lands to them. The farsaglags now became landlords, and might own slaves, but the children of these latter were regarded as freemen. The kavdasards might not be owned by the farsaglag, as this privilege was restricted to the highest class. The gurziaks or slaves had no rights, and were merely regarded as chattels, with whom their owners might do whatever they pleased. They might sell or give them away in whole families, and even kill them if they pleased. What the 'wozdanlags' or 'aldars' were in Taghauria the 'badiliats' were in Digoria. Here the Kabardinian influence is even more marked than in Taghauria. The upper class is said by the Digorians to be derived from the comparatively recent settlement in their midst of a stranger from Madjar,' a town the ruins of which may still be seen on the Kuma near the stanitsa of Praskovia. His name was Badil, and he became the founder of the mighty tribe of Badiliat. From a humble emigrant earning a living as a shepherd, Badil raised himself to an honourable position among the Digorians, owing to the important part he took in their wars against a neighbouring village, Donifars. Tradition says that the Digorians were at that time ignorant of firearms, and Badil was the first to instruct them in their use. As a Mussulman he was supported by his co-religionists the Kabardinians, and helped them to proselytize the Christians · 1 The ruins of Madjar or Madjari are situate in the district of Vladikavkaz, at the confluence of the Buival and Kuma, on the left bank of this last-named river near the stanitsa or Cossack village of Praskovia. Klaproth, who visited these ruins in 1810, says, that the foundation of Madjar has been erroneously attributed to the Hungarians. He derives the name from a Tartar word meaning stone building, and says that the first to inhabit this place were the Kipchaks. In support of this view he adduces the similarity in the style of building and monuments, the inscriptions and coins of Sarai their chief city found here, and lastly the information concerning it given by Eastern writers. Thus in the Derbend Nameh, it is stated that in the second century of the Hejrah (i.e. eighth of the Christian era), Great and Lesser Madjar were two important towns. They are mentioned by Abulghazi in A.D. 1282, and by Abulfeda in his geography (A.D. 1321). Finally Madjar was known to the Russians as late as the year A.D. 1319, when it was a large trading town, and it was to this place that the body of Mikhail, prince of Tver, was brought after he had been tortured to death by the horde. Madjar probably ceased to exist in the fourteenth century during the civil wars of the Kipchaks. The ruins have been well described by Güldenstädt, cf. Klaproth, Voyage au Caucase, vol. ii. pp. 165, 180; Reineggs, vol. i. p. 66; Karamzine, Histoire de Russie, ed. cit. vol. iv. pp. 234-5. of Digoria. By degrees the Digorians grew accustomed to look upon the Badiliats as Kabardinian agents, and to submit to them however unwillingly. Under Kabardinian influence the Badiliats established the same social organization as we have already spoken of in Taghauria. The kavdasards were represented by 'tuma,' the freemen by 'adamikhat,' while the slaves were divided into two classes: those who had the right to marry and found families, and those who were denied this right, precisely as in Kabarda; and the archives of Naltchik are full of the petitions of slaves against their masters for degrading them from one category to the other, the effect of such degradation being to place them at the mercy of the lord, who might separate man and wife either by selling one or both, or by giving away the female slave. The only distinction between the laws of Kabarda and those of Digoria was, that the latter were rather more humane in prohibiting the separation of man and wife if the parents of the latter paid the lord the indemnity or price he claimed. Historians of feudalism usually characterize it by saying that during its prevalence the owner of the land was the representative of the governmental power, and the peasantry formed groups subject to a hierarchy. The same traits are met with in the class-organization we have described. The aldar and the badiliat are not merely landlords receiving customary rent from the perpetual-hereditary leaseholders, they are also the political chiefs both in peace and war. At their summons the farsaglag and kavdasard must arm and follow them to battle, at their bidding they must in time of peace receive and entertain their guests. The Osseti adati are explicit as to the obedience required of these vassals. Moreover, without personally exercising judicial functions, the aldars and badiliats made their authority felt in juridical affairs by levying a tax for their own benefit on all who might choose to settle their disputes in their courts of appeal payable by the party in the wrong. With all its similarity, 1 Fort Naltchik in the district of Kabarda, territory of Terek, on a river of the same name, was founded in 1817-20 in order to strengthen the Russian advance into Trans-Caucasia. however, to feudal institutions, the Ossete social organization differed from that prevalent in Europe at the epoch when feudalization was accomplished in the greater liberty enjoyed by the Ossete vassal as compared with his medieval prototype. The farsaglag may rather be likened to the hospes mentioned in charters of the eleventh century in France, i.e. before feudalism was an established institution. They were both freemen settling on the lands of others by agreement with the owner, and undertaking to discharge certain duties personal as well as proprietary. The position too of the slaves assimilates closely with the earliest mediæval period, when according to Bracton a distinction was drawn in England between Villenagium purum and Villenagium privilegiatum, with this difference, however, that Christianity prohibited the dissolution of the marriage-tie of slaves. The peculiarity of the Ossete organization is the existence in their midst of a special hereditary class derived from the extra-matrimonial ties of the privileged class. The analogy drawn by some writers between the Ossete kavdasards and the boiarskiye détii (children of boyards) in Great Russia in Prof. Kovalefsky's opinion fails. The subjection of the Ossetes to the Russian empire was accompanied by great changes in their social state. Their former dependence on Georgia in the South and on Kabarda in the North came to an end. Hostile encounters between neighbouring tribes were stopped, and peace began to reign. The country was divided into magistracies, and was included in course of time in the government of Tiflis and territory of Terek. At the same time blood reprisals, so frequently the cause of these internecine feuds, were replaced by indemnities payable in kind and money. Disorders were suppressed by armed force, the princely families were deposed, and the land was re-distributed. Like other kindred races the Ossetes settled not in great masses, but in families or households, the members of which related to one another through the males numbered as many as 40 and upwards. More recent family divisions led to the establishment of new households derived from the same stock. Settlements formed in this way took the name of the locality in which they were situate, or the tribe which founded them, while a few took patronymic names, a sure indication of their tribal origin. Klaproth says that the Ossete settlements ('kau' or ‘gau') are usually small and placed so close together as to be easily mistaken for a continuous village. Every family, says Reineggs, forms a separate settlement of a few households, living contentedly together till increase of numbers and scarcity of food oblige some to migrate, who then take a new name. But these observations relate to a bygone time, for the modern traveller meets with continuous settlements comprising a few dozen households not related to one another, though frequently bearing the name of one of the families composing them. With the exception of those communities which were started not very long ago by the Russian Government, when they transferred the inhabitants of the highlands to the plains, the large majority of Ossete settlements may be included in one or other of the following categories: (1) auls (i.e. villages) occupied by families related to one another, bearing the same family name, owning land on the communal system, and not unfrequently having a community of goods, these however are the exception; (2) auls in which the lands are apportioned among the several families composing them; and (3) auls inhabited by a few families who, according as there are many or few living together, have either lost or retained their system of common holdings. These last are the most numerous in Ossetia. The Ossete 'dvor' or enclosure, an indispensable part of every aul, has been fully described by M. Kokief, himself an Ossete by origin. He says there are two types of these buildings; the first are the so-called 'galuans,' probably many centuries old, mentioned in the oldest heroic legends,* a proof of their antiquity. Their very appearance carries 1 Voyage au Caucase, vol. ii. p. 262, note. 2 Cf. Description of Mount Caucasus, translated by Wilkinson, i. 248. 3 New Christian, New Muhammadan or Ardon communities. 4 e.g. in the Nart legends. |