There is a historical hypothesis that Tsar Fyodor Ivanovich finally plunged Russia into the darkness of serfdom by issuing a document called “Decree on the Lesson Years”. He almost completely deprived the peasants of the right to release, turning people into wordless slaves, a kind of analogue of working cattle. Nevertheless, the text of the “commandment” itself is lost, and information about its content is extremely scarce. Historians have been arguing about the most plausible version of events for centuries.
Officially accepted concept
According to history textbooks, the “Decree on Lesson Years” was signed in 1597, December 4, according to the Julian calendar. This legal norm was caused by the emergence of a critical situation in the state. Prior to this, the law was in effect for exactly one hundred years, according to which, during the week until November 26 (the church holiday of St. Yuri) and seven days after this date, each serf could withdraw from his status by declaring his desire and paying the owner an extra amount (“old ») To the ruble in silver. The price was considerable at that time, but the peasants who were striving for freedom tried to accumulate it. This phenomenon has become widespread. In addition, often, failing to raise money, some serfs simply fled. According to the officially accepted version, the "Decree on the Lesson Years" forbade the peasants to leave the landowners. But his reactionary essence was not limited to this. It was not enough just to escape from the hateful master. The Decree on the Lesson Years established a specific search period during which the master could return his serf - five years.
"Indicated" version and its variants
The lack of documentary evidence for the historian is about the same as for the physicist - the discrepancy between the experimental results of his theoretical concept. There are two main versions of the description of the enslavement of the Russian peasantry. According to the first (called the “decree”), it happened strictly in accordance with the legal norms of the sixteenth century. The Decree on the Lesson Years was signed, and from that moment ... But this theory also has its own branches. According to V. N. Tatishchev, this document already existed since 1592, and its author was not Fedor Ioannovich, but Boris Godunov. They lost paper, but could not find it. But she was.
The considered “indicative version” is certainly plausible, but suffers from a common vice characteristic of many historical theories. It is built solely on logical premises, and is supported by nothing but them. There must be a decree, and that’s it. And where he is is another question. You never know what can happen with paper over four centuries ...
Was there a decree?
The influence of the “Decree” on the change in public life in the country can be judged by the fact that the title of the document was practically not mentioned in the petitions of the landlords about the return of their “property”. It would seem quite logical, demanding to find and deliver a runaway slave, referring to the tsar's “Decree on the Lesson Years”. Is not it? After all, then the petition acquires the character of not just a personal request, but a petition for compliance with the law. But the landowners did not refer to the royal letter, preferring to dispense with wordings more abstract.
Here you are, grandmother, and St. George's Day
At present, the only written document confirming the existence of the royal will materialized on paper can be a letter from the Novgorod monks in which they refer to a certain decree, according to which, “there is no way out” for peasants and boblins. Moreover, both the date and the author of the legislative act remain unknown. Definitely attributing its creation to Tsar Fedor is difficult. Firstly, during his reign, Godunov, the “gray regent,” actually led the country, and it was he who could put forward this legislative initiative. Secondly, there is very real reason to believe that the document itself appeared five years earlier, and then was destroyed (perhaps intentionally) by Boriska himself (or by his order). Thirdly, it is quite possible that the “reserved decree” was adopted by Ivan Vasilyevich, but entered into legal force a little later. Despite all these versions, the fact remains: Yuryev’s day was destroyed at the end of the 16th century, and the peasants lost the rights that they previously had.