The history of state administration in Russia is inconceivable without an understanding of land policy, the center of which for centuries was the Pomestnyi prikaz. This agency did not merely record rights to land — it shaped the economic foundation of the service estate (sluzhloe soslovie), thereby ensuring the combat capability of the army of the Moscow state. Thanks to surviving archival documents, in particular unique stolbtsy of the first quarter of the 17th century, we can peer inside this bureaucratic machine and see a vivid picture of Muscovite recordkeeping, the acute struggles over inheritance, and the elimination of the consequences of the Time of Troubles.
The fiery boundary of 1626
In the history of the Pomestnyi prikaz there exists a clear chronological boundary — the “great Moscow fire” of 3 May 1626. On that day the element destroyed a significant portion of the Kremlin archives: ukaznye knigi (registers of ukases) containing tsar and patriarchal decrees, boyar verdicts, as well as “pistsovye and dozorniye knigi and dachi and stolpy and separate knigi.” This event struck a colossal blow to the legal system of the state, for the fire consumed the evidentiary basis of landholding for the preceding decades.
Nevertheless, the bureaucratic machine found a way to restore itself. The authorities promptly dispatched ukases to the towns demanding that local voevody and gubnye starosty send to Moscow protivni (copies) of pistsovye, dozorniye and separate knigi. It is precisely owing to such surviving documents, for example stolbets No. 31149 containing charters for 1616–1626, that historical scholarship is able to reconstruct the activity of the prikaz in the “pre‑fire” period.
The land question: ispomeshchenie and conflicts
One of the Pomestnyi prikaz’s immediate tasks after the Time of Troubles was to provide land to service men, especially the Cossacks, who constituted an important military force. The documents attest to the large‑scale distribution of palace lands in the Tarusskii, Obolenskii and other uezds. The process was complex and conflictual. The prikaz sent to the localities otdel'shchiki (commissioners for parceling land), who were to allot land “sryadu s odnogo” (in contiguous lots, by contract, without selections).
In practice this often led to abuses. Among the archival cases there survive complaints by Cossacks that the otdel'shchiki, acting “po posulam” (in return for bribes), gave the best lands to others, while petitioners (chelobitchiki) were allotted “zemli khudye i pustye” (inferior and barren land). In such instances the Pomestnyi prikaz acted as the supreme arbiter, issuing peredel'nye gramoty (redistributive charters) to restore justice and ordering that the lands be remeasured. Moreover, for usurpation and violation of ukases (for example, for alienating villages not intended for such disposition), the prikaz could impose sanctions on officials — to lash with rods and to exact fines.
The state rigidly regulated the circulation of land. While gentry pomestia enjoyed a certain freedom of transfer, strict prohibitions applied to Cossack votchiny. Sale and pledge of Cossack votchiny were forbidden because these practices undermined the material basis of service. Already in documents of the early 1620s there are cases in which unlawfully sold or pledged Cossack votchiny were confiscated and transferred to those who reported the infringement.
Justice and “rozysk”
The Pomestnyi prikaz performed both civil and criminal judicial functions in the land sphere. Particular attention was paid to the political reliability of landholders. In the cases of the 1620s the echoes of the Time of Troubles are plainly audible. In disputes over inheritance or rights to a votchina thorough rozyski (investigations/searches) were conducted with the interrogation of dozens of witnesses — priests, gentry, peasants. Investigators were interested in whether “he had been in Tushino and kissed the thief’s cross.” If treason was confirmed, or it emerged that a landholder had fled to Lithuania, his lands were confiscated and transferred to loyal servants or relatives.
An important function of the prikaz was the social protection of widows and orphans. After the death of a service man part of his land was allotted to his wife and daughters “for subsistence.” A clear order of inheritance existed: sons assumed rights to their father’s pomestie upon attaining the age of 15, when they became capable of entering the tsar’s service.
Bureaucratic structure and personnel
The prikaz was led by sud'i (usually boyars or okol'nichie) and diaki. At various times the department was headed by such prominent figures as knyaz Ivan Borisovich Cherkasskii and knyaz Andrei Vasil'evich Sitskii. Diaki, such as Gerasim Martem'yanov or the well‑known Nikolai Novokshchenov, were the “engine” of the institution, sealing every outgoing document with their signatures.
The internal structure of the prikaz continually evolved and grew more complex as the territory of the state expanded. Initially recordkeeping was organized on a territorial principle, but by the end of the 17th century distinct stoly (departments) had been clearly formed within the prikaz: the Moskovskii, Riazan'skii, Vladimirskii, Pskovskii stoly. The Riazan'skii stol, being the most heavily loaded, over time generated new specialized subdivisions, such as the Stol votchinnoy zapiski (stol of votchina records) and the Stol dikikh pol' (stol for the allocation of unsettled borderlands). The staff of podyachie (subordinate clerks) was large and strictly hierarchical: they were divided into “old,” “middle” and “young” (or “nevernastennye”) ranks.
The study of the activity of the Pomestnyi prikaz opens before us the most complex mechanics of governance in the 17th‑century Moscow state. This institution was not simply a chancery for registering land rights but a powerful instrument of state policy, cementing the link between service to the tsar and landholding. Analysis of the surviving documents shows how flexible and resilient this system was. Even after the catastrophic fire of 1626 that destroyed the central archive, the prikaz managed to restore its operations by mobilizing the resources of local administration and recreating the documentary basis through a system of copies (protivni) and investigations.
The particular importance of the Pomestnyi prikaz lay in its role as a stabilizer of society after the upheavals of the Time of Troubles. Through strict regulation of land distributions, prohibitions on the alienation of Cossack votchiny, and control over the political loyalty of owners, the state reasserted control over resources and secured the loyalty of the service estate. The prikaz acted as a guarantor of justice as understood at the time: it protected the rights of widows and orphans, resolved boundary disputes, and suppressed abuses by local officials, although it was not itself free from corruption.
The evolution of the prikaz’s structure — from simple territorial povyti to specialized stoly (such as the Stol votchinnoy zapiski) — demonstrates the process of gradual professionalization and complication of Russian bureaucracy. Documents of the prikaz, whether dry lists of arable and haymeadows or dramatic chelobitnye of grievances and treasons, serve as indispensable sources for understanding not only legal norms but also everyday life, customs, and the psychology of people of that era. Ultimately, it was the painstaking work of the diaki and podyachie of the Pomestnyi prikaz that created the documentary foundation upon which the pomestnaia system rested — the basis of the military and political power of pre‑Peterian Russia.
Time: 1616–1626, first quarter of the 17th century, 17th century, 1626, the 1620s, 3 May 1626
Personalia: Cherkasskii Ivan Borisovich (knyaz), Sitskii Andrei Vasil'evich (knyaz), Martem'yanov Gerasim (diak), Novokshchenov Nikolai (diak)
Geographical names: Tushino, Obolenskii uezd, Tarusskii uezd, Moscow, the Moscow state, Lithuania, Russia
Events, processes: ispomeshchenie, rozysk, recordkeeping (deloproizvodstvo), confiscation, state administration, inheritance, Time of Troubles, pomestnaia system, land policy, great Moscow fire
Organizations, institutions: Stol votchinnoy zapiski, Stol dikikh pol', Pomestnyi prikaz, Vladimirskii stol, Riazan'skii stol, Pskovskii stol, army of the Moscow state, Moskovskii stol
