A recurring theme throughout many Ancient Rus texts after the baptism of Vladimir has been the inevitable Judgement Day promised by monks and other authors of these texts. The purpose of this may be multifactorial: to instill reverence of the clergy among the common people, to create stability amongst the ruling class or to foster a culture with common values of decency and respect. However, The Domostroi pushes the narrative of a doomsday and a fear of God, the Boyars, and Tsar Ivan the Terrible as a means to suppress women, and indeed, bolster patriarchal rule.
The text argues, good wives, “should not eat or drink without her husband’s knowledge, nor conceal food or drink from him. Nor should she have secrets from her husband.” (pp, 138). Societal rules under Tsar Ivan the Terrible gave women no autonomy, authority or even a way to sustain life unless their husbands agreed. Women were not allowed to drink alcohol in public or in the privacy of their homes. Instead, they were relegated to drinking kvass and other weakly-alcoholic beverages.
Legislation is nothing, however, without an executive that enforces it. Recognizing this, The Domostroi begins by exclaiming you should speak to the Tsar, “as if you spoke to God himself,” and, “if you serve the earthly king righteously and fear him, you will learn to fear the Heavenly King also.” (pp. 71). This fear-eliciting rhetoric continues when the text outlines how women specifically should act. On the topic of whom to let into the house, women are given strict guidelines to obey. Otherwise, their “practices [may] spawn many evils.” (pp. 132).
All of this fearmongering plays to the commoner’s anxiety of a judgement day or being suaded by evils. The text states that only obedient followers will receive, “answers on Judgement Day.” (pp. 92). Thus, through the creation of a potential doomsday event and outlining a means to avoid it, The Domostroi suppresses women and solidifies the claim to the throne of the patriarch Tsar Ivan.
All so true, Jacob! And yet, in the context of its time, this was a very progressive document, intended to regulate behaviors and curb abuses. This is why, for instance, husbands are told that when punishing their wives: “do not do it in hatred, do not lose control,” and they are instructed to forgive them afterwards : “A husband must never get angry with his wife” (p.143). Of course, these relations, as you say, are patriarchal, and they are also totally unacceptable to us in our culture today. But if we take them within the context of their own time and culture, then we can see that they were intended to set “humane” standards of behavior for all members of that society (according to the sensibilities and beliefs of the time). I hope we’ll have a few moments in class to talk about this briefly!