austrian Lands, where the insertion of mercenary soldiers and, to a lesser extent, officials during and after the Thirty Years War made the lite the most cosmopolitan in Europe.14 . In the Monarchys Hereditary Lands, military service remained an important path into the nobility and to promotion within it until 1800 and even beyond (Chapter 6). The Bohemian and Austrian Lands were typical in one further respect: the evolution of a service nobility. The families who consolidated their power or who became established there during the upheavals in the first half of the seventeenth century long remained faithful servants of the Habsburg dynasty.15 . Until the end of the eighteenth century and beyond, successive generations of these lineages provided ministers and officials, army commanders and diplomats, and the loyal service of these noblemen contributed much to the rise of the Austrian Habsburg Monarchy (Chapter 6). Developments in Denmark after the establishment of absolutism in 1660 were a second striking example of this trend, and were distinctive in one respect. Usually the existing lite became a service nobility, undergoing significant structural change in the process. In Denmark, however, the new absolute monarchy set out to create ab initio, through grants of land and titles, a new aristocracy which was purely a service lite. The old nobility, divided and in decline, was quickly supplanted at the top of the social and political pyramid. In time, some families from within it became part of the new lite (Chapter 3).

H. M. Scott

11

A nobility of service was to be found in every country covered by these essays to some extent. It was not restricted to the eastern half of the continent. On the contrary, throughout Southern and Western Europe the social lite was coming, during the seventeenth and eighteenth centuries, to furnish an increasing number of State officials and military commanders.16 This evolution, however, was less formal and perhaps less conscious than that occurring throughout Northern, Central and Eastern Europe. There it meant essentially two things. The first and also the most obvious meaning was that the nobility served the State and provided it with essential specialised personnel. Secondly, and rather more importantly, the structure and nature of nobility itself was coming to be shaped by such service. In other words, noble status and with it social pre-eminence were increasingly determined by service and by State rank rather than by birth or lineage. This was particularly apparent in the establishment of formal Table of Rank. These tied social status to the military and administrative hierarchy and gave precedence to the claims of merit and service over those of birth, lineage or inherited social position. Denmark led the way in 1671 and Sweden followed suit 9 years later, with the Table of Ranks introduced by Karl XI in 1680. The most celebrated and also the most significant, however, was that introduced in Russia in 1722. Peter Is Table of Ranks was the centrepiece and the culmination of his wide-ranging reconstruction of the Russian lite (Chapter 10). The nobilities examined in this volume were increasingly service lites. Successive generations of a family would serve (in the major states) in the officer corps, and everywhere within central and particularly local government. In this way, they enhanced their prestige and power, securing a career and some income. The State gained essential trained manpower, which the nobility alone could supply, and in this way fused the social lite with its own agencies and identified it closely with its own aims. This, far more than serfdom, was the principal influence upon the development of the nobilities of Northern, Central and Eastern Europe during the seventeenth and eighteenth centuries, as the essays which follow will make clear.

Notes
1. Below, p. 317. 2. Below, p. 334. 3. See Lee A. Farrow, Peter the Greats Law of Single Inheritance: State Imperatives and Noble Resistance, Russian Review 55 (1996), pp. 43047. 4. R. J. W. Evans, The Making of the Habsburg Monarchy 15501700 (Oxford, 1979), pp. 17174, 202. 5. Sheilagh Ogilvie, Communities and the Second Serfdom in Early Modern Bohemia, Past and Present no. 187 (2005), pp. 69119, at p. 76. This is one of a series of important articles by Professor Ogilvie on this topic.

12 The Evolution of Service Nobilities 6. An important discussion is provided by Edgar Melton, Gutsherrschaft in East Elbian Germany and Livonia, 15001800: a critique of the model, Central European History 21 (1988), pp. 31549. 7. See the illuminating comments on the historiography of William W. Hagen, Village Life in East-Elbian Germany and Poland, 14001800: Subjection, SelfDefence, Survival, in Tom Scott, ed., The Peasantries of Europe: From the Fourteenth to the Eighteenth Centuries (London, 1998), pp. 14560. 8. See the remarks of William W. Hagen, Ordinary Prussians: Brandenburg Junkers and Villagers, 15001840 (Cambridge, 2002), Introduction, esp. pp. 825. Professor Hagens book, a microhistory of the Stavenow lordship in the Prignitz (northwest Brandenburg), is the most distinguished work which incorporates these new perspectives to have appeared. 9. David Moon, The Russian Peasantry 16001930: The World the Peasant Made (London, 1999), pp. 1, 21 and passim. 10. See Edgars Dunsdorfs, The Livonian Estates of Axel Oxenstierna (Stockholm, 1981), pp. 9, 74, 100 and passim, for a notable example. 11. See the essays by William W. Hagen (Village Life in East-Elbian Germany and Poland), Hermann Rebel (Peasantries under the Austrian Empire, 13001800), and Edgar Melton (The Russian Peasantries, 14501860), in Scott, ed., Peasantries of Europe, pp. 14589, 191225, and 22766. 12. See the comments of Andrzej Kaminski, Neo-Serfdom in PolandLithuania, Slavic Review 34 (1975), pp. 25368, at p. 256. 13. Melton, Gutsherrschaft in East Elbian Germany, p. 342. 14. Below, p. 176. 15. Grete Klingenstein, Der Aufstieg des Hauses Kaunitz (Gttingen, 1975) is a classic study of the rise of one Moravian ministerial family, the Kaunitz: see Professor James Van Horn Meltons essay, below, pp. 19598 16. See the Introduction, Volume I, pp. 3448.

Index

In this index there are major entries for the nobilities of each country covered by this volume, with many sub-headings related to each nobility. There are also entries on major themes in the study of nobilities so that the reader can compare the situation in different countries. For kings and queens listed in the index, regnal dates are given. For individuals birth and death dates are given. absolutism Danish, 3, 10, 467, 53, 5668, 69 Habsburg, 174, 182, 185, 190, 193, 251, 255 Hohenzollern, 134, 151, 163 Russian, 319, 326, 351, 358 Swedish, 25, 29, 34, 412 absolutism, seigneurial, 18693, 199 Academy of Chivalry, Sor, Denmark, 52, 53 Accession Charter (1611), Sweden, and rights of office, 19 address, style of, in Russia, 359 adscription, bond of, 678 agrarian developments, 7 agriculture, in Denmark, 445, 47, 68 Allgemeines Landrecht (1794), Prussian Law Code, 394 allodial, xiii, 14, 37, 310, 317, 318, 320, 328 Anna Ivanovna, Empress of Russia (173040), 341, 345, 350, 351, 358 aristocracy, 37799 Bohemian, 194 Brandenburg, 133, 140, 154, 161 British, 281 Danish, 10, 435, 48, 50, 52, 601, 62, 63, 678 Hungarian, 4, 212, 21520, 23941, 24950, 2535, 265 Polish, 4, 288, 292 Portuguese, 378 the Reich, 746, 81, 912 Russian, 2, 311, 31216, 31820, 322, 3301, 3345 Swedish, 3, 8, 28 see also nobility aristocratic power, continuity of, 396, 41820 aristocratisation, 395 armalistae, 223, 252 army, role of nobility in Bohemia and Austria, 175, 176, 195 BrandenburgPrussia, 1423, 14551 Denmark, 44, 667 Hungary, 239, 254 the Reich, 912, 1024 Russia, 32830, 344 Sweden, 234, 27, 289, 32 Arnim family, 1234, 136, 155, 157, 183 Assembly of the Land, see Zemsky Sobor aulic aristocracy, 5, 175, 181 Austria, 10 definition of, 171 landholdings in, 187 titles in, 4 Austrian nobility after Thirty Years War, 171 religion of, 171 see also Austro-Bohemian nobility; Bohemian nobility; Habsburgs (Austrian) Austrian Succession, War of (174048), and role of Bohemian aristocracy, 194 Austro-Bohemian nobility, 171209 agrarian reform, 1989 army careers, 176 commerce, involvement in, 192, 193 consolidation of, 18593 421

422 Index Austro-Bohemian nobility continued Court, 1812 declining influence after 1720, 1939 declining size of, 389 education of, 1968 lite, 181, 187 estate management, 18990, 1913 finances of, 183 further reading, 4078 influence in Estates, 184 inheritance, 1856 international nature, 1767 land ownership, 177, 1868 lower nobility, 177, 187 marriage, 181 Protestant nobles, 1778 resilience of after 1800, 37980 rural life, 17981 service nobility, 195 size of, 177 taxation of, 178 upper nobility, 177 wealth of, 183 barshchina, 334 Batthyny, Jzsef (b.1727), 2589 Bavaria, electors of, 93, 98, 108 bene possessionati, 2212, 252, 257, 280 Benekendorff, Karl von (171383), 163 Bessenyei, George (d.1811), 2423 Bocskay, Stephen (d.1606), 2278, 244 bocskoros, 223 Bohemia, 10, 171 definition of, 171 titles in, 4 Bohemian nobility, 171209 declining influence at Court, 1934 foreigners, influx of, 1756 Protestant estates, confiscation of, 174 reconstitution after Thirty Years War, 171 religion of, 171, 173 see also Austrian nobility; Austro-Bohemian nobility Bohemian peasantry, 1989 enserfment of, 171, 1868 Bohemian rebellion (1618), 1734 boiars, in PolandLithuania, 271, 272, 273, 293 Boris Godunov, 31415, 321 boyar council, see Duma boyars, in Russia 31314, 315, 316, 317, 318, 319, 320, 3226, 3305, 336, 339, 363 lifestyle of, 3315 number of, 322 Brandenburg, 11923 Brandenburg, electors of, 88, 93 Brandenburg nobles, as mercenaries, 124 BrandenburgPrussia, 11870 inheritance in, 142 Junkers ascendancy, 12330 marriage in, 140, 161 modernizing lite, 1367 new nobility in, 1323 size of nobility, 177 titles in, 5 see also Junkers, BrandenburgPrussia Britain, resilience of nobility, 3801 Brunswick-Lneburg, duchy of, 1067 burghers, Polish, and noble status, 278 Cadet Corps, Russian, 362 Cadet Corps School, Berlin, 1456 Calvinists, and the Brandenburg Court, 1367, 139 Cantonal System, BrandenburgPrussia (1733) army recruitment, 145 militarization of Prussian society, 147 Cap government in Sweden, and radical reforms, 3940 Catherine II, Empress of Russia, the Great (176296), 2, 298, 340, 341, 348, 349, 3512, 353, 355, 356, 357, 359, 360, 362, 364, 367 Catholic magnates, in Austro-Bohemia, 181 Catholic nobles, promotion under Austrian Habsburgs, 1723 census, 214, 251 Charles XII of Sweden,see Karl XII, King of Sweden (16971718) Charter of Nobility (1612), Sweden, and privileges, 19 Charter to the Nobility (1785), Russia, 357 chief justice, office of, 219 Christian V, King of Denmark (167099), 60, 63

Index Civil Code (1804), 391, 392 clientage, in Sweden, 35 comitats, see county commerce, involvement of nobility in Austro-Bohemia, 192, 193 Hungary, 2378 Poland, 281 the Reich, 111 Russia, 349 compossessores, 252 conscription, in Denmark, 667 convents, imperial, 87 corona, 250 corporal punishment, Russia, 359, 364 Cossacks, 2745 Council of the Realm, Danish, 45, 51 dissolution of, 56 power struggle with the monarchy, 556 taxation, 545 county, 2213 county administration, 118, 221, 223 Court, nobility at Austro-Bohemia, 181, 195, 196 Brandenburg, 136, 141 Hungary, 2345, 240, 241 Reich princely courts, 101 Russia, 31516, 3305, 341, 353, 3589 Crown estates, in Denmark, 478 Crown peasants, in Sweden, 14 culture Austro-Bohemian nobility, 181 Russia, 3334, 360, 362, 364 Sweden, 334 curialistae, 223 Czartoryski family, 274, 290, 294, 298 Danish nobility, 4373 armorial letters patent, 60 collapse of old nobility, 569, 60, 62 constitutional settlement of 1660, 534, 556 Court versus country, 523 Danish nationalism, 645 decline of, after 1800, 378 definition of, 46 economic decline after 1600, 489 education of, 523 eighteenth century, 638

423

embourgeoisement of, 689 estate management, 445, 478, 49, 578, 63, 656 exclusivity of, 456 further reading, 4023 hereditary nobility, 59 inheritance, 50 knighthoods, 612 lifestyle of, 656 marriage, 50 new lite after 1660, 601 political power, decline of after 1660, 589 political rivalry with monarchy to 1660, 456 privileges of, 44, 567, 69 rank, 59, 62 service nobility after 1660, 5969 size of, 467, 57, 59, 61, 63 social composition, change of, 5960, 63 taxation, 54, 56, 66 titles after 1660, 601 titles, lack of, 489 wealth, disparity of, 4950, 512 decrescendo, 395 definition of nobility Denmark, 46 Hungary, 21014 PolandLithuania, 2667, 268, 3002 the Reich, 912, 11011 Russia, 3358, 3568 Sweden, 16, 18 Denmark, Kingdom of, 45, 46 derogation, xiii, 301, 349 drogeance, see derogation deti boyarskiye, 329, 330, 335 Dienstadel, 195 Diets Austria and Bohemia, 172, 184 Hungary, 216, 250, 254, 255, 257; election of officials, 222; privileged position of aristocracy, 21617 imperial, 81, 90 Landtage, 812, 121 PolandLithuania, see Sejm Sweden, 13, 17, 19, 20, 23, 25, 26, 2932, 33, 34, 3741

424 Index diplomacy, role of nobility in, 380, 382 Austro-Bohemia, 181, 197 dualism, see dyarchy duels, 364 Duma, 314, 320, 322, 323, 349, 355 dumnyy dvoryanin, 314, 322, 328 dvoryanin, 1, 314, 317, 328 dvoryanstvo, 272, 335 dyarchy, 172, 182, 250 East Prussia, 11923, 138 growth of absolutism, 1345 outlook of nobles, 1389 education of the nobility Austro-Bohemia, 1968 BrandenburgPrussia, 139, 162 Denmark, 523 Russia, 333, 343, 360, 363 Sweden, 18, 33 Elbe, river, 7 electors, German, 77, 80, 81, 82, 89, 92, 109 Elizabeth Petrovna, Empress of Russia (174162), 344, 347, 351, 353, 357, 358 endogamy, xiii Enlightenment, The, 109, 2423, 361, 363, 383 ennoblement Austro-Bohemia, 4, 172, 195 BrandenburgPrussia, 139, 146 Denmark, 45, 5962 Hungary, 211, 215, 224, 228, 2327 PolandLithuania, 269, 274, 276, 278, 301 the Reich, 924, 103, 104; by service, lack of, 75 Sweden, 1920, 28, 29, 312, 33, 35, 37 entail, xiii, 2, 389, 391, 392, 393, 394 Austro-Bohemia, 1856 Brandenburg, 142, 154 Denmark, 61 Hungary, 23940 Poland, 2912 the Reich, 106 Russia, 345 Estate, noble, in Hungary, 250 Estates, in Austria and Bohemia, 172, 184 Estates, imperial, 75, 81, 834, 87, 88, 90, 92 Estates of Russia, 322, 335 estates, size of, 9 Estates, in Sweden, 34, 39 Estates, territorial, in Germany, 824, 95, 121 Eszterhzy family, 218, 219, 221, 235, 239, 254, 256, 379 exogamy, xiii familiaris, 2256 family, role in nobility in Bohemia, 174 in the Reich, 74, 1068 in Russia, 318, 323 fedecommesso, abolition of, 393 feudal rights, in the Reich, 99100 fideicommissum, 1856, 192 Fideikommiss, xiii, 394 fief holding, in the Reich, 97100 cash conversion, 978 privileges associated with, 956 finances of nobility Austro-Bohemia, 183 the Reich, 1045, 110 Russia, 334, 3489 Sweden, 323 Finland, integration of into Sweden, 13 First Estate, in Hungary, 2523 foreigners, in Austrian Habsburg nobility, 1767 forms of address, and Russian nobility, 343 Four Year Sejm, 298, 301 Frederick II, King of Prussia, the Great (174086), 5, 104, 11920, 147, 148, 149 Frederick III/I, Elector of Brandenburg (16881713) and King of Prussia (170113), 133, 134, 135, 140, 141, 144 Frederick William, Elector of Brandenburg, the Great Elector (164088), 5, 120, 131, 132, 134, 1356, 137, 138, 139, 140, 141, 142, 145 Frederick William I, King in Prussia and Elector of Brandenburg (171340), 143, 145, 149, 152

Index Frederik III, King of Denmark (164870), 55, 56 free knights, Reich, 849 freemasonry, in Russia, 363 Freiherren (Barons), 79, 122, 172 French nobility after 1789 abolition of feudalism, 383 abolition of noble status, 3834 army, reduced influence, 387, 38990 Bourbon restoration, 387 declining size of, 389 imperial nobility established, 1808, 384 land holdings of, 3856 privileges, end of, 385 public life, 387 revival of rank after 1795, 384, 395 status, change of, 385 superiority of, 386 French Revolution, and challenge to nobility, 3837 influence on Russian nobility, 364, 367 Gemeinde, 1889 General Land Survey, 355 generalitet, Russia, 350 gentry, Hungarian, 2212 Georgica Curiosa (1682), 148, 17981, 189 German nobility, see Junkers, BrandenburgPrussia; Reich Germanization of Bohemia, myth of, 1745 gosti, 335, 349 government, nobilitys role in Austro-Bohemia, 195 Denmark, 45, 51, 546, 65, 68 Hungary, 254 PolandLithuania, 267 Prussia, 1505 the Reich, 102 Russia, 3235 Sweden, 1618, 19, 23, 28, 29, 31 Grand Prince of Moscow, 314 Grand Tour, 523, 1968, 363 Great War (191418), impact of, 381 Gustav II Adolf, King of Sweden (161132), 18, 19, 20, 21, 22

425

Gustav III, King of Sweden (177192), and the loss of noble hegemony, 401 Gutsherrschaft, xiiixiv, 610 Austrian lands, 188 Bohemia and Moravia, 1868 BrandenburgPrussia, 126, 1556, 163 Habsburg nobility, see Austro-Bohemian nobility; Hungarian nobility Habsburgs (Austrian), 779, 81, 83, 85, 86, 96, 989, 1014, 111, 174, 199, 227 culture, 1813 effect of Thirty Years War, 171 and ennoblement, 4, 923 expansion of rule, 1934 Hungary, 213 income of, 183 loans from Austro-Bohemian aristocracy, 183 noble loans to, 234 relations with Protestant Estates, 172 selling titles, 171 Hadiach, Treaty of (1659), 274 hajd, 2268, 251 Hat government of nobles in Sweden, 358 Haugwitz reforms (1749), 194 hayducks, see hajd Herald Master, Russia, 340 Herrenstand, 121, 1723, 177 hetman, 286, 289, 290, 293, 294, 299 Hochadel, 77, 89 Hohberg, Wolf Helmhard von (161288), 148, 17981, 189 Hohenzollern, 74, 77, 79, 80, 93, 104, 108 ennoblement, 93 growth of absolutism, 1345 growth of Prussia, 1201, 1235 Holy Roman Empire, see Reich honour, Russian concepts of, 318, 31920, 324, 334, 335, 345, 356, 357, 363 Horn, Arvid, 345 House of Lords, Britain, 381

426 Index House of Nobility, Sweden, 1920, 38 dispute with the Council, 23 ennoblement, 32 reduction of privileges, 23 restoration of power, 29, 34 Hungarian nobility, 21065 after 1790, 25761 Britain, comparisons with, 249 commerce, involvement in, 2378 definition of, 21014 distribution of, 251 lite, 212 estate management, 238 Estate, 212 foreigners in, 2367, 253 further reading, 40811 groups with noble or noble-like privileges, 22432 growth of lesser nobles, 224 higher nobles, 21520 inheritance, 216, 23940 lesser nobles, see lesser nobles, Hungarian lifestyle, 2402 magnates, see magnates, Hungarian opposition to Austria, 256 patriotism, 257 privileges, 21112, 224, 22532, 252 religion, 2438 rights and liberties, 21112, 252 service nobility, 2556 size of, 21415, 217, 251 taxation, 224 wealth of, 239 Hungarian noble bodyguard, 241, 256 Hungary county administration, 2214, 250, 254 county courts, 222 dualism between king and nobles, 2501 election of officials, 222, 254 politics and geography, 209, 21314, 250 royal household, and noble office holders, 21820 titles in, 4 Turkish occupation in, 213, 250 impartible entailment, in Denmark, 61 imperial church, 77, 867, 90, 104, 111 imperial cities, 75, 84, 90, 103 imperial diet, see Diet, imperial imperial estates, see Estates, imperial imperial fiefs, 77, 79, 82, 97 imperial knights, 75, 8590, 97, 11011 cathedral and Abbey chapters, 867 decline of autonomy, 87 imperial law, 78, 82, 83, 96, 98, 107 imperial nobility, 75, 93, 107, 110 imperial princes, 76, 779, 83, 92, 1001, 123 impossessionati, 270, 279 Industrial Revolution, impact of, 382 inheritance, partible, xiv, 2, 9, 61 inheritance, patrilinear, xiv inheritance practice Austro-Bohemia, 1856 Brandenburg, 142 changes in and the decline of nobility, 3913 Denmark, 50 Hungary, 216, 23940 Poland, 269, 280, 2912, 294 the Reich, 96, 98, 1057, 120 Russia, 314, 315, 366 Sweden, 17 Ivan IV, the Terrible, Russian Tsar (153384), 272, 313, 317, 319, 320, 321, 322, 323, 325, 345 Jagiellonian dynasty, 267, 2712, 273 Johanniter, 88 John Casimir, King of Poland (164868), 274, 289, 290, 291, 298 Joseph II, Holy Roman Emperor (176590) and sole ruler of the Habsburg Monarchy (178090), 185, 194, 195, 198, 199, 214, 223, 251, 255, 256, 258, 259 Junkers, BrandenburgPrussia, 5, 74, 11870 army careers, 1424, 145, 146, 14851; cost of, 1501 ascendancy in Brandenburg, 15001620, 12330 crisis in, 16201700, 13041 differentiated from peasants, 125 economic weakness of, 1312, 1334

Index education of, 139, 162 English gentry, comparison with, 159 estates of, 1257, 141, 1559 growth of absolutism, 134 Landrat, 152 lifestyle of, 15963 marriage, 140 military lite, 14751 new nobles, threat from, 135 number of, 121 peasants, changing relations with, 1589 political power, 1223, 1278, 130 portrayal of, 11819 Prussian government, 1515 recovery, 170025, 1417 resilience of, 380 service under foreign princes, 124 status, 122 taxation, 122 titles, 140 wealth of, 136, 161 see also BrandenburgPrussia; Reich, nobility of juridical privileges, loss of, 391 Karl X Gustav, King of Sweden (165460), 23, 24, 55 Karl XI, King of Sweden (166097), and reduction in noble power, 248 Karl XII, King of Sweden (16971718), 28, 29, 31, 291 Kaunitz, Prince Wenzel Anton (171194), 1957, 198 Kleist, Andreas Joachim von (16791738), 1435, 149, 157 Knights of St John of Jerusalem, 889 knights, Austro-Bohemian, 177, 178 Koataj, Hugo (17501812), 3012, 303 Kontribution, 1523 kznemesek, 220 krugovaya poruka, Russia, 319 land grants, in Russia, 316 Land Law, in Sweden, 1617, 25, 26 land ownership, 56 Austro-Bohemia, 177 Denmark, 445, 46, 47, 512, 578, 63, 66 Hungary, 237

427

Poland, 27880, 2823, 2956 Prussia, 154, 1559 the Reich, 97100 Russia, 318, 345, 346, 3545 Sweden, 1316, 21, 22, 256, 31 land tax, in Prussia, 1523 land values, 381 Landadel, 75, 79 Landeshauptmann, 183 Landesregierung, 183 Landmarschall, 184 Landrat, 1523 landscape gardening in Brandenburg, English style of, 1601 Landschaft, 1534 latifundia, 8, 296 legal tradition in Russia, 366 Legislative Commission, 3556 Lehndorff, Ahasverus (163788), 139 lesser nobles, Hungarian, 212, 241 armalistae, 223 bene possessionati, 2212, 252, 257 bocskoros, 2234 curialistae, 223 diversity within, 220, 221, 2234 growth of, 224 increasing separation from magnates, 2401, 253 local administration, 2223 loss of influence, 2201 religion, 2446 Liber chamorum, PolandLithuania, 277 Liechtenstein family, 173, 174, 181, 183, 186, 189, 191, 193, 379 Lipsius, Justus (15431606), 137 Lithuanian nobility origins of, 2714 structure prior to 1569, 2713 union with Poland (1569), impact of, 2734 see also Polish nobility (szlachta) local administration in Hungary, see county administration lord lieutenant, in Hungary, 2212 assistant lord lieutenant, election of, 222, 254 Lublin, Union of (1569), 267, 273 Lutheranism, 78, 86, 88, 105, 109

428 Index magistrates, imperial, 89 magnates, Hungarian, 235 admission to, 235 Catholicism, 244 creation of, 217 legal distinction from other nobles, 218, 222, 2401, 253 lords lieutenant, 221 number of, 217 office holders, 21819 separation from lesser nobles, 2401 Mainz, electors of, 87, 105, 111 majorat, 385, 386, 3912 Manifesto of 1762, 351, 353, 357, 362, 363 manners, of Russian nobility, 342 manor house style in Brandenburg, 160 manorial farms, in Prussia, 141 Maria Theresa, Archduchess of Austria and Queen of Hungary and Bohemia (174080), 174, 176, 184, 194, 195, 198, 199, 224, 241, 251, 255, 256, 258, 259 marriage, and the nobility, 389, 394 Austro-Bohemia, 181 BrandenburgPrussia, 140, 162 Denmark, 50 Poland, 2801, 294 the Reich, 1078, 122 Russia, 362 Sweden, 31 mayorazgo, abolition of, 392 Mazovia, 270, 276, 279, 280, 291, 2967, 303 mercantilism, 192 mercenary armies and the decline of noble warriors, 44 msalliance, 281, 394 mestnichestvo, 31820, 324, 325, 330, 335, 336, 363 Ministeriales, 79 Mirror of Honour for Youth, 342 Moritz von NassauSiegen, Count Johann (d.1679), 136, 137 Moscow, 314, 318, 321, 323, 327, 332, 334, 343, 349, 360, 361, 366 Moscow, nobles of, 317, 318, 327, 330, 333, 350 Moscow, princes of, 31314 Moscow University, 360, 362 music, and Habsburg Court, 1823 Napoleon Bonaparte, 3845 nation, concept of, and the Reich, 110 Neo-Stoicism, 137, 139, 179 Netherlands movement, the, 137 New Mark, BrandenburgPrussia, 124, 147, 154, 155, 163 nobiles unius sessionis, 252 nobility changing nature of after 1800, 3906 convergence across Europe, 1, 3 decline of, after 1800, 37782 declining numbers within, 38990 diversification, 10 service versus lineage, 11 noble behaviour in Russia, 343 noble demography, 389 noble peasants, in Sweden, 14 noblesse oblige, in Russia, 364 noblewomen Poland, 294 Russia, 331, 3401, 345, 346, 360, 362, 363 Sweden, 20 non-noble service class, in Russia, 355 obrok, 334 okolnichi, 314, 336 Old Belief, 334 oprichniki, 319 Order of the Black Eagle, 140 Order of the Dannebrog, 62 Order of the Holy Cross with Red Star, 87 Orders of Chivalry, creation of Russian, 33940 Oxenstierna, Axel, Swedish Chancellor (15831654), 19, 20, 21, 223 Palatine, electors of, 80, 97 palatine, office of, 218, 255 partible inheritance, xiv, 2, 9, 106, 240, 269, 280, 314 Partition Settlement (1772), 299 patrilinear inheritance, xiv patronage Habsburg, 1723 Russia, 364 Sweden, 24

Index Paul I, Emperor of Russia (17961801), 364 peasant households in Austria, 1878 peasantry, 610 Austro-Bohemia, 171, 1778, 179, 1845, 1868, 189, 190, 191, 199 Denmark, 48, 656, 67 Prussia, 1569 the Reich, 99100, 109 Russia, emancipation of, 391 Sweden, 8, 1316, 18, 22, 47, 48, 656, 67, 68 peasants, 47 Peter I, Tsar of Russia, the Great (16891725), 2, 322, 324, 326, 33546, 350, 351, 352, 357, 358, 35960, 366, 368, 369 Peter II, Emperor of Russia (172730), 347, 350 Peter III, Emperor of Russia (1762), 351 Pietism, 109 Poland Constitution of 3 May 1791, 303 election of monarch, 267, 291 monarchs appointments to high office, 28991 noble supremacy in, 2669 PolandLithuania, Commonwealth of, 2667, 298303 Catholicism of ruling lite, 274 Cossacks, 2745 end of, 303 extinction of nobility, 3778 further reading, 41115 influence on Russian nobility, 335 magnate oligarchy, theory of, 287 reform of, 3023 royal land in, 282, 294 Russian influence, 299 titles in, 4 police ordinances, 190 Polish nobility (szlachta), 4, 266310 admission to, 2769 commerce, involvement in, 281 definition of, 2667, 268, 3002 distribution of, 276 diversity of, 26970 economic diversity of, 27985 lite, 269, 284, 2878 inheritance in, 269, 280, 2912, 294

429

integration of Lithuanian nobility, 2734 lesser nobles, 2967 marriage in, 2801, 294 office and status, 2889 origins of, 26971 political control, 2678, 2856, 301 private armies, 2923 privileges of, 2667 property requirements, 3023 reform of, 3003 religious persuasion, 267, 274, 275 rights, 267 senate membership, 288 size of, 2756 status within, 2867 Polizeiordnungen, use by nobility, 1901 poll tax, 359 Pomerania, 11923, 1389 pomeshchik, 316, 317, 322, 329 pomestya, 316, 317, 318, 328, 329, 343, 344, 345, 346, 355 Poniatowski, Stanisaw Augustus, King of Poland (176495), 2989, 301 populism, rise of, in Sweden, 38 Portugal, decline of nobility after 1800, 378 possessores, 279 precedence, in Russian nobility, 31820, 3245 prikazy, 314, 320, 323, 324, 338 primogeniture, xiv, 389, 391 Austro-Bohemia, 1856 Denmark, lack of, 50; after 1660, 61 the Reich, 1056, 107, 108 Russia, 366 princes, Russian, 31213, 31415 privileges, basis of nobility Denmark, 44, 567, 69 Hungary, 21112, 224, 22532, 252 PolandLithuania, 2667 the Reich, 947, 109 Russia, 2, 3345, 358 Sweden, 14 Protestant nobles Austro-Bohemia, 1789, 181 erosion of position under Habsburgs, 1723

430 Index Protestantism, 1712 Hungary, 2278, 2438, 252, 253 provincial administration in Russia, lack of salaries, 355 provincial society in Russia, 362 Prussia, 11923 army officer corps, 104 militarization of, 147 see also BrandenburgPrussia; Junkers, BrandenburgPrussia Prussian Junker, misleading term, 119 Prussian nobility, 119 territorial nobilities, 11920 see also Junkers, BrandenburgPrussia Quitzow family, 1267 Radziwi family, 137, 284, 286, 289, 290, 2923, 298, 299, 301 Reformation, 76, 83, 96, 105, 123 Danish nobility, 45 Hungarian nobility, 212 regnum, 250 Reich, 2 distinctions between social groups, 75 feudal systems, 75 Reich, nobility of, 74117 ancient nobility, 11011 commerce, involvement in, 111 complexity of, 8990 criticism of, 10910 definition of, 912, 11011 distinctiveness, 746, 11011, 156 emergence of, 804 ennoblement, 924 finances of, 1045, 110 formation of, 7684 further reading, 4036 higher nobility, 75, 121 imperial nobility, 75 inheritance, 96, 98, 1057, 120 lesser nobility, 79, 849, 121 marriage in, 1078, 122 military orders, 889 origins of, 902 privileges of, 947, 99, 109, 3945 provincialism, 162 regional corporations, 84 relationship to emperor, 75 religion, 96 size of, 7980 state employment, 1045 survival strategies, 10511 taxation, 95, 967, 122 territorial nobility, 75 territorial sovereignty, 789 territorial states, 1005 see also Junkers, BrandenburgPrussia Reichsadel, 75 Reichsfrsten, 77 Reichsgrafen, 122 Reichskammergericht, 86 Reichskirche, 767 Reichsritter, 8590 Reichsstnde, 75, 81 Reichstag, 81, 86, 88, 92 Reichsunmittelbarkeit, 76, 77 representative institutions, see Diets; Duma; Estates, imperial; Reichstag; Sejm; Zemsky Sobor (Assembly of the Land) Rittergter, 90, 94, 96, 97, 98, 104, 105 Ritterstand, 121, 177 robber baron, 74 Robot, 187, 1989, 283 Roman Catholic Church Austro-Bohemia, 171, 195 Hungary, 21920, 222, 227, 2438, 252, 253, 258 Poland, 274, 275 the Reich, 767, 86, 87, 122 Romanov Dynasty, 322 Russia, 7 early history, 31120 lack of large estates, 56 resilience of nobility until 1917, 380 Russian nobility, 12, 31176 commerce, involvement in, 349 compulsory service, 347, 350, 351 consolidation of, 335 corporate rights, 357 definitions of, 3358, 3568 development of a European-style nobility, 2 education, 333, 343, 360, 3623 lite, 350 estates of, 332, 348, 354, 359 further reading, 41518 Herald Master, 340

Index hereditary nobility, 312, 315, 317, 318, 325, 335, 339, 353, 356, 366 inheritance, 314, 315, 366 Ivan the Terrible, 319 land with serfs, monopoly of, 355, 356 landholding, 318, 345 lifestyle, 35864 marriage, 302 militarization of, 3389, 365 military service, 31617, 318, 32830 origins of, 31112, 365 Peter the Great and power over, 3589 Petrine reforms, 33643, 3667 political power, 320, 3268, 34958, 366 precedence, 31820, 3245, 331, 3368 privileges of, 2, 3345, 3578 provincial nobility, 327 ranks of, 31516, 318, 3368 security of status, lack of, 3478 service to the State, 3435, 347, 350, 351, 353, 364, 366 size of, 322, 344, 365, 388 structure of, 31618 superiority of, 365 taxation, 359, 365 uniform for, 365 Russian Orthodox Church, 326, 333, 334, 360, 363, 367 Ruthenia, 271, 272, 273, 274 Sacred Crown, Hungary, 2478, 256 St. Petersburg, 342, 343, 361 Saldern, Matthias von (c.150575), 1289 Sarmatian myth, 267, 269 Schloss Raudnitz, 182 Schwarzenberg, 379 second serfdom, in east central Europe, 1868 Secret Committee, Sweden, 30, 34, 35, 36, 38, 39 seigneurial absolutism, 18693, 199 Sejm, 267, 269, 270, 273, 285, 293, 296, 299 derogation, abolition of, 301 entails, 291 noble creations by, 276, 278, 301

431

Protestants excluded from, 275 reform of, 3023 sejmiki, 267 Senate, Russian, 349 serfdom, 610 in Hungary, 213, 2214, 22731, 232, 233, 238, 244 in PolandLithuania, 2667, 283, 284, 293 in Russia, 348, 353, 361; introduction of, 319, 328, 334; owners, 3534 serfs, see peasants service nobility, 311, 314, 316 emergence of, 1011 further reading, 400 service people, 316, 338, 356, 359, 365 shaving, requirement to, 341 Silesia, 11923 size, of nobilities Austro-Bohemia, 177 Brandenburg, 121 Denmark, 467, 57, 59, 61, 63 Hungary, 21415, 217, 251 in nineteenth century, 38890 Poland, 2756 the Reich, 7980 Russia, 322, 344, 365, 388 Sweden, 1819, 20, 30 skldebrev, 18 Smolnyy Institute, 360 smotr, 343, 346, 351 Sobraniye, 352 Spanish nobility, declining size of, 392 Sporck family, 175, 183 Stndestaaten, 120, 121 starosties, see starostwa starostwa, 2823, 2945 State Council (Habsburg), 255 State, bureaucratic, emergence of, 3823 State, and the nobility, 910 Denmark, 51, 54, 65, 68 the Reich, 1005 Sweden, 18, 19, 29 State, use of foreign administrators, 10 Statthalter, 255

432 Index status of nobility, how acquired, 11 Denmark, 445, 56, 59 Hungary, 21011, 2327 PolandLithuania, 2867 the Reich, 8994 Russia, 31617, 3368, 339, 3567 Sweden, 16, 18, 19, 21, 28 stolniki, 315, 336 structure of nobility, 3 Denmark, 59 Hungary, 21532, 2513 Poland, 279 the Reich, 74, 79 Russia, 31618, 3368, 358 Sweden, 1920, 24, 28 stryapchiye, 315 Sweden, 3789 Sweden, kingdom of, 13 decline of nobility after 1800, 3789 lack of serfdom, 78 Swedish nobility, 1342 Crown estates dispersed, 21, 22, 256 definition of, 16, 18 education of, 18, 33 emergence of titles, 3 exclusivity of, 201, 32 finances of, 323 further reading, 4002 growth of, 28 hegemony, loss of, 3442 inheritance, 17 loss of property and rights, 267 magnates and lesser nobles, 16, 1824 magnates, power of, 1826 marriage in, 31 official salaries, 323 partnership with Gustav Adolf, 20 political power after 1719, 2930, 3442 privileges of, 14 promotions to nobility, 201 protection in the Land Law, 1617 rank, disputed, 24 relations with peasantry, 1516 rentier landlords, 16, 33 royal absolutism, 249 self-preservation, failure of, 412 service nobility from 1650s, 23, 31 size of, 1819, 20, 30 statutory position, 19 taxation, 212 titled nobility, power of, 1718 Szkeley, 22832, 251 Szeklers, see Szkeley szlachta, 4 szlachta, see Polish nobility (szlachta) szlachta brukowa, 280 szlachta czstkowa, 279 szlachta czynszowa, 285 szlachta osiada, 279 szlachta zagrodowa, 279 Table of Ranks (1722), Russia, 11, 3369, 350 Table of Ranks, Sweden, 11, 28, 39 taxpaying people, 316, 338, 365 Teleki, Smuel (b.1739), 258, 259 territorial Estates, in Austria and Bohemia, 181, 184 territorial fiefs, 97 territorial government in Austro-Bohemia, 1835 territorial states in the Reich, administration of, 1023 Teutonic Knights, 889, 122 Thirty Years War, economic effect of, 132, 141 Time of Troubles (15981613), 3212 titles, 13, 395 Denmark, lack of, 48; new titles, 60 functional, 12 hereditary, 1 Hungary, 216, 220, 253 Poland, 286 Prussia, 140 the Reich, 90 Russian, 31516, 3368, 339, 364 Sweden, 17 Trepka, Walerian (d.1640), 2778 Tripartitum (1517), Hungary, 21112, 252 Trolle, Herluf, 434 Ukraine, 2745 unigeniture, 345

Index Vienna, Habsburg Court at, 1812 voyevody, 315 wage labour, and Junkers estates, 1589 Waldeck, Count George von, 136 Wallenstein family, 1745, 183, 1923 wealth and aristocratisation, 395 Werb oczy, Stephen (d.1541), 21012, 214, 225, 247, 248, 252 Westphalia, Peace of (1648), 78, 86, 178 Year of Revolutions (1848), 37980

433

Zamoyski family, PolandLithuania, 2834, 285, 289, 291, 292, 302 Zemsky Sobor (Assembly of the Land), 320, 321, 323, 3268