UBC Theses and Dissertations

UBC Theses Logo

UBC Theses and Dissertations

The agrarian problem in Russia as a background for the revolution 1932

You don't seem to have a PDF reader installed, try download the pdf

Item Metadata

Download

Media
UBC_1932_A8 K2 A4.pdf [ 7.34MB ]
Metadata
JSON: 1.0098638.json
JSON-LD: 1.0098638+ld.json
RDF/XML (Pretty): 1.0098638.xml
RDF/JSON: 1.0098638+rdf.json
Turtle: 1.0098638+rdf-turtle.txt
N-Triples: 1.0098638+rdf-ntriples.txt
Citation
1.0098638.ris

Full Text

THE AGRARIAN PROBLEM IN RUSSIA •* ' A3 A BACKGROUND FOR THE REVOLUTION by Marie Katherine Kaak »** A Sheaia submitted for the Degree of MASTER OF ARTS in the Department of HISTORY *** THE UNIVERSITY OF BRITISH COLUMBIA 1932* CAT NO. /93>- fi&Kz ft\ A C C - HO. THE AGRARIAN PROBLEM IN RUSSIA AS A BACKGROUND FOR THE REVOLUTION by Marie Katherine Kask *** A Theaia Submitted for the Degree of MASTER OF ARTS in the Department / of HISTORY THE UNIVERSITY OF BRITISH amii* 1952. COLUMBIA THE AfiRARIAN PROBLEM IN RUSSIA TABLE OF CONTENTS CHAPTER I PAGE The Peasantry and the Geography of Russia 1 CHAPTER 1,1 The Russian People 10 CHAPTER III A Brief Sketch of the Peasant Problem to Emancipation 25 CHAPTER IV Ttte Emancipation Movement • 38 CHAPTER V The Condition of the Peasants to Emancipation 5&L • CHAPTER VI The Rise of Discontent After Emancipation 67 CHAPTER VII The 1905 Revolution 99 CHAPTER VIII Russian Agriculture and the War 117 BIBLIOGRAPHY 1 . The Agrarian Problem In Russia. The Peasantry and the Geography of Russia. In Russia is to be found as satisfactory a proof aa anywhere in the world of the theory that geography tends to exert a lasting influence upon the character and history of a people. The physical features and the climate of the country assume the greatest importance when considered in connection with the land problem which is and has been for generations the most overwhelming question in Russian affa i r s . The most striking feature of the country is i t s immense size. The fact that i t is a single unit, and also that i t has never been f u l l y de- veloped, and has consequently been of l i t t l e importance in European affairs obscures the fact that European Russia by i t s e l f is almost exactly two- thirds of the total area-of Raeeia. Taking into consideration that Siberia . is also a part of the same unit Russia covers about a sixth of the World's surface or about 8,250,699 square miles of territory. Its importance in world affairs has never been in proportion to i t s size. The reason for this can be traced clearly to the backwardness of her people and her government in the past, which in turn can be traced partly^ at least, to the geographical charac- ter of the country. The actual extent of Russian territory has always been somewhat in- definite because there are few natural boundaries. To-day the p o l i t i c a l boun- daries to the west are marked by no geographical divisions. The great cen- t r a l plain of which Russia consists continues into Poland, Austria and the Baltic States. The Ural mountains mark the division line between European Russia and that in Asia in the East, but these mountains are in fact no barrier at a l l , and the European plain rolls into the Asiatic plain, even as far 2. as the Pacific. In the South<the Black Sea and the Caucasus Mountains break off the Russian territory, but between Persia i n the West, and China in the East, again there is no marked boundary. In the past this lack of natural barriers has somewhat influenced the the roving character of the people, and has made for the policy of expansion by land. The fact that i t is easy to advance unobstructed has been made use of by Russia's enemies in the course of history; but the immense size of the country has counteracted a l l the benefits which might have resulted from the lack of barriers, to. that in spite of a l i i Russia has been a very d i f f i c u l t country to conquer. The fact that Russia is one solid mass of land has made the d i f f i c u l t y of conquest and of penetration by other outside influences more d i f f i c u l t . Its coastline is one of the shortest for i t s size..about one mile of coastline to (flarty-one square miles of area i n Europe and about the same in Asia. Thea large rivers, of the greatest importance internally as w i l l be noted later, have their outlets in comparatively unimportant waters, so that the importance of penetration into the interior from the outside has been reduced geographically almost to nothing. Because of the extent of territory Russia's problems of over- population have not so far been real. During recent years the population has increased very greatly, causing congestion in certain l o c a l i t i e s , but with better methods of distribution there w i l l be no serious danger from land shortage for many generations to come. The fact that the point of saturation is and has been so far away has allowed the population of the country to d r i f t from one lo c a l i t y to another with the result that in the past only parts of the country have become actually settled. Therefore when dealing with the agrarian problem in Russia i t is necessary to -limit ones' self to certain areas where the problem has actually arisen. Histori- 3 5. cally the land question has hardly developed in the outlying parts of Siberia which quite possibly w i l l some day be important agriculturally, and the Russian problem is not found in a l l i t s phases in the border provinces, which have been or are under Russian control! Each of these has a problem of i t s own, sometimes closely connected with that of Russia proper, but characteristic of local conditions. Russia consists practically of one continuous plain from the Scan- dinavian mountains in the north to the Carpathians in the South on to the Urals in the East. Only tot the South does the land rise to mountainous heights. The surface of this plain is not entirely level but is marked by clefts and chasms which give the appearance of elevations and depressions, but since the greatest height to which the land rises is nowhere more than eleven hundred feet, these variations are negligible and change l i t t l e the general uniformity. The/soil varies greatly in the various regions of the r o l l i n g plain and has been a factor in deciding the density of population in different areas. From barren clayey and sandy s o i l there is a gradual change to the richest possible black humus which in turn becomes thinner and thinner un- t i l the s o i l becomes mere arid sand i n the South. The regions can be roughly represented by parallel division lines running East and West. The extreme Northern tundra area is of l i t t l e importance until i t advances south and becomes the pine area where large marshes., frozen a great part of the year, are numerous. The s o i l i a not f e r t i l e and consists largely of glacial de- posits. Agriculture is practically impossible, and because l i f e is very hard the region is sparsely settled. The land immediately South of this is the great forest region... about five hundred thousand square miles of tiabedand. Beginning with 4. evergreens of the f i r and pine families with aapen and bireh scattered among them, advancing south the trees become hardwoods of the oak and maple variety. The forests have not been well kept. Fires and reckless clearing have destroyed much, but not so destructively as ha9 been the case in North America. The s o i l of this region is quite suited tor agriculture, but the clearxHt ings so far are small, and because of the abundance of land generally the s o i l has been exploited, and the old clearing is often l e f t when i t ceases to be productive. The s o i l is not of the best, and the climate is harsh. Forestry will^ no doubt ;be the industry of this region when modern methods of work and power have been adopted. The chief agricultural products of this part are rye and oats, with barley and wheat next in importance. Flax has been introduced of late years, and in the Baltic Provinces the potato was the important product. North of the sixtieth parallel there is l i t t l e agriculture. The great forest plain merges into what is known as the Black Soil region, the northern boundary of which can be roughly traced by a line drawn from Zhitomia, through K|.ev, Tula, Kazan to Ufa. The s o i l is very f e r t i l e known as Ohernozium..and is a heavy black humus which is peculiar to this region and seems to be the result of ages of decay of organic matter. This area consists of grasslands with islands of woods scattered throughout, and is i n reality the saving grace of the expands of Russian territory. The western part including the Ukraine is the most f e r t i l e part of Russia. Wheat is the important coop, but the sugar beet and f r u i t are also grown in abundance. West of the Dneiper the vine is also developed. It is also the most useful for livestock. Toward the Northeast the region is less favored by nature. There are occassional droughts and the f e r t i l i t y of the s o i l is practically exhausted, becausenit has been i n use for gene- rations, with no s c i n t i f i c methods of recuperation. Ditectly South of this region of f e r t i l i t y the s o i l becomes thinner until in parts of the country i t becomes arid desert. In the west however there are f e r t i l e areas. In Bessarabia maise and hardy fruits are grown, and large quantities of wine are manufactured. To the East the land becomes drier, but in spots wheat,watermelons, sunflowers and flax are grown in abundance. Toward the Black Sea the country becomes mountainous and much of i t is devoted to the breeding of horses and sheep. The f e r t i l i t y of the whole region is quickly disappearing because nothing is given back to the land. There is a continual possibility of droughts and although during the short period of r a i n f a l l vegetation grows luxuriously i t matures very quiciy and is then burned brown by the hot dry summer sun. The desolation of this burnt countryside gives way to the monotony of snow during the winter. Toward the East these dry steppes become a barren desert, which is the home of nomadic peoples. The d i s t r i c t of the Don is the home of the Cossacks who load a type of pastoral l i f e . The shores of the Black Sea and the C r i - mean Peninsula have been developed of late years. Immigration has given the country an energetic population, but climatic conditions are so uncer- tain that progress is very slow. Russia is a network of rivers. The uniformity of the surface of the land gives then their character. The four large river systems _ the Volga Dwlna, DntJeper and the Don arise in the elevation known as the Valdai H i l l s which ends in the basin of the Don. They empty respectively into the Cas- pian, the Baltic, the Black and Azov Seas...none of which waters are useful outlets to the rest of the worldt The Caspian is most unhappily situated for this; the Baltic is frozen a great part of the year; and, the Black Sea and the Azov forming outlets only through foreign territory. 6. But as internal waterways the rivers are of the utmost importance. Because of the lack of variation i n the surface of the country, they are long and serpentine , and reach a great deal of territory. Moreover the streams are quite sluggish, and the lack tff=swift currents and rapids makes them navigable. Until the present.they have formed the important trade and transportation routed of Russia, since railways are s t i l l not highly de- veloped. River t r a f f i c with human strength used for power has served Russia for a very long t ime, and has made i t s e l f known to us through such songs as "The Volga Boatman", which is one of many, because Russians always sing when working together. Not only during times of peace have the rivers served an important purpose: fhey have been the chief means of getting from place to place, for friend and for foe throughout history. Because of the heavy snowfall during the winter and the sudden melting in the spring, the rivers tend to overflow their banks, and cause great floods. TheBe are not unexpeated in Russia and in a way they are beneficial is forming a l l u v i a l plains the f e r t i l i t y of which ass renewed from year to year. On the other hahd they are dangeroui and cause a great deal of suffer- ing in a country where few public precautions have been taken to counteract the destructive character of the floods. The fact that nearly every part of Russia is in danger of these is another instance of the general uniformity of the physical features. The climate above a l l continental and extremej_pnforms to the same uniformity. The moderating influences are few. There are naturally, di f f e r - ences in temperature varying with the flifferent latitudes but everywhere the winter is a long hard one and the summer a short^hofe.The large bodies of water exert l i t t l e influence. The coast regions benefit somewhat by the seas, but the moderating influence does not penetrate far inland. Added to the monotony of the 1 sands cape i s the snow of the winter which stays i n most parts of the country for many months. The above emphasized uniformity which is so striking throughout the the huge expanse of territory has been an important factor in retaining the p o l i t i c a l solidarity, in spite of internal divisions and feuds, and attempted conquests from the outside. The early Slavs found themselves obliged to adapt their daily l i f e to conditions they found around them and although tri b a l relationships were important at f i r s t a complete rupture of these followed, which was replaced by geographic unions. The lack of barriers for division lines soon made a l l one. The transference of ideas and customs which so easily seize upon the uncultured mind crept over the whole land; Ig&m i t is surprising, comparing with other parts of the world how uniform is the folk lore and folk music over the great expanse of territory. Re- ligion also, introduced from the outside, has developed certain Russian peculiarities which show ths same uniformity. For while on the one hand the sameness of geographical features foster likenesses, the extent of t e r r i - tory on the other, reduces the possibility of ever suppressing an idea or custom* For instance, when Eastern Catholicism was introduced, every effort was made to suppress the ancient folk music because of i t s pagan i n f l u - ences but quite without success; and , the early superstitions and customs of pagan Russia became a part* of the Orthodox belief, &£ the bei4ef and has remained so ever since. The likeness of traditions has helped greatly in the formation of a uniform language. When living conditions in one part of the country be- come unbearable whole villages of peasants have been known to pick up their few belongings and migrate to new parts. This went on for generations and no power or law was able to stop the practice. The direst result of this 8. was an intermingling of dialects which might have tended to grow up in particular l o c a l i t i e s . ( Here again one must take the precaution to remember in forming a general impression that since Russia includes numerous races and nationalities so there are numerous languages. But reference is made here as before to European Russia i t s e l f in which, comparing the size of Russia with England foe example, the number afi and difference of dialects is negligible.) The monotony of the long cold winter and the influence of the same- ness of£he landscape along with the d i f f i c u l t y of agricultural labor and the poverty and lack of any physical comfofct or intellectual stimulus have tended to produce a certain brooding melancholy, almost cruel, strain in the character of the people. To them the sameness of the wintry world would suggest that a l l w-ould always be as i t has been, and to li v e in the future is to exist merely as in the past, through countless ages to come. The result is that a slow sleepy, stoical hopelessness has become charac- t e r i s t i c . But this dullness seems anly a sleep from which the masses can be awakeoed. Possibly i t is carrying the extent o f f the geographical influence too far to suggest that the extreme change and quick beauty of the short summer transform the minds of the peasantry, and rekindle hope. This contrast is expressed in Russian folk-lore over and aver again; and the proportion of the melancholy strain to that essential gayety in the Russian character corresponds to the length and dreariness of the winter compared with the summer. This peoportion is again borne out in the folk music. The bulk of i t consists of the heart-rending minor melodies which have become familiar during recent years in this country, but this is interspersed with utter contrasts i n the light and happy d i t t i e s . The Russian peasants being s t i l l a primitive people show the i n - 9. fluence of their surroundings much more than do more highly c i v i l i z e d societies. As culture and knowledge advance the modifying influences of geographical features upon history and character tend to decrease, but i t is well <to bear in mind that the influence of such an expanse of country as is found in Russia w i l l always tend to modify the trend of events in one way or another as i t has done in the past. 10. Chapter II. The Russian People. Any attempt to sum up the abstract characteristics of a people is bound to be contradictory, because human nature i t s e l f is not consistant . The problem is doubly d i f f i c u l t for a nation such as the Russian because the country contains numerous nationalities with various languages and regional customs. But as emphasized i n the previous chapter the wide geog- raphical uniformity makes for certain outstanding traits in character which make one recognize a unity. These t r a i t s often give a clue to the interpre- tation of historical events, while at other times they mould the course of history. Like other developements they are made and influenced by history and in turn make and influence i t . For instance, the combination of the slow, non-complaining melancholy with quick-witted understanding; the re- tention of pagan superstiiaens with a great capacity for religious feeling, the f a t a l i s t i c acceptance of hardships, the great powers of sacrifice; and the latent f i r e and energy , have helped shape the course of events even while working as unseen forces. The historical setting and the lack of organizing power have in turn l e f t their mark, i f not altogether shaped the character of the people. Broadly speaking there are four divisions among the Russians proper. The great Russian characterized by his sociable open-heartedness, brisk in mind and speach , and quick to love and gorget; the Ukranian, or l i t t l e Russian, dreamy and reserved; the Siberian, practical, very versatile, and independent since he has never been a slave; and, the White Russian who has been continually suppressed under one yoke or another and is consequent- l y timid and unobtrusiv^^Then surrounding these are the border peoples, (if Stepniak- Russian Peasantry...Pg. 12 f f g . 11. Poles, B a l t i c peoples, Georgians, Armenians, Jews and T a r t a r s , whose problems are t h e i r own although they have at times influenced and modified the problems and p o l i c i e s of Russia proper..Different groups have played d i f f e r e n t roles but the great Russian has played the important part p o l i t i - c a l l y and s o c i a l l y and has influenced the r e s t considerably, while the L i t t l e Russian has had a r t i s t i c influence. The e f f e c t of geography upon the character has been discussed above. I t i s a land o f vast lonely spaces of hopelessness only f i t to brood inM(P and the monotony o f i t s long cold white winters produces a melancholy i n any mind. The homesteaders o f e a r l y Western Canada weee subjected to conditions not unlike those found i n the greater part o f Russia, and the e f f e c t i n many cases was s i m i l a r . Theirs, however being accentuated by excessive loneliness often caused insa n i t y . The Russian peasants l i v i n g i n v i l l a g e s f o r the most part escape the burden of loneliness but the monotony remains. Add to t h i s the dire poverty brought on by baokward methods of a g r i c u l t u r e , lack of p o l i t i c a l and economic organization and the continual dread o f the natural enemies - drought, f l o o d s , c o l d and insect pests and there seems l i t t l e l e f t to develope a cheerful sunny . . .. .__ d i s p o s i t i o n i n a people. They have been between the lethargy o f despair (2) and the enthusiasm of the seer" f o r so long that out of the former haas developed a b r u t a l c r u e l t y which comes to the surface o c c a s s i o n a l l y , as i t does i n the wild animal c o n t i n u a l l y at bay. Hard tense struggle with privations at a l l times has given r i s e to a cruel c y n i c a l egotism i n the (1) - Lancelot Lawton - The Russian Revolution - Pg. 6. (2) - I b i d . - pg. 9. 12. in the peasant which shows i t s e l f in his daily l i f e , and is even more evi- dent because of i t s contrast with the unexaitable calm which characterizes him as a rule. It might be well to note at this point that although i t is to the peasantry that national traits hold most strongly the Russian landowner and nobleman in the past shows his share of them. There were other in- fluences to modify his mode of l i f e and outlook, but essentially he remained the same. Outside of the superior station that he held as a landowner and c i v i l or military servant to the state, he had received some education, and after the reign of Peter the Great had come in contact with European ways. But he was and is a Russian as is the peasant and the national charac- teri s t i c s apply to both. The fact that the nobility af the country are of the same stock - race and color - as the peasants^ is probably the cause of a certain in- dependence in the nature of the people. The Russian peasant was not sub- servient to his master and possesses l i t t l e of that slave instinct which knows no self control. This fact was well shown at the time of the emanci- pation and again during the various revolutionary outbreaks, which have been marked by a decided lack of violence on a large scale. He takes off his hat to a gentleman, but he retains his self respect. There is less of the grovelling slave about the Russian peasant than one finds for instance, among the people of the Baltic States where landlords have been foreigners either German or Russian, and where the native language and customs have been hounded and mutilated i f not altogether eradicated during years of oppression. This does not imnly that there is a conscious feeling of nation- alism or of Russianiam among the peasants. L i t t l e has been done to encourage i t in the past. Even among the higher classes was patriotism in the western sense deficient, as emphasized in Tolstoy's "War and Peace". The only unity has been a a loose r e l i g i o u s unity — 6rthodoxy, with the Tzar at i t s head. I t i s doubtful i f the Slav iflea has ever consciously meant much to the peasant. I t i s not that which conquers s e r v i l i t y i n the people. I t i s some- thing more deeply -rooted than such conaciousneaa and i s as yet a negative c h a r a c t e r i s t i c ; but i t can one day become a very p o s i t i v e force, and can then be used as a basis for greater unity. Along with t h i s indepadence i s a contradictory submissiveness born of long past oppression, a f a t a l i s t i c "Neecheva" (Never mind or i t does not matter) a t t i t u d e . The worst i s quite l i k e l y to happen and i t i s best to l e t things take t h e i r course. This can again be traced, i n part a t l e a s t , to geographic and c l i m a t i c conditions over which the people have no c o n t r o l . Storms, floods, droughts and ravaging grasshoppers may come at any time. Nothing has ever been done to a l l e v i a t e the misery which these goring. Why t r y to take any a c t i o n against them. The e v i l s are so overwhelming that no e f f o r t i s great enough to check t h e i r progress. She peasant adoots the same a t t i t u d e toward other matters. What i s the use of s t r i v i n g and learning? " The less you know the leas you are asked," i s a f a v o r i t e Russian ssaying. a sophisticated cynic who has exhausted the p o s s i b i l i t i e s of l i f e and l e t s matters s l i d e . He rather resembles a simple -minded c h i l d who flhoosee the course of l e a s t resistance,and who has not yet de--veloped that r e s t l e s s d r i v i n g foree which w i l l not allow him to r e s t . I t almost seems that he i s a semi-barbarous being with a l l the active forces latent with^in him. Long suppression has served to increase his energy which w i l l manifest great power when the time comes. There i s "that philosophic imperturbable i n d i f f e r e n c e to passing changes which never quite conceals "a true Prmethean f i r e 1 burn- ing within." The conviction that there are exceptional l a t e n t powers But i t would be a mistake to gather from t h i s that the Russian i s (10 1*. within, the masaea which have not yet been in any way JSBBH reached or used, ia possibly the most interesting and important thing about the Russian people. Along with the lethargic attitude towards matters concerned with the state and their own condition , practically every traveller in Russia remarks upon the surprising intelligence and quick wit of the peasantry. Even the oldest and dullest are ready to list e n with interest to someone from the outside wocld. They are very fond of questioning the -|oreigner and are ready to discuss any suhject. They know nothing of science but they show an interest in sc i e n t i f i c explanations of natural phenomena. In fact they show signs of having considerable powers of theorizing.(1). They re- veal surprising knowledge and great f a c i l i t y of expression (2). Bo#]J fo- reigners and Russian c r i t i c s remark upon i t . It is upon this characteristic that Tolstoy partly b u i l t up his great faith in the peasants of the dark villages. On the other hand the average Russian has not shown great promise so far of powers of application of his theories to daily l i f e . "Russians are only thorough in theoretical matters; in the practical they are by far the moat careless nation in Europe," saya Stephen Graham after l i v i n g among them for some time. Bert, & certain inefficiency seems to be charac- t e r i s t i c of the people as a whole and is a basis for possible explanation of the long-continued oppression of the people. There ia alwaya time enough for everything according to the Russian p^&p^e. A l l work is carried on (1) Stephen Graham - Changing Russia...pg. 53/ (2} Henry W. Nevinson - The Dawn in Russia - pg. 62 - 65. ftt the time of the 1$05 re volution " the people were drunken with ideas. After these centuries of suppression a l l Russia was revelling i n a spiritual debauch of words Without practice or tradition in public speaking Russia was found to be a race of orators." (5) Stephen Graham - ob.cit. pg. 37. at a slow rate and no power has yeQ^J been found to hurry i t up. Practi- cally a l l work is accompanied by song, which no doubt reduces the monotony of the long hours of labor, but which does not f i t into the American scfeme of efficiency. This attitude does not exist among the peasantry only. Turgeniev, after l i v i n g most of his l i f e abroad notices this characteristic inefficiency among a l l classes. He shows in" Smoke." the young, educated broad-minded landowner - always going to do great things but never accom- plishing anything...all his efforts passing off in smoke. An intelligent peasant c r i t i c i z e s the land owning class thust " They have studied a l l the sciences, they speak so fluently that your heart is melted, but they do not understand the actual business in hand. They don't even perceive what is their own interest."(1) It may be that a l l that is needed is some impetus strong enough to put the potential energy into motion and some power wise enough to give i t direction. The group of statesmen in the Soviet Union who carried through the revolution seem to contradict everything that has been said about Russian inefficiency. They may be a f i r s t example of the new energy l e t loose. The religion of the Russians is a subject to which a great deal of attention has been given in the past by c r i t i c s and travellers. It should be noted that when speaking of the religious attitude, the social aims and the popular morals the upper and lower classes form two separate groups, each having i t s own ideas. No doubt in the fi n a l analysis the capacity for feeling and action in these matters id the same, but external en- vironment has: had such a decided effect upon each class that they appear (1) Turgej_ev - Sportman's Sketches - I - The Peasant Proprietor Ovsyanikov. 16, absolutely d i f f e r e n t e n t i t i e s . The a t t i t u d e of the peasant i s native, while that of the higher classes i s a foreign growth. There i s among the Russians a great capacity f o r r e l i g i o u s f e e l i n g which expresses i t s e l f i n Orthodoxy and i n s u p e r s t i t i o n s . In f a c t t h i s i s so much so that t h e i r patriotism and t h e i r moral l i f e i s one with it.When speaking of capacity f o r r e l i g i o u s f e e l i n g i t i s not maant that the people as a whole are r e l i g i o u s i n the western sense. The majority accept Orthodoxy of course, or some other form of b e l i e f . ThiB had consciously been encouraged for p o l i t i c a l purposes. The Bolsheviks say that r e l i g i o n i s the opium of the people, and i t seems that the Russians of the o l d regime well recognized t h i s , considering the way i n which they used i t a i x along with intoaricating drink to keep the people subdued and contented under extremely adverse conditions. Religions u s u a l l y develope where a need i s f e l t f o r them. A l l people seem to f i n d i t necessary to have someone or something to c l i n g to f o r hope i n time o f hardship and misery - and f o r t h i s purpose unconsciously create f o r themselves gods. I t i s easier f or the ignorant masses to f i n d solace i n t h i s way than f o r the more enlightened, and the Russian people have shown themselves extremely capable of leaning toward and having f a i t h i n the supreme being who can correct a l l i l l s . An i n t e r e s t i n g developement ogf t h i s tendency i s showing i t s e l f at the present time when Lenin i s baing d i e f i e d by the masses. There i s a. tendency to consider him akin to a god to whose wisdom i n the past they can appeal and upon whom they can l a v i s h t h e i r s p i r i t u a l emotions. There i s a- transference o f b e l i e f and allegiance from the oldec gods which had proved themselves out—worn . The change i s not cons- cious: The older people confuse the o l d and the new, while the younger people think they are casting away r e l i g i o n altogether, and do not r e a l i z e that there i s a new force taking the place of the o l d . 17. Many writers upon the subject of religion contradict the statement that the peasantry is intensely religious on the grounds that theirs is a mixture of heathen customs with orthodox be l i f s . But this does not seem to lessen the religious capacity of the believer . To the western European, and tkg his American descendant there is a decided taste of sacrilege about the religion of the peasant. It is a strange mixture of pagan superstitions and Christianity. The doctrine of the Orthodox church and the popular religion vary greatly. Their attitude is far more objective than that accepted by the western mind. So many spirits of the early paganism remain to support or annoy the new God who came with Christianity, and no amout of suppression aould oust them from the minds of the people. The clergy assume a peculiar position because of this. The "pop" or priest of the Russian is not a "holy man" . He is a necessary factor in the ritualism which is half pagan. He is very important in the daily l i f e of the people because every activity is carried on by the aid of God, but he is made use of rather than revered highly, and often forms the butt &£Hhe jokes among the people. In 1659 there was a schism known as the Rascol in the State Church over controversial points of ritu a l which caused intense agitation and feeling on both sided. It divided the people into the "Old Believers" group and the state group. This division has exerted considerable influence upon the history of the country ever since. The Old Believers became the persecuted party, and under this added suppression have given rise to some interesting developments. Many new sects have been formed which have had some influence but the differences between theses and the State church are minor differences of ritu a l only. Much of the religion of the Russians seems to be mere formalism 18. of the kind which would enchain the minds of primitve people, but with i t is found a great emotional power which expresses i t s e l f in real religious exaltation as well as in art. It is said that Russia contains the greatest wealth in folk songs and folk music of any country in the world. The people are steeped in music and give expression to i t upon every occasaion. In the early days of Christianity an attempt was made to suppress the singing and composing of folk songs because they supported the ancient pagan out- look and hindered the advance of orthodoxy. But the folk songs have per- sisted i n a l l ojf their force, and they form a most v i t a l part of the l i f e of the people. It is only recently that the rest of the world has come to hear them and their pathos and poignancy leave no one untouched. In other branches of art too the peasants show great originality. Folk dancing and story t e l l i n g are a necessity to the Russian heart. Arts and crafts, represented by carved wooden utensils, jewelry, and the use of ornament in needlework, and also the famous ancient ikons show some Byzantine influence. But nost of i t has native originality. Under the heavy brooding melancholy there seems to be a strain of emotional color- fulness which expresses i t s e l f in art. It seems that only recently i n t e l l i - gent interest has been given to the wealth of these treasures dofi art, and i t seems l i k e l y that much is s t i l l unrevealed. Russia is also rich in superstitions, and these play a very im- portant part in the lives of the people. They have been retained with ex- ceptional force. The whole mass of superstitions is so closely connected with the religion that i t is d i f f i c u l t very often to distinguish where the one ends and the other begins. Harvest festivals are held, even to-day, with the Holy Ikons and the spraying of holy water. The peasant crosses (1) Albert Rhys Williams - The Russian Land - p i . 128 - 52. 19. himself i n the Orthodox manner before a meal and sets out food at the same time f o r the "domovoi" or house s p i r i t . He places his l i g h t e d candle before the image of his f a v o r i t e s a i n t , and at the same time repeats an incantation to save a s i c k animal. I t i s hard to say whether i t i s supers- t i t i o n verging on r e l i g i o n , or r e l i g i o n very near to paganism. And with these there i s the ever-present b e l i e f i n a Fate or Predestination which causes him to adopt the f a t a l i s t i c , l e t h a r g i c a t t i t u d e toward l i f e . I t i s i n t e r e s t i n g to note that the greater number of su p e r s t i t i o n s and pagan and C h r i s t i a n practices are connected i n one way or another with |jhe question of food, and s p e c i a l l y bread. The reason f o r t h i s can be found i n the f a c t that always a very high percentage of the people, even now about eighty percent, l i v e on the land and make t h e i r l i v i n g from i t . Moreover the Russian loves the l i f e and work of the farm and f e e l s that i t gives him a c e r t a i n status i n the s i g h t of God and man. He makes an ef- f o r t to come back to i t i f he i s forced to leave i t . ( l ) . Since he puts his steadiest e f f o r t s into the a c q u i s i t i o n of bread, and even with the continu- ous work of h i s whole family i t i s not p l e n t i f u l i t assumes a sacrddness for him that i s not known i n countries of greater plenty. When crops f a i l s t a r - vation i s near at hand. The natural enemies which threaten the crops are many, and with them the very l i f e of the peasants i s threatened. Prayers, songs, omens and proverbs have to do with the harvest ( 2 ) . The importance of a g r i c u l t u r e i s not only f e l t by the peasants, but forms the subject of national i n t e r e s t throughout the extent of the country. Something has. already been said about the backwardness of the (1) Stepniak - ojp.cit. - pg. 58. (2) A.R.Williams - o b . c i t . Chapter "Comrade Harvest". 20. Russian peasants. They are conservative like a l l other uneducated, supers- titious people. At the present time they are ignorant, unsanitary and hard to teach. Drinking "vodka" (raw sp i r i t s of alcohol diluted with wat^r) has been the chief pastime. Life to them has been one round of work, religion, and drinking. They themselves say that where God builds his temple there Satan also places his public house. This can be accounted for largely when i t is remembered that keeping the peasant ignorant has been the cons- cious policy of the State for centuries. The conservatism of the Russian is more apparent than real. He has no great awe for institutions or beliefs. He is quite willing to doubt and question. With a l i t t l e encouragement there is reason to believe that he would be quite capable of doing his own think- ing, and he could be brought to question even the Pate which he has so far taken as a matter of course. Nor has he any great respect for his superiors. The Tzar when he was at the head of the state was too distant to be considered a reality. Evidences of his work were scarce. The village elder was one of themselves. The priest was the only greater personage in their daily l i f e , with the exception of the tchinovnik (the government o f f i c i a l ) . But as shown above the priest has been the butt oĝ j? Russian jokes for generation! and the tchinovnik was considered a necessary e v i l . The Soviet authorities, so far are receiving the same treatment. Even when they show decided signs of working for the people they are regarded with distrust. The Russian masses form an unwieldy weigilTto move, but with a l i t t l e encouragement and enlightenment they would be easier to influence than,let us say, the British who are absolutely convinced that the old is the best, and reforms are only good when they are based upon solid tradition and precedent which are dear to the British heart. In England 21. these have been fostered, to make the people united and conscious of their own greatness. In Russia they have been suppressed and down-trodden. The traditions in the form of folk legend and song have even been suppressed at times. They have not disappeared, but they have failed to produce that national patriotism of the Western European countries. "No consciousness of national solidarity has been created by the rulers.... The government was not a delegation of power to be exercisedfis for the common good by res- ponsible trustees, but a vested interest to be jealously safeguarded and administered for the aggrandisement of a favored minority. H(l). Because of this the rulers and the ruled have never been one, and a na- tional patriotism along p o l i t i c a l lines has not developed. The Tzar was "the L i t t l e Father" to the Russian people, but he was connected in their minds in some unknown way with the Orthodox Church rather than with the government. The nationality that the Russian knew was Orthodoxy..."the Provoslavny" for which there is no exact equivalent in Western Europe. The strength of the Tzar tradition was not a very strong one in Russia. He was a distant cold individual who did not enter into their lives of the people with heart and soul. Proof of this weakness is found in the fact that now after ten years of absence from their lives the Tzar is a for- gotten figure. In fact not an arm among the masses was raised to save him from his tragic downfall. Because of the consciousness of the dual interests of the rulers and the ruled, a feeling grew up among the peasants th«tt they had some- thing quite apart from the state to fight for when the time should come. An intense s p i r i t of sacrifice has developed among them which i n times of.stress produces even great efficiency, which characteristic i t has been 6 (1) - Atlantic Monthly - Feb. 1928 - Fa l l of the Russian Empire. "22. shown is not habitual to the Russian mind. Possibly i t is this which has produced the•remarkable statesmen whos carried through the revolution. They were men who had suffered throughout their lives for a cause. The cr i t i c s and writers of the past have recognized this characteristic of sac- r i f i c e . Dostoievsky says in analysing the secret of Slavic characters " The Slavic idea, conceived in its largest terms.is sacrifice. It feels the need of offering i t s e l f up i n behalf of its brothers. The strongest sentiment ot the Slavic people is their desire to fight for the weakest of their fellow men, to gain equality through liberty and and p o l i t i c a l independence .and thus to establish the great Slavic union on the basis of God's own truth -in other words to assist in the profit, service and love of a l l humanity, and defend the weak and oppressed."(1) Considering the peasant as he is at home this seems extravagant description. Among the masses the s p i r i t is s t i l l latent, but among the intelligentsia there have been numerous examples of an almost blind sac- r i f i c e . Andreyev in one of his novels represents a young man of the middle class - ( the intelligentsia is almost the only middle class that Russia has had so far) - of the 1905 period sacrificing his home, friends and l i f e for - not Russia, or the peasantry, he hardly knows what for...for humanity^ He serves by helping to burn landlord property and k i l l innocent people - a f u t i l e sacrifice, but intensely earnest. Russian history is f u l l of such incidents. Among the peasants there are no remarkable signs of unselfishness, but there is a recognition of natural justice. Law and authority in the Western sense are foreign to the Russian minfl, as is the western idea of patriotism. But there i s also a lack of lawlessness which is born of law. This brings us to a discussion of the mir with i t s l i t i g a t i o n and governing powers which w i l l be traced in the next chapter. The paternal government 25- of the village elder has been well recognized by the peasant, and the tchin- ovnik/a personage quite apart from the stats* the mir government. Every peasant feels a kind of patriotism toward the village community where he resides. It is toward the institution generally that he feels the love and respect, just as i t is no one piece of land that he l©ves, but the s o i l in a general sense. The reasons for t h i s are found in the frequent re- divisions of the land in the latter case, and in the roving character of the Russians in the other. A man possibly lives under the authority of several mirs in his l i f e time. This was even more so before the laws Hhich xsatxxel restricted his movements. As shown above the geographical nature of the E country encouraged movement, and since the l i f e of the peasant at a l l times l e f t considerably to be desired, he was quite l i k e l y to leave old homes for new. This habit has in one sense broadened their outlook, and has prevented a certain narrow localism from growing up, such as has been the case in other European countries. Generally speaking the Russian is not rooted to one spot as is the German peasant to his paternal home. Extreme poverty and great ignorance have restricted the progress which might have resultefl from this search for something better. But the Russian has developed a certain ease toward strangers which comes only from outside contacts, and is considered one of the most hospitable people in the world. These are the characteristic t r a i t s in Russian nature. Very much in the character of any people defies analysis; but , i t is well to correct the erronous idea that the uneducated, ignorant, superstitious and dirty Rus- sian masses are a degraded and brutalized part of humanity. They are a i i ignorant and superstitioas, but under these external characteristics are latent powers of a very high ordermwhich break through the surface of leth- argy, and give great promise of future developement when some advantageous 24. p o l i t i c a l and economic order has been established, and when science has improved their methods of work, and has modified and alleviated the i n f l u - ence of geographic and climatic conditions. They seem the most intersting people i n Europe at the present time, perhaps because the least is yet known of them, and their achievement is in the future. In any case of a l l the vast sources of raw material that Russia has to work with the masses are the most important. 0 25. Chapter I I I . A B r i e f Sketch Of The Peasant Problem To Emancipation. The S l a v i c people are not indigenous to any part of the great p l a i n which forms the stage of t h e i r developement. They penetrated into the i n - t e r i o r much as did the e a r l y pioneers into Canada, and trade was also t h e i r f i r s t object - trade i n f u r s , honey^ wax and slaves. Agriculture i n e a r l y times was secondary. I t came with c o l o n i z a t i o n when firm settlements were already established. The migrations were from the south east, and when the e a r l y hordes were already well s e t t l e d , new hordes of these same Slavs came from the same parts and attacked the established settlements. I t seems that then the Scandinavians known as the V a r i a g i , penetrating from the North West were hired as mercenaries to d r i v s out the int r u d i n g Slavs. As i n other countries at other times where the Nofcthmen were i n v i t e d to drive out the foe, a f t e r s u c c e s s f u l l y defeating the advancing enemy, they usurped the power and became the r u l e r s . In Kiev, Askold, Novgorod and Ladoga b r i l l i a n t m i l i t a r y and commercial states were set up under Rurik and h i s kinsman. In the process of forming these states the upper classes of the former people were absorbed by the conquerors, and the lower classes, some of whom were slaves became menials who paid t r i b u t e to the r u l e r s . But there does not seem to have been any great antagonism between the s o c i a l c l a s s e s . ( 1 ) . Eventually the upper cl a s s came to be known by the name of "RUBS"(2) from which developed the name l a t e r applied to a l l classes. (1) James Mavor - Economic H i s t o r y of Russia Vol.1 - pg. 18. (2) "The word ' Rus' i n former times wrongly connected with the t r i b a l name 1Rhoxolani' i s more probably derived from 'Ruotsi' a Fi n n i s h name for the Swedes which seens to be a corruption of the Swedish 1 rothsmenn 1 rowers or seafarers.... Encyc. Br i t a n n i c a . Later contacts with the outside world were not with the west but with the east, possibly because of greater trade p o s s i b i l i t i e s . Prom the east before the beginning of the eleventh century, Greek Orthodoxy was i n - troduced which was to exert such wide influence l a t e r upon the h i s t o r i c a l developement of the country. (1). In these e a r l y states the system of land holding developed put of the custom and necessity o f rewarding the f i g h t i n g leaders or boyars by granting them large t r a c t s of land over which they had extensive powers. By the end o f the eleventh century and the beginning of the twelfth t h i s system of land holding was f i r m l y established, and a c l a s s of 1 c h e l a d i ' or slaves had grown up, who c u l t i v a t e d the land, and who came to be known as 'kholopi' or c u l t i v a t o r s . They were thus very c l o s e l y connected with the ownership of the land, and within the minds of the t i l l e r s of the s o i l there was a firm conviction that the land belonged to those who t i l l e d i t . They recognized that they , as s e r f s , belonged to the landowner. They said "We are yours, but the land i s ours". This has remained the firm beiuef of the peasants throughout h i s t o r y . Some a g r i c u l t u r a l labor at t h i s time seems to have been done by free workers, but the greater part of the land was c u l t i v a t e d by the serfs who became h e r i t a b l e with the estate or'votchina'. Extremes of great wealth and d i r e poverty grew out og the established system, and the states became a prey f o r the Tartars who had conquered them ata by the middle of the twelfth century. (2) The people predominantly S l a v i c were scattered with_«eut organi- zation over the country. Great numbers f l e d to the Upper Volga regions (1) Alexander Kornilov - Modern Russian H i s t o r y - Vol.1 pg. 22. (2) E.A.Walsh - The F a l l o f the Russian Empire -pg. P. 19. 27. where they turned to a g r i c u l t u r e , as a l l other a c t i v i t i e s which had pre- dominated i n the e a r l i e r organization were stopped by the presence of the conquerors i n the south. The land was divided into estates c a l l e d appanages or u d e l i , each under the r u l e r s h i p o f some prince who received his authority from ancestry rather than from service to some greater r u l e r . The service to t h i s prince i n turn was voluntary and could be changed. The land within the appanage was divided amon^lesser princes, who i n turn along with the ^appanage prince rented i t to free peasants though oftener i t was t i l l e d by the e a r l i e r kholopi. Over the l e s s e r princes the appanage prince re- tained some authority but the holders were not v a s s a l s ( l ) , and service was changed from one prince to another without f o r f e i t i n g the use of the land. Because free peasant labor was hired on many estates, that part o f the population tended to become migratory, rather than stationary as under feudalism. As time went on t h i s system of appanages showed i t s weaknesses. D i v i s i o n among the members of the f a m i l i e s of r u l i n g princes, and consequent quarrels weakened the power of the appanages taken s i n g l y . Consequently the way was paved for the r i s e of one strong prince who would unite a l l of them by force into a larger u n i t . This power was found i n the l i n e of Mos- cow princes who forced the submission of the neighboring appanages. Free towns such as Novgorod and Pskov which had grown up under the appanage system, and which had exerted a considerable influence upon the l i f e of the times, also f i n a l l y submitted to the r i s i n g power. Landholding became de- pendent upon the rendering of m i l i t a r y s ervice, and ceased with that s e r v i c e , which i t s e l f became hereditary. Allegiance became f i x e d . Independent de- (1) - I b i d . pg. 25. " 28. velopement along industrial and commercial lines was interrupted, and Russia became rural.(1). But no conscious effort was made on the part of the ruling power to give dieection to the developement of peasant and agricul- tural, affairs. These were l e f t to f i t into the system of conquest and con- solidation as best they could. The aggressiveness of the Moscow princes which had by the middle of the fifteenth century united the separate ap- panages into a Tzardom had l i t t l e time to give to external developement.(2) But the pressure of the military campaigns f e l l upon the peasants nevertheless. Up until this time the peasant or cultivator had had a certain freedom of migration. He either rented land from the owner or worked as a laborer for him. The result of this was that the .peasants sought regions where l i v i n g conditions were easiest and tended to migrate to the borders of the state where population was scarce and owners conceded better conditions fea to cultivators because the supply of labor was limited. This meant that in the central regions peasant households were depleted and taxes and rents were hard to collect. To counteract these hindrances to state developement, the Mos- cow government imposed checks upon migrations - a f i r s t step toward bond« age, even i f in theory i t was not considered so. Further burdens in the form of debts f e l l upon the peasants as a class. In the southern outlyyng Black Soil regions the land was rented to the peasant. But before he could make a start the owner had to lend him capital. A beginning was not easy to make, and tee result was that the paa peasant could not pay his debts, and thus f e l l into debt servitude to the landowner. But while the peasant did not own the land there was s t i l l the understanding that while he cultivated i t , he could not be driven from i t . (1) - James Mavor - ob.cit. Vol.1 pg. (2) - A. Kornilov - ojj. c i t . Vol. I pg. kj. 29. The peasant became the cause for a struggle between the landowner and the state. In theory he was a free citizen and as such he paid taxes directly to the state. Communities rather than individuals were taxed, and to inaureJthe receipt of taxes, mirs or organized village communes were formed. This secured for the state a mutual guarantee. While i t was a beginning of local organization among the peasants, i t was in reality a step toward bondage. But a realsx bondage developed out of the indebted- ness to the landowner. The latter took over the debts of the peasants4 aakta and with that the services of the individuals. To have them formally bonded would have insured these services for a l l time, but this could not be done in the interests of the State, because Snly from theoretically free citizens could taxes be collected. During the early part of the Seventeenth century when the Roma- novs came to poser (2) a new era of external expansion Began, requiring more money for wars which meant greater burdens for the people. Greater pressure was brought to bear upon the psapxa peasantry. Class separations became more distinct. By the restriction of the right of migration of the peasant class, bondage became easier to enforce.By 1628 when a peasant was brought back from f l i g h t he had to promise to live with the master " t i l l the end of Ms l i f e ^ C ^ . and in 1649 laws about desertion were made much stricter and the acquired bondage through debt of father was inherited by the son. In many parts of the country the landlord now paid the taxes for the peasant which meant! total bondage, although theoretically he was s t i l l a free man. But since the landowner possessed judicial powers upon his estate the free- dom of the peasant was in every way a contradiction, and he and the earlier (l)The Russian institution the Mir has given material for a great deal of discussion among Russian patriots.The ilavophils based their hopes for self-developement of the Russian peasant upon this institution. Without doubt the attitude towards, and the attachment Jro the mir gave rise to 50. kholop became one in custom* National l i f e was seriously affected by the fact that the c u l t i - vator was bound to the s o i l . Earlier the'Sobori 1 or the councils of Boyars had served a considerable purpose because they were of a representative character, since they stood for the attitude of the countryside. Now they appeared merely as individuals representing their own interests only, since the majority of the people were in their power. The councils tended to de- teriorate and f i n a l l y were discontinued altogether. The Tzar and the Pat- riarch (1) , the representative eufid head of the OrtlrPdox Church) took over a l l the authority. Though at no time had Russia possessed a government of a representative nature, now i t became a decided autocracy. When Peter the Great came to the throne in 1686, the way was paved for his a c t i v i t i e s . Peter the Great, with.his desire to simplify society in order to f a c i l i t a t e the achievement of his policy of "Westernization, Centrali- ii zation, and Subordination, did away with the established classes of peas- ants and classified a l l as kholopi, who were servants to their masters, and alfjof whom were to be tased. But payment of taxes was no longer a sign of personal freedom, because bondage was forced upon a l l . This uniformity introduced by Peter did not necessarily inten- s i f y the pressure of bondage utson the people but i t altered i t s character. In fact in one way i t c l a r i f i e d matters , because henceforth the status of the peasant to himself was that of a bonded man, awaiting freedom; and to the landowner he was an economic unit only, for later fceformers this was a clear basis upon which to work. The likeness of the interests of (continued from page 29) a warm patriarchal s p i r i t - one of the finest things i n the l i f e of the peasant, contrasted with his attitude toward the State. (Discussed by Mavor - ob.cit. Vol.1 Chap.X.) ^ (2) *6J0 1615 - Michael Romano ftf was elected Tzar. (1) Later Peter the Great replaced the Patriarch by the Synod. 51. of the Tzar and the Pomyetschek or landowner became apparent at onee, and thie l e f t the peasant no one to whom he could appeal for redress when wronged. The f i s c a l burdens were increased almost fourfold and Peter changed the tax from one on the peasant household to one on each individual, which meant that there was no escape from burdens no matter how well the peasant organized his household, to produce a surplus. Toward the close of the century Peter transferred the collection of taxes from the handa of military o f f i c i a l s to those of local elected bodies* from among the commercial and manufacturing classes.(2). And to secure laborers for his industries founded on the Western plan, he removed peasants from the land, forcibly when necessary, and sent them to work in factories. They by no means lost their serf status in this way, and came to be known as possessional pea- sants. During the rule of Peter the Great the peasants almost reached the limit of what they could endure, but with the coming of the weaker rulers after his death, his system was to bring even greater burdens upon the peasantry, because the restrictions l a i d upon them by Peter were used un- wisely to take more out of the lower classes. Uprisings occurred every- where and flights by thousands became common. As a result of these , among other things, there began to grow among the higher classes the realization that the peasant was the real backbone of the nation, and by 1750 the evils of bondage right were discussed.($). But for more than a century yet the evils were to continue growing even more intense, as the position and power of the nobles increased in the country. (1) Makeef and O'Hara - Russia - pg. 54. (2) J. Mavor - ob. c i t . pg. 142 - Vol.I. (5) Ibid. - pg. 174. The problem was written of by Maslov and others. 52. Katherine II , the enlightened despot, after securing greatt increase of rich territory in the Black Soil regions, turned her attention to i n - .ternal developement, but she saw with the eyes of the nobles, and she p placed the working of changes in their hands which augered l i t t l e good for the peasants. The nobles were pleased to escape from the burdens placed upon them as on a l l classes by tea Peter the Great, but under no condition lose would they lighten the l o t of the people and gain thereby. The fact that tradition had been swept aside , and attention was turned to internal developement, a new way was opened for change even in the lowest strata of society, and widely i f not generally the institution of bondage came to be regarded as abnormal. But ton the other hand, with the increase in the power of the nobles, the hardships of bondage l i f e reached thaar cul- mination. During Peter's time already recruits had been taken from among the people, since wars withfc the west were modernized and were no longer games for gentlemen only. This military duty to peasant households was an added burden. On the other hand i t was a step to freedom because the peasants who became soldiers saw something og'the outside world, and came back to the villages with a wider outlook upon l i f e . Again with the increase in the importance of the state a great number of the landed proprietors became public servants which took them away from their estates* These were l e f t under the supervision of b a i l i f f s , often foreigners who had neither the interests of the peasants, nor those of the nobles at heart. Not only did the grinding down of the peasant increase with this, but ultimately the danger of economic ruin for the state was increased. In fact as greater demands for the support of the country were placed upon the nobles, orders were sent home to take more and more out of the peasants. The distance between the sovereign and the people became greater and greater, as laws 33. were passed , increasing the powers o f the nobles over them, while unsanctioned practices , causing even greater s u f f e r i n g were overlooked(1). The change i n the nature of the problem, as well SSB as the l i m i t s of endurance are seen i n the number o f p e t i t i o n s sent to Katherine by the peasants. These a c t u a l l y resulted i n nothing. F i n a l l y the pent up f e e l i n g s of the people showed themselves i n the support given to Pugaehev i n h i s u p r i s i n g against the government. This one led by the Cossack leader was the most important one of i t s kind 52) which were by no means uncommon. The movement f i n a l l y crushed did not i n any way furthefc the cause o f the peas- ants, bijt rather put a stop to a l l furthefc discuasions upon the subject. Under subsequent rulers unrest as well as suppression increased. The serfs under the burden of s u f f e r i n g tended to become unsubmissive and expressed t h e i r i l l - f f i e l i g by f u r t h e r complaints to the c e n t r a l government upon whom they based t h e i r l a s t hopes. Uprisings, assassinations and f l i g h t s became more common when other methods f a i l e d , but these were sporadic i n nature. United a c t i o n , which the upper classes could not have withstood was unknown. But signs of awakening were numerous, arid the peasants began to to- expect freedom. At the accession of nearly every monarch s t o r i e s of l i b e r a t i o n were d i r c u l a t e d , which when they came to nothing gave r i s e to i n t e n s i f i e d discontent. Under Paul(l796 - 1800) an ukase was a c t u a l l y given out which seemed l i k e a step toward emancipation. Peasants were not to be sold with- out land, and the bartschina (the required labor on the estate of the landowner) was f i x e d at three days a week. The r e s u l t s were n e g l i g i b l e (lJ.Mavor & o b . c i t . Vol . 1 * pg. 181. (2) Pugaehev, leader of a peasants and Cossacks r e b e l l i o n i n the r e i g n of Katherine I I proclaimed that he was Tzar Peter I I I who had escaped a f t e r the palace r e v o l u t i o n of 1762. This r i s i n g conspicuous f o r the a t r o c i t i e s committed on both sides lasted f o r nearly two years.(1773 " 1775) F i - n a l l y Pugaehev was betrayed by his followers and executed i n Moscow. 5*. for whereas in some places this was a decrease in others i t was actually an increase in the number offf days. Very l i t t l e investigation had as yet taken place, and the ukase was a half hearted effort to show some activity for the deplorable conditions under the incompetent Paul caused even yet an increase in discontent.(l) By the end of the eighteenth century the Pugachev risings anfl other disturbances of like nature show that ideas of social and p o l i t i c a l consciousness were growing up among the people(2), and with the course of events in higher circles far ahove their heads the hopes and fears of the peasants rose and f e l l . When Alexanderl succeeded to the throne he had a reputation of being liberal-minded, and his early reforms although vague, seemed to point to change. Discussion of internal reform, specially in a committee appointed for that purpose went so far as to advance the sug- gestion of a charter for the people giving them the right to own real es- tate .(<̂ ) Alexander was not ready to go so far and l i t t l e came of the discussions while they did pave the way for later reform. By the ukase of I805 (serf owners were allowed to liberate bondsmen individually or by whole communities with land, provided the consent of the Emperor was obtained. The result of this was not far-reaching(<^) because the landowners were the chief opponents of reform; but the very fact that such a reform was passed points toward safaris, emancipation. In the Baltic provinces by the request of the landowners ( peasants were given rights in 1804 and 1805 and again in 1816 ^ the peasants were liberated without land and became economic slaves to the nobles. (1) In the four years of his reign Paul gave away as gi f t s to his favorites 5 5 0 , 0 0 0 peasants. ((2) Makeef and O'Hara - ob.cit. pg. 4 0 . ( 5 ) A.Kornilov - ob.cit. Vol.1 pg. 8 8 . Vorontzov, etc. ( 4 ) In this reign 1 6 0 agreements were reached, and the total number of liberated peasants amounted to 47,155 male souls. Kornilov ob.cit. 102. 35. Developements and events in upper circles drove the problem of eman- cipation into the background again for about thir t y years. After 1820 Alex- ander showed decided reaction; in 1825 at the time of the accession of NicholasI, the palace revolt of the Decembrists made for further caution; and the expulsion of CharlesX of France, and the Polish uprising fixed the policy of suppression. But within the system of bondage i t s e l f was found the germ of des- truotion truotion, as has been the case with every social system, which has fallen, and because of this no outside force could have saved i t . It had^lready out- lasted i t s necessity as most organizations in history tend to do. Conditions in the world generally had changed and no one country under tht influence of economic internationalism could have retained outgrown institutions l i k e bondage. Its f a l l could not have been prevented by the autocracy, nor the unlimited power of the nobles; nor could i t have been brought about by the work of the tevolutionary parties and the general aftitude of the new i n - telligentsia, the growth of which had been marked since the influences of the French Revolution and the Napoleonic Wars. Nevertheless the attitude rather than the work of these new forces in connection with the peasant problem had Jts effect, for a l l activity was driven underground by the policy of Nicholas I. The real causes for the f a l l of bondage right are found within the institution. The very severity of the conditions of the l i f e of the peasants had reached the breaking point, and as Russia attempted to vie with other European countries i n world a f f a i r s , with 7/estern methods^added burdens were l a i d upon the masses. The unlimited powibr of the landowners ignorant of economic trends aggravated these burdens. The problem had reached the point where diplomacy in dealings was becoming necessary, but 56. the estates in many cases impoverished before, were l e f t in the hands of b a i l i f f s , who ground the peasants down without reason. The wars with France specially had undermined the system, because of the untold expense involved, so that by I8A5 more than f i f t y four percent of the estates were mottgaged to credit institutions, and the peasants to the average of sixty nine dollars per bonded serf, the value being taken as one hundred dol l a r s . ( l ) . Besides this landowners had private debts to pay and the new tastes and habits ac- quired by foreign contact further impoverished them.(2) The burdens of a l l these debts f e l l upon the peasant class, and i l l - f e e l i n g resulted to the extent that during the reign of Nicholas there were as many as five hundred f i f t y six peasant disturbances, i n many cases whole villages revolting so that armed force was necessary to quell them. In aany provincaaa the idea became popular that liquidation of serfdom with the retention of the land by the gentry would be profitable. Laws for the protection of the peasants were included i n Nicholas' new code, but European disturbances of I85O and 1848 tended to keep down discuaaions. But the most important force of a l l was the fact that new econo- mic factors were making serf labor unprofitable, and liberation became an economic necessity, much as liberation of slave labor in the United States preceding the O l v i l War. Specially was this so in the districts and provinces where the peasants held their land by the bartschina system, whereby they worked an allotted number of days for the landowner. There waa often a surplus of labor power with very l i t t l e increase in productivity, and the surplus grew because during the early part of the nineteenth century there was a great increase in the population( $) • This aggravated the con- (1$ A. Kornilov - oJ». c i t . Vol.1 - 259. (2) The Rostovs in Tolstoy's "War and Peace" is a good example of a family impoverished by mismanagement, etc. dition of the already impoverished gentry. JAn attempt was made to put the surplus into house labor, and into state factoties, which Peter the Great had founded; but the methods and output from these could not vie with true industrialization and the competition of merchant factories worked by free labor. The latter were able to secure better means of production and more willing workmanship. Forced labor came to be considered unprofitable. Considering these factors one might be led to believe that an agreement might easily have been reached by which the institution of serf- dom would have come to an end; but the very immensity off the reform kept i t back until 1861, even after the necessity for i t was f e l t . Not only the fact that a solution by which the peasants were to benefit and by which the landowners were not to be deprived of their property and rights, was almost impossible to arrive at; but also the fact that a tremendous reform which would so radically change the relationship of the lowest class to the aristocracy might in turn be but a beginning for other reforms which would endanger the very being og the aristocracy. There was sufficient dause for fear, taking into donsideration the troubled times in western Europe, with the many revolutions, and the fear and reaction evinced by the very mention of reform, among the monarchs of the century. But i f serfdom had not been abolished when i t was, i t would have fallen of i t s own accord with greater disturbances to the state. The disastrous course and results of the C r i - mean War which benefitted Russia internally more than victory would have done, revealed to the thinking mind of Alexanderll, that serfdom had to go. He was by no means a lib e r a l by nature, and was both militant and con- servative by education and trainingC%), but he was a man of reason to the extent that he realized the inevitability, and so consented to this greatest reform of the century. (1) In 1816 the number of serfs was 9,787,000 as compared with 10,892,000 in I855, even after 41^,000 had been liberated in the Baltic Provinces. 58. Chapter IV. The Emancipation Movement. Discussion concerning refoam in. the institution of bondage began , as we have seen, before the middle of the eighteenth century, and the inevitability of change was apparent to a l l thinking minds. Among the aristocratic and p o l i - t i c a l revolutionists of 1825 (Dekabristl) there were those who advocated complete abolition of serfdom (1). In the higher government spheres the next thirty five years were to see an attempt at doing away with the e v i l of serfdom without asking any sacrifice on the part of the land owners, and without bettering the actual l i v i n g conditions of the peasants - intact, without looking the problem squarely in the face.(2). In 1826 a committee was appointed which worked on the question for four years. Another committee in 1855, and s t i l l another secret com- mittee (I859 - 42) considered the problem from i t s various angles£5)« But theae committees, and the same is true of later ones did not or would not see, that what was necessary was a complete change in the methods of the government. And even at the timt. of the emancipation this fact was not f u l l y recognized. Nevertheless the discussions led to the signing of an ukase by the Tzar in 1842 which was "a developement of the existing law of XO<J y 1805W (4) and emphasized once moee that landowners could liberate peasants i f they chose, and for this purpose methods were suggested. It was advertised as a f i r s t step toward emancipation, but having the interest of the land- owners only at heart i t was bound to be ineffectual. The peasant was s t i l l (1) Mavor - ob.cit. Vol.1 pg. 55 1* (2$ Ibid - Speransky suggested liberating the peasants without land but giving them equality in c i v i l rights. He suggested an Imperial Duma. Pages 558ete. Paulucci and Kisilev also had reform programs. (5) Ibid. - I - 541. (4) Ibid. - I - 548. 5 ? . expected to pay the whole coat of his greater personal freedom. However limitation in serfdom was brought about at this time by minor measures. In 1827, the purchase of peasants without sufficient land to support them was forbidden, and in I855 the separation of families by sale was dis- allowed.(1) Another dommittee which worked from 1840 to 1844 on the problem of the dvorovie lyudi ( the serfs who were hot on the land but were domes- t i c servants in town and country houses, tradesmen, clerks managers and foundary andjfactory workers) gave a report which resulted i n two ukases by which proprietors were given freedom to emancipate serfs upon mutual agreement.(2) But as the serf was in no case i n a position to bargain agreements necessarily meant the acceptance of landowners' tBrms. So l i t t l e had so far become of the investigation and reform, t h a t the "^zar becoming impatient tried to carry out an experiment in one large section of the country. He sfet committees to obtain inventories from the landowners in some of the western guberni(j). stating the obligationa due to the landowners by the peasants. Where the information was unobtainable relations between owners and serfs were to bfe fixed. Bibikov who as the Minister of the Interior was at the head of this work pointed out the great variety of conditions and obligations, and the impossibility of making general regulations to govern them. Certain rules were made however with the hope that they be an aid to the fin a l solution. The peasants of the clergy (higher and later the lower) were transferred t o the state(4), and nearly a l l state peasants i n western Russia were transferred from bartachina to obrok( by which the serf paid in money rather than in days of work) (1) G. Vernadaky - A History of Russia - pg. 144. (2) J.Mavor - ob.cit. -Vol.I pg.J51. ( 5 ) Vilenskaya, Godinskaya, Minskaya, Kovskaya, and others. (4)J #Mavor - ob.cit. pg.568...weldomed by the peasants. 4 0 . Tzar Nicholas the First,autocrat that he waa, was convinced that a limitation of serfdom was necessary, and hiB ministers conservative at heart worked upon the problem because this was expected of them.(l). Bet- ween 1844 and 1857 many reports were brought before the Tzar. Perovsky (1845)(6$ advised that the peasant couldi not be liberated without land, and he suggested that before anything could be done i t was necessary to re- organize the local administration. In 1847 a further ukase outlined more methods by which peasants could be liberated.(5) 1848, the year of Revolutions in Western Europe stopped a l l talk of reform i n Russia but serfdom was too real a menace to national l i f e and developement to be neglected long. The Crimean War with its diee results was to prove a blessing to Russia as other wars have proved since. She eventually benefitted more by defeat than she would have by v i c t o r y ( 4 ) . The danger of general national collapse brought the evils of bondage to the front with new vigour. Nicholas the F i r s t died realizing that his sys- tem had not brought success, and leaving a number of unsolved problems for his son. Alexander II came to the throne in 1855. He had not been brought up to be a reformer(5), but the great task of effecting the change in bon- dage f e l l to him. And because he was far-seeing enough to realize that i t was high time action was taken he probably averted a revolution in his country which might have been even more terrible than those which Russia has seen. (6$ (1) Ibid. pg. 5 6 9 . ( 2 ) Ibid. pg. 3 7 0 Perovsky's analysis shows that the attitude of many land- owners was that serf labor was uneconomical. (5) Ibid. pg. 574. ( 4 ) E.A.Walsh - The F a l l of the Russian Empire - Pg. 5 0 . He states that although the Crimean War was a national humiliation i t was regarded by patriotic Russians as a blessing in disguise as i t revealed the i n - ternal weakness. (5) A.Kornilov Modern Russian History - Vol.11 pg.5. 41. Alexander stated in a speech in 1856 to the marshalls of nobility i n Moscow that though he did not wish1 to annihilate serfage' the existing manner of possessing serfs could not remain unchanged."It is better", he said to abolish serfage from above than to aaait the time when i t w i l l be- gin to abolish i t s e l f from below." But i t took about six more years before the reform was effected. So strong was the opposition of the economic i n * terests of the landowners. Alexander placed liberal-minded men i n executive positions. Lans- koy was made minister of the Interior, and throughout the period of dis- cussion men like Levahin, Unkovsky, Obofcbyky, Cherkassky ansa G.Samarin, Melyuten, and Rostovtzev held leading positions, and worked with true patriotism for the welfare of the country. Investigations soon showed that the general attitude among the landowners was as follows! (1) In the Black-Soil region - because population had increased and bad harvests had made foodstuffs higher in price the landowners found i t to their disadvantage to feed serfs i n the bad years; and, in many cases be- cause of this they had been liberated without land. Some were even in favor of giving very small allotments to keep the labor power near at hand be- cause they were to be hired back when necessary. Land without peasants sold for more than land withaHt peasants. The Black-Sail proprietors there- fore favored liberation without land. (2) In the non-black s o i l areas the land i t s e l f was not valuable, and in many cases the landowners did not even own agricultural implements, but they derived huge profits from the work of the serfs i n factories, and those engaged in home industries. Therefore the peasants rather than the ( continued from page 40 ) (6)"AlexanderII had i n fact the same ideals of enlightened absolutism as NicholasI but Alexander was a much gentler and tolerant disposition than Nicholas." G.Vernadsky - op.cit. pg. 151/ 42. land were valuable, and the landowners would lose p r o f i t s ay emancipation. They therefore wanted redemption i n case of l i b e r a t i o n f o r which they were w i l l i n g to give land. (5). On the p r a i r i e s of Great Russia, and i n the L i t t l e Russian guberni where the population was scanty help was hard to get. The landowners i n t h i s area wanted some settlement by which the peasants could be made to stay upon the allottments given them whether f r e e or not, to insure labor f o r the estates.. (4) In the South-West, and many parts of L i t t l e Russia the c u l t i v a t i o n of sugar beets had become a p r o f i t a b l e industry to the p r o p r i e t o r , and here too landless emancipation was favored.(l) The basic cause f o r the difference of the opinions of the landowners was found i n the fliffering economic conditions of t h e i r d i s t r i c t s and i t was quite evident that whatever the settlement might be , a uniform method o f dealing with the problem was not p r a c t i c a l . Alexander had hoped that the nobles would of t h e i r own accord come forward to discuss the matter, and at the time of h i s coronation when they were a l l assembled they were sounded b$ Lanskoy, but only the L i t h u - anian nobles who were interested i n the e a r l i e r inventories , and whose xx problem was somewhat d i f f e r e n t to the usual problem remained to discuss the matter. Only i n rare cases did any of the more liberal-minded landowners show any interest. ( 2 ) In the Main Committee appointed by Alexander , which consisted o f about twenty leading men discussions came to nothing. The nobles of three guberni had decided to l i b e r a t e the peasants without land but i t was e a s i l y seen that t h i s would merely create a large landless p r o l e t a r i a t , i f ( 1 ) J.Mavor op. c i t . pg. 577 f f g . ' " (2) I b i d . 5SI»«A request fotr l i b e r a t i o n of peasants on her estate came from Alexander's aunt, grand Duchess Elena Pavlovna - noted f o r her l i b e r a l i n t e r e s t s . * 3 . applied to the whole land. And so the diacusaions continued un t i l , Alex- ander losing patience ordered Lanakoy to formulate in three days (St a re- acript of a project offered by the latter himaelf to the Lithuanians. It provided for the following! (l) The landowners to retain the right to the property but the peasants to keep their allotments for which they would pay in installments. Por the use of the land for subsistence they were to pay in money or in worlj,on the landowners property. (2) Peasants to be divided into village communities and landowners to be res- ponsible for police functions and the organization of future relations and security of payment of taxes to the government. (5) The$ reform to be effected gradually but the plan to be ready in six months.(l). This wae the f i r s t active step to emancipation and when rumors of i t spread there was rejoicing in many parts|of the country. The revolution- arie8 praised Alexander and there were hopes of great things to come. But from the conservative element there was criticism^ Uhile the idea of gradual reform did not satisfy the more liberal-minded Tver nobility who had a l - ways been noted for their progress. The rescript was sent tot the different guberni and Alexander waited for favorable replies. The Moscow nobility haughtily turned i t down...re- vealing the lack of support and co-operation under which the work had to be done.(2) In many cases i t seems that th^ local committees appointed to deal with the matter would have quite ignored i t , but for the fear of the displeasure of the fzar. There was also the fear that now since the rumor of great things about to come had reached the peasants, they would rise i f **************** (1) J.Mavor - Op.cit. - 38$. (2) Ibid. - 587. 44. inaction were too apparent. It was a d i f f i c u l t matter for the ministry of the Interior. To coerce the nobles was unwise, whereas the reluctance they showed required futther action. The local committees required a more detailed programme, and that of Pozen was accepted, which cunningly provided for a transition period of twelve years, after which the peasants were to go landless.To many this was quite satisfactory, but i t met with violent opposition on the part of the Tver nobles once more, and again had to be changed. The Tver nobility favorad emancipation with land, and redemption by government credit. More and more support was found for this view among the influential leaders.(1), because they were beginning to realize that to liberate the peasants without land would be to incite them to revolution. Rostovtzev became the leader of the movement from 1858 on, and he upheld that the sale of landowners' rights should be obligatory on the demand of the peasants (purchase being optional), and that the necessary sums should be advanced by the government, in spite of the wretched state of public f i - nances. To this the peasants were to add six percent yearly.(2). Now the local committees recognized that a betterment in the l i v i n g conditions of the peasants could no longer be evaded; but to give them more land with fewer obligations was considered absolutely impossible. They held _hat the estates would be ruined. During the transition period the landowners wished to preserve for themselves the greatest possible powers, and at the end of that time they s t i l l wished to reap the greatest possible benefits, fltey has HaxJaiHRxdeftaite^ (1) Rostovtzev wrote four famous letters to the fzar in which he condemned landless liberation. These had considerable influence. (2) Mavor - op.cit. - pg. 598. 45. They had nothing definite to offer in the way of village government(l) but they were in favor of enforcing the new obligations upon the community or mir so that this system of mutual guarantee could hold the individual responsible while the landowner would s t i l l have power over the community. Since not only rights but property also was at stake the interest taken in this matter of reform was very real. The adherents of reaction feared the radicalism of the reformers, while the latter worked with real patriotism to do away with this e v i l of long standing. Under the presidency of Rostovtzev the Editing Commissions were formed by the Tzar. They were made up of the officers of the various depart- ments connected with peasant affair s , and they included a number of experi- enced landowners. Lanskoy was replaced by the more active Melyuten aa minis- ter of the Interior. The main points according to Rostovtzev were outlined thus: (1) Peasants to be liberated with land. (2) Compensation to be paid by peas- ants for allotments(5) process of compensation to be fac i l i t a t e d by govern- ment guarantee ( 4 ) lempoary period of obligatory relations to be avoided i f possible, or to be made as short as possible (5) There should be a transi- tion from bartschina to obrok in thBee years except where peasants did not want i t . (6) Villages were to be endowed with autonomy. (2) The Editing Commissions in four sections - the judi c i a l , adminis- trative, economical, and financial - discussed the problem in partsj and, altogether its thirty five reports, rediscussed and amended became eventually parts of the Emancipation Act of February 19, 1861. The work of the Editing Commissions was to draw up the material and in revising the projects prepare i t for the act. It was vested with (1) Ibid. pg. 5 9 4 . (2) Ibid. pg. 599. 46. considerable power,,and the l o c a l committees came to look upon the members as a bureaucratic body, and no longer considered them aa representing themselves.$1) i n any way. The delegates from the l o c a l committees were asked to meet the commission. They were to come i n two groups - the f i r s t to discuss and study projects, and the second f o r the period of constructive l e g i s l a t i o n . When decisions had been reached i n these groups the projects were to be sent to the main committee, where the f i n a l r e v i s i o n was to be made.(2) Every point and phase of the problem met with heated controversy. In most cases the E d i t i n g Commission was decidedly more l i b e r a l than the representatives from the country. In the problem of the s i z e of the a l l o t - ments s p e c i a l l y did t h i s difference become apparent. The economic committee of the E d i t i n g Commission suggested that the peasants should at l e a s t have as much land as they had c u l t i v a t e d f o r th-^mselves formerly, and that i f the landowner were l e f t with one t h i r d cof the estate the d i v i s i o n would be f a i r . As a r e s u l t of considerable discussion, c e r t a i n maximam and minimum allotments were f i x e d for the Black-Soil and Non-black-soil regions. These were as follows: In the d i f f e r e n t guberni, and sometimed i n the same one, i n the B l a c k - s o i l section, the maximum l o t s were to be...taking f i v e l o c a l i t i e s 5>3&» 5k» 4, 4_? dessiatines per soul respectively. In the non-black s o i l region maximum l o t s were i n d i f f e r e n t l o c a l i t i e s $fe, 4, 4§-, 5, 6 and 8 dessiatines respectively. The minima were to be two f i f t h a o f the maxima ( l a t e r changed to one t h i r d ) . In the steppe regions there were to be four l o c a l i t i e s - the allotments being 6%, 8fe, 10§-, and 12 dessiatines respec- t i v e l y (with no minima). Special arrangements were made f o r the L i t t l e Russian guberni, and those on the western f r o n t i e r where the holding a f land (1) Ibid. pg. 400. (2) Ibid. pg. 401. 47. had been somewhat different. The above was the settlement on this point during the f i r s t part of of the work of the Editing Commission. In the matter of the obligations to be rendered by the peasants the decision was as followst The Great Russian, the White Russian and New Russian guberni were divided into four regions, namely, the non-black s o i l obrok region, non-black s o i l bartschina region, black s o i l region and the steppe region. In the f i r a t of these the obrok was set at nine rubles per soul, except in certain localities where a gra- dation system was to be used...the f i r s t dessiatine requiring three and a half to four rubles, the second at a lower sum and so on. Where bartschina obligations were to be rendered, forty days for men, and t h i r t y days for women were fixed. These sums and days were of exceptional importance because upon these was to be based the future redemption price of the land which the peasants were to pay. Before he had paid obrok or rendered bartschina for the right to t i l l the b i t of s o i l alloted to him, as well as a necessary duty required of him because he was a bonded slave. Since now the redemption price required the same value to be rendered by the peasant , i t stands to reason that he was not paying only the same value for the land (which we shall see was much less in extent in many cases than the land he had t i l l e d before) but also for his greater personal freedom. Economically this meant that the peasant had from the f i r s t a very heavy burden to carry. Another project which gave rise to a great deal of discussion was that of the structure and organization of the village community and adminis- tration. At f i r s t i t was suggested that village communities for police pur- poses , and agrarian communities should exist side by side. This plan was met with criticism on the score that the administrative commune would na- 48. t u r a l l y tend toward bureaucracy, which would be undesirable. Then the idea of r e - i n s t a t i n g the volost ( d i s t r i c t ) of e a r l i e r times was considered, and the agrarian community, the mir, was to be a subdivision of the former. The volost however was not to have i t s former autonomous powers. The c h i e f of the volost was to be responsible to the c h i e f o f the mir and the l o c a l p o l i c e , and the v i l l a g e head and the other v i l l a g e o f f i c i a l s were i n turn to be under the authority of the volost head.(l) This meant that the administrative and agrarian bodies were hampered by each other and both of them were sub- servient to the p o l i c e . This settlement met with a great deal of c r i t i c i s m on the part of the l i b e r a l heads i n the emancipation movement. The landowners also ob- jected. OnB of the grounds of c r i t i c i s m was that i f p o l i c e power were to be uppermost, corruption would r e s u l t and that while governmental power would be c e n t r a l i z e d , l o c a l freedom would be hampered.(2) The landowners argued ^ u i t e l o g i c a l l y , that while by t h i s arrangement, the ce n t r a l government would gain an easy method of c o n t r o l , and the landowners would lose the authority of former times the peasant would gain nothing and his in t e r e s t s would be altogether neglegted.(5) Meanwhile there was much d i s s a t i s f a c t i o n among the landowners when they saw that t h e i r representatives i n the l o c a l committees and t h e i r suggestions were being over-ruled. They objected to the intrig u e s of the bureaucracy and when they were permitted to make t h e i r c r i t i c i s m s i n f u l l they offered them i n three t h i c k volumes.(4). Then Rostovtzev died i n i860, and t h i s open-minded f r i e n d of emancipation was replaced by Count Panin who was noted f o r his conservatism. Besides being an uncongenial personality(5) he was an a r i s t o c r a t , himself &&& ( l ) I b i d . 464. (2)- U.F.Samarin's objection. I b i d . 406. (5)A.D.Jultukin - Ibid.406. (4) Ibid . 407, a f t e r Kornilov. (5)A.Kornilov op. c i t . Vol.11 pg. 58. 49. an owner of twenty one thousand serfs, and an outspoken opponent of the work which had so far been done in the Editing Commies|ion. His appointment was a decided blow to the supporterd of the movement, but actually the work had advanced so far that no power on earth could stop i t or hold i t back. It seems too that the Tzar considered Panin a good tool for his wishes. This is the reason he gave for his appointment.(1). Alexanders instructions to Panin were that the work should continue along the lines followed up to this point. The representatives i n the local committees who came for the second period, as noted above, were a much more conservative lot than the f i r s t . But their influence was not much greater, in spite of Panin's sympathy . The Editing Commission started on i t s work of codifying its conclusions. Some minor coneessions were made to the conservativesj The extent of the allotments i n some districts wfls?̂  diminished, and certain changes in the terminology used in the case of future land holding were made.(By Panin's demand the term "use in perpetuity" was changed to"continual use" - the sense remaining the same. After the work of codification was completed, the task of eman- cipation passed into the hands of the Main Committee. After twenty months of continual labor the Editing Commission was dissolved (October i860). It had accomplished an enormous task: It had drafted sixteen sections of the fut?e Emancipation Act, in eighteen large volumes with six volumes of s t a t i s t i c s . In the course of the discussions in the Main Committee the landowners^ representatives tried hard to make further changes. They succeeded in having the allotments s t i l l further reduced in certain d i s t r i c t s ; and, they succeeded in passing an amendment to ,the effect, that i n the higher steppe loc a l i t i e s , the landowners were to bs permitted"to give gratuitously to the peasants one fourth of the allotment to which peasants were entitled (1) Kornilov - Vol.11 - pg. 5 9 7 50. after which a l l obligations on both sides were to be cancelled. These allotments came to be known as the "beggarly allotments" and were to give considerable trouble afterwards. On February 19th, 1861, the Act was signed.(l) This monstrous work was no doubt a f i r s t step to freedom, but the general feeling is that i t should have done more than i t did. The Agrarian Problem in Russia was by no means solved as remains to be shown. The very method of solution predicted this. It was carried out bji the bureaucratic element interested in the Statej^by the landowners, led by their own immediate economic interests; and, by royal w i l l , because i t had become an unavoidable necessity. The peasants who were most concerned were not represented. I f they had been their one desire for sufficient land would have been over-ruled by the interests of the other representatives. If the bulk of the land had been given to the peasants at the time many subsequent troubles might have been avoided. Numerous new problems were raised by the passing of this great reform. The fact that one great change had been carried out raised a de- sire for others. Henceforth the desire among the nobles as well as a l l other educated classes, for p o l i t i c a l power began to grow. They f e l t that by emancipation they had relinquished j u r i d i c i a l and economic power(2), and they f e l t that this had to be made up i n other ways. The agrarian reform had to be followed by numerous other reforms* Although the autocracy con - tinued i n power, its way was not to be a happy one, since the problems raised were many and d i f f i c u l t . (1) A closer analysis of the terms of the act and the results of these w i l l be dealt with in a later chapter. (2) G.Vernadsky - op.cit. pg. I56. ft. Chapter V. The Contlition. o t the Peasants to Emancipation. During the century and half before Emancipation there was a tremendous increase i n population. This was p a r t l y the case because by conquest numerous new lands were annexed, and p a r t l y because of a natural increase. The major- i t y of the peasants remained agrarian, although frfl>m the be- ginning of the eighteenth century to the middle of the nine- teenth there was an increase i n the urban population from three percent of the t o t a l to eight percent ( l ) . With ups and downs due to wars the population of European Russia had remained f a i r l y constant, about f i f t e e n m i l l i o n , during the sixteenth and seventeenth centuries. At the death of Peter the Great i n 1725 - the number had decreased to thirteen m i l l i o n l a r g e l y because of reasons already noted (2) By the beginning of the nineteenth century there was a populat- ion of f o r t y m i l l i o n , and by the middle of that century the number had increased to seventy m i l l i o n . (3) While the population had increased enormously the number of serfs had a c t u a l l y decreased considerably. The growth i n urban population, and the fre e i n g of serfs, by the releases of the years preceding emancipation, as noted above, accounts f o r t h i s . (1) . G. Vernadsky. A History of Russia. P. 106. (2) Supra. Ohap. I I I . (3) G. Vernadsky. Op. c i t . Pg. 106. The following figures i l l u s t r a t e t h i s f a c t : No. of landowners No. of State Total Peasants Peasants Population 1st Census - 1722 3,200,000 2,200,000 14 m i l l i o n 5th Census - 1796 9,789,680 7,276,170 36 6th Census - 1812 10,416,813 7,550,814 41 8th Census - 1835 10,872,229 10,550,000 60 9th Census - 1851 10,708,856 12,000,000 69 10th Census - 1859 10,696,136 13,800,000 74 (1) This w i l l show that i n the l a s t twenty four years there was an actual increase i n the landowners peasants, and a s l i g h t increase i n State peasants, not at a l l proportional to the increase i n population. In fact, while i n 1835 44.93 per cent of the population were serfs by 1859 the percentage had decreased to 34.39 percent. A change had been taking place, too, i n the methods of meeting the obligations to the landowners. Generally i t wa3 a change from bartsching^to obrok. As a rule the l a t t e r was preferred by the peasants as i t l e f t them with a l i t t l e more independence, but i n payment i n money there were disadvantages as well, f o r money payments could amount up from year to year, while days of work could not. On the other hand i t l e f t them free to work upon t h e i r own land during the busy season which usually resulted i n better crops to the extent that they could pay. In a few l o c a l i t i e s i t was found that a combination of the two systems worked so well (2) that a surplus of grain resulted i n the d i s - t r i c t s . This led to the formation of markets. But the (1) J. Mavor. Econ. Hist, of Russia. Vol. I. 418. (2) Mavor.ef.t.TlI. 422. 6'3 merchants benefited at the expense of the landowners who were unused to business. And t h i s l e f t s t i l l l e s s for the peasants who were given correspondingly l e s s by the proprietors. The system of economy was such that the community reaped none of the p r o f i t s . Then, too, much of the surplus grain, i n a country which had for so long grown f o r l o c a l consumption, would never reach the markets as the transportation system was quite inadequate. In 1838 there were only twenty seven miles of railway i n Russia, and i n 1858 the t o t a l had only reached one thousand and ninety two miles (1) which was of course quite inadequate f o r a country of the size of Russia. (Only a f t e r emancipation did the nation enter on u large scale railway building system). Beside t h i s , the means f o r storing grain from year to year were exceedingly poor, and t h i s and poor transportation means were the cause of the numerous famines i n the unhappy country. Price fluctuations were v i o l e n t . As always, bad harvests meant high prices, and good harvests brought low prices, but beside t h i s , other fluctuations were caused by e x i s t i n g conditions. Economists of the time t r i e d to trace t h i s i n s t a b i l i t y to the bondage of peasants. For example, i n 1804 - the very high price of grain was traced to the demand of the growing c i t y population. But by 1826 the conditions were reversed. Oity populations were no longer increasing but even decreasing because i t was imposs- i b l e to carry out anything of a commercial nature, and a l l (1) Makttf & O'Hara - Russia. Page 50 a t t e m p t s i n t h i s r e s p e c t were d i s c o u r a g e d b e c a u s e t h e s e r f s c o u l d n e v e r become a d e p e n d a b l e b u y i n g p u b l i c ( l ) . I t a p p e a r s t h a t g r a i n g r o w i n g as a n i n d u s t r y c o u l d n e v e r be e c o n o m i c a l l y p r o f i t a b l e u n d e r t h e s e c o n d i t i o n s , and a r e a l i z a t i o n o f t h i s was b e c o m i n g f a i r l y g e n e r a l . A t t h e t i m e o f E m a n c i p a t i o n t h e c l a s s e s o f p e a - s a n t s s t o o d much a s t h e y had b e e n d u r i n g the p r e v i o u s c e n t u r y and a h a l f . The numbers i n t h e d i f f e r e n t g r o u p s v a r i e d f r o m p e r i o d t o p e r i o d , but t h e c l a s s i f i c a t i o n was a s f o l l o w s : (1) . L a n d o w n e r s ' p e a s a n t s , w e r e t h e m a j o r i t y , owned p r i v a t e l y by t h e n o b l e s , b u t n o t e x c l u s i v e l y by t h i s c l a s s : Many mer- c h a n t s p o s s e s s e d l a r g e e s t a t e s and t h e r e were c a s e s where r i c h p e a s a n t s owned l a n d and s e r f s . T h i s c l a s s o f p e a s a n t s , a s a l l o t h e r c l a s s e s , were d i v i d e d i n t o o b r o k p a y i n g and b a r t s - c h i n a l a b o r i n g g r o u p s , a s has b een n o t e d a b o v e . T h e n t h e r e was t h e huge c l a s s o f d«/orovie l y u d e (2) - who s e r v e d i n t h e h o u s e s o f t h e owners - and p e r f o r m e d a l l t a s k s f r o m o r d i n a r y d o m e s t i c s e r v i c e t o t h e e n t e r t a i n m e n t i n a c t i n g and m u s i c o f t h e m a s t e r c l a s s . (2) The C h u r c h p e a s a n t s - were i n t h e m i d d l e o f t h e e i g h t - e e n t h c e n t u r y , n u m e r i c a l l y t h e seoond most i m p o r t a n t g r o u p . T h e y were owned by m o n a s t e r i e s , t h e H o l y Synod, t h e b i s h o p s and o t h e r churchmen, as w e l l a s by c a t h e d r a l s and o t h e r c h u r c h e s . The c o m p l a i n t s a b o u t t h e i r t r e a t m e n t and misman- agement o f t h e e s t a t e s , however, b r o u g h t a b o u t f i n a l l y , a f t e r ( 1 ) M a v o r i f r 424. (2) The s y s t e m o f d i f o r o v i e l y u d e was i n f o r c e o n l y i n R u s s i a . l a v o r I 200. many former attempts of the same kind, the s e c u l a r i z a t i o n of the clergy lands i n 1764. About a m i l l i o n church peasants passed int o the hands of the State, and were henceforth known as the Economical Peasants (1). The conditions of t h e i r l i f e were greatly improved as bartschina was altogether abolished. But for lack of adequate management abuses developed again, and the results of the ukase were not followed out thoroughly. But oh the whole they fared much better than before, and better too than the landowners' peasants. (3) The court peasants and the peasants of the Tzar formed a large group. They served the varied needs of the court and the Tzar. The numbers i n t h i s group also varied from period to period, since grants from the court lands were given from time to time to private persons who had served the crown. The peasants were taxed as the others, and were divided into obrok and bartschine^groups. Abuses i n administration occurred here as well as elsewhere. In 1797 - the administration of the Grown lands as well as the lands of the Imperial family passed into the hands of the Department of the Udelny. Before t h i s there had been frequent changes and fluctuations of p o l i c y . The l o c a l control of the Court lands was i n the hands of managers, and the mir organization was responsible for the taxes ( 3 ) ; the f i x a t i o n of obligations and the administration of i n t e r i o r a f f a i r s . (1) They were placed under the administration of the Mavor I. 833. (2) (3) S t r i c t l y s p e a k i n g , t h e T z a r ' s p e a s a n t s f o r m e d a g r o u p d i f f e r i n g f r o m t h e C o u r t p e a s a n t s . The T z a r , and t h e members o f h i s f a m i l y p e r s o n a l l y o f t e n s u p e r v i s e d t h e s e i n d i v i d u a l l y owned e s t a t e s , and b e c a u s e o f t h i s , t h e p e a s a n t s on t h e s e e s t a t e s were e v e n more a t t h e meroy o f t h e i n d i v i d u a l t h a n were t h o s e o f t h e l a n d o w n e r s , c o n s i d e r i n g t h a t t h e members of t h e R o y a l f a m i l y were so much more p o w e r f u l and i n f l u e n t i a l . B e s i d e s t h e s e g r o u p s t h e r e were t h e S t a b l e P e a - s a n t s and t h e F a l c o n e r s , who as t h e names i m p l y , s e r v e d c e r t a i n n e e d s o f t h e C o u r t . L a r g e s t u d s o f h o r s e s were m a i n t a i n e d , n o t o n l y f o r t h e u s e o f t h e c o u r t , but f o r r e i n f o r c i n g t h e c a v a l r y s t u d s by t h e i n t r o d u c t i o n o f good s t o c k . ( 1 ) . F a l c o n r y , a g a i n , was a f a v o u r i t e s p o r t o f t h e T z a r s , and a g r o u p o f p e a s a n t s (2) was m a i n t a i n e d t o p r o c u r e and k e e p t h e s e b i r d s . P e a s a n t s were i n t r u c t e d t o p r o v i d e f o r t h e n e e d s o f t h e h u n t e r s . I n 1827 t h e f a l c o n e r s were c l a s s i f i e d w i t h t h e S t a t e p e a s a n t s . (4) The S t a t e P e a s a n t s , who a t t h e t i m e of E m a n c i p a t i o n f o r m e d t h e l a r g e s t g r o u p o f s e r f s , had come t o i n c l u d e n e a r l y a l l o f t h o s e n o t owned by l a n d o w n e r s and! t h e C o u r t . O u t s i d e o f t h e p e a s a n t s o f t h e c l e r g y , t h e s t a t e p e a s a n t s were g e n e r a l l y c l a s s i f i e d as f o l l o w s : fa) The P o s s e s s i o n a l p e a s a n t s , who worked i n t h e v a r i o u s i n d u s t r i a l e n t e r p r i s e s s i n c e t h e t i m e o f P e t e r t h e G r e a t . (1) Mavor P A , TI. 263. (2) I n 1742 i t was s t a t e d t h a t t h e r e were 868 f a l c o n e r s . They have l i t t l e t o do w i t h t h e a g r i c u l t u r a l d e v e l o p m e n t o f t h e c o u n t r y and t h e r e f o r e b e l o n g o u t s i d e o f t h i s d i s c u s s i o n , ( b ) . The B l a c k P l o u g h i n g P e a s a n t s - o r t h o s e who worked on t h e l a n d . I n many ways o f c o u r s e , t h e y were s u b j e c t t o t h e same r u l e s as t h o s e o f t h e l a n d o w n e r s , but t h e y w e r e n o t a c t u a l l y u n d e r s u c h c l o s e s u p e r v i s i o n o f a s e l f i s h head and t h e i r p r o t e s t s i n t i m e o f t r o u b l e were more e f f e c t i v e b e c a u s e t h e y r e a c h e d t h e a u t h o r i t i e s more e a s i l y . B e c a u s e of t h e s e t h i n g s t h e y were, on t h e whole, somewhat b e t t e r o f f t h a n the l a n d o w n e r s ' s e r f s . T h e y seemed t o have a l i t t l e more room f o r d e v e l o p m e n t , and we f i n d i n t h i s c l a s s more i n e q u a l i t y i n t h e s c a l e of l i v i n g . H e r e t h e r e were w e a l t h y p e a s a n t s a n d mer- c h a n t s who t h e m s e l v e s owned l a n d and p e a s a n t s . Those who l i v e d on t h e l a n d had come i n many c a s e s t o mortgage i t , and e v e n t o s e l l a t t i m e s . By t r a d i t i o n o f c o u r s e t h e p e a s a n t s had r i g h t s t o t h e l a n d , b u t l e g a l l y no r i g h t t o s e l l e x i s t e d . The s e l l i n g o f l a n d r e s u l t e d i n p o v e r t y f o r some, and t h e s t a t e b r o u g h t i n programmes o f r e p a r t i t i o n , w h i c h do n o t seem t o have been g e n e r a l ( e s p e c i a l l y i n t h e n o r t h e r n g u b e r n i ) f r o m e a r l y t i m e s . R e q u e s t s f o r r e p a r t i t i o n came o f t e n f r o m t h e p o o r e r p e a s a n t s and t h e s t a t e t e n d e d t o i g n o r e a g r e e m e n t s o f s a l e and p r o h i b i t e d f u r t h e r s a l e s , w h i c h , as above s t a t e d , had no l e g a l g r o u n d s ( 1 ) . I n t h i s way, t h e w e a l t h i e r i n d i - v i d u a l s o f the community s u f f e r e d . The c e n t r a l government (1) Mav o r f l . Pg. 278. a t t e m p t e d by r e p a r t i t i o n t o e q u a l i z e t h e l i v i n g c o n d i t i o n s among t h e p o o r e r p e a s a n t s , t h e w e a l t h i e r k u l a k S t fy*^* ) and th e p e a s a n t and v i l l a g e owners, who had come i n f r o m t h e o u t - s i d e w i t h p u r c h a s i n g power. F r o m e a r l y t i m e s one s o l u t i o n f o r d e a l i n g w i t h l a n d p o v e r t y i n t h e p o p u l a t e d s e c t i o n s o f S t a t e owned l a n d was e m i g r a t i o n t o S i b e r i a . The p e a s a n t s who went were ex- p e c t e d t o s u p p l y t h e c i v i l and m i l i t a r y f o r c e s w i t h s u p p l i e s , and s i n c e l a n d was u n l i m i t e d t h e r e , t h e y r e c e i v e d l a r g e t r a c t s f o r t h e i r own u s e d u r i n g the e a r l y y e a r s . A l i t t l e more room seemed t o have b e e n l e f t t o i n d i v i d u a l i n i t i a t i v e h e r e and t h i s l e d i n t i m e t o t h e f o r m a t i o n o f t h e r i c h and p o o r c l a s s e s . Here, to s o l v e p r o b l e m s o f i n e q u a l i t y , t h e s o l u t i o n o f r e p a r t i t i o n i n g was a l s o a d o p t e d , ( l ) . ( c ) . A n o t h e r g r o u p o f s t a t e p e a s a n t s were t h e P o l o v n e k e o r M e t a y e r t e n a n t s , who c u l t i v a t e d l a n d and s h a r e d the p r o d u o e w i t h the owner. They were s u p p o s e d t o p a y one h a l f of the c r o p t o t h e l a n d o w n e r aftea? t h e seed f o r t h e n e x t y e a r was d e d u c t e d and were o b l i g e d t o p e r f o r m numerous o t h e r d u t i e s as w e l l . Many o f t h e s t a t e p e a s a n t s who had s o l d t h e i r l a n d or were l a n d l e s s t h r o u g h o t h e r c a u s e s d r i f t e d i n t o t h i s c l a s s . They worked on t h e e s t a t e s o f p o m y e t s c h i k i , m o n a s t e r i e s and a l s o on t h o s e o f m e r c h a n t s , o f f i c i a l s and e v e n p e a s a n t s ( 2 ) . B u t t h e y had t h e i r o b l i g a t i o n s t o t h e S t a t e l i k e a n y o f t h e o t h e r s e r f s - s u c h a s r e n d e r i n g r e c r u i t s , f o r i n s t a n c e . (1) . M a v o r f t I - 284. (2) " I 285. ( d ) . The f r e e h o l d e r s o r A d n e d v o i t s i were a c l a s s d e s c e n d e d f r o m t h e s e r v i n g p e o p l e who had s e t t l e d a l o n g t h e s o u t h and e a s t f r o n t i e r s o f R u s s i a i n t h e s i x t e e n t h and s e v e n t e e n t h c e n t u r i e s t o r e s i s t t h e a t t a c k s o f the T a r t a r s ( l ) . T h e y had been g i v e n l a n d f o r i n d i v i d u a l s e r v i c e , and t h e r e f o r e d i d n o t h o l d i t i n common ( 2 ) . Many o f t h i s c l a s s were w e a l t h y and had p e a s a n t s o f t h e i r own. But, h e r e , as among o t h e r s t a t e p e a s a n t s , t h e s e l l i n g o f l a n d had d e v e l o p e d , and the f a c t t h a t i n many c a s e s , l a n d o w n e r s had come i n and had bought t h e r i g h t s , c a u s e d t h e o d n o d v o i t s - i t o become i m p o v e r i s h e d . The s t a t e a d v i s e d common o w n e r s h i p as a s o l u t i o n , and by 1851 - of the 1,190,285 o d n o d v o i t s i s o u l s , a b o u t h a l f had a c c e p t e d t h e common o w n e r s h i p o f l a n d . These c l a s s e s p r a c t i c a l l y c o n s t i t u t e d t h e p e a s a n t r y o f R u s s i a a t t h e t i m e o f t h e e m a n c i p a t i o n . A word s h o u l d be s a i d a b o u t t h e C o s s a c k s and t h e M i l i t a r y S e t t l e m e n t s o f A l e x a n d e r t h e F i r s t . The C o s s a c k s were p e a s a n t s who i n t h e e a r l y t i m e s had come t o a n agreement w i t h t h e T z a r and were t o f u r n i s h m i l i t a r y s e r v i c e v o l u n t a r i l y i n r e t u r n f o r c e r t a i n p r i v i l e g e s , and f r e e l a n d t e n u r e i n t h e i r own d i s t r i c t . They p r o v i d e d t h e i r own h o r s e s and e q u i p m e n t and were a l w a y s r e a d y a t t h e c a l l o f t h e T z a r . I n f a c t , t h e y were m e r c e n a r y t r o o p s , and had o r g a n i z a t i o n s o f t h e i r own f o r g o v e r n i n g p u r p o s e s , and t h e y e l e c t e d t h e i r l e a d e r s ( a t a m a n s ) . T hey (1) S u p r a op. c i t . Chap. I l l (2) The o l d S e r v i c e S e r v i n g p e o p l e - a l s o c l a s s e d w i t h O d n o d v o i t s i ) , p o s s e s s e d more common p r o p e r t y Mavor I - 300 enjoyed considerable independence and because of t h i s often clashed with the central power. The great leaders of Peasant revolts came from among the Cossacks - namely Stenka Razin (1670) and Pugaehev (1773). The Cossacks have formed a picturesque group i n Russian history and have had a consider- able place i n her development, but because of the roving nature: of the population and i t s m i l i t a r y character, i t s ' importance i n agrarian development i s not very extensive. In an e f f o r t to free the state from the nobles, Alexander I founded M i l i t a r y Settlements. Under supervision and d i s c i p l i n e whole peasant v i l l a g e s were to be m i l i t a r i z e d , and by the end of his reign about 200,000 men had been trans- ferred to these colonies ( l ) . These people were to have special p r i v i l e g e s i n land tenure, but a c t u a l l y nothing im- portant to the State resulted from these colonies, but as a class f o r future reference they should be noted. In the foregoing the classes of peasants i n Russia have been analysed. It remains to discuss the r e l a t i o n of the i n d i v i d u a l to the powers above him. The chief contact which gave r i s e to the greatest discontent, was the relationship to thejl. and owner. In the early days of Russian history the pomyetschek had been a m i l i t a r y chief, but with the growth of the State he became the economic and f i n a n c i a l representative of the government (2). Prom among his peasants he supplied r e c r u i t s to the army, and i t was to (1) . G. Yernadsky - A History of Russia. Pg. 111. (2) . G. Yernadsky - " 11 " " Pg. 110. the i n t e r e s t of the State to encourage his power over the peasants. U n t i l 1731, the state taxes had been colleoted by- State Commissars accompanied by M i l i t a r y forces, but after that date the Commissars were withdrawn, and the power of c o l l e c t i o n was placed i n the hands of the landowners ( l ) . Thus the subordination of peasants to the land- owners progressed, and since i t was to the inte r e s t of the state, inhuman and unfair treatment was overlooked. James Mavor says:- "Russia had never been f a s t i d i o u s about the s a c r i f i c e of i n d i v i d u a l freedom or comfort, or even about the s a c r i f i c e of l i v e s when large aims seem to demand such s a c r i f i c e s " (2) Abuses of authority increased i n sp i t e of laws against cruel treatment, f o r peasants' complaints were f o r - bidden. (3)Corporal punishment was common, and peasants were sold and bartered l i k e ordinary goods and chattels with no regard f o r family t i e s (4). For any crime they were i n danger of penal servitude and e x i l e to Si b e r i a . The following was common - taken from the Moscow Gazette 4n 1801 (5). "For Sale - three coachmen, well trained and handsome and two g i r l s , one eighteen and the other f i f t e e n years of age, both of them good-looking and well acquainted with various kinds of handiwork. In the same house are f o r sale, two hairdressers, the one twenty one years of age, can read, write, play on a musical instrument and act as huntsman; the other can dress (1) Makeef & O'Hara - Russia, P 34. (2) Mavor I - Pg. (3) Mavor I - Pg. 204. (4) Makfflf & O'Hara - Russia, p 34. (5) Quoted by E. A. Walsh "The F a i l of the Russian Empire" p 34. to. l a d i e s ' and gentlemens' hair; i n the same house are sold pianos and organs". In many places penal codes were drawn up with the bodily punishments i n f l i c t e d f o r samll crimes as well as great. Torturing of serfs was quite common. The cruelty of the land- owner was reflected i n the attitude of peasant to peasant. An example of t h i s horror i s seen i n the treatment of horse- thieves (1) (which, however, was not confined to Russia) (2). And, when the pojjyetschek f e l l prey to the anger of the serfs, h i s own methods of punishment were i n f l i c t e d upon him (3). We have seen that i n the demands which the land- owner could make upon his serfs there was no l i m i t . The j u r i - d i c i a l r e l a t i o n s of ownership and possession of land, f o r i n - stance were extremely confused. Actually the peasant had certai n t r a d i t i o n a l heritable rights, as had the pomyetschek, but his rights were not defined and were based upon changing custom. The peasants' conception of his rights was t r a d i t i o n - a l while the landowners' conception was based upon expedience. The law did not f i x a maximum obrok, nor a settl e d bartschina requirement. In the majority of cases the landowner was l e f t to take what he wished, and the peasant natu r a l l y tottered on the verge of ruin. But the l i m i t a t i o n of the personal freedom i n (1) A. Kuptfcn "The Horse Thieves". (2) Gr. B. Shaw. "The Devil's D i s c i p l e " . (3) Mavor1''/!. 211. m a t t e r s o f o r d i n a r y l i f e among t h e v i l l a g e r s was n o t h i n g com- p a r e d w i t h t h a t among t h e d t f o r o v i e l y u d e . T h e i r s u f f e r i n g i n many o a s e s was much more s u b t l e . Sometimes t h e y w e r e them- s e l v e s e d u c a t e d and t a u g h t t h e c h i l d r e n o f the p r o p r i e t o r . Many were s e n t a b r o a d t o s t u d y m u s i c and a c t i n g , o n l y t o r e t u r n t o a r b i t i a r y t r e a t m e n t by t h e m a s t e r , whose e v e r y whim was l a w . M a r r i a g e among a l l p e a s a n t s was s u b j e c t t o t h e s u p e r v i s i o n o f t h e l a n d o w n e r . On t h e o t h e r hand, i t was b o t h t o the i n t e r e s t o f t h e s t a t e and t o t h a t o f t h e l a n d o w n e r t h a t t h e communal s y s t e m o f l a n d - h o l d i n g was p e r f e c t e d by t h e p e a s a n t s t h e m s e l v e s . The r e s p o n s i b i l i t y o f t h e m i r i n t h e c o l l e c t i o n of t a x e s was a d e c i d e d a i d t o t h e pomyetschek, and t h e o t h e r r e s p o n s i b i l i t i e s w h i c h f e l l upon t h i s o r g a n i z a t i o n f u r t h e r s i m p l i f i e d t h i s work. As has b e e n p o i n t e d out b e f o r e , i n some p a r t s o f R u s s i a f r o m t h e e a r l i e s t t i m e s , and i n most p a r t s d u r i n g t h e y e a r s p r e - c e d i n g e m a n c i p a t i o n , r e d i s t r i b u t i o n o f l a n d had t o k e n p l a c e p e r i o d i c a l l y . T h i s was done by t h e p e a s a n t s t h e m s e l v e s and i t h as been shown t h a t i t was e x t r a * - o r d i n a r i l y w e l l d o n e . The d i v i s i o n was a l w a y s e v e n a n d f a i r i n e x t e n t and v a l u e o f t h e l a n d , i n s p i t e o f t h e f a c t t h i - t no s c i e n t i f i c i n s t r u m e n t s were u s e d . ( l ) . I n t h e d i f f e r e n t d i s t r i c t s the l e n g t h o f t i m e be- tween r e p a r t i t i o n s was d i f f e r e n t . T h e y v a r i e d f r o m one t o t e n y e a r s ( 2 ) . These r e d i s t r i b u t i o n s had the e f f e c t o f e q u a l i z i n g p e a s a n t p r o g r e s s ; u n d e r t h e e x i s t i n g c o n d i t i o n s i t (1) . Mavor I . 211. (2) . " I 211. r e s u l t e d i n common want. The f a c t t h a t p e a s a n t p o p u l a t i o n i n c r e a s e d f r o m y e a r t o y e a r c a u s e d a d e c r e a s e i n t h e s i z e o f t h e a l l o t m e n t s . S i n c e t h e same amount o f l a n d a t t h e end o f t h e n e x t p e r i o d had t o be d i v i d e d among the g r e a t e r number o f p e o p l e , made f o r g r e a t e r and g r e a t e r l a n d h u n g e r , w h i c h r e s u l t e d i n f u r t h e r want and m i s e r y . I t i s t r u e t h a t t h e a r e a o f c u l t i v a t e d l a n d i n c r e a s e d c o n s i d e r a b l y d u r i n g t h e c e n t u r y and a h a l f b e f o r e e m a n c i p a t i o n but i t i n no way k e p t p a c e w i t h t h e i n c r e a s e i n p o p u l a t i o n ( l ) . The g r o w t h o f f a c t o r i e s and t h e c o n s e q u e n t c o n c e n t r a t i o n o f p e o p l e i n the c i t i e s , and m i g r a t i o n s t o S i b e r i a meant some d e c r e a s e o f p o p u l a t i o n on t h e l a n d , but n o t h i n g was done on a s u f f i c i e n t l y wide o r o r g a n i z e d s c a l e t o r e s u l t i n a l l e v i a t i o n . The s t a t e d i d n o t seem a l t o g e t h e r t o r e c o g n i z e t h e i m m e n s i t y o f t h e p r o b l e m ; i t was n o t t o t h e i m m e d i a t e i n t e r e s t s o f t h e l a n d o w n e r t o w o r k i n t h e d i r e c t i o n o f d e p o p u l a t i n g any a r e a o f l a n d as a man's w e a l t h was r e c k o n e d by t h e number o f s o u l s he owned ( 2 ) ; and i t was q u i t e out o f t h e s c o p e o f power o f t h e p e a s a n t i n t h e m i r t o do a n y t h i n g a b o u t t h e c o n d i t i o n . The m i r o r g a n i z a t i o n , however, a t t e m p t e d t o s o l v e t h e i n d i v i d u a l d i f f i c u l t i e s . B e s i d e s t h i s common o w n e r s h i p and r e d i s t r i b u t i o n of l a n d , t h e y p e r f o r m e d many of t h e l o c a l d u t i e s o f g o v e r n m e n t . T h e y were r e s p o n s i b l e f o r t h e p o o r and h e l p l e s s i n t h e v i l l a g e , as w e l l a s t h e o r p h a n s (1) Gr. V e r n a d s k y - A H i s t , o f R u s s i a Pg. 107. (2) E . A. W a l s h . The F a l l o f t h e R u s s . Emp. Pg. 32. 66'- and outcasts. And the treatment of these was humane and reasonable. Each peasant l i v i n g i n the v i l l a g e f e l t a person- a l r e s p o n s i b i l i t y for the unfortunate; and i t i s said that no matter how l i t t l e he had, he gave some to those i n want. Taxes, as stated previously, were paid to the landowner and the state by the community and not by the i n d i - vidual, and the c o l l e c t i o n of taxes, the p o l i c y and method, were decided upon by the mir. The taxpaying unit was known as the tyaglo, and i t usually (l) consisted of one man and one woman. It was l e f t to the landowner to decide when a man or woman was old enough to begin paying taxes. The land given to a household did not depend necessarily upon the number paying taxes, but rather upon the number of souls i n the family and t h e i r means of l i f e - a personal touoh due to l o c a l control. Among State peasants however, d i v i s i o n of souls wa3 more common ( i . e . male souls at a census). Sometimes the mir as a unit would rent land from private proprietors and oases were known where the community would buy c o l l e c t i v e l y such things as s a l t , or would rent m i l l s (2). To the Russian peasant i t was a beginning of l o c a l organization a*«ag- thena. They elected t h e i r own o f f i c i a l s and held t h e i r meetings - according to l o c a l i t y - more or l e s s often. (Fortnightly meetings were common). In a l l matters not having any r e l a t i o n to the state or the landowner, the v i l l a g e en-joyed|autonomy. The burmister or alderman conducted (1) Tverskaya guberni tyaglo consisted of two or three men and the same number of women. MavorTEV 209. (2) Mss-or -i - 213. LL>- a l l busgjess with the state, through the v i l l a g e p r i e s t very often because he could read and write. But the meetings, themselves, at which a l l were allowed to be present, (though the tyaglo men had the decisive vote) were l e f t to the v i l l a g e r s , and the fact that they so early learned to run public meetings must necessarily have something to do with t h e i r a c t i v i t y i n the recent Soviets. Common ownership of land no doubt gave the v i l l a g e a f e e l i n g of unity, and i t kept i n d i v i d u a l s from becoming disproportionately r i c h or poor, b i t i t at the same time discouraged i n d i v i d u a l e f f o r t to improve, since at the next r e d i s t r i b u t i o n the results of such e f f o r t might benefit the lazy and e f f i c i e n t neighbour. This must necessarily have made f o r i n e f f i c i e n c y on the part of the community, and may be regarded as one of the causes underlying the retardation of progress i n Russia during the centuries. Chapter VI. The Riae of Discontent after Emancipation. The great reform of 1861 may be b r i e f l y analysed as follows: F i r s t oame the general act, which dealt with the l e g a l p o s i t i o n of the peasants and the administrative organization, which two points were to be applied a l i k e every- where. The general methods and conditions of redemption, and the l o c a l i n s t i t u t i o n s for peasant a f f a i r s were discussed here. It provided f o r o f f i c i a l s c a l l e d Peace Mediators, with t h e i r d i s t r i c t iSonferences and p r o v i n c i a l boards, to put the reform into practice; and, i t also included provision f o r the l i b e r a t i o n of a l l house-serfs without property two years a f t e r the publication of the act ( l ) . Next oame a group of economic l o c a l acts, each of which was to meet special geographic and economic conditions. These dealt with the problems of Great Russia, White Russia and New Russia where the communal system was i n existence; i n L i t t l e Russia - with the provinces of Poltava, Chernigor and part of Kharkov; there was a separate act for the south western provinces and one f o r Lithuania. Then there were special acts dealing with special problems, There was one which provided f o r the sale of the estate by small serf-owners to the government, i f the emancipation as drawn up was to prove disadvantageous to them. Another provided f o r peasants performing obligatory work i n landowners f a c t o r i e s , and s t i l l others f o r peasants i n the (1). The domestic serfs who formed 6.79 per cent of a l l of the serfs became landless peasants. Geoffrey Drage - "Russian A f f a i r s " . P. 88. it. M o u n t a i n s and t h e 3 a l t w o r k s ; t h o s e i n t h e r e g i o n o f t h e Dew. army; t h o s e i f \ t h e one p r o v i n c e i n t h e C a u c a s u s where l i b e r - a t i o n t o o k p l a c e ; a g a i n , f o r t h o s e i n B e s s a r a b i a where l i b e r - a t i o n had t a k e n p l a c e b e f o r e a n n e x a t i o n ; and l a s t l y f o r t h o s e i n West S i b e r i a where a l o n e i n S i b e r i a bondage r i g h t had been i n f o r c e . T h e s e d i f f e r e n t a c t s , s e v e n t e e n i n a l l , c o n t a i n e d o v e r a h u n d r e d a r t i c l e s e a c h , and t h u s a t t e m p t e d t o meet e v e r y p r o b l e m w h i c h m i g h t a r i s e , t h o u g h t h e r e f o r m a s a w h o l e d i d n o t meet t h e i s s u e f u l l y . The l e g a l s i d e o f t h e E m a n c i p a t i o n A c t was p o s s i b l y t h e most g i g a n t i c i n u n d e r t a k i n g . S u d d e n l y o v e r f o r t y s e v e n m i l l i o n (1) p e o p l e were g i v e n l e g a l s t a t u s . B u t t h e m a t e r i a l d i f f e r e n c e t h a t t h i s was t o make i n p r a c t i c e p r o v e d t o be d i s - a p p o i n t i n g , a l t h o u g h t h e r e i s no d o u b t t h a t t h e m o r a l e f f e c t was f a r - r e a c h i n g . The f a c t was t h a t t h e c i v i l r i g h t s g i v e n t o t h e p e a s a n t s were n o t on e q u a l t e r m s w i t h t h o s e o f t h e l a n d - l o r d . They d i d n o t become f u l l c i t i z e n s but were t r a n s f e r r e d t o t h e " S o - c a l l e d t r i b u t a r y o r d e r s " ( 2 ) . They were s t i l l t a x e d by t h e government p e r c a p i t a and n o t by i n c o m e . They were s t i l l t i e d to t h e v i l l a g e s by t h e p e r s i s t e n c e o f t h e m u t u a l g u a r a n t e e system, and were f u r t h e r r e s t r i c t e d by a n i n v o l v e d p a s s p o r t s y s t e m . T h i s meant t h a t t h e r e was no f r e e - dom o f movement o r o f p r o f e s s i o n . The a c t e m p h a s i z e d t h a t (1) K n i g h t , B a r n e s , F l u g o l / E c o n . H i s t o r y o f E u r o p e i n Modern Times - P. 750. (2) K o r n i l o v - Modern Ruas. H i s t o r y Page 46, V o l . I I . 6f a p e r i o d o f n i n e y e a r s t h e o b l i g a t o r y p e a s a n t s o o u l d n o t r e - f u s e t o a c c e p t t h e i r a l l o t m e n t s and t o p e r f o r m o b l i g a t i o n s f o r them f l ) , and e v e n when t h i s p e r i o d was p a s s e d , t h e p e a - s a n t c o u l d n o t s e l l o r m o r t g a g e h i 3 s o - o a l l e d p r o p e r t y , t e c h n i c a l l y , a n y more t h a n he had been a b l e t o b e f o r e 1861. T h i s meant t h a t a c t u a l l y t h e o n l y t h i n g w h i c h t h e p e a s a n t now had was a s h a r e i n t h e v i l l a g e , and i t was t o t h e i n t e r e s t s o f t h e community, t o d i s t r i b u t e t h e l a n d so t h a t i t w o u l d be t i l l e d , i n o r d e r t h a t c o l l e c t i v e l y t h e t a x e s c o u l d be p a i d ( 2 ) . The p e a s a n t had now become a s e r f to t h e s o i l . The a d m i n i s t r a t i v e o r g a n i z a t i o n p r o v i d e d f o r by t h e a c t was b r i e f l y as f o l l o w s : The p e a s a n t s were t o c o n t i n u e l i v i n g i n v i l l a g e s w h i c h were the s m a l l e s t autonomous s o c i a l u n i t s . The v i l l a g e s were t o be e c o n o m i c a l l y i n d e p e n d e n t and w i t h i n t h e m s e l v e s were t o d e t e r m i n e t h e t a x e s , w h i c h were u s u a l l y a c o o r d i n g t o t h e s i z e o f the a l l o t m e n t s . Above t h e v i l l a g e i n a u t h o r i t y was t h e v o l o s t , but t h i s power was i n p o l i c e m a t t e r s , s i n c e t h e d i s t r i c t o r v o l o s t p o l i c e became t h e r e p r e s e n t a t i v e s o f the c e n t r a l government a l o n g w i t h t h e g overnment t a x c o l l e c t o r . D u r i n g t h e t i m e o f change the P e a c e M e d i a t o r s were t o have v e r y c o n s i d e r a b l e powers and i t was b e c a u s e of t h e c o n s c i e n t i o u s work o f t h i s g r o u p o f p u b l i c s p i r i t e d men, t h a t t h e i n e x p e r i e n c e d p e a s a n t s r e c e i v e d any o f t h e r i g h t s g r a n t e d t o them by t h e A c t . A c t u a l l y , no s e l f (1) K o r n i l o v - Modern R u s s . H i s t o r y Page 47. V o l . I I (2) K n i g h t , B a r n e s , F l u g o l - Page 751. 70. government, on t h e b a s i s o f r e s p o n s i b i l i t y t o e l e c t o r s was g r a n t e d a t a l l . The e c o n o m i c b a s i s o f t h e A c t h a s b e e n d i s c u s s e d i n e a r l i e r c h a p t e r s . B r i e f l y i t was t o be a s f o l l o w s : The p e a s a n t s were t o r e t a i n a p p r o x i m a t e l y t h o s e a l l o t m e n t s w h i c h t h e y had been u s i n g i n t h e i r bondage s t a t e . However maximal norms were s e t i n t h r e e d i f f e r e n t r e g i o n s . ( l ) I n t h e n o n - b l a e k - s o i l - t h e r e were t o be s e v e n g r a d e s r a n g i n g f r o m t h r e e and a h a l f t o e i g h t d e s s i a t i n s ( 1 ) . (2) I n t h e b l a c k s o i l a r e a - f i v e g r a d e s - f r o m t h r e e t o f o u r and a h a l f d e s s i a t i n s and (3) i n t h e Step p e r e g i o n s - f o u r g r a d e s f r o m s i x and a h a l f t o t w e l v e d e s s i a t i n s . The m i n i m a l norms were t o be n o t l e s s t h a n one t h i r d o f t h e maximal ( 2 ) . The s e , s m a l l as t h e y were, were i n c r e a s e s u p o n what t h e p r o v i n c i a l c o m m i t t e e s had recommended. But t h e i m p o r t a n t t h i n g t o n o t e , w h i c h was t o be t h e b a s i s o f f u t u r e t r o u b l e , i s t h e f a c t t h a t e v e n i n t h e b e s t o a s e s , t h e p e a s a n t s r e c e i v e d o n l y h a l f o f t h e l a n d w h i c h t h e y were a b l e t o c u l t i v a t e , s i n c e t h e i r a l l o t m e n t s meant o n l y t h r e e d a y s ' work a week t o them, b e c a u s e f o r t h e o t h e r t h r e e d a y s t h e y had worked on t h e l a n d o w n e r s ' l a n d . T h e n t h e l a n d was n o t i n one b l o c k but t h e p o r t i o n r e c e i v e d by e a c h would be d i v i d e d i n t o a s many as t e n s t r i p s , r e p r e s e n t - i n g l a n d o f e v e r y f e r t i l i t y - s c a t t e r e d o v e r t h e c o u n t r y s i d e , and f u r t h e r m o r e was s u b j e c t t o r e d i s t r i b u t i o n e v e r y t e n o r t w e l v e y e a r s . The l a n d was g i v e n t o t h e v i l l a g e and t h e m i r (1) D e s s i a t i n - 2^ a c r e s ( a b o u t ) . (2) K o r n i l o v - Modern R. H i s t o r y - V o l . I I . P. 50. II- d i d t h e a p p o r t i o n i n g - t h e a l l o t m e n t s b e i n g b a s e d u p o n p e r s o n a l n e e d s i n many c a s e s . Of c o u r s e i t s t a n d s t o r e a s o n , t h a t t h e l a n d o w n e r s made no e f f o r t t o g i v e up t h e b e s t o f t h e i r l a n d , n o r any more t h a n was a b s o l u t e l y n e c e s s a r y , I n many c a s e s t o o , f r a u d was p r a c t i s e d - I n one c a s e we a r e t o l d t h a t a n o b l e r e t a i n e d 100,000 a c r e s f o r h i m s e l f , and s a o r i f i c e d 6,500 a c r e s f o r h i s s e r f s , but was p a i d a t t h e u s u a l r a t e o f f o u r f i f t h s o f t h e v a l u e o f t h e e s t a t e by t h e government. ( 1 ) . The o b l i g a t i o n s were made a s h e a v y a s p o s s i b l e by t h e l a n d o w n e r s . T h e / e & C ^ Commission had d i v i d e d t h e c o u n t r y i n t o f o u r r e g i o n s f o r t h e sake o f s e t t l i n g t h e ob r o k t o be p a i d . T h i s d i v i s i o n was as f o l l o w s : I n t h e i n d u s t r i a l non- b l a c k s o i l r e g i o n i t was t o be n i n e r u b l e s p e r s o u l and t e n i n d i s t r i c t s n e a r t h e c a p i t a l s where a d v a n t a g e s c o u l d be d e r i v e d by t h e p e a s a n t s f r o m the p r o x i m i t y o f t h e c i t y . I n t h e A g r i c u l t u r a l n o n - b l a c k s o i l r e g i o n i t was t o be e i g h t r u b l e s . I n t h e b l a c k s o i l b e l t i t was a t f i r s t f i x e d a t e i g h t but was l a t e r r a i s e d to n i n e r u b l e s , and i n t h e S t e p p e r e g i o n s i t was e i g h t r u b l e s t h r o u g h o u t . When t h e p e a s a n t h e l d l e s s t h a n t h e maximal a l l o t m e n t , t h e ob r o k was l e s s e n e d b u t n o t p r o p o r t i o n - a t e l y . T h e r e was a s p e c i a l g r a d a t i o n s y s t e m f o r t h i s p u r p o s e , a l w a y s t o t h e a d v a n t a g e o f t h e l a n d o w n e r ( 2 ) . The r e s u l t o f t h i s s e t t l e m e n t was t h a t t h e s t a n d a r d o f l i v i n g o f t h e p e a s a n t c o u l d n o t r i s e and t h a t l a n d s h o r t a g e (1) Case c i t e d by E . A. W a l s h "The F a l l o f t h e R u s s . Emp. P.40 (2) K o r n i l o v , V o l I I . P. 51. 72- was f e l t at onoe. The peasant had to rent land at onoe from the noble, or seek work elsewhere. As the population increased, the allotments upon r e d i v i s i o n became even smaller, and because of the increased land shortage rents rose, and people became poorer. As before, i n the most f e r t i l e parts of Russia, these conditions were f e l t most strongly. As we have seen, the land became the possession of the peasant community, and the i n d i v i d u a l held i t only i n "perpetual (permanent) u t i l i z a t i o n " . By mutual agreement between the landowner and peasant, the obligations, not the land, could be redeemed (1). The redemption was not compulsory, but while i n the non-black s o i l regions the landowners wished i t , i n the black s o i l f e r t i l e belt, the nobles were driven to i t . Since the peasants were no longer under the di r e c t control of the land- owner, the estates deteriorated with losses to the owners, and t h e i r only escape l a y i n redemption, and f o r t h i s reason the process was carried out f a i r l y quickly. The bulk of the land they kept, of course, and because of the density of the population, labor could be e a s i l y hired. In the northern nenvblack s o i l regions only few landowners remained on the land. They sold t h e i r estates and went into industry. The immediate effeot of the reform upon the peasantry was as follows: For four years before i t was f i n a l l y published and circulated, the Russian masses had (1) Kornilov Vol. I I . 52. been conscious of great things about to take place and with t h e i r c h a r a c t e r i s t i c calm they waited. Not that there was no discussion i n the v i l l a g e s . The matter was character- i s t i c a l l y viewed and theorized upon from every angle. The peasants expected f u l l freedom, with a l l the land which they had been t i l l i n g . They expected the Tzar to recompense the landowners ( l ) . It i s true that they received over 350,000,000 acres, or one-half of the arable land of the Empire (2), but they had expected a l l of i t . It i s then no wonder that the subsequent cry among the peasants i n a l l the revolutionary outbreaks i n Russia, was to be the cry f o r more land, and the recognition of t h i s want i n practice i f not i n theory, gave the Bolsheviks that support of the pea- sants which the other parties had not had. The peasants were to see, on the other hand, that the proprietors were very well paid. The money was ad- vanced by the State and i n f o r t y nine yearly payments the peasants were to repay the government. Economically, emancipation was of the greatest advantage to the landowner, although l e g a l l y he l o s t a very great deal of authority, and i t was t h i s phase which caused conservative opposition. As has been shown i n an e a r l i e r chapter, as buainess concerns, the estates were already before emancipation i n many cases on the verge of bankruptcy. (1) Kornilov - Vol. I I . 65. (2) Knight, Barnes, Flugel - P. 750. fit- The p e a s a n t s were l e f t c o l d and unmoved by t h e a b s t r a c t c o n c e p t i o n o f c i v i c r i g h t s and l e g a l i s t i c a s s u r a n c e s of i n d e p e n d e n c e when t h e y d e s i r e d t a n g i b l e f a c t s ( 1 ) . When t h e t e r m s o f t h e a c t were made known t o them t h e m a j o r i t y u n d e r s t o o d l i t t l e o f t h e i m p o r t a n c e and i m m e n s i t y o f t h e r e f o r m ( 2 ) . A l l t h e y knew was t h a t c o n d i t i o n s were n o t t o be v e r y d i f f e r e n t a f t e r a l l , and i n many p l a c e s t h e y r e f u s e d t o b e l i e v e t h a t t h i s was t h e r e a l e m a n c i p a t i o n , and d i s t u r b a n c e s t o o k p l a c e . The c o n s e r v a t i v e e l e m e n t had been p r e d i c t i n g v i o l e n c e s i n c e t h e b e g i n n i n g o f t h e d i s c u s s i o n and now t h e government s e n t o u t g o v e r n o r - g e n e r a l s w i t h s p e c i a l powers, t o t h e d i f f e r e n t p r o v i n c e s I. And where n e i t h e r t h e g e n e r a l s n o r t h e p e a s a n t s were r e a s o n a b l e , b l o o d s h e d r e s u l t e d ( 3 ) , and r e p r e s s i o n on t h e p a r t o f t h e government was s e v e r e . But, g e n e r a l l y s p e a k i n g , the a t t i t u d e o f t h e c o u n t r y s i d e was much a s i t had been d u r i n g t h e a g e s . D i s - c o n t e n t r e m a i n e d and t h e c r y f o r l a n d a l s o r e m a i n e d t h e c h i e f one i n t h e h e a r t s o f t h e masses. G r u m b l i n g c o n t i n u e d , b u t i t was F a t e w h i c h d i r e o t e d m a t t e r s , and d i r e c t r e s i s t a n c e on a l a r g e r s c a l e was i m p o s s i b l e b e c a u s e o f l a c k o f o r g a n - i z a t i o n . The p e a s a n t s r e p e a t e d t h e i r p r o v e r b s once a g a i n : " I t i s h i g h up t o God, and f a r t o t h e T z a r " . "We c a n n o t r e a c h t o Heaven w i t h o u r mind, n o r t o t h e T z a r w i t h out* h e a d " . (1) E . A. W a l s h "The F a l l o f t h e R u s s . Emp." P.38 (2) K o r n i l o v V o l I I . 65. O n l y e n l i g h t e n e d g o v e r n o r s t o o k c a r e t o h e l p t h e p e a s a n t s t o r e a l i z e t h e m e a n i n g o f t h e r e f o r m . (3) K o r n i l o v V o l . 11. 66. I n t h e P r o v i n c e o f Penz a , t h e p e o p l e r e s i s t e d , and t r o o p s were c a l l e d who A Once the act was passed, the progress of carrying out the reform did not look very encouraging. The l i b e r a l Minister of the Inte r i o r , Lanskoy was replaced by Valut_tv - a man who had shown himself to be a determined enemy of reform, throughout the course of the discussion of emancipation. He wa3 appointed to c o n c i l i a t e the nobles who had opposed emancipation, and he meant to work into the hands of the landowners ( l ) . Now during Lanskoy 1s term of o f f i c e , by means of the help of the governors, many of whom were liberal-minded men, the Peace Mediators mentioned before had been appointed. Since the friends of the reform r e a l i z e d that t h i s executive work of bringing the reform to the people was possibly i t s most important phase, men known for t h e i r sense of j u s t i c e and f r i e n d l i n e s s to the peasants had been selected (2). As they, with t h e i r d i s t r i c t conferences and p r o v i n c i a l boards were not under the authority of the pr o v i n c i a l or central a u t h o r i t i e s they had great power, which they exercised i n the cause of the peasants. Naturally, they clashed with Valufikv. On the pre- text of economy he t r i e d to reduce t h e i r numbers, but the mediators stayed on, on only a half or a t h i r d of the salary (contd.) upon them. The students at Kazan University had a requiem served f o r the dead. The monks who o f f i c i a t e d were exiled to Solovki and the leader of the students brought to St. Petersburg. (1) Kornilov Vol. I I . P. 67. (2) " " I I . P. 68. 1L. i n order to aooomplish the work assigned to them i n the two years set down. It was because of t h e i r sincere e f f o r t s that even more was not taken from the peasants. The peasants, on the whole, were l e f t d i s i l l u s i o n e d by the great act. I t s e f f e c t upon the country generally was further reaching. Alexander II introduced and allowed free- dom of discussion and f i n a l l y padsed the peasant reform i n order to save the State structure. It was to be a s o c i a l revolution, the necessity of which was f e l t , and could no longer be ignored. P o l i t i c a l reform was quite foreign to his mind. The State as i t existed was sacred: The power of the Emperor was absolute. But the very fact that a matter of such fundamental nature as emancipation should become the topic of di scussion of Russia's m i l l i o n s , would mean that i n the future other matters, p o l i t i c a l , economio or s o c i a l , would also be d i s - cussed and reform would be expected. Public backing and support of opinions and theories of the I n t e l l i g e n t s i a became known almost f o r the f i r s t time. As the new generation grew up, i t s demands and s t r i v i n g s f o r whioh i t asked the support of public opinion were much more revolutionary. The younger people had l o s t the f e e l i n g of the permanence of the absolute bureaucracy, and thus with the impetus given^he peasant re- form, were to come ttge l a t e r much more widely-spread demands for p o l i t i c a l , economic and s o c i a l reform. Literature was the only means of expression, and p o l i t i c a l and economic 11 theories were the material f o r thought. Many sects grew up (1), which, however, f o r various reasons gained l i t t l e support except among the I n t e l l i g e n t s i a i t s e l f . But the government became alarmed, and a l l further reform would have been cu r t a i l e d , i f the very nature of the Emancipation Act had not made i t absolutely necessary. Therefore, even during the decided period of reaction, a f t e r the attempted assassination of Alexander II i n A p r i l 1866, the passing of great and important reforms continued. The r i s i n g i n Poland i n 1863, and consequent repression, also, ahd l i t t l e e f f e c t upon the changes i n the f i e l d s of finance, education, l o c a l self-government, law courts, press, and the army, which followed i n quick succession a f t e r 1861. The Crimean War had revealed the crushing weight of bureaucracy upon the f i n a n c i a l system. Mow the Minister of Finance was freed of cer t a i n complications with the j u r i s d i c t i o n of other min i s t r i e s , and was placed d i r e c t l y under the Inspector of the State Comptroller or Auditor. Public budgets were to be presented annually and the State Bank was erected to centralize credit and finance (2). In ^une 1863 - a reform i n the University Adminis- t r a t i o n placed the power of government i n the hands of councils elected from the various f a c u l t i e s but student organisations (1) For example - Pisarev and the N i h i l i s t s - who believed ' i n the negation of a l l authority. Furglnev's ^d^^^Aj "Fathers and Sons" presents the N i h i l i s t s theories. (2) p.Pares - A Hist, of Russia - Page 360. were s t i l l i l l e g a l . T h i s r e f o r m and one o f t h e p r e s s i n 1865 were t o have l i t t l e r e a l e f f e c t . However, t h e r e m o v a l o f c e n s o r s h i p i n advance, on newspapers and s e r i o u s p u b l i c a t i o n s might have been e f f e c t i v e i f t h e p u n i t i v e c e n s o r s h i p had been g i v e n t o t h e l a w c o u r t s i n s t e a d of b e i n g r e t a i n e d by t h e a d m i n i s t r a t i v e a u t h o r i t i e s . T h e s e r e f o r m s , a l o n g w i t h o t h e r s c o n c e r n i n g town c o u n o i l s ( l ) and r e - o r g a n i z a t i o n i n t h e army (1) had t h e i r i n d i r e c t e f f e c t s upon t h e p e a s a n t r y . The e s t a b l i s h i n g o f t h e e l e c t e d c o u n c i l s o f Zemstvos, f o r p u r p o s e s of s e l f government were t o have a more d i r e c t e f f e c t u p o n t h e c o u n t r y . The Zemstvos were a n e c e s s i t y b ecause some l o c a l a d m i n i s t r a t i o n had t o t a k e t h e p l a c e of t h e c o n t r o l w h i c h had been h e l d by t h e l a n d o w n e r s b e f o r e e m a n c i p a t i o n . The members o f t h e s e b o d i e s were t o be e l e c t e d i n t h e c o u n t r y d i s t r i c t s and p r o - v i n c e s f r o m among t h e g e n t r y p r i m a r i l y , but i n c l u d i n g a m i n o r i t y o f p e a s a n t r e p r e s e n t a t i v e s a s w e l l . The d i s t r i c t Zemstvo e l e c t e d a permanent g o v e r n i n g b o a r d , and f r o m among i t s own members s e n t r e p r e s e n t a t i v e s t o t h e p r o v i n c i a l Zemstvo, w h i c h i n t u r n e l e c t e d i t s own g o v e r n i n g b o a r d . ( 5 ) . The powers o f t h e Z e m s t v o s i n c l u d e d t h e s u p e r v i s i o n on r o a d s , h o s p i t a l s , f o o d d i s t r i b u t i o n , and l a t e r a l s o e d u c a t i o n , m e d i c a l and v e t e r i n a r y s e r v i c e , and p u b l i c w e l f a r e i n g e n e r a l . I f we a n a l y s e t h i s c o n t r o l , i t i s a t once a p p a r e n t t h a t no (1) P a r e s . P g s . 364-65. Town C o u n c i l s (1870) e s t a b l i s h e d i n a l l t h e l a r g e r towns - g i v i n g marked p r e d o m i n a n c e i n r e p r e s e n t a t i o n t o t h e w e a l t h y . Army R e f o r m - C o n s c r i p t i o n Dn W e s t e r n b a s i s , w i t h e x e m p t i o n s and s h o r t e r t e r m s . (2) C f . The S o v i e t method and s y s t e m o f r e p r e s e n t a t i o n . 71 p o l i t i c a l power was g i v e n t h e s e r e p r e s e n t a t i v e o b o d i e s . The c e n t r a l government r e t a i n e d a l l p o l i c e and m i l i t a r y a u t h o r i t y , and, a s we s h a l l s e e , i t was t o be c l e a r l y u n d e r s t o o d t h a t t h e f o r m a t i o n of t h e s e b o d i e s d i d n o t mean any d e v i a t i o n f r o m t h e i d e a s o f a b s o l u t e c o n t r o l . W i t h t h e p a s s i n g o f t h e power o f t h e l a n d o w n e r t h e l o c a l l e g a l a d m i n i s t r a t i o n had a l s o t o be r e p l a c e d . The l o w e r law c o u r t s were e s t a b l i s h e d w i t h J u s t i c e s o f t h e Peace e l e c t e d by t h e Z e m s t v o s . R e f o r m i n t h e h i g h e r c o u r t s was a l s o e s s e n t i a l . I n t h e o r y , a t l e a s t , t h e c o u r t s were f r e e d f r o m c l a s s d i s t i n c t i o n and were t o be i n d e p e n d e n t o f t h e a d m i n i s t r a t i v e o f f i c i a l s . F u r t h e r m o r e , j u d g e s were t o be p a i d , and c o u l d n o t be removed as b e f o r e on t h e s l i g h t e s t p r e - t e x t ; t r i a l s were made p u b l i c and t h e j u r y system, most im- p o r t a n t o f a l l , was i n t r o d u c e d . I n t h e o r y t h e r e f o r m s were much more f a r r e a c h i n g t h a n t h e y c o u l d p o s s i b l y be i n p r a c t i c e , c o n s i d e r i n g t h e r e t e n t i o n o f a b s o l u t e a u t o c r a t i c c o n t r o l , and the g e n e r a l r e a c t i o n a r y a t t i t u d e o f mind o f t h e age. So much f o r t h e v a r i o u s r e f o r m s w h i c h f o l l o w e d i n t h e wake of t h e E m a n c i p a t i o n A c t : How l e i u * t u r n t o f u r t h e r r e f o r m and a p p l i c a t i o n i n t h e p e a s a n t r y p r o b l e m i t s e l f . I n 1866 t h e p r i n c i p l e s o f E m a n c i p a t i o n were . s p r e a d t o i n c l u d e t h e numerous g r o u p s o f s t a t e p e a s a n t s , and i n 1883, t h e s e r f s b e l o n g i n g t o t h e I m p e r i a l F a m i l y were f i n a l l y l i b e r a t e d . The l a t t e r were t o r e t a i n t h e p o r t i o n s o f l a n d u pon w h i c h t h e y were l i v i n g ( i n a l l c a s e s l a r g e r t h a n S6- t h o a e of t h e l a n d o w n e r ' s p e a s a n t s ) and t h e i r o b r o k payments were c o u n t e d as r e d e m p t i o n payments t o be c o m p l e t e d i n f o r t y n i n e y e a r s . T h i s c l a s s i n c l u d e d a b o u t 850,000 p e a s a n t s o f the male 3ex ( 1 ) . The m a t t e r o f a p p l y i n g t h e p r i n c i p l e t o t h e S t a t e p e a s a n t s was a more i n t r i c a t e p r o b l e m . When t h e M i n i s t r y o f S t a t e Domains was f o r m e d i n t h e r e i g n o f N i c h o l a s I t h e l a n d p o s s e s s i o n o f t h e S t a t e p e a s a n t s was r e o r g a n i z e d . The a l l o t - ments were e q u a l i z e d and where t h e r e was n o t enough l a n d t o go a r o u n d i n one d i s t r i c t t h e p e a s a n t s were removed t o o t h e r f r e e s t a t e l a n d s ( 2 ) . A s p e c i a l c o m m i s s i o n ( C a d a s t r a l ) w h i c h worked! upon t h i s p r o b l e m a c t u a l l y p r o v i d e d t h e S t a t e p e a s a n t s w i t h much more l a n d t h a n the l a n d o w n e r s ' p e a s a n t s had r e c e i v e d , and t h e o b r o k s a l s o were s m a l l e r . Not t h a t a t t e m p t s had n o t been made b e f o r e t o i n c r e a s e the b u r d e n o f the S t a t e p e a s a n t s , so t h a t t h e e x p e c t a t i o n s o f t h e o t h e r s s h o u l d n o t be r a i s e d ( 3 ) . But i n s p i t e o f t h i s , t h e a l l o t m e n t s were l a r g e r and t h e p o s s i b i l i t i e s o f a somewhat h i g h e r s t a n d a r d o f l i v i n g w i t h i n e a s i e r r e a c h among t h e S t a t e p e a s a n t s , by t h e f i n a l s e t t l e m e n t , t h a n t h e y were among t h e l a n d o w n e r s ' p e a s a n t s ( 4 ) . (1) K o r n i l o v I I - 117. (2) " I I - 117. (3) " I I - 119 - 21. M u r a v i o v , as m i n i s t e r o f S t a t e Domains, a v e r y r e a c t i o n a r y s e r f owner h i m s e l f , t r i e d t o c u r t a i l t h e l a n d a l l o w a n c e e t c . o f t h e S t a t e p e a s a n t s . (4) K o r n i l o v I I - 119 - 21. A c c o r d i n g to t h e a n a l y s i s o f P r o f . L. 0. Khodsky, q u o t e d by K o r n i l o v - 50$ o f t h e S t a t e p e a s a n t s r e c e i v e d " g e n e r o u s " norms, 35$ s u f f i - c i e n t a l l o t m e n t s and 15% were g i v e n " i n s u f f i c i e n t " . W h i l e he s t a t e d t h a t o n l y 13% o f t h e l a n d o w n e r s ' p e a s a n t s were p r o v i d e d f o r g e n e r o u s l y , 4 3$ s u f f i c i e n t l y , and 4 2$ i n s u f f i c i e n t l y . The u s e of t h e t e r m s was o f c o u r s e c o n d i t i o n a l . We have s e e n t h a t i m m e d i a t e l y a f t e r e m a n c i p a t i o n n e i t h e r g r e a t improvements n o r happe-&ar»gs o o u l d have b e e n e x p e c t e d . The l a n d o w n e r s were n o t worse o f f t h a n b e f o r e , a l t h o u g h i n t h e b l a c k s o i l r e g i o n s t h e y c o u l d n o t a t once a d j u s t t h e m s e l v e s t o new c o n d i t i o n s . They were f o r c e d t o r e n t t h e i r l a n d to t h e p e a s a n t s b e c a u s e t h e y had n e i t h e r t h e c a p i t a l t o h i r e l a b o r n o r t o buy i m p l e m e n t s a n d c a t t l e f o r c u l t i v a t i n g , s i n c e i n bondage t i m e s t h e p e a s a n t s had u s e d t h e i r own. I n t h e n o n - b l a c k s o i l l j r e g i o n s , t h e l a n d o w n e r s s o l d t h e i r e s t a t e s i n many c a s e s - n o t t o t h e p e a s a n t s , but t o m i d d l e m e n - e i t h e r m e r c h a n t s o r i n d i v i d u a l r i c h p e a s a n t s who boughjj them f o r t h e f o r e s t s , e t c . , and o n l y a f t e r ex- p l o i t i n g t h e l a n d d i d t h e y s e l l them t o t h e p e a s a n t s when the l a t t e r had money t o buy. ( 1 ) . We have 3een t h a t i n t h e b l a c k - s o i l r e g i o n s , a f t e r t h e p e a s a n t s r e a l i z e d t h a t t h e power o f t h e l a n d o w n e r o v e r t h e p e r s o n o f p e a s a n t was gone, t h e work upon t h e n o b l e s ' e s t a t e d e c r e a s e d i n e f f i c i e n c y so t h a t t h e owner was d r i v e n t o r e - d e m p t i o n . But r e d e m p t i o n was t o be by m u t u a l agreement and i n many s e c t i o n s t h e p e a s a n t s 1 r e a l i z e d t h a t t h e o l d s t a t e w i t h t h e d e c r e a s e d l e g a l power o f t h e l a n d o w n e r was p r e f e r a b l e t o be t h r o w n on t h e i r own. T h e r e f o r e i n 1863 t h e government p a s s e d a l a w by w h i c h t h e g e n t r y c o u l d r e c e i v e r e d e m p t i o n f o r the p e a s a n t h o l d i n g s a t once i f t h e y were w i l l i n g t o a c c e p t f r o m e i g h t y t o s e v e n t y - f i v e p e r c e n t o f t h e c o m p e n s a t i o n sum. (1) K o r n i l o v I I - 124 f f . T h i s was welcomed by t h e l a n d o w n e r s , but p e a s a n t s i n t h e s o u t h and s o u t h e a s t s p e c i a l l y , f l e d f r o m t h i s k i n d o f e m a n c i p a t i o n b e c a u s e i t meant t h a t t h e y would be l e f t t o t h e i r own s m a l l a l l o t m e n t s w i t h no means o f making t h e s i d e - e a r n i n g s n e c e s s a r y to e x i s t e n c e . Then a l s o t h e y w o u l d be a t t h e m e rcy o f t h e l a n d o w n e r who c o u l d c h a r g e what r e n t he p l e a s e d f o r e x t r a l a n d . I t i s t r u e t h e i r o b rok was t o be r e d u c e d a f o u r t h o r f i f t h a c c o r d i n g t o t h e l e s s e r c o m p e n s a t i o n p r i c e , but e v e n t h i s t h e y d e s p a i r e d o f b e i n g a b l e t o pay ( l ) . T h e r e f o r e t h e o n l y a l t e r n a t i v e i n many c a s e s ( s p e c i a l l y i n t h e S o u t h E a s t e r n and E a s t e r n p r o v i n c e s ( 2 ) ) was f o r the p e a s a n t s t o a c c e p t th e f r e e ' b e g g a r l y " o r " q u a r t e r l y " a l l o t - ments ( 3 ) . T h e y were f r e e f r o m f u r t h e r r e d e m p t i o n f e e s , b u t t h e i r p o v e r t y was e s t a b l i s h e d f o r a l l t i m e . B e c a u s e o f t h e r e d u c e d c o m p e n s a t i o n p r i c e t h e l a n d o w n e r s were s p e c i a l l y c a r e f u l t o g i v e t h e p e a s a n t s as l i t t l e a s p o s s i b l e , and where no s p e c i a l p r o v i s i o n t o t h e c o n t r a r y was s t a t e d t h e y w o u l d c u t o f f l a n d w h i c h was o f t h e u t m o s t i m p o r t a n c e t o t h e p e a s a n t community - s u c h as p a s t u r e l a n d f o r i n s t a n c e . I t was a b s o l u t e l y n e c e s s a r y t h e n f o r t h e p e a s a n t s t o r e n t back s u c h l a n d a t t h e l a n d o w n e r s ' p r i c e o f c o u r s e . T h i s l a i d t h e b a s i s f o r a new bondage -. e c o n o m i c i n n a t u r e , w h i c h was t o become more b i n d i n g as t h e y e a r s went by, s i n c e t h e p e a s a n t r y had no c a p i t a l t o s t a r t w i t h , and had (1) K o r n i l o v I I - 197. (2) U f a , S o r o n e s h , Tambor, Samara, p a r t o f S a r a t o r . (3) C o n s i s t e d o f f r o m I f t o 2-f d e s s i a t i n s ( Farbman - B o l s h e v i s m i n R e t r e a t - Page 5 ) . a b s o l u t e l y no means o f a c c u m u l a t i n g any. Thus t h e y c o u l d n o t i m p r o v e t h e i r methods o f c u l t i v a t i o n and t h e p r o b l e m became a v i c i o u s c i r c l e . T h e y were s t i l l d e p e n d e n t upon t h e l a n d l a a r d . The c o n d i t i o n s i n t h e v i l l a g e s , t o o , h e l p e d t o k e e p back p r o g r e s s . The community s y s t e m o f l a n d h o l d i n g had i t s d i s a d v a n t a g e s . I n d i v i d u a l i n i t i a t i v e had l i t t l e p l a c e . The a l l o t m e n t s s m a l l enough i n t h e f i r s t p l a c e , were s u b j e c t t o p e r i o d i c r e d i s t r i b u t i o n , and w i t h t h e i n c r e a s e o f p o p u l a t i o n w h i c h was i n t e n s i f i e d a f t e r 1861, t h e a l l o t m e n t s became s m a l l e r and s m a l l e r . Thus, i n 1861 - t h e a v e r a g e p e a s a n t h o l d i n g was 4.8 d e s s i s t i n s , i n 1886 i t went down t o 3.5 d e s s i a t i n s and by 1900 t o 2.6 d e s s i a t i n s . ( 2 ) T h i s meant t h a t t h e s u p p l y o f l a b o r u p o n w h i c h t h e l a n d o w n e r c o u l d draw became g r e a t e r and g r e a t e r , w h i c h meant t h a t t h e p r i c e o f l a b o r d e c r e a s e d and s i n c e t h e demand f o r l a n d became g r e a t e r t h e r e n t s went up. S i n c e t h e M i r was r e s p o n s i b l e f o r t h e payment o f t a x e s i t was t o t h e community i n t e r e s t t h a t t h e b e s t men s h o u l d have t h e community l a n d t o t i l l i n o r d e r t h a t t h e r e - t u r n s w o u l d be t h e g r e a t e s t p o s s i b l e . N a t u r a l l y , some were n o t a b l e t o compete, and s i n c e t h e y c o u l d n o t s e l l t h e i r a l l o t - ments t h e y had t o r e l i n q u i s h t h e i r r i g h t s f o r a p e r i o d o f t i m e . I n t h i s way a c l a s s o f l a n d l e s s p e a s a n t s d e v e l o p e d , w h i l e , no d o u b t , t h e t h r i f t i e r grew r i c h e r . ( 3 ) . (1) P o p u l a t i o n i n o r o a s o : (2) Farbman - B o l s h . i n R e t r e a t - Page 12. (3) K n i g h t , B a r n e s , P l u g o l - Page 752. ttf. The f a c t t h a t g r a i n g r o w i n g was p r o f i t a b l e d u r i n g t h e y e a r s a f t e r E m a n c i p a t i o n was r e a s o n enough f o r t h e l a n d - owners o f t h e s o u t h t o r e t a i n t h e i r c o n t r o l o f t h e l a n d . The w o r l d g r a i n m a r k e t was g r o w i n g and t h e r e was a demand f o r R u s s i a n g r a i n . The l a n d o w n e r s where a t a l l p o s s i b l e h i r e d t h e p e a s a n t s t o work f o r them, b u t b e c a u s e o f l a c k o f c a p i t a l (1) t h e y f o u n d i t a l m o s t i m p o s s i b l e t o o p en up new l a n d . B u t t h e c u l t i v a t e d a r e a i n c r e a s e d g r e a t l y ( 2 ) , e s p e c i a l l y i n t h e s o u t h , and t h i s was l a r g e l y b e c a u s e o f p e a s a n t p o p u l a t i o n i n c r e a s e . The r i c h e r p e a s a n t s , n o t t h e communties, r e n t e d o r b o ught l a n d , w h i l e the masses became s t e a d i l y p o o r e r . (3) The p o p u l a t i o n i n c r e a s e was so g r e a t t h a t t h e s u r p l u s c o u l d n o t e a s i l y be a c c o m o d a t e d . From y e a r t o y e a r g r e a t numbers o f p e a s a n t s went to t h e towns t o work, but t h e y s t i l l b e l o n g e d t o t h e v i l l a g e s . T h e r e were a l s o p e r i o d i c m i g r a t i o n s t o S i b e r i a w h i c h were a t f i r s t r e s t r i c t e d ( $ ) . The w e i g h t o f t a x a t i o n was a b u r d e n w h i c h was bound t o s t o p a l l p r o g r e s s ; and t h e p e a s a n t s c a r r i e d t h e b u l k o f i t . From f i g u r e s (4) c o l l e c t e d d u r i n g t h e y e a r s a f t e r e m a n c i p a t i o n we see t h a t i n 1872, o f t h e sum o f a l l d i r e c t t a x e s and payments w h i c h was p l a c e d u p o n t h e r u r a l p o p u l a t i o n , namely - two h u n d r e d and e i g h t m i l l i o n r u b l e s , o n l y t h i r t e e n m i l l i o n r u b l e s were p a i d by p r i v a t e l a n d o w n e r s . (1) K o r n i l o v I I . 200. The l a n d o w n e r s were h e a v i l y i n d e b t t o t h e S t a t e . E v e n a f t e r t h e r e t e n t i o n o f c o m p e n s a t i o n money by the s t a t e i n 1861. By 1870 t h e new d e b t was 230 m i l l i o n r u b l e s , by 1880 - 400 m i l l i o n s , by 1890 600 m i l l i o n . a'. The taxes were of several kinds - the Imperial Tax - paid to the central government, including the hated p o l l tax of Peter the Great, which was not abolished u n t i l 1883-4; Local Zemstvo taxes; Communal taxes, paid to the Mir f o r communal administration purposes; and the redemption dues - which were heaviest of a l l . Then besides these i n some places there were the obrok payments which were con- tinued on top of a l l the other burdens. The landowner peasants bore the heaviest burden of the taxation. (5). The central government took l i t t l e heed of the growing discontent of the peasants. In spite of the growing d e f i c i t i n the Treasury, they waged i m p e r i a l i s t i c wars which produced greater burdens, which were to inorease the discontent. We are t o l d that "tauoh of the terrorism (Contd.) (2) Kornilov II - 199. In the '60's 88,800,00 dessiatins under c u l t i v a t i o n . . E a r l y '80'a, 160,800,000; by 1887 - 170,000,000 dessiatins. (3) Beazley, Forbes, Birkett - Russia from the Vangariana to the Bolsheviks - P. 45. (4) Kornilov II - 202. (5) " II - 203 - landowners' peasants paid 54 m i l l i o n rubles f o r t h e i r 33̂ - m i l l i o n dessiatins, while the state peasants paid 37 m i l l i o n rubles f o r t h e i r 75 m i l l i o n dessiatins. (6) Knight, Barnes & Flugol, oja. c i t . Page 757. ft. and p e a s a n t r e v o l u t i o n a r y s e n t i m e n t o f t h e t h i r t y y e a r s f o l l o w i n g e m a n c i p a t i o n must be a t t r i b u t e d t o t h e c r u s h i n g b u r d e n o f a n I m p e r i a l i s m f o r w h i c h t h e v i l l a g e s g e n e r a l l y had n o t t h e s l i g h t e s t e n t h u s i a s m " ( l ) . We a r e f u r t h e r t o l d t h a t i n t h e War w i t h T u r k e y (1877 - 78) t h e R u s s i a n o f f i c e r s d e p l o r e d t h e f a c t t h a t t h o s e t h e y came t o l i b e r a t e were b e t t e r o f f t h a n t h e l i b e r a t o r s . The i m p e r i a l i s t i c p o l i c y was o n l y a n i n d i c a t i o n o f t h e g e n e r a l p o l i c y o f r e a c t i o n w h i c h was c o n s t a n t i n R u s s i a u n t i l t h e R e v o l u t i o n o f 1917. I n a c o u n t r y where a u t o c r a c y was g l o r i f i e d t o t h e e x c l u s i o n o f a l l e l s e , w h i l e t h e e c o n o m i c c o n d i t i o n s were l e a d i n g t o c o l l a p s e , i t was no wonder t h a t t e r r o r i s m d e v e l o p e d on b o t h s i d e s . T h i s p r o - d u c e d s t e r n e r r e a c t i o n , c o n s i d e r i n g w h i c h t h e c o u r s e and non- s o l u t i o n o f the p e a s a n t p r o b l e m became i n e v i t a b l e . But s o u n b e a r a b l e d i d c o n d i t i o n s become i n t h e t h i r t y y e a r s f o l l o w - i n g e m a n c i p a t i o n t h a t some a c t i o n by t h e government was n e c e s s a r y a t d i f f e r e n t p o i n t s . I t h a s b een shown how t h e l a n d p o v e r t y c r e a t e d by E m a n c i p a t i o n l e d t o a new e c o n o m i c bondage w h i c h c a r r i e d w i t h i t e v e n g r e a t e r d a n g e r s o f i n s e c u r i t y t h a n t h a t o f e a r l i e r t i m e s : A l s o , how t h e community c o n t r o l of t h e i n d i v i d u a l , w h i l e on one hand i t p r o v i d e d t h e o n l y w o r l d he knew t o t h e p e a s a n t , on t h e o t h e r r e s t r i c t e d p r o g r e s s i n meiitods o f (1) K n i g h t , B a r n e s & F l u g e l oj&. c i t . Page 753. agriculture; how the method of r e d i s t r i b u t i o n and the decreased allotments s t i l l f urther lowered the standard of l i v i n g ; and f i n a l l y how the unreasonable burden of taxation led the people to desperation. Now l e t us analyse the s i t u a t i o n at the end of the f i r s t t h i r t y years of emancipation. By 1887, the arable land had increased twenty f i v e per cent over the area of 1861. In the Black s o i l regions t h i s increase was much greater than i n any other part, and i n the Non-Black 3 0 i l regions there was even a decrease.(1) The land held by the peasants yielded about 68.1 percent of the t o t a l y i e l d . But t h i s was not because the peasant lands yielded greater crops. On the contrary the y i e l d of landowners'" land was always greater than that of the peasants (2). The fact was that there was an increase i n the amount of arable land held by the peasants. The f e r t i l i t y of the landowners' land was conserved by the fact that they could afford to leave i t fallow, whereas peasants exploited t h e i r s u n t i l the f e r t i l i t y decreased - by un- s c i e n t i f i c methods of c u l t i v a t i o n . Rye was the chief crop, occupying as many dessiatins as a l l other crops together. Wheat came next, a f t e r whioh came oats and barley. The sugar beet was (1) Mavor - ofc.. c i t . II - 283. (2) " " " II 283. an i m p o r t a n t o r o p a l s o , e s p e c i a l l y i n t h e w e s t . B e c a u s e o f l a c k o f a g r i c u l t u r a l c a p i t a l and b e c a u s e of t h e i g n o r a n c e and c o n s e r v a t i s m o f t h e masses t h e i n t r o d u c t i o n o f s c i e n t i f i c m ethods o f a g r i c u l t u r e , and t h e u s e o f i m p l e m e n t s o f a modern c h a r a c t e r was e x c e e d i n g l y s l o w . N e v e r t h e l e s s t h e u s e o f a r t i f i c i a l f e r t i l i z e r s and m a c h i n e r y wa3 known, and s p e c i a l l y a f t e r 1890. A c o n s i d e r a b l e amount o f r e s e a r c h was done i n R u s s i a i n a g r i c u l t u r e methods. B u t up t o 1890 and a f t e r w a r d s t h e f e r t i l i t y o f t h e l a n d t e n d e d t o d e c r e a s e b e c a u s e o f t h e l a c k o f r e s t o r a t i v e methods, and w i t h t h a t t h e d e c l i n e i n t h e w e l l - b e i n g o f t h e p e a s a n t became more marked. T h i s d e c l i n e i s e v e n b e t t e r i l l u s t r a t e d by t h e l e s s e r number o f c a t t l e owned by t h e p e a s a n t s . From 1870 t o 1900 t h e r e i s a d e c l i n e of t h i r t y p e r c e n t ( 1 ) . A c c o r d i n g t o t h e c e n s u s o f 1899-1901 i n t h e number of w o r k i n g h o r s e s t h e r e was a d e c l i n e o f over t h i r t y p e r c e n t - s o t h a t about t h i r t y p e r c e n t o f t h e p e a s a n t s were w i t h o u t h o r s e s , a b o u t t h i r t y two w i t h one h o r s e , a h d u t t w e n t y one p e r c e n t w i t h two h o r s e s , and a b o u t e i g h t e e n p e r c e n t w i t h t h r e e o r more h o r s e s . The f o r e g o i n g i s t r u e o f E u r o p e a n R u s s i a ( 3 ) . I n S i b e r i a , on t h e o t h e r hand e v e n by 1900, t h e r e was a n i n c r e a s e i n c a t t l e . The i m p o s s i b i l i t y o f r e t a i n i n g any c i v i l i z e d (1) Mavor Ob. c i t . I I 285. (2) Mavor Ob. c i t . I I 289 - K o r n i l o v s t a t e s t h a t a c c o r d i n g t o d a t a c o l l e c t e d a t t h e b e g i n n i n g o f t h e n i n e t i e s , i n some v i l l a g e s a b o u t 50$ o f t h e p e a s a n t s had no h o r s e s , a b o u t 45$ owned one and o n l y 5 o r 6% p o s s e s s e d two o r more h o r s e s ( K o r n i l o v ofc. c i t . I I . 205) s t a n d a r d o f l i v i n g , much l e s 3 i m p r o v i n g t h a t s t a n d a r d i s i l l u s t r a t e d by t h e n e c e s s a r y p r a c t i c e among t h e p e a s a n t s o f s e l l i n g g r a i n i n the autumn, e v e n i f t h e t o t a l y i e l d grown e s s e n t i a l l y f o r t h e i r own c o n s u m p t i o n was d e f i c i e n t . The c e n t r a l government d i d n o t d i s c o u r a g e t h i s b e c a u s e i t s e r v e d two o f i t s p u r p o s e s , r e g a r d l e s s o f t h e f a c t t h a t t h e p e a s a n t s had, b e c a u s e o f i t , n o t o n l y t o l i v e on t h e v e r g e o f s t a r v a t - i o n , b i t i n many c a s e s a c t u a l l y d i e d of t h e r e s u l t s . W i t h the s a l e of g r a i n i n t h e autumn t h e p e a s a n t s r a i s e d t h e money f o r t h e payment o f t a x e s . T h e r e f o r e t h e y were e n c o u r a g e d t o do so, w i t h t h e r e s u l t t h a t o f t e n t h e r e was a s h o r t a g e o f s e e d A g a i n , t h e g r a i n e x p o r t t r a d e was l u c r a t i v e f o r t h e s t a t e , and w i t h no r e g a r d f o r p o s s i b l e f a m i n e s a t home t h e e x p o r t s i n g r a i n i n c r e a s e d . But n o t a l l t h e g r a i n s o l d was e x p o r t e d . A good d e a l o f i t was bought up by t h e m i d d l e m a n i n t h e f a l l when p r i c e s were l o w and s o l d i n t h e S p r i n g ( s o m e t i m e s b e f o r e ) t o t h e v e r y same p e a s a n t s who had s o l d i t . I t was v e r y p o o r b u s i n e s s f o r t h e p e a s a n t t o s e l l a t a l o w p r i c e and buy a t a much h i g h e r p r i c e l a t e r on, but i t was a n a b s o l u t e n e c e s s i t y . To buy l a t e r i n most c a s e s he had t o borrow t h e money, and s i n c e he had no hope of e v e r p a y i n g i t back, he had t o p r o m i s e h i s s e r v i c e s t o t h e l a n d o w n e r , t h e same t y p e o f d e b t s e r v i t u d e as had e x i s t e d b e f o r e e m a n c i p a t i o n . Mavor q u o t e s t h e j e s t s o f t h e p e a s a n t s t h e m s e l v e s u p o n t h i s m a t t e r o f p o o r e c o n o m i c s : (1) K n i g h t , B a r n e s , B l u g o l - op c i t . page 735. "Don't t h o u be s o r r y , M o t h e r Rye!" s a y s t h e p e a s a n t to t h e g r a i n , " t h a t t h y p a t h i s c i t y w a r d s . I n s p r i n g I w i l l o v e r p a y ; but I w i l l t a k e t h e e b a c k " . "Don't be s o r r y , O a t s J t h a t I b r o u g h t y o u i n t o Moscow. A f t e r w a r d s I w i l l p a y t h r e e t i m e s o v e r ; but I w i l l t a k e y o u home a g a i n " , ( l ) . The above c o n d i t i o n s were t r u e i n t h e b e s t a g r i - c u l t u r a l d i s t r i c t s o f t h e n o r t h e r n r e g i o n s , i m p o r t s o f g r a i n had t o t a k e p l a c e . T h ese c o n d i t i o n s were b r o u g h t t o t h e n o t i c e o f t h e C e n t r a l Government, and t o t h e c o u n t r y a t l a r g e , by t h e numer- ous c r o p f a i l u r e s w h i c h o c c u r r e d d u r i n g t h e y e a r s a f t e r t h e e m a n c i p a t i o n . I n 1867 - i n Smolensk, p e o p l e d i e d o f s t a r v a - t i o n . V a l u i ^ e v , t h e M i n i s t e r o f t h e I n t e r i o r , d e n i e d t h e e x i s t e n c e o f the f a m i n e , s a y i n g t h a t t h e r e s e r v e s s h o u l d s a t i s f y t h e p e a s a n t s n e e d s , but i n v e s t i g a t i o n showed t h a t t h i s was n o t t h e c a s e . I n 1870, i n t h e s o u t h e a s t e r p r o v i n c e s , n o t e d f o r t h e i r g r a i n , t h e r e were p o o r h a r v e s t s . I n Samara i t l a s t e d f o r t h r e e y e a r s . The government r e c o g n i z e d t h e n e c e s s i t y o f a c t i o n , but, a s a l w a y s , was s l o w t o move. The a c t u a l e c o n o m i c p r e s s u r e r a t h e r t h a n any d e s i r e t o b e t t e r t h e c o n d i t i o n s o f t h e p e o p l e f i n a l l y d i d b r i n g a b o u t c e r t a i n c h a n g e s i n t h e l a w s g o v e r n i n g t h e p e a s a n t s . Bo a t t e m p t was made t o b e t t e r t h e i r l i v i n g c o n d i t i o n s - p h y s i c a l , m e n t a l (1) Mavor, Op. c i t . I I - 289. 9t- o r m o r a l . l o t t h a t t h e p e a s a n t s were n o t on t h e v e r g e o f u t t e r d e g r a d a t i o n . T h e i r l i f e was one o f u t t e r m i s e r y , and i t oan be s a i d f o r t h e R u s s i a n p e o p l e t h a t i t was t h e i r power o f h a l f - h u m o r o u s a c c e p t a n c e o f F a t e t h a t d u r i n g t h e y e a r s o f u t t e r h a r d s h i p s , t h e y r e t a i n e d t h e i r w h i m s i c a l p h i l o s o p h y o f l i f e . Many w r i t e r s and s o - c a l l e d r e f o r m e r s among t h e h i g h e r c l a s s e s (2) denounced p o l i c i e s o f c u l t u r a l advancement among t h e p e a s a n t s on t h e g r o u n d s t h a t t h e y s p e n t what l i t t l e t h e y had f o r t h e i r " v o d k a " . D r i n k i n g among t h e R u s s i a n p e o p l e was t h e u s u a l means f o r r e l a x a t i o n . T h e i r h o l i d a y i n g was a l w a y s cf a v i o l e n t n a t u r e - but i f men l i v e u n d e r g r e a t p r e s s u r e f r o m day t o day, t h e t e n d e n c y i s t h a t i n t i m e s o f r e l a x a t i o n t h e i r r e a c t i o n s w i l l a l s o be u n d e r p r e s s u r e . The l i f e o f t h e R u s s i a n p e a s a n t was a c o n t i n u a l war a g a i n s t t h e powers o f n a t u r e , p o v e r t y and s t a r v a t i o n . The r e m a r k a b l e t h i n g i s t h a t he d i d n o t become u t t e r l y b r u t a l i z e d , and t h a t he was a b l e t o r e t a i n t h r o u g h h a r d s h i p s t h a t u t t e r t e n d e r n e s s t o w a r d t h e s m a l l and t h e weak w h i c h i s so c h a r a c t e r i s t i c o f t h e R u s s i a n p e a s a n t f l ) . (1) N i c h o l a s N e k r a s s o v ' s "Who c a n be happy and f r e e i n R u s s i a " i l l u s t r a t e s t h r o u g h o u t i t s c o u r s e t h i s c o n t r a s t between t h e v i o l e n c e and b r u t a l i t y o f t h e p e a s a n t o n one hand, and t h e t e n d e r n e s s , k i n d l i n e s s and l o v a b l e - n e s s on t h e o t h e r . (2) K l i m o v - G o v e r n o r o f Zamara 1873 - Quoted by K o r n i l o v Modern R u s s . I I . Page 2.4. f t . W hether t h e e x c e s s d r i n k i n g i n R u s s i a was a d e l i b e r a t e government p o l i c y o f c o u r s e , r e m a i n s a m a t t e r f o r argument. I t i s t r u e t h a t t h e S t a t e had a monopoly on t h e s a l e o f v o l k a and i t b r o u g h t i n a n enormous incom e . I t i s a l s o t r u e t h a t t h e S t a t e d e l i b e r a t e l y a t t e m p t e d t o c u r b edu- c a t i o n among t h e p e a s a n t s ( l ) t o k e e p them i n t h e "Power of D a r k n e s s " ( l a ) i n o r d e r t h a t f r o m t h a t s o u r c e t h e r e s h o u l d be no o p p o s i t i o n t o a u t o c r a c y . The p e a s a n t s t h e m s e l v e s had a p r o v e r b w h i c h s a i d t h a t "Where G o d . b u i l d s h i s c h u r c h t h e r e t h e D e v i l e r e c t s h i s t a v e r n " - f o r i t was t r u e t h a t t h e two were a l w a y s i n c l o s e p r o x i m i t y , and a f t e r t h e Sunday c h u r c h s e r v i c e t h e r e s t o f t h e day was s p e n t a t t h e t a v e r n . The s o r d i d c o n d i t i o n s o f t h e i r l i f e a r e r e a l i z e d when we c o n s i d e r t h a t t h e i r s t o v e s had no c h i m n e y s i n o r d e r t o save f u e l , i n many c a s e s t h e y had no windows i n o r d e r t o c o n s e r v e h e a t , and o f t e n were u n c o v e r e d b e c a u s e t h e s t r a w o f t h e r o o f had been f e d t o t h e c a t t l e ( 2 ) . The w r i t e r s o f t h e t i m e .noted t h e eoonomic i n s e c u r i t y o f t h e p e a s a n t ; h i s p o o r n o u r i s h m e n t , bad p h y s i c a l and m o r a l c o n d i t i o n o f l i v i n g , t h e g r e a t amount o f s i c k n e s s and t h e h i g h d e a t h r a t e (3) and t h e c a u s e s g i v e n were p o o r s o i l , i n s u f f i c i e n t a!4Ui and (1) . S. A. Walsh, ob. c i t . 53 - 1887 a c i r c u l a r - t h a t c h i l d r e n o f coachmen, s e r v a n t s , e t c . , were n o t t o be e n c o u r a g e d t o r i s e above t h e s t a t i o n i n w h i c h t h e y were b o r n . (2a) T o l s t o y ' s p l a y i s on t h i s s u b j e c t . (2) K a r n i l o v I I - 203. (3) G e o f f r e y Drage - '.'Russian A f f a i r s " P. 81. I n r u r a l d i s t r i c t s o f R u s s i a t h e d e a t h r a t e f o r t h e y e a r s 1890 t o 1894 r e a c h e d 33 p e r t h o u s a n d . T h e r e was a c t u a l d e c r e a s e i n p o p u l a t i o n i n c e r t a i n d i s t r i c t s . I n f a n t m o r t a l i t y was f r o m 40$ t o 50%. h e a v y t a x a t i o n . W r i t e r s s u c h as V a s s i l c h i k o v i n 1880 p o i n t e d out t h e l i k e n e s s o f t h e o p p r e s s i o n o f t h e R u s s i a n p h e a s a n t s t o t h a t o f t h e F r e n c h p e a s a n t s b e f o r e 1789 and p r e d i c t e d v i o l e n c e , ( l ) The I n t e l l i g e n t s i a r e c o g n i z e d q u i t e g e n e r a l l y t h e d e f e c t s o f t h e system, and the c r i t i c i s m o f t h e e conomic o r d e r was common among them. They f e l t t h e i r d u t y t o w a r d t h e m asses: T h e y c o n s i d e r e d t h a t t h e y owed the p e o p l e f o r t h e c u l t u r e t h e y e n j o y e d . From t h e s e i d e a l i s t i c p r i c k s o f c o n s c i e n c e d e v e l o p e d t h e movement w h i c h had f o r i t s s l o g a n "To t h e P e o p l e " , and o t h e r r e v o l u t i o n a r y movements w h i c h grew out o f i t . B u t t h e i d e a l i s m o f t h e i n t e l l i g e n t s i a h a r d l y g r a s p e d t h e i n m e n s i t y o f t h e e c o n o m i c s i t u a t i o n , and w h i l e t h e y w i s h e d t o g i v e t h e p e o p l e knowledge and c u l t u r e , t h e y f a i l e d t o r e a l i s e t h a t what t h e y r e a l l y wanted was l a n d . T h i s i s t h e r e a s o n o f t h e i n e f f e c t i v e n e s s o f t h e r e v o l u t i o n a r y a r d o r o f t h e e a r l y p a r t i e s . The c e n t r a l government was s l o w t o b r i n g a b o u t r e f o r m as has been p o i n t e d out b e f o r e , but c e r t a i n c h a n g e s were made u n d e r t h e p r e s s u r e o f c i r c u m s t a n c e s . I n 1880, L o u i s M e l i k o v , as M i n i s t e r o f t h e I n t e r i o r , p e r m i t t e d t h e d i s c u s s i o n #^ a t a x a t i o n p o l i c y and t h e r e o r g a n i z a t i o n o f t h e l e g a l and a d m i n i s t r a t i v e s t a t u s o f t h e o f t h e p e a s a n t s , i n t h e p r o v i n c i a l and d i s t r i c t Zemstvo (1) K o r n i l o v I I - S05 9Q- a s s e m b l i e s . . T h i s was welcomed w i t h g r e a t r e j o i c i n g . He w i s h e d f a r t h e r t o i n v i t e r e p r e s e n t a t i v e s f r o m among Zemstvo w o r k e r s , p r o f e s s o r s , e t c . , t o a c o n f e r e n c e t o d i s c u s s m a t t e r s o f f u r t h e r r e f o r m . But a l l d i s c u s s i o n o f change came t o an end w i t h t h e a s s a s s i n a t i o n o f A l e x a n d e r I I on M a r c h 1, 1881. B u t t h i s was t o be o n l y f o r t h e t i m e b e i n g , b e c a u s e t h e p e a s a n t q u e s t i o n had a g a i n become s o u r g e n t t h a t e a r l y i n t h e r e i g n o f A l e x a n d e r I I I , t h a t most r e a c t i o n a r y o f E m p e r o r s , p r o m i s e s t o a i d t h e p e a s a n t s were made. I n June 1881, t h e f i r s t m e e t i n g o f t h e s o - c a l l e d " i n f o r m e d men" t o o k p l a c e t o d i s c u s s l o w e r i n g o f r e d e m p t i o n payments, t h e r e g u l a t i o n o f p r e s e n t m i g r a t i o n and o t h e r p r o b l e m s . The m a t t e r o f r e d e m p t i o n had n o t been s e t t l e d e v e n y e t t h r o u g h o u t th e c o u n t r y . T h e r e were s t i l l p e a s a n t s p a y i n g o b r o k as b e f o r e 1861 (1) j J J i n c e no v o l u n t a r y a g r e e - ment had b e en r e a c h e d . Now r e d e m p t i o n was made o b l i g a t o r y , a l t h o u g h t h i s r a i s e d c o n s i d e r a b l e o p p o s i t i o n on t h e p a r t o f t h e n o b l e s on t h e g r o u n d s t h a t t h i s was a n " i n f r i n g e m e n t o f s a c r e d r i g h t s o f p r o p e r t y " . Next a r e d u c t i o n i n r e d e m p t i o n payments was made - n a m e l y a r o u b l e on a n a l l o t m e n t , t o t a l l i n g t w e l v e m i l l i o n roubles i n a l l . And a sum o f f i v e m i l l i o n roubles was s e t a s i d e f o r r e l i e f i n s p e c i a l l y b u r d e n e d d i s t r i c t s . (1) K o r n i l o v I I - 253 - About l / 7 o f t h e e s t a t e s were s t i l l r e c e i v i n g o b r o k . V- The most i m p o r t a n t change o f 1881 ( n o t c o m p l e t e d u n t i l 1886) was t h e a b o l i t i o n of t h e p o l l t a x o f P e t e r t h e G r e a t . I t meant a l o s s of some f o r t y m i l l i o n r o u b l e s , w h i c h had t o be made up i n o t h e r ways by t h e S t a t e ( l ) . T h i s r e - f o r m was t o have f a r r e a c h i n g r e s u l t s , f o r i t had b e e n the c h i e f r e a s o n f o r t h e " m u t u a l g u a r a n t e e " s y s t e m i n t h e v i l l a g e s , and w h i c h had so r e t a r d e d t h e g r o w t h o f p r o f e s s i o n s o u t s i d e t h e v i l l a g e s , f o r no m a t t e r where a man l i v e d , he was r e s p o n - s i b l e t o t h e v i l l a g e f o r t h e head t a x . A f u r t h e r r e f o r m i n t h e method o f t a x c o l l e c t i o n was c a r r i e d o u t by Bunge, t h e M i n i s t e r o f F i n a n o e . The p o l i c e , who had worked i n c r u d e and c r u e l ways, were r e p l a c e d by t a x - i n s p e c t o r s , who were a l s o t o g e t i n f o r m a t i o n a b o u t t h e p e a s a n t s ' a b i l i t y t o p a y . The f a c t t h a t l a n d s c a r c i t y was at t h e r o o t o f were o u t l i n e d many t r o u b l e s was r e c o g n i z e d and t h r e e m e t h o d s / t o overcome t h i s s h o r t c o m i n g . A P e a s a n t Bank was t o be e s t a b l i s h e d , t h e r e n t i n g of s t a t e l a n d s was t o be made e a s i e r , and a s y s t e m o f m i g r a t i o n was t o be f o r m u l a t e d . The P e a s a n t Bank was t o r e c e i v e f i v e m i l l i o n r p u b l e s a y e a r f r o m t h e S t a t e , i n o r d e r t o g i v e c r e d i t t o p e a s a n t s w i s h i n g t o buy l a n d . A t f i r s t i t seemed t h a t t h i s m i g h t h e l p t o s o l v e t h e s i t u a t i o n , but s o o n i t d e t e r i o r a t e d i n t o a bank f o r t h e w e l l - t o - d o o n l y , who o f t e n bought t h e (1) K o r n i l o v I I - 254. A new l i q u o r t a x was e s t a b l i s h e d . A l s o t h e b e t t e r s i t u a t e d p e a s a n t s were t a x e d more h e a v i l y , and t h e t a x e s o f t h e S t a t e p e a s a n t s were i n c r e a s e d 45$. land from th e i r poorer brothers. Its laok of e f f i c i e n c y i s shown by the fact that i n ten years' time i t had only a g i s t e d the increase of peasant landownership by one and one-half percent (1). No State control of rent throughout the country was effected but on state lands regulation of rents took place. Furthermore, these lands were to be rented primarly to peasants i n the d i s t r i c t s . Migrations, i n spite of laws to the contrary by 1880 - had reached the huge number of f o r t y thousand per year. In 1881 a special rule to r e s t r i c t t h i s was passed but i t was never put into p r a c t i c e . In 1889 - af t e r long discussions a law was passed by which migrations were to be made easier. These reforms, as those before 1861, merely indicated the serious nature of the peasant problem. L i t t l e a l l e v i a t i o n was f e l t because of them, but even such as th:£s?w#Be. to come to an end, f o r under the influence of Count Tolstoy (2) and Po&iedonostzev, Alexander III showed what was (1) Kornilov II - 256. (2) Count Dmitry Tolstoy - served in the Ministry of Public Instruction and was Chief Procurajsor of the Holy Synod ( 1866 - 80 ) His reaction- ary tendencies in his dealings with the Universities and schools is specially noteworthy. Pobiedonostzev - * He was a man of fine intellect and a f i r s t class jurist; he won the confidence of three Emperors. He had conviction and he was plain-spoken. A thorough despiser of human nature he turned reaction into a system of philosophy. He was Procurator of the Holy Synod t n t i l 1905." (Bernard Pares - Cambridge Modern History pages - 298 and J1J.) 97 his r e a l attitude toward reform. Even the foregoing he considered i n the l i g h t of weak concessions to public opinion. After 1882, re a l reaction was to be enforced. The acts which followed were to prove t h i s . In 1884 the U n i v e r s i t i e s l o s t the semblance of freedom which they had had and the discussion of Zemstvo administration reform and the peasant question were no longer tolerated. (1). In order to strengthen the autocratic control, Alexander III and his successor t r i e d to win the goodwill of the n o b i l i t y once more by granting them special p r i v i l e g e s . The class d i f f e r - ences were to be accentuated consciously again. This move has been c a l l e d an act of p o l i t i c a l madness (2). In 1889, the f i r s t of the two laws was passed, which were to plaoe a l l l o c a l power en the hands of the nobles. "Zemsky Chiefs" were appointed, from among the nobles, and they were to have almost supreme power over the self-governing i n s t i t u t i o n s of the peasants (3). This was a decided step backward to the period before emancipation. These land captains had cer t a i n police powers, and became judges i n l e s s e r court cases, and i n 1893 they were further given power to control the p e r i o d i c a l r e d i v i s i o n of communal land (4). By an act of 1890 - the e l e c t o r a l system f o r the (1) Kornilov II - 262. (2) Vernadsky - Ob. c i t . Pg. 170. (3) Kornilov II - 263. (4) Beazley, Forbes, Birkett, Ob. c i t . 475. TV. Zemstvos was revised, giving the nobles a complete pre- dominance. The peasant delegates were reduced, and the few thus l e f t , were to be appointed by the governor from a l i s t submitted to him by the commune. In practice the Zemstvos became merely assemblies of nobles, supporting the Central Government. These reactionary steps were carried out b l i n d l y and without reason, and were to court disaster, as we s h a l l see. Chapter VII The 190 5 i n v o l u t i o n . The reactionary p o l i c y of the l a s t years of the rule of Alexander III was continued under the strong influence of Po^iedonostzev, a f t e r Nicholas I I , the l a s t of the Tzars, came to the throne. The p o l i c y of suppression of anything savoring of reform was a natural c o r o l l a r y to the narrowness of the bureaucraoy, the i n e f f i c i e n c y of the absolute monarch, and the fear of the seething powers below the supposedly p l a c i d surface^f d a i l y occurences. A l l the t a l k of p o l i t i c a l change, although that was foremost i n the minds of the I n t e l l i g e n t s i a , was driven underground, and the only l e g a l l y accepted leaders of the countryside, namely the zemstvo. workers, were driven to do economic and s o c i a l work only. This work w i l l be discussed i n a l a t e r chapter. Already t h e i r organization e f f o r t s have been noted during the famine of 1891 and 1892. The years before 1905 were to see the c r y s t a l l i z a t i o n of a l l the revolutionary parties i n Russia which were to play such an important part i n the history of the country during the revolutions following, but none of them ever came very close to the peasantry. The Zemstvo leaders with t h e i r l i b e r a l tendencies were to become the leaders of the Constitutional-Democratic Party (Cadets) and t h e i r economic and s o c i a l work i n l o c a l administration remained t h e i r greatest contribution to the peasant problem. The S o c i a l i s t parties approached the peasants i n d i f f e r e n t ways. The Social Democrats (who s p l i t i n 1903 into the Bolshevik and IOO. Menshevik sections) tended to ignore the peasant question, because t h e i r theoriea of future organization were baaed altogether upon i n d u s t r i a l i z a t i o n and the c i t y p r o l e t a r i a t . The party which took moat inter e s t i n the peasants as a class was the Socialist-Revolutionary party which combined ce r t a i n ideas of Western Socialism with the Russian communism of the Mir. Withjidealiatio energy, they gave themselves to the cause of revolution and as a part of t h e i r programme carried out a system of t e r r o r which found expression i n the numerous assasainationa i n high p o l i t i c a l c i r c l e s . But t h e i r influence upon the peasants among whom they worked waa p r a c t i c a l l y n e g l i g i b l e . The class differences between the I n t e l l i g e n t s i a and the peasantry wttt too great. The highly t h e o r e t i c a l s o c i a l systems and reforms formulated and d i s - cussed by the revolutionary parties meant l i t t l e to the peasants. Their problem did not seem to need these d i s - cussions. I t waa very simple. They s t i l l adhered to t h e i r age-long desire |;ot the land. "The land i s oura - give i t to us and l e t ua c u l t i v a t e i t " ( l ) . There i s no doubt that the influence of the v i l l a g e r a who spent a good part of t h e i r time working i n the o i t i e a brought back a number of new ideas. While away from home they were fed upon Western Marxiam, and the contact with the outside world naturally opened t h e i r eyes to many of the e v i l 3 of the l i f e i n the v i l l a g e a but the peasants needed no outaide teaching to make them r a d i c a l i n t h e i r demanda. Their deaire f o r the land, and t h e i r intent (1). Jas. Mavor. - An Econ. History of Russia. Vol.11 P.300 101. to get i t were more r a d i c a l tendencies than those of any of the other t h e o r e t i c a l or p r a c t i c a l groups* The reason f o r a c e r t a i n show of prosperity i n Russia during the years before the outbreak of 1905, can be found i n the steady growth of capitalism, whioh was encouraged by the p r o t e c t i o n i s t p o l i c y carried on by Witle and h i s predecessors. As nearly always i s the case, t h i s i n d u s t r i a l development was altogether at the expense of the a g r i c u l t u r a l classes. The peasants paid heavy duties upon a l l the manu- factured things which they had to buy, and, not only that, but also upon the ne c e s s i t i e s such as cotton and sugar. The result of t h i s continued p o l i c y of protection was that the peasants aunk into greater misery Sp e c i a l l y was t h i s true i n the Central provinces. Hot so much as a means of reform, but rather to counteract the influence of Ph&ve i n govern- ment c i r c l e s , ' Witte, i n 1902, set up a commission "for the inv e s t i g a t i o n of the causes of exhaustion of the central provinces." ($). He was aided i n t h i s work of i n v e s t i g a t i o n by the Zemstvos. The t o t a l result of t h i s was that the work was even more decidedly r e s t r i c t e d and Witte l o s t h i s o f f i c e . So jealous was the bureaucracy of i t s power, the e v i l s of which were i n danger of being revealed, and so l i t t l e i n t e r - est did they a c t u a l l y take i n the conditions of the people of the countryI (1) Kornilov - Modern Russian History. Vol.11. P.282 tox- The government was weak, floundering and stupid, and i ts utter inefficienoy was seen in its policy in making war upon Japan. It was possibly a stroke of policy to counteract the growing dissatisfaction in the country. It was hoped that a foreign war would appeal to the patriotism of the masses, but this proved an utter fiasco (1). It added another 2,442,000,000 rubles to the State debt; i t shamed Rusaia before the world and waa an indictment of the whole government ay8tem; and i t brought to the foreground for the firat time so generally, the diacontent latent in the differ** ent classes of society. It is significant to note how l i t t l e the distur- bances in the country and those in the city had to do with each other. Unions of trades and p r o f e a 3 i o n s were formed^ for democratic demands among the city and town dwellers, and how they carried through their revolution is not for dis- cussion here. But in discussing the revolution in connect- ion with the agrarian problem, i t is moat important to note that a special peasant movement had been growing up before 1905, and that an impetus for organization was found in the fact that the reactionary government had tried to secure from the peasants' assemblies formal approval of the Russo-Japanese War; and also of i ts projects of agrarian legislation, including the principle of unlimited supremacy of the (1). Knight, Barnes & Flugol - P. 754. )6i. landowners and authorities over the Russian peasantry" (1). The opposition was general and out of i t developed numerous peasants" unions - forming f i n a l l y the "All-Rusaian Peasants' Union" whioh met i n Moscow on July 31st, 1905. It had the si/pport of the I n t e l l i g e n t s i a - i n the form of the Agronoms' and S t a t i s t i c i a n s Unions. The discussions and resolutions had to do f i r s t of a l l with the question of land, as was to be expected, and ce r t a i n i n t e r e s t i n g resolutions were agreed upon. A l l private, f i s c a l udelnya, monastery and church lands were to be transferred to the disposal of a l l the peo- ple. "The use of the land i s to be enjoyed only by those who, by t h e i r families or by partnership but without hii?ed labor, c u l t i v a t e the land, and to the extent only of such powers of c u l t i v a t i o n " (2). At t h i s time there was s t i l l considerable t a l k of redemption, and here disagreements developed. nevertheless a resolution to the following effect was passed: "That the land must be considered the common property of a l l the people, that private property must be abolished, that the monastery, church, udelnya, cabinet and Tzars' lands must be taken without compensation, and that the lands of private owners must be taken p a r t l y with and p a r t l y with- out compensation; that the detailed conditions of the mobilization of private lands must be defined by the coming Constitutional Convention or Constituent Assembly" (3) (1) . Quoted by Mavor - ob. c i t . P. 297. (2) Mavor I I . P. 298. (3) Quoted by Mavor I I . P. 299. This shows the radioal tarend of thought i n the economic f i e l d . At this congress, complaints were made about the work of the land captains who were thoroughly hated. The v i l l a g e p r i e s t s came i n f o r t h e i r share of c r i t i c i s m , and the landowners methods of f i n i n g f o r trespasses which could not be avoided, were made matters f o r complaint (1). The p o l i t i c a l problem was not discussed openly. , The blame f o r e x i s t i n g conditions was s t i l l placed upon the landowners and the land captains. However, the attitude of the peasants at t h i s time toward the autocracy i s apparent from the words of a peasant at t h i s congress. He i 3 quoted as saying: "The Tzar ought not to be touched. He i s s t i l l breathing as something great to the peasants. This i n turn w i l l be otyer. (2) At t h i s f i r s t conference i n July twenty-two pro- vinces were represented, but at the second one, i n November Of the same year, p r a c t i c a l l y a l l the parts of European Russia sent delegates. A difference i n tone was also noticeable. The Peasants' Union decided to act with the other revolution- ary unions of the p r o l e t a r i a t , and they also planned a general s t r i k e , by refusing to make any land contracts with the land- owners u n t i l t h e i r wishes were complied with. The peasants were quite sure that the peasant question would be the f i r s t f o r settlement i n the new State Duma, and that t h e i r demands would be taken as the basis f o r the solut i o n ! So l i t t l e did they understand the workings of the bureaucracy! (1) Quoted by Mavor I I . P. 300. (2) Ibid. 301. loS'. However, they recognized that there was a p o s s i b i l i t y that the government would prosecute the Peasants' Union, and as a safeguard they drew up resolutions, concern- ing t h e i r l i n e of action i n that case. They would refuse to pay taxes, they decided. Also, they would refuse to supply r e c r u i t s and r e s e r v i s t s f o r the army; they would demand the payment of a l l deposits from the Savings' Banks, and they would destroy a l l the l i q u o r shops (to stop that source of government revenue). These were most revolutionary ideas! The peasants were beginning to r e a l i z e t h e i r own power. The other revolutionary parties t r i e d to make the peasants put forward the general p o l i t i c a l demands which interested them above a l l else but the peasants i n t e r e s t s were not p o l i t i c a l . (1). But when the Socialist-Revolut- ionaries c i r c u l a t e d the motto: " A l l land for those that labof" t h e i r influence was at once f e l t i n the v i l l a g e s because i t f i t t e d with t h e i r desires, and they adopted t h i s programme wholesale. (2). While t h e i r representatives were meeting to d i s - cuss the land problem the peasants i n the v i l l a g e s were taking things into t h e i r own hands. Disorders began already i n February of 1905 i n the impoverished provinces of Orel and Kursk, and as they spread they became more organized. The peasant commune, which had been so c a r e f u l l y preserved by the (1) Beazley, Forbes & Birkett - Russia from the Varangians to the Bolsheviks. P 529. (2) Bernard Pares - A r t i c l e i n Cambridge Modern History, Vol. 12. P 355. Ibt>. autocracy f o r purposes of i t s own, as has been shown above, now showed that i t could i n a time of excitement be turned into a weapon of resistance. Communities acted as one man and took what they wanted ( l ) . P e t i t i o n s from peasants demanded among other things that seven acres of land should be allowed per head; that there should be r e l i e f from the excessive taxation, remission dftthe remaining redemption dues, freedom to rent land and leave the commune, grants of state lands to those who t i l l e d them, p a r t i a l expropriation of landowners' land with compensation by the state, a l e g a l l i m i t to the extent of estates, freedom from special class laws, freedom of i n s t r u c t i o n and s p e c i a l l y the a b o l i t i o n of the hated land captains. (2). In the d i f f e r e n t sections of the country the resistance took d i f f e r e n t forms, but throughout," the use of force and violence to persons was very exceptional. (3). From reports (4) concerning the resistance i n d i f f e r e n t d i s t r i c t s i n the d i f f e r e n t provinces i t i s possible to summarize the expression of discontent as follows: In the northern provinces of European Russia the resistance to authority often took the form of cutting timber on the lands of private owners and upon those of the State. This i l l e g a l cutting was quite open and participated i n by (1) Bernard Pares - A t r i c l e i n Cambridge Modern History Vol. 12. P. 353. (2) Ibid. 354. (3) Ibid. 353. (4) Quoted by Mavor Vol. I I . Pg. 302 f f g . I of whole v i l l a g e s . The peasants were resolute i n showing that they had grievances against the owners. Often new houses were b u i l t (1). They refrained from touching the estates of such nobles or landowners whom they knew to be poor, but they attacked the property of the r i c h owners, and often those not so r i c h . Taxes also were l e f t unpaid, but i t seems that t h i s was because of the poor harvests, although an e f f o r t to embarrass the government was suspected. The au t h o r i t i e s found i t d i f f i c u l t to deal with these outbreaks. Proclamat- ions were at f i r s t sent to the v i l l a g e s making extensive pro- mises, but the peasants'* c h a r a c t e r i s t i c a l l y suspected these papers ( 2 ) . In cases of arson, which occurred often and also i n cases of the a r b i t r a r y expropriation of hay and grain troops were c a l l e d i n to check the a c t i v i t i e s . In the Central d i s t r i c t s resistance took the form of a r b i t r a r y pasturing of c a t t l e on landowners land; the p i l l a g e of estates owned by landowners and merchants, c a t t l e being driven away and houses and hay being set on f i r e ; timber cutting also was carried on here; and, demands f o r new wage scales were set up by the peasants themselves ** including length of working hours, working conditions, and even, a demand f o r c i v i l i t y to be shown^was made (3). The landowner, the p r i e s t , sometimes the shopkeeper, and the land (1) Out of t h i s , and the same practice during the more recent revolution grew the saying: "The peasants have new houses, but do not ask where the logs were obtained". (2) Mavor - Vol.11. P. 305. (3) Ibid. 321. fo8 captain came i n f o r c r i t i c i s m . In one case the fees paid to the p r i e s t f o r the performance of the ceremonies of marriages, funerals and baptisings were reduced (1). The same influences seem to have been at work here as i n the northern provinces. It has been said (2) that the dr a s t i c demands made by the peasants were a means f o r d r i v i n g the landowners from the land, because the peasants believed that i t was against the law to leave ground uncultivated. It has also been said that another matter which influenced the peasants to attack the nobles was the fact that the returned soldiers told of Cossack raids upon Jews being l e f t unpunished, and that now the peasants t r i e d the same thing. Whether t h i s was the case or not, the e f f o r t s of the peasants did not go unpunished. Cossacks and dragoons were sent to beat the people, and martial law, always on the side of the landlords, was put into force. With these suppressions and the disagreements among the peasants them- selves nothing much of a l a s t i n g nature was accomplished. The one thing which l e f t a l a s t i n g result was the reaction to the b r u t a l i t y of the Cossacks. They used no judgment and the "nagaiH.a" or long whip made use of by them became a symbol of hatred not only of the soldiers but of the whole system. In the southern b l a c k - s o i l d i s t r i c t s a general (1) Mavor - Vol. II P. 326. (2) Ibid. 327. /of revolutionary wave passed over the country a f t e r the Manifesto of October 17, 1905. Property was p i l l a g e d and burned, and i l l e g a l pasturings and ploughings were organized. Insuffi c i e n c y of land and the poverty of the people were the causes. A pec u l i a r feature of the problem of t h i s section of the country was the faot that the r i c h and poor peasants were divided against each other, and often the farms of the "kulaj(s" were p i l l a g e d . The above sketch shows that the resistance to authority was quite general. It grew out of age-old causes. It seems that the patience of the peasants was reaching a breaking point. It was a spontaneous movement guided by the common f e e l i n g upon the subject of land. But even though the standard of l i v i n g of the Russian peasant was extremely low, Mavor points out (l) that the peasants had awakened l a r g e l y because just before 1905 the conditions had improved. The "kulaks" had become a real force i n v i l l a g e l i f e , and even the v i l l a g e p r o l e t a r i a t were making better wages (2). "People who are i n the depths of despair through sheer want may be very discontented, but they r a r e l y r e v o l t " . The peasants showed action during the revolution- ary year, but outside of the fact that i t indicated awakening, nothing was r e a l l y accomplished. The Revolution of 1905 can generally be called a f a i l u r e , even though the Duma developed (1) Mavor I I . ob. c i t . page 356. (2) This can be compared to the French peasant at the time of the French Revolution. out o f i t . T h e r e was no r e a l u n i o n between t h e g r e a t work- i n g c l a s s g r o u p s o f t h e c o u n t r y - n a m e l y t h e p r o l e t a r i a t and t h e p e a s a n t r y , and t h e o r g a n i z a t i o n was weak. B e s i d e t h i s , t h e e f f e c t o f t h e a g r a r i a n d i s t u r b a n c e s u p o n t h e l i b e r a l r e - f o r m e r s was t o make them t u r n t o t h e r i g h t . The Zemstvo w o r k e r s h e n c e f o r t h were w i l l i n g t o w o r k w i t h t h e government, h o p i n g o f c o u r s e t o c o u n t e r a c t t h e f o r o e o f t h e b u r e a u c r a c y t h r o u g h t h e Duma. The p e a s a n t s had a t t a c k e d t h e i n t e r e s t s o f t h e l a n d o w n e r s , s i n c e t h e Zemstvo l e a d e r s b e l o n g e d t o t h i s c l a s s , t h e y n a t u r a l l y 3 i d e d w i t h t h e c e n t r a l government a g a i n s t t h e p e a s a n t s . Then a l s o , when t h e e n e r g y o f Jrhe r e v o l u t i o n had s p e n t i t s e l f , many o f t h e p e a s a n t s t h e m s e l v e s t u r n e d i n f o r m e r s o r p r o v o c a t o r s - l a r g e l y out o f f e a r and a d e s i r e t o b e t t e r t h e i r own c o n d i t i o n . A l l t h e l i b e r a l - m i n ded i n t e l l i g e n t s i a who h e l d p o s i t i o n s , t e a c h e r s and so on, were now d i s m i s s e d o r r e p l a c e d by S e m i n a r y g r a d u a t e s o f t h e H o l y Synod. But i n t h e h e a r t s of t h e p e a s a n t s t h e f e e l i n g o f r e v o l t was n o t k i l l e d . I n f a c t t h e r e was a change t h e r e . Whereas b e f o r e t h e c h i e f o p p o s i t i o n had been t o w a r d t h e l a n d - owner, now i t was t u r n e d u p o n t h e g o v e r n m e n t . The p e a s a n t d i s t u r b a n c e s s h o u l d most c e r t a i n l y have p o i n t e d out t o t h e c e n t r a l g o v e r n i n g a u t h o r i t i e s t h e d a n g e r t o be e x p e c t e d f r o m t h i s backbone g r o u p o f t h e S t a t e , once i t was a r a u s e d ; and r e f o r m s were p a s s e d ( 1 ) , but n o t so much t o h e l p t h e p e a s a n t s as t o 3ave t h e a u t o c r a c y . The (1) L e n i n t u r n e d h i s a t t e n t i o n t o t h e A g r a r i a n programme o f S o c i a l D e m ocracy a t t h i s t i m e " H i s t o r i c a l l y , t h e p e a s a n t r y had been t h e r e a l r e v o l u t i o n a r y c & a s s i n R u s s i a f o r c e n t r u i e s " - K n i g h t , B a r n e s , F l u g o l - P 775. r e a l f e e l i n g o f the g o v ernment i s r e v e a l e d by t h e r e p r e s s i v e m e a sures i t a d o p t e d , and i t s sympathy w i t h t h e l a n d e d g e n t r y I t a s s i g n e d 8,000,000 r u b l e s t o t h o s e who had s u f f e r e d f r o m t h e a g r a r i a n d i s o r d e r s ; w h e r e a s t h e p e n a l t i e s f o r a g r i c u l t u r a l s t r i k e s were made e x t r e m e l y h e a v y . (1) I n November o f 1905 W i t t e had t r i e d t o r e l i e v e t h e s i t u a t i o n by p a s s i n g a law, by w h i c h t h e r e d e m p t i o n f e e s f o r 1906 were t o be r e d u c e d by o n e - h a l f , and a f t e r t h a t were t o be done away w i t h a l t o g e t h e r . ( 2 ) . B u t p e a s a n t r i o t s had c o n - t i n u e d . We have s e e n t h a t t h e p e a s a n t s p l a c e d g r e a t h o p e s i n t h e r e f o r m s w h i o h t h e f i r s t Duma was t o p a s s f o r t h e i r b e n e f i t . Now t h e government i n t e n d e d t h a t t h i s same f i r s t r e p r e s e n t a t i v e body s h o u l d be one w h i o h w o u l d do e x a c t l y t h e o p p o s i t e - i . e . work i n t o t h e h ands o f t h e b u r e a u c r a c y . The government f e l t t h a t a p e a s a n t m a j o r i t y was the s u r e s t way t o o b t a i n t h e e o n s e r v a t i v e body w h i c h i t d e s i r e d , and f o r t h i s p u r p o s e W i t t e had a c t u a l l y p a s s e d t h e r e d e m p t i o n r e d u c t i o n l a w - i n o r d e r t o g a i n t h e f a v o r o f t h e p e a s a n t s . W i t t e a l s o based h i s b e l i e f i n t h e c o n s e r v a t i s m o f t h e p e a s a n t s i n t h e f a c t t h a t t h e t r a d i t i o n a l l o v e o f t h e p e a s a n t r y f o r t h e i r " L i t t l e F a t h e r T z a r " was v e r y g r e a t ( 3 ) . By t r i c k e r y (4) t h e r e was t o be a p e a s a n t m a j o r i t y . A c t u a l l y t h e government was doomed t o d i s a p p o i n t m e n t , b e c a u s e among t h e f i r s t t h i n g s (1) B e a z l e y , F o r b e s , B i r k e t t - ob. c i t . 537. (2) B e r n a r d P a r e s - Cambridge Modern H i s t o r y V o l . 1 2 - 361. (3) K o r n i l o v ob. c i t . V o l . I I . 317. (4) M avor - ob. c i t . I I . 34. asked f o r by the Duma was the expropriation of state and private lands f o r the peasants. A haughty answer was re- turned by the government, and although 15,000,000 rubles were voted f o r r e l i e f of starving peasants, the agrarian question became the f i n a l point of c o l l i s i o n between the Duma and the Bureauoraoy. The Duma was dissolved and by the reactionary cabinet under Stol^ypins d i r e c t i o n , as Minister of the In t e r i o r , the Agrarian reform of Nov. 9, 1906 was passed. The great thing that t h i s law was to bring to the country was to change land-ownership i n the v i l l a g e s from c o l l e c t * ^ ! s t to i n d i v i d u a l . Throughout Russian history we have seen the importance of the commune i n peasant a f f a i r s , and i n previous chapters the merits and f a u l t s of such economic organization have been noted. It was part and parcel of Russian r u r a l l i f e . Individual ownership was known but r a r e l y (1). The Emancipation Act had provided f o r purchase of land by private owners from the commune, but cases of such ownership were not numerous. Now every householder was allowed the right to separate from the community and make the portion of land which belonged to h i s family at the l a s t d i s t r i b u t i o n his own, with no further compensation to the community. He could s e l l t h i s or divide i t , but to prevent large t r a c t s of land being owned by a few no one was allowed to purchase more than 25 dessiatines from any ind i v i d u a l s e l l e r . (1) Mavor - ob. c i t . I I . 341. By t h i s act the land became the property of the head of the family, and the e f f e c t of t h i s was bound to be f a r reaching. It meant that he had much more power than formerly, and the children had no more actual share i n the family land. Stolypin saw the necessity of change and f o r t h i s reason he had t h i s law passed. But he was not a reformer. It was not to improve the l i v i n g conditions of the peasants, but to save the autocracy that he brought i n his measures. He was counting on the p o l i t i c a l e f f e c t s of i n d i v i d u a l freehold knowing from lessons of h i s t o r y that the l a t t e r i n v a r i a b l y proves to be one of the most conservative forces i n p o l i t i c s (1). She reactionary cabinet also recognized that the community system of the v i l l a g e s had been a very real force i n revolution. This was another reason f o r t r y i n g to do away with the ancient mir. Stolypin's reform was received i n d i f f e r e n t ways. The peasants realized that i t was merely a p o l i t i c a l measure, and the t o t a l innovation i n system was n a t u r a l l y d i s t a s t e f u l . Then instead of leaving the act to work i t s e l f out, which would of course have been slow, Stolypin t r i e d to coerce i t and l o s t the support of the I n t e l l i g e n t s i a (2). The reform was bound to produce a large p r o l e t a r i a n class, since the members of the family who would not i n h e r i t any part of the land would have to (1) S. A. Korpf. - Autocracy and Revolution i n Russia P. 37 (2) Ibid. P. 37. /Hi- seek something new sooner or l a t e r . Because of t h i s possible tendency the Social Democrats at f i r s t received the law favor- ably - seeing i n i t a means of "proletariat!zing".the peasantry(1) The introduction of the reform was bound to be con- fusing. It did not solve the question of land scarcity, nor any of the other e v i l s under which the peasants had struggled. The strip-system of f i e l d s which had always been a handicap i n the commune was even more aggravated, although l a t e r other acts t r i e d to remedy t h i s . The s t r i p s , often miles apart, were fixed f o r good, and continual s e l l i n g and exchange was to bring about greater confusion (2). The State introduced other reforms to spped up t h i s main one. It t r i e d to make the purchase by the peasant of state land as well as that owned p r i v a t e l y a l i t t l e easier, and f o r this purpose t r i e d to u t i l i z e the Peasant Bank. An attempt was made to smooth away grievances over petty fines and other f r i c t i o n s between landowners and peasants, and measures were discussed f o r the transference of peasants from congested d i s - t r i c t s to les3 populated areas. In May of 1906 - l o c a l land Reform Committees were decided upon to a s s i s t i n the work of land d i s t r i b u t i o n by the methods of the other reforms (3). But as might be expected these committees, chosen against the background of reaction, sided with the i n t e r e s t s (1) Makftf & O'Hara - Russia - 106. (2) Makgtf & O'Hara - Russia - 107. (3) Mavor II - 346. of the landowners and the bureaucracy. The representation of these i n t e r e s t s was so much greater than that of the peasants, since the committees consisted of the inspector of taxes, the d i s t r i c t member of the l o c a l government court, the land captains, d i s t r i c t marshal of nobilitym the Zemstvo representative and only thfrSUtJpeasant representative,*. Their duty was to f i x land prices, so that the peasants could buy but since they themselves were landowners, t h e i r i n t e r e s t s would demand that they should not reduce p r i c e s . They bought up land f o r the Peasant Bank, and much of t h i s was quite undesirable bought at high prices to benefit the land- owners who had i t to s e l l , and where land was sold again, too often t h i s was done i n small s t r i p s , which i n t e n s i f i e d the e x i s t i n g e v i l s . Under the e x i s t i n g conditions, these committees could hardly be expected to work wisely. The government reforms, having p o l i t i c a l control of the bureau- cracy always at heart, were neither extensive nor sincere enough to a l l e v i a t e the e x i s t i n g conditions. The fact that land was thrown open f o r sale raised the hopes of the peasants that now the age-old question of land hunger was to be settled, but the very nature of the sale was bound to i n t e n s i f y trou- bles. Only those who had money could buy land, and the l i f e of t h i s class was not unbearable. The tendency now was to strengthen t h i s wealthier class, and to bring even greater poverty to those already poor. fiften the land offered f o r sale was not i n the d i s t r i c t s where the need f o r i t was the greatest and the government was not i n a p o s i t i o n f i n a n c i a l l y lit. n o r d i s i n t e r e s t e d l y t o a d o p t o r g a n i z e d o o l o n i z a t i o n schemes. The r e f o r m s , t h e n , were n o t a d e q u a t e to s o l v e t h e p r o b l e m s o f l o n g s t a n d i n g . W h e t h e r t h e e f f e c t s o f t h e s e w o u l d have been d i f f e r e n t i f h i s t o r i c a l l y t h e r e had b een a l o n g e r t i m e i n w h i c h t h e y c o u l d have been worked out, we s h a l l n e v e r know. P o s s i b l y t h e y a r r i v e d t o o l a t e . ( l ) . ( l ) "The e x p e r i m e n t was much t o o s h o r t - l i v e d t o a l l o w one t o r e a c h a d e f i n i t e c o n c l u s i o n a s t o i t s u l t i m a t e e f f e c t s . I t has been m a i n t a i n e d , however, by e c o n o m i s t s and a g r i c u l t u r a l e x p e r t s , b o t h R u s s i a n and f o r e i g n , t h a t i t was a n immense and u n q u a l i f i e d s u c c e s s " . A. F l o r i a s k y "The End o f t h e R u s s i a n E m p i r e " . Page 16. I>1 Chapter VIII. Russia© Agriculture and the War. In the l a s t Chapter i t has been shown that Stolypin i n 1906 made an attempt to solve the Agrarian problem i n Russia and the lafc$ passed at that time were r a t i f i e d by the Land Settlement Aot of 1911. As discussed above the reform was one which might have had very f a r reaching results, i n spite of the fact that i t was not an e f f o r t to improve the economic condition of the peasants - but a move to augment the power of the autocracy. The opinions of economists and h i s t o r i a n s vary very greatly (l) upon the importance of the Agrarian l e g i s l a t i o n of 1906 to 1911, but any movement which his t o r y checks i n working i t s e l f out to i t s ultimate conclusion i s bound to become the subject of endless surmise. On the one hand knowing the corruption of the administrative side of the bureaucracy and the bewildered and demoralized state of the / (2) country during Stolypin's regime, i t seems that the agrarian (1) Antiseroe, etc.- "Russian a g r i c u l t u r e during the War" (Carnegie Endow.) page 344. Speaking of the period a f t e r 1906.- "It seems as i f the oountry was conscious of the great t r i a l s awaiting her, so intense were the e f f o r t s devoted to reorganization and renovation i n - cluding the thorough reconstruction of the agrarian system by land settlement reform on an unprecedented Makoee & O'Hara "Russia" 108 f f g . Speaking of Stolypin's land law says "... the reform instead of bettering the l o t of the peasant i n r e a l i t y was responsible for wide- spread impoverishment. Small farmers, suddenly uprooted from t h e i r old c o l l e c t i v i s m under the eommunal system, now found t h e i r holdings economically unworkable ... The Stolypin reform and the measures that followed up, instead of resolving the fundamental problem of Russian national economy, complicated i t " . (2) Kornilov - Modern Russia History, Vol.11, P.332. Between 1905-1909 there were i n Russia more than 45,000 suicides - the natural consequence of the general despair and d i s - paragement, the profanation of ideals and the general hopelessness gave ri s e to excessive neurasthenia and per- verse practices among the i n t e l l e c t u a l s . A l l of t h i s shows the necessity f o r fundamental change. Ill problem could never have solved i t s e l f , no matter what re- forms were passed i n theory; and, because, weighed down by the load of i t s own e v i l s , the autocracy collapsed, the agrarian problem with a l l other problems was l e f t at the mercy of revolutions, and i s i n the process of being solved along t o t a l l y d i f f e r e n t l i n e s . On the other hand, judging by the f a c t that private property i n land has been and incentive to progress throughout history, the reforms might possibly have become the foundation f o r a l l other changes. They attracted a great deal of attention among the economists i n Europe generally (1) and analysing the conditions of agriculture and the peasantry just before the war, i t i s evident that a r e a l change was taking place. The problens of over-population and land hunger hatoe been discussed before. The population since eman- cipa t i o n had more than doubled (2). Naturally i n a country the size of Russia with better organization that would have meant no overcrowding. The huge expanses of S i b e r i a (3) were suitable f o r colonization. But density of population i n p a r t i c u l a r l o c a l i t i e s had been brought about by the fact that the central government had, u n t i l 1906 r e s t r i c t e d rather than encouraged emigration (4). Por example, the passport (1) . Ant^sfiiferoc/, etc., ob. c i t . Pg. 345 f f g . German and French views. ' (2) Ibid. 290 - 1858 - 75 m i l l i o n s i n Russian Empire. 1914 - 182 m i l l i o n s . (3) Ibid 43. In Eastern Siberia and the Far East - i n 1914 9 out of 103,451,200 dessiatins of land suitable f o r c u l t i v a t i o n only 629,100 dessiatins were cul t i v a t e d . (4) Ibid. 14. " f - system was most cumbersome. The written consent of two ministers was necessary i n order to obtain permission to emigrate ( l ) . The frequent r e d i s t r i b u t i o n s of land among the peasantry had reduced the size of the allotments very considerably, which meant that upon the same area of oldn there were now many more f a m i l i e s . But even before the war there was a movement afoot f o r the formation of new peasant homesteads (2), but a l l of t h i s was quite i n s u f f i c i e n t to meet the demands. The only organization which could have done anything on a general scale was the Peasant Bank, but i t neither had s u f f i c i e n t funds, nor s u f f i c i e n t power. The measures taken by the government were half-hearted and i n - adequate and lacking i n foresight and v i s i o n . c u l t i v a t i o n (3) and the f a c t that from year to year so muoh of the l i t t l e land held by the peasants l a y fallow (4) i n - creased the misery and want of the peasants. (1) Maktef - Ob. c i t . 81. (2) AntSfftferod - Ob. c i t . 1861 - 8,450,782 peasant homesteads i n Europ. Russia. 1905 - 12,298,000. But t h i s involved a c e r t a i n decrease i n average size of holdings (page 23) which was not l e s s than 10$. (3) Barnes,Plugol,Knight - Eoon. Hist, of Europe - P.763. 1907 - 13 Russian crop on average 10 bu. per acre - which was one half of that of Prance, and of that of Canada. In Canada the per capita y i e l d was nearly seven times as great. (4) Ibid. Page 16. 30$ of the arable land was l y i n g fallow. Added to these factors, the primitive methods of 1X0. In 1905, the land i n European Russia was owned as follows: By State & Public I n s t i t u t i o n s 154.7 m i l l i o n dessiatins Peasant Allotments 133.8 " " By Private Persons: Gentry 58.8 " " Peasants (richer) 84.7 " " Other Social groups 83.8 " " The land held by peasants had increased somewhat since 1878 . S p e c i a l l y was t h i s true of land p r i v a t e l y owned, which i s s i g n i f i c a n t because i t shows that there was a trend toward i n d i v i d u a l ownership even before Stolypin's reforms. After the Agrarian disturbances of 1905 and the law of 1906, there was even a greater move i n that d i r e c t i o n . S p ecially i n the Black S o i l regions was over-population general, and here a f t e r the precarious times of the 1905 revolution the gentry were most anxious to s e l l t h e i r private property. Consequently very much of i t was transferred to the peasants by means of the intermediary Peasant Bank. By January 1st, 1917 the land holding i n European Russia was as follows: The peasants possessed 185 m i l l i o n dessiatins or 46.8$. State and public i n s t i t u t i o n s had 147.8 m i l l i o n dessiatins, and private owners 63 m i l l i o n dessiatins (8). By 1917, too, there were 7.7 m i l l i o n peasant farms, i . e . one h a l f of the peasant households i n European Russia had freed themselves from the communal forms of land tenure. (1) . Ibid. Page 18. Allotment land increase from 30.9$ to 33.9$. land p r i v a t e l y owned 1.3$ to 6.2$. But Page 29 - the peasants formed i n 1892 - 98.1$ of a l l owners, so the amount of arable land held by a peasant household remained very small. (2) . Ibid. Page 22 - 23. More modern methods o f a g r i c u l t u r e were a l s o b e i n g i n t r o d u c e d , and a c l a s s o f p r o s p e r o u s p e a s a n t s was g r o w i n g up w h i c h e i t h e r b ought more and more l a n d t h r o u g h t h e p e a s a n t Bank o r l e a s e d i t f r o m t h e s t a t e o r f r o m p r i v a t e p e r s o n s ( 1 ) . T h i s n a t u r - a l l y was t o make f o r a new p r o b l e m i n t h e v i l l a g e s - t h e e x p l o i t a t i o n o f t h e w e a k e r e l e m e n t s o f a community by t h e s t r o n g e r . I t was t o t h e p o o r e r p e a s a n t s i n t h e v i l l a g e s t h e l a r g e m a j o r i t y of c o u r s e t h a t t h e r e v o l u t i o n a r y p a r t i e s f i n a l l y made t h e i r a p p e a l . ( 2 ) . T h e s e p o o r e r p e a s a n t s (3) s u p p l i e d a good d e a l o f t h e a g r i c u l t u r a l l a b o r on p r i v a t e l y owned f a r m s , b u t t h e m s e l v e s r e m a i n e d a t t a c h e d t o t h e l a n d . I n t h i s way a p r o f e s s i o n a l a g r i c u l t u r a l p r o l e t a r i a t d i d n o t e v e r d e v e l o p p i n R u s s i a . Of t h e c r o p s grown b e f o r e t h e war; as a f t e r w a r d s c e r e a l s f o r m e d 90 p e r c e n t - (1913 - wheat 31.2$, r y e 28.7$, o a t s 18.4$ and b a r l e y 1 2 . 7 $ ) . P o t a t o e s , f l a x and hemp f o r m e d a b o u t 9.8$ and t h e o t h e r 2.2$ was made up o f s u g a r b e e t w h i c h was bec o m i n g a n d i m p o r t a n t c r o p ; c o t t o n , s u n f l o w e r s , t o b a c c o , r i c e , t e a and g r a p e s , most o f t h e l a t t e r grown o n l y i n v e r y r e s t r i c t e d l o c a l i t i e s . The p e a s a n t s sowed c h i e f l y r y e , buckwheat and f l a x - l a r g e l y f o r home c o n s u m p t i o n s i n c e (1) These l e a s e s t e n d e d t o d e c r e a s e t h e f e r t i l i t y o f t h e s o i l b e c a u s e u s u a l l y t h e y were s h o r t t e r m l e a s e s , and no f e r t i l i z e r s were u s e d . The l a n d was e x p l o i t e d w h i l e i n u s e . I b i d . 36. (2) The B o l s h e v i k s - Nov. 1917. (3) Many o f t h e s e were p r a c t i c a l l y l a n d l e s s p e a s a n t s o r t h o s e who had r e c e i v e d t h e b e g g a r l y a l l o t m e n t - s u p r a P-r~ r y e b r e a d has f o r m e d t h e c h i e f f o o d of t h e p e a s a n t s f o r g e n e r a t i o n s . O t h e r owners p r o d u c e d wheat, g r a s s and s u g a r b e e t - l a r g e l y f o r s a l e . D u r i n g t h e f i r s t y e a r s o f t h e t w e n t i e t h c e n t u r y t h e need-^or a r a b l e land' was so g r e a t t h a t t h e meadows were p l o u g h e d up c a u s i n g a d e c i d e d d e c r e a s e i n t h e l i v e - s t o c k . J u s t b e f o r e t h e war t h i s d e f i c i e n c y waa r e c o g n i z e d but t h e war b r o k e down any a t t e m p t t o meet i t ( 1 ) . On t h e whole d u r i n g t h e y e a r s p r e c e d i n g t h e war a g r i c u l t u r e i n R u s s i a showed some s i g n s o f p r o g r e s s : t h e y i e l d o f t h e l a n d was i m p r o v i n g , t h o u g h n o t v e r y g e n e r a l l y ; p o t a t o e s and o t h e r r o o t s were b e i n g i n t r o d u c e d ; r o t a t i o n o f c r o p s was b e g i n n i n g t o t a k e t h e p l a c e o f f a l l o w ; more l a n d was b e i n g manured and a r t i f i c i a l f e r t i l i z e r s were s l o w l y i n t r o d u c e d (2) and g r a s s c r o p s l i k e c l o v e r and a l f a l f a were b e i n g sown i n t h e meadows where b e f o r e o n l y n a t u r a l g r a s s had been grown; and, t h e u s e o f b e t t e r i m p l e m e n t s and a g r i c u l t u r a l m a c h i n e r y became known - t h o u g h n o t g e n e r a l l y ( 3 ) . T h i s p r o g r e s s , s l i g h t a s i t was, c a n be a t t r i - b u t e d t o many t h i n g s . The D e p a r t m e n t o f A g r i c u l t u r e c a r r i e d (1) I n A s i a t i c R u s s i a t h e r e v e r s e was t h e c a s e . ( 8 5 ) . (2) I n 1907 - t h e u s e was s t i l l v e r y l i m i t e d - 13 m i l l i o n p u ds t o 100 m i l l i o n d e s s i a t i n s w h i l e i n Germany 167 m i l l i o n puds were u s e d t o 15 m i l l i o n d e s s i a t i n s . A n t i f e r o r - 61. (3) K n i g h t , B a r n e s , l l u g o l - " E c o n . H i s t , o f E u r o p e " p.761. I n 1912 - o n l y 5 0 ^ p e r p e a s a n t was s p e n t f o r a g r i c u l t u r a l m a c h i n e r y . on some u s e f u l work a l o n g t e c h n i c a l l i n e s . To some e x t e n t p r i v a t e l a n d o w n e r s e n c o u r a g e d p r o g r e s s . But t h e b u l k o f t h e work done c a n be a t t r i b u t e d t o t h e Z e m s t v o s and t h e c o - o p e r a t i v e and a g r i c u l t u r a l s o c i e t i e s . Thejy, sometimes, w i t h t h e f i n a n c i a l h e l p o f t h e government f o u n d e d a g r i c u l t u r - a l s c h o o l s and model f a r m s ( l ) . F r o m 1895 t o 1904 t h e Z e m s t v o s i n c r e a s e d t h e e x p e n d i t u r e i n i m p r o v i n g a g r i c u l t u r e f r o m one t o f o u r m i l l i o n r o u b l e s ( 2 ) . They a r r a n g e d f o r c o u r s e s i n d a i r y i n g and l e c t u r e s a t c o u n t r y f a i r s . T h e y f o u n d e d e x p e r i m e n t a l s t a t i o n s and a g r i c u l t u r a l museums. T h e y employed agronoms or a g r i c u l t u r a l e x p e r t s f r o m Whom p e a s a n t s c o u l d g e t a d v i c e , and e n c o u r a g e d t h e f o u n d i n g o f a g r i c u l t u r a l a s s o c i a t i o n s , o f w h i c h i n 1914 t h e r e were 4,685 a s compared w i t h 175 i n 1896 ( 3 ) . A l t h o u g h t h e c e n t r a l government d i d n o t r e g a r d t h e s e a t t e m p t s w i t h f a v o r , t h e d e p a r t m e n t o f a g r i c u l t u r e h e l p e d t h e work a l o n g many l i n e s . By 1912 - w i t h t h e a i d o f t h e Z emstvos t h e r e were 212 model f a r m s o p e r a t e d . The work o f a g r i c u l t u r a l c o - o p e r a t i v e s and a r t j l s was a l s o i m p o r t a n t . They w e r e f o r m e d t o o b t a i n m u t u a l l o a n s , (1) A g r i c u l t u r a l s c i e n c e i n R u s s i a o c c u p i e d a h i g h l e v e l . I n s o i l s c i e n c e , . a g r i c u l t u r a l c h e m i s t r y a n d p h y s i c s , p l a n t and a n i m a l p h y s i o l o g y , g e n e t i c s and p l a n t b r e e d - i n g , t h e S o v i e t U n i o n has c o n t i n u e d t h i s work. - P r o f . N. J . V a i r l o v - S c i e n c e and T e c h n i q u e u n d e r C o n d i t i o n s o f a S o c i a l i s t R e c o n s t r u c t i o n o f A g r i c u l t u r e (Pub. L e n i n , Academy o f A g r i c . S c i e n c e s . " (2) James Mavor - iiicon. H i s t o r y of R u s s i a - Page 287, V o l I I . (3) AntSitelferou' - ob. c i t . page 76. the production of dairy products, maintenance of a common store, and so on, and i n numbers they increased very quickly. In 1905 there were 4,479 of these co-operatives while i n 1916 there were already 37,000. ( l ) . These points noted are indications of a change, which shows that a certain new consciousness seemed to be awakened i n the l i v e s of the people. But by the time of the outbreak of the war very l i t t l e had as yet been accomplished, and just to what extent any r e a l progress would have been possible w i l l remain a question f o r e v e r . The very f a c t that the peasants seemed to be on an up-grade i n progress made i t more inevi t a b l e that i n time of upheaval t n the state i t s e l f they would make revolutionary demands. P o l i t i c a l l y and economically the revolution was f e l t to be inevitable sooner or l a t e r , during the summer of 1914. (2). But when war was declared the nation responded with great fervor (3). The peasants as well as the c i t y population seemed to show considerable patriotism i n time of c r i s i s , but the masses knew very l i t t l e about the r e a l issues. In August of 1916 - Maurice Pal^ologue wrote: "Among the r u r a l masses the dream of Constant- inople, which has never taken d e f i n i t e shape i s becoming increasingly vague, remote and unreal. From time to time a p r i e s t reminds them that the Russian people i s (sic) under a sacred duty, a holy obligation to wrest Tzajttgrad from the (1) Kornilov - Modern Russian History II, 335. (2) " ob. c i t . I I . 337. (3) Ibid. 341. i n f i d e l and r a i s e t h e o r t h o d o x c r o s s on t h e dome of S a n t a S p p h i a . H i s a u d i e n o e l i s t e n s t o h i m w i t h a composed and d u t i f u l a t t e n t i o n but w i t h o u t a t t a c h i n g more p r a c t i c a l s i g - n i f i c a n c e t o h i s words t h a n i f he were s p e a k i n g o f t h e L a s t Judgment and t h e t o r m e n t s o f H e l l . I t s h o u l d a l s o be n o t e d t h a t t h e m o u j i k who i s e m i n e n t l y p e a c e - l o v i n g a n d t e n d e r - h e a r t e d and a l w a y s r e a d y t o f r a t e r n i z e w i t h h i s enemy i s r e v e a l i n g a n i n c r e a s i n g l o a t h i n g f o r t h e h o r r o r s o f war" ( 1 ) . The p e a s a n t s s t i l l had dreams o f o b t a i n i n g t h e l a n d , and a l t h o u g h t h e s t r e s s o f war a l t e r e d c i r c u m s t a n c e s i n t h e v i l l a g e s a s e l s e w h e r e f o r a t i m e , t h e a g e - l o n g p r o b l e m was s t i l l u p p e r m o s t i n t h e m i n d s o f t h e masses ( 2 ) , a s was s e e n when t h e r e v o l u t i o n b r o k e o u t , and e v e r y y e a r s t r e n g t h e n e d t h e c o n v i c t i o n t h a t t h e s t a t e was a t y r a n n y w h i c h had o u t l i v e d any u s e f u l p u r p o s e . The b l u n d e r o f e n t e r i n g t h e war a t a l l , and t h e s u b s e q u e n t mismanagement were t o p r o v e t h e t r u t h of t h i s c o n v i c t i o n v e r y s o o n . F o r e i g n t r a d e w h i c h had g i v e n t h e c o u n t r y a k i n d o f f i n a n c i a l p r o s p e r i t y f e l l a t once, and h e r e x p o r t s (1) M a u r i c e P a l i o l o g u e - "An Ambassador's M e m o i r s " V o l I I P 316. (2) Makof & O'Hara - 119. A* 6- two and a half years a f t e r the outbreak f e l l to one ninth of the pre-war l e v e l ( l ) . This i n i t s e l f was a huge l o s s to the country. State revenues decreased i n other ways. The pr o h i b i t i o n of s p i r i t s , wine and alc o h o l i c l i q u o r s meant a yearly loss to the Treasury of £750,000,000. The fact that i t was quite impossible for the government to meet expenses pointed early to ruin. In agriculture the results of the war were not f e l t immediately. The f a c t that huge numbers of men were called to serve i n the army made l i t t l e difference at f i r s t since the settled areas had been overpopulated anyway. Again, the fact that the demand of grain f o r the aimy was great raised prices paid to peasants, and since l i t t l e could be exported to foreign countries, more was l e f t f o r home consumption. This tended to raise the l e v e l of l i v i n g i n the v i l l a g e s f o r a while. The p r o h i b i t i o n of alcohol also c e r t a i n l y made a difference i n the every day l i f e of the people as well as t h e i r a g r i c u l t u r a l productivity. Money was l e s s rare among the masses, and t h i s meant that they could buy more than ever before. But a l l of t h i s was true only of the f i r s t year of the war. Eventually the 10,960,000 peasants (2) taken away from the countryside were to leave a deficiency i n the (1) "Prom the st a r t the peasants were but l i t t l e acquainted with the causes, aims and general circumstances of the War. Their i s o l a t i o n had been a calculated p o l i c y of successive governments" Makttf - 153. (2) AntXBlferod, etc. ob. c i t . - 117. labor force, s p e c i a l l y since these were the able-bodied men of the v i l l a g e s . Also, 2,600,000 horses (1) were taken from a g r i c u l t u r a l work. This amounted to about 16.2$ of the whole number. The r e q u i s i t i o n i n g of c a t t l e , too, reduced a g r i c u l t u r a l output. Soon the peasants r e a l i z e d that a l - though they were receiving money, they could buy very l i t t l e , since the war demanded moat manufactured a r t i c l e s for the sol d i e r s ; and, a l i t t l e l a t e r i t became evident that the paper money they were receiving was r e a l l y worth nothing even i f there had been things to buy. At once the peasants ceased to supply as much as they had done before, and a l - ready i n 1916 - the sowing area was d i s t i n c t l y diminished (2). There was further d e t e r i o r a t i o n i n the a g r i - c u l t u r a l industry because p r a c t i o a l l y no a g r i c u l t u r a l machinery was imported a f t e r the outbreak of the war, and very l i t t l e was produced at home, because men from f a c t o r i e s were sent to the army or transferred to munition f a c t o r i e s ; or the plants themselves were changed into munition f a c t o r i e s . Thus hardly any new machines came into use and old ones f e l l into d i s r e p a i r (3). The importation of f e r t i l i z e r s also f e l l to a minimum. A considerable amount was being used before the war - but now even t h i s was stopped. (1) Ibid. - 117. (2) MakOf - Russia - 123. (3) Antjaiferot/ - ob. c i t . 129. B e c a u s e o f t h e s e c a u s e s o f d e t e r i o r a t i o n and t h e - o t h e r r e a s o n s n o t e d above, t h e g r a i n p l a c e d on t h e market by t h e p e a s a n t s t e n d e d t o d e c r e a s e a s t h e war c o n t i n u e d . The v i l l a g e s were b e c o m i n g p o o r e r . S p e c i a l l y i n t h e n o r t h e r n and c e n t r a l p r o v i n c e s where p a r t o f t h e a n n u a l income had b e f o r e come f r o m o t h e r i n d u s t r i e s , w h i c h were now b r o k e n down, t h e r e was r e a l n e e d . The f a c t t h a t more p r o s p e r o u s d i s - t r i c t s w ould n o t s e l l , and a l s o b e c a u s e t h e t r a n s p o r t a t i o n s y s t e m was so p o o r l y a r r a n g e d l e d t o f o o d c r i s i s i n t h e s e d i s t r i c t s a s w e l l a s i n t h e towns ( l ) . D u r i n g t h e f i r s t y e a r s o f the war t h e g r a i n o b t a i n e d f o r t h e army was much i n e x c e s s o f t h e demand, but a l r e a d y i n 1915 - 16 t h e s u p p l y f e l l s h o r t by a b o u t f o u r m i l l i o n puds (2) and i n 1916 - 17 t h e r e was a d e c i d e d s h o r t a g e s p e c i a l l y b e c a u s e c i v i l i a n p o p u l a t i o n s had t o be p r o v i d e d f o r a s w e l l ( 3 ) . Out of t h e 1,106 m i l l i o n puds n e c e s s a r y o n l y 48.2 p e r c e n t was o b t a i n a b l e . T h i s was a s e r i o u s s i t u a t i o n and the government had t o r e s o r t t o o t h e r m e a s u r e s t o o b t a i n g r a i n . From t h e f i r s t t h e r e had b een c o n f u s i o n a s to t h e u l t i m a t e a u t h o r i t y i n t h e m a t t e r o f p r o v i d i n g p r o v i s i o n s f o r t h e c o u n t r y . F i n a l l y i n A u g u s t o f 1915 a S p e c i a l C o u n c i l was a p p o i n t e d , p r e s i d e d o v e r by t h e m i n i s t e r o f A g r i c u l t u r e . T h i s body was t o have f u l l a u t h o r i t y , and any d i s o b e d i e n c e was t o be s e v e r e l y p u n i s h e d . The s p e c i a l c o u n c i l had l o c a l (1) Makuf - Ob. c i t . - 124. (2) Pud - 40 pounds (3) A n t i s i f e r o r - Ob c i t . 190. committees a l l over the country through which i t worked. The p o l i c y of t h i s council was to buy grain direct from the Zemstvos and a g r i c u l t u r a l associations i n order to avoid middlemen, but because the government had no f a c i l i t i e s for storing the grain before shipping, i t had to resort to the use of middlemen a f t e r a l l , who possessed storehouses and elevators. But a l l of these measures proved to be inadequate. In the autumn of 1915 already the government found i t necessary to f i x the prices of grain. But t h i s f i r s t e f f o r t was only p a r t i a l and proved of l i t t l e use. New price f i x i n g took place which was to apply to government purchases and private buying and t h i s was announced to the public i n September of 1916. ( l ) . But i t was too late f o r that year. The trade i n grain was i n f u l l swing, and the fixed prices were so much below the market prices that the owners held back th e i r grain (2), hoping that the prices would be raised. The prices were raised at the end of November, but i t made l i t t l e difference then. Upon t h i s the Government considered i t necessary to introduce compulsory l e v i e s (3) of grain and fodder - A certa i n quantity of grain was to be purchased i n every province, to be determined by the (1) Antsifero*/ - Ob. c i t . 197. (2) Ibid. - 197. (3) It i s important to note that the Tzar i s t regime f i r s t introduced compulsory l e v i e s of grain, much before the same attempt was made by the Bolsheviks. no chairman of the special committee; while p r o v i n c i a l Zemstvo board3 were to help decide how much should be taken from each d i s t r i c t ; and v i l l a g e meetings were to s e t t l e the amounts to be levied upon the d i f f e r e n t v i l l a g e s and i n d u s t r i a l peasants. The grain w a 3 to be bought at a fixed price, and i n case of refusal to s e l l on the part of the owner, i t was to be requisitioned at a price f i f t e e n percent lower than the fixed p r i c e . The whole plan met with l i t t l e success, and t h i s was one of the problems l e f t to the new provisional government. The revolution when i t came seemed on the surface an upheaval i n the c i t i e s , and s p e c i a l l y of the p r o l e t a r i a t . But i t stands to reason that i n a country so predominantly a g r i c u l t u r a l as Russia, the e f f o r t s f o r change would nave been necessarily f u t i l e i f the great masses of people had not had reasons f o r being discontented* It has been shown before that p o l i t i c a l and economic parties and t h e i r programmes played p r a c t i c a l l y no part i n the attitude of the peasants toward reform. Their one aim was to secure the land - a very re a l and concrete aim, and a stronger force than a l l other th e o r e t i c a l s t r i v i n g s for democracy. And because of t h i s while on the surface the urban p r o l e t a r i a t was performing spectacular acts (which were to have a l a s t i n g e f f e c t , no doubt) the peasants were carrying out a revolution of t h e i r own i n the country which was to make i t impossible to bring back former times ever again. At f i r s t t h i s movement was marked by the same aloofness which had characterized the revolutionary relations of the peasantry before, and during the early part of the ;3i struggle, i n the absence of the strong arm of law and authority, the country was quiet and peaceful. "The seizure of land- owners' estates and the p i l l a g e of valuable property by the peasant wa3 of comparatively rare occurence. The v i l l a g e was content to watch patiently, while i t organized slowly but sure- l y . " ( l ) . The peasants were the r e a l power behind the revo- l u t i o n . In spite of a l l party s t r i f e i n the Oities " i n an inconspicuous manner they hammered out as equitable a d i s t r i - bution of property a3. they could among themselves" (2). Most authorities upon the subjeot of the Russian Revolution occupy themselves almost exclusively with the upheaval i n the c i t i e s and therefore emphasize the undoubted horrors which accompany any vi o l e n t outbreak. Because of t h i s , not too much can be said about the comparative peace- fulness i n the country. "Many r e l i a b l e witnesses f o r whom the Russian Revolution was an unspeakable d i s a s t e r from many points of view, t e s t i f y to the unexceptionally calm and peace- f u l nature of i t s course on the countryside. It i s by no means necessary to be an i d e a l i s t and a lover of the people" writes a landlord r e f e r r i n g to the e a r l i e r stages of the Revolution, "to a f f i r m that no s o c i a l revolution was ever carried out so peacefully and bloodlessly as the Russian one where property was the sole issue, not the person". The brutal treatment and murder of landed propretors were quite exceptional occurences" (3). This speaks a great deal f o r (1) Makttf & O'Hara - ob. c i t . page 152. \d) «J. Bartlet Brebner "The Country of Dobsoi Ivan" Canadian Forum, Feb. 1928. (3) Makttf & O'Hara - Ob. c i t . 202. ax t h e f u n d a m e n t a l w o r t h o f R u s s i a n c h a r a c t e r , and g i v e s m a t e r i a l f o r hope f o r g r e a t t h i n g s t o come when t h e R u s s i a n masses have e v o l v e d p o l i t i c a l l y t o t h e p o i n t where t h e y w i l l do t h i n g s t h e m s e l v e s ( 1 ) . One of t h e c h i e f c a u s e s o f t h e f a i l u r e o f t h e R e v o l u t i o n of M a r c h 1917, and t h e i m p o s s i b i l i t y o f t h e P r o - v i s i o n a l Government t o r e t a i n power l a y i n the f a c t , a s we s h a l l see l a t e r , t h a t t h e r e was h e s i t a t i o n i n the s e t t l i n g o f t h e l a n d p r o b l e m ; and t h e s e c r e t o f t h e s u c c e s s o f t h e B o l s h e v i k s i n Nov. 1917, i s f o u n d i n t h e f a c t t h a t t h e y com- p r o m i s e d t h e i r own p o l i c y , and s u r r e n d e r e d t o t h e p e a s a n t s i n th e m a t t e r o f l a n d s e t t l e m e n t . They s a i d "The l a n d i s handed o v e r f o r t h e u s e o f t h e t o i l i n g p o p u l a t i o n " w h i c h f i t t e d t h e i r own t h e o r i e s , and d i d n o t c l a s h w i t h t h e d e s i r e of t h e p e a s a n t s . " l e t t h e p e a s a n t s t h e m s e l v e s s o l v e a l l t h e p r o b l e m s ; l e t them, t h e m s e l v e s a r r a n g e t h e i r l i f e " s a i d L e n i n . ( 2 ) . (1) T h e r e a r e o t h e r o p i n i o n s o f t h e c o u r s e o f t h e R e v o l u t i o n i n t h e c o u n t r y . Of. f o r example - Ant£p-iferoV. e t c . ob. c i t . , Page 373. " L a r g e and s m a l l e s t a t e s were r o b b e d o f e v e r y t h i n g , b u i l d i n g s were d e s t r o y e d o r b u r n t down, e t c . . . I n s h o r t , i t was a huge J a c q u e r i e , o r t o r e f e r t o a R u s s i a n p r e c e d e n t , a new P u g a c h i v r e b e l l i o n ... Whe r e v e r i t was n o t c h e c k e d by o u t s i d e i n t e r v e n t i o n , t h e b u l k o f l a n d o w n e r s ' e s t a t e s had p a s s e d , de f a c t o , i n t o the hands of t h e p e a s a n t s e v e n b e f o r e t h e B o l s h e v i k s , on t h e i r a d - v e n t t o power l e g a l l y a b o l i s h e d p r i v a t e l a n d o w n e r s h i p " . But much o f t h e argument u s e d grows o u t o f t h e p r e j u d i c e t o ward a l l r e v o l u t i o n a r y p a r t i e s u p o n whom he blames a l l e x c e s s e s . (2) M i c h a e l S. Parbman - " B o l s h e v i s m i n R e t r e a t " Page 203. The s u o o e s a o f t h e r e v o l u t i o n ! i n t h e C i t i e s a l s o l a y i n d i r e c t l y i n t h e d e s i r e o f t h e p e a s a n t s f o r t h e l a n d . The t e n s o f t h o u s a n d s o f s o l d i e r s w i t h o u t whose b a c k i n g n o t h i n g c o u l d have been done were a l m o s t e x c l u s i v e l y p e a s a n t s . T h e i r i n c e n t i v e t o oppose t h e g o v ernment was t h a t t h e y wanted t h e l a n d , and when t h e r e v o l u t i o n b r o k e out g r e a t numbers d e s e r t e d i n o r d e r t o g e t back t o t h e v i l l a g e s i n t i m e to r e c e i v e t h e i r s h a r e ( l ) . T h e i r p a t r i o t i s m became a t h i n u n r e a l i t y when compared w i t h t h i s one r e a l d e s i r e i n t h e i r l i v e s . The war was m e r e l y "a war o f m a s t e r s and t z a r s " t o t h e p e a s a n t s i n t h e t r e n c h e s ; and, a t home the t r u t h o f t h i s f e e l i n g was e x p r e s s e d i n a r e s e n t m e n t a g a i n s t t h e u n r e a s o n a b l e r e q u i s i t i o n s o f h o u s e s and c a t t l e f o r t h e war ( 2 ) . The p e a s a n t s t h r o u g h o u t t h e c o u n t r y were w e a r y o f war, and a r e v o l u t i o n t o them meant t h e r e a l i z a t i o n o f t h e i r a g e - l o n g d e s i r e f o r l a n d . When we con- s i d e r t h a t t h e p r o v i s i o n a l government a l l e v i a t e d n e i t h e r t h e w a r - w e a r i n e s s n o r l a n d hunger, the f a i l u r e of i t s l a n d p o l i c y becomes e a s i l y u n d e r s t a n d a b l e . The S o c i a l i s t R e v o l u t i o n a r y p a r t i e s had opposed the L a n d R e f o r m s o f S t o l y p i n f r o m t h e f i r s t . The S o c i a l D e m o c r a t s c o n s i d e r e d them as a p u r e l y b o u r g e o i s move; and t h e S o c i a l R e v o l u t i o n a r i e s who i d e a l i z e d t h e M r a s the b a s i s f o r f u t u r e s o c i a l o r g a n i z a t i o n , c o n s i d e r e d the d e s t r u c t i o n o f i t i n t h e l i g h t o f u t t e r s a c r i l e g e . The C o n s t i t u t i o n a l D e m o c r a t s o f t h e l e f t , a l s o c r i t i c i z e d t h e government p o l i c y ( 3 ) . When t h e (1) A n t i s i f e r o t f e t c . Ob. c i t . page 3 7 £ . (2) Makttf - Ob c i t . page 153. (3) A n t s i f e r o r 7 e t c . Ob. c i t . page 369. P r o v i s i o n a l Government was f o r m e d ( t h e p e r s o n n e l o f w h i c h c o n s i s t e d o f r e p r e s e n t a t i v e s o f many p a r t i e s who were al w a y s c h a n g i n g ) t h e f i r s t t h i n g t h a t t h e y d i d was t o a b o l i s h t h e l a n d s e t t l e m e n t c o m m i t t e e s o f t h e o l d g o v e r n m e n t . They had no d i r e c t p o l i c y o f t h e i r own to p u t i n i t s p l a c e but l e f t t h e f i n a l d e c i s i o n s to t h e C o n s t i t u e n t A s s e m b l y . B u t f e a r i n g t h a t t h e l a n d o w n e r s w o u l d make a n a t t e m p t , t o s e l l t h e i r p r o p e r t y ( f e a r i n g worse t i m e s w i t h c o n f i s c a t i o n ) t h e y f o r b a d e a l l s a l e s ( 1 ) . T h e i r whole p l a n o f a c t i o n was i n d e f i n i t e and i n d e c i s i v e . A c e n t r a l l a n d committee and l o c a l l a n d c o m m i t t e e s i n t h e c o u n t r y were f o r m e d . . The p u r p o s e o f t h e s e was i n v e s t i g a t i o n o f c o n d i t i o n s - a s i f t h e s u f f e r i n g masses had n o t been e x p o s e d t o i n v e s t i g a t i o n i n t h e l a n d p r o b l e m s i n c e b e f o r e E m a n c i p a t i o n ! The I m p e r i a l Appange Department was r e o r g a n i z e d as t h e S p e c i a l C e n t r a l Department, and a l l t h e l a n d s b e l o n g i n g t o H i s M a j e s t y ' s C a b i n e t were t r a n s f e r r e d t o t h e S t a t e and p l a c e d u n d e r t h e Department of A g r i c u l t u r e ! But i t i s e a s y t o see o f what l i t t l e p r a c t i c a l i m p o r t a n c e t h e s e , a c t s were. The T z a r ' s l a n d s had a l r e a d y d u r i n g t h e o l d r e g i m e been i n t h e hands and a t t h e d i s p o s a l o f t h e De p a r t m e n t o f A g r i c u l t u r e ! No d e f i n i t e r e f o r m t o o k p l a c e c o n c e r n i n g t h e l a r g e p r i v a t e e s t a t e s . The method o f c o n f i s c a t i ons w h i c h were t o t a k e p l a c e was t o be l e f t t o t h e Q o n s t i t u e n t A s s e m b l y , and t h i s f o r t h e t i m e b e i n g a l l r e f o r m was b r o u g h t t o a c l o s e . N a t u r a l l y t h e p e a s a n t s became i m p a t i e n t . The (1) A n t s i f e r o j / , e t c . Ob. c i t . 371. l a n d c o m m i t t e e s were of l i t t l e u s e s i n c e t h e y had no g u i d i n g p o l i c y t o h e l p them i n t h e i r work ( l ) . The c e n t r a l committee was a n u n w i e l d y b u r e a u c r a t i c o r g a n i z a t i o n of more t h a n two h u n d r e d members, w h i c h c o u l d o n l y c o l l e c t i n f o r m a t i o n w i t h w h i c h n o t h i n g c o u l d be done. W i t h i n t h i s body i t s e l f , many p a r t i e s were r e p r e s e n t e d : B o l s h e v i s m was d e v e l o p i n g q u i c k l y , and many members o f the o r g a n i z a t i o n c a r r i e d a v i o l e n t p r o p a g a n d a among t h e p e a s a n t s ( 2 ) . T h e r e i s l i t t l e d o u b t t h a t t h e y i n f l u e n c e d somewhat t h e s t e a d y p r o g r e s s o f q u i e t c o n f i s c a t i o n i n t h e c o u n t r y . The f e a r o f g r a i n s h o r t - age w h i c h was q u i t e g e n e r a l i n t h e l a t e s p r i n g o f 1917 was blamed upon t h e d e m o r a l i z a t i o n of t h e p e a s a n t s by a g i t a t o r s who, i t was s a i d , were b e c o m i n g l a w l e s s and e n c o u r a g e d d i s s e n t ; and t h e y were t h r e a t e n e d w i t h p u n i s h m e n t ( 3 ) . B u t t h e r e a l t r o u b l e l a y i n t h e i n d e c i s i o n o f t h e government i t s e l f and i t s l a c k o f c o h e s i o n . T h e r e was d e c i d e d d i s s e n t i o n among t h e government o f f i c i a l s t h e m s e l v e s - C h e f h o v , who was o f the l e f t , was M i n i s t e r of A g r i c u l t u r e . H i s p o l i c i e s were d i r e c t l y opposed t o t h o s e of P r o f e s s o r P o s n i i o v , t h e C h a i r m a n o f t h e C e n t r a l L a n d Committee, and he worked a l s o a g a i n s t t h e l e a d e r o f t h e Government - P r i n c e , who f o u n d i t n e c e s s a r y t o r e s i g n . When K e r e n s k y was p u t a t t h e head o f a f f a i r s , f u r t h e r p r o m i s e s were made t o s o l v e t h e l a n d p r o b l e m by " g i v i n g t h e l a n d t o t h e w o r k e r s " ( & ) . The d a n g e r i n t h e (1) I b i d - 262. (2) I b i d . 267. (3) A n t s i f e r o t f - Ob. c i t . 269. (4) I b i d . 271. c o u n t r y by t h i s t i m e was v e r y r e a l . The w e i g h t o f t h e wa#, and t h e d i s o r g a n i z a t i o n b e c a u s e o f r e v o l u t i o n were t h r o w i n g t h e l a n d i n t o g r e a t e r chaos f r o m day to d a y . S p e c i a l l y g r e a t was t h e f o o d p r o b l e m , and a l t h o u g h t h e P r o v i s i o n a l Government t r i e d t o i n t r o d u c e s y s t e m and e f f i c i e n c y i n i t s method o f d e a l i n g w i t h i t , (1) a w e l l - o r g a n i z e d a d m i n i s t r a t i o n was l a c k i n g t o cope w i t h t h e i m m e n s i t y o f f e e d i n g t h e m i l l i o n s o f men i n t h e army a s w e l l a s p r o v i d i n g n e c e s s i t i e s f o r t h e peo- p l e i n t h e c o u n t r y . I t i a h a r d to s a y i f any power c o u l d have d e a l t w i t h t h e war a n d t h e p r o b l e m s a r i s i n g o u t o f t h e R e v o l u t i o n a t t h e same t i m e . T h e r e were so many c o n t r a - d i c t o r y i n t e r e s t s . W h i l e Ohefnov, as t h e M i n i s t e r o f A g r i c u l t u r e was t r y i n g t o s o l v e t h e l a n d p r o b l e m by e n c o u r a g i n g a p p r o p r i a t i o n of l a n d , t h e M i n i s t e r of Pood s u p p l y was g i v i n g o r d e r s w h i c h were d i r e c t l y o p p o s i t e , i n t h e h o p e s o f s o l v i n g t h e army f o o d q u e s t i o n ( 2 ) . And s i m i l a r c o n t r a d i c t o r y commands e x i s t e d i n a l m o s t e v e r y d e p a r t m e n t Of t h e g o v e r n m e n t . And n o t o n l y t h a t but t h e work o f t h e e x t r e m e p a r t i e s , and f a c t i o n a l i n t e r e s t s d i d e v e r y t h i n g t o c o m p l i c a t e m a t t e r s , a s s e e n i n t h e J u l y r i s i n g o f t h e B o l s h e v i k s , a n d t h e K o r n i l o v r i s i n g i n t h e army. E v e r y t h i n g p o i n t e d t o t h e n e c e s s i t y o f some r a d i c a l i n t h e n e a r f u t u r e . M eanwhile, i n t h e c o u n t r y , a c e r t a i n amount o f g r a d u a l c o n f i s c a t i o n was g o i n g on. But g e n e r a l l y s p e a k i n g e v e r y t h i n g was p e a c e f u l . E v e n t h e d e c r e a s e i n t h e c u l t i - v a t e d a r e a o f l a n d was c o n s i d e r a b l y s m a l l d u r i n g t h e f i r s t (1) Makttf - ob. c i t . 178. (2) A n t i s i f e r o * f ob. c i t . 272. y e a r o f t h e r e v o l u t i o n - namely f r o m 50,081,000 t o 48,433,000 a c r e s o r a b o u t 3.3$. The d r a s t i c c o n s e q u e n c e s o f d e c r e a s e d c u l t i v a t i o n were n o t f e l t u n t i l 1 9 1 8 . f l ) . I t was n a t u r a l t h a t a s a r e s u l t o f t h e g e n e r a l a t m o s p h e r e o f u n c e r t a i n t y a b o u t t h e f u t u r e p e o p l e were a n x i o u s to sow o n l y so much g r a i n a s was needed f o r t h e i r own c o n s u m p t i o n ( 2 ) . T h e r e i s no d o u b t t h a t the p r o p a g a n d a of the B o l s h e v i k s and o t h e r s had i t s i n f l u e n c e u p o n t h e p e a s a n t s where t h e y w e r e r e a c h e d , as i t had upon t h e s o l d i e r s i n t h e c i t i e s , but t a k i n g i t a l l i n a l l , t h e e f f e c t was c o m p a r a t i v e l y s m a l l . On t h e l a n d t h e r e v o l u t i o n was a v e r y s i m p l e t h i n g - t h e s e t t l e m e n t of t h e a g e - l o n g q u e s t i o n o f l a n d , and t h e p e a s a n t s were s o l v i n g i t f r o m below. A l l t h e y n w a n t e d was l e g a l s a n c t i o n f o r t h e i r d e e d s . S i n c e t h e P r o v i s i o n a l Government h e s i t a t e d a b o u t t h i t h e y were r e a d y t o back any o t h e r power t h a t w o u l d . Thus when, because o f numerous o t h e r c i r c u m s t a n c e s as w e l l , t h e B o l s h e v i k s were d r i v e n t o power i n November, t h e i r l a n d p o l i c y g a i n e d t h e s u p p o r t tfffthe p e a s a n t s t h r o u g h o u t t h e c o u n t r y . The f a c t s t h a t t h e y b o r r o w e d t h e l a n d p o l i c y f r o m t h e S o c i a l R e v o l u t i o n a r i e s ; t h a t t h e y c o n s e n t e d i n p r a c t i c e i f n o t i n t h e o r y t o p r i v a t e o w n e r s h i p ; and, t h a t t h e y compromised o u t o f q u e s t i o n as f a r a s t h e i r own t h e o r i e s were c o n c e r n e d , a r e not w i t h i n t h e s c o p e o f t h i s work. W i t h one s t r o k e on Nov. 8 t h by t h e D e c r e e o £ t h e S o c i a l i z a t i o n o f l a n d (1) S a v e l Zimand - S t a t e C a p i t a l i s m i n R u s s i a 1917-1926. ( F o r e i g n P o l . A s s o c . ) . S t a t i s t i c s f o r d e c r e a s e i n C u l t i v a t i o n 1916 - 236,000,000 a c r e s . 1921 - 132,300,000 a c r e s . A n s t i f e r o y ob c i t . L i v e s t o c k d e c r e a s e f o r 1917-1919 L i v e s t o c k 20$, Sheep - 24$, P i g s 42$. (2) A n t s i f e r o l / Ob. C i t . 283. lif given below they did what the Provisional Government had hesitated i n doing. They stated that: f l ) A l l private ownership of land i s abolished immediately without compensation. (2) A l l landowners' estates, and a l l lands belonging to the Crown, to monasteries, church lands with a l l t h e i r l i v e stock and inventoried property, buildings and a l l appurtenances are transferred to the d i s p o s i t i o n of the township Land Committees and the d i s t r i c t Soviets of Peasants' Deputies u n t i l the Constituent Assembly meets. (3) Any damage whatever done to the confiscated property which from now on belongs to the whole people i s regarded as a serious crime punishable by the revolutionary t r i b u n a l s . The d i s t r i c t Soviets of Peasants' Deputies s h a l l take a l l necessary measures fo r the observance of the s t r i c t e s t order during the taking over of the landowners" estates, f o r the determination of the dimensions of the plots of land, and which of them are subject to confiscation, for the drawing up of an inventory of the entire property, and f o r the s t r i c t e s t revolutionary protection of a l l the farming property on the land, with a l l buildings, implements, c a t t l e , supplies of products, etc., passing into the hands of the people. (4) For guidance during the r e a l i z a t i o n of the great land reforms u n t i l t h e i r f i n a l resolution by the Constituent Assembly, s h a l l serve the following peasant nakaz (instructions) drawn up on the basis of 242 l o c a l peasant nakazi by the editorial-board of the " I s v i e s t i a of the A l l - E u s s i a n Soviet '99 o f P e a s a n t s ' D e p u t i e s " , and p u b l i s h e d i n Wo. 88 o f s a i d " I z v i e s t i a " ( P e t r o g r a d , No. 88) ( A u g u s t 1 9 t h , 1917.) The l a n d s o f p e a s a n t s and of C o s s a c k s s e r v i n g i n t h e army s h a l l n o t be c o n f i s c a t e d . ( 1 ) . T h e r e was one t h i n g a b o u t t h i s d e c l a r a t i o n w h i c h made i t d i f f e r e n t t o o t h e r r e v o l u t i o n a r y d e c l a r a t i o n s : I t was d e f i n i t e . The B o l s h e v i k s were q u i t e aware t h a t t h i s was n o t l i k e l y t o be a s o l u t i o n of t h e a g r a r i a n p r o b l e m . B u t t h e y won t h e p e a s a n t s u p p o r t f o r t h e t i m e b e i n g . The l a n d programme a d o p t e d a t t h e time was, i n f a c t , i n d i r e c t c o n t r a d i c t i o n t o M a r x i a n d o c t r i n e s . I t was p a s s e d a s a f i r s t s t e p t o g a i n t i m e . One t h i n g w h i o h i t d o e s show i s t h a t t h e R u s s i a n P e a s a n t , f o r t h e f i r s t t i m e , was r e c o g n i z e d a s a r e a l and c o n s c i o u s f o r c e , whose w i s h e s were n o t t o be i g n o r e d . A s t u d y o f s u b s e q u e n t d e v e l o p m e n t s shows t h a t t h e e a r l y p o l i c i e s o f t h e S o v i e t government by no means s o l v e d t h e A g r a r i a n P r o b l e m i n R u s s i a . But i t c a n be s a i d t h a t s i n c e t h e R e v o l u t i o n a s i n c e r e e f f o r t has b e e n made t o meet i t . ( 1 ) . S c o t t & B a l t z l y " R e a d i n g s i n E u r o p e a n H i s t o r y S i n c e 1814" Page 581. f r o m M. H. Graham's New G o v ' t s , o f E a s t e r n E u r o p e . P. 592. BIBLIOGRAPHY. ANTSIFEROV A. And Bilimovich, Batchev, Ivantsov, Russian A g r i c u l t u r e during the War.(New Haven - 19J0) Many f i g u r e s . Very o p t i m i s t i c about the o l d order. Prejudiced about the revolution. Useful source f o r economic s t a t i s t i c s . ANTONELLI ETIENNE * Bolshevik Russia - ( New YOrk - 1920 ) Somewhat sensational. Prejudiced about the r e v o l u t i o n . Sketchy, but one good chapter upon the people and t h e i r reaction toward the r e - vol u t i o n . ATLANTIC MONTHLY * February 1928 F a l l of the Russian Empire. Good h i s t o r i c a l sketch. Good summing up of the causes of the re v o l u t i o n ALEXINSKY GREGOR - Russia and the Great War - (London - 1915) Chapter IV on r u r a l communes and Co-operatives. F i r s t hand information but considerably prejudiced, and not ne c e s s a r i l y very accurate. BARING MAURICE * The Russian People (London - 1911) Easy and i n t e r e s t i n g reading. A true appreciation of the Russianripeople sympathetic approach - . For h i s t o r i c a l material i t i s too sketchy. Chapters 18, 19, and 2Q give a general discussion of the emancipation movement. The Mainsprings lof Russia -(London - 191?) The f i r s t chapter contains a general sketch of the revolutionary move- ment. Brebner J . B a r t l e t - Canadian Forum, February 1928 - The Courting of Dobroi Ivan. Some i n t e r e s t i n g s i d e l i g h t s upon Russian character, and i t s r e a c t i o n to the Revolution. Beazley, Forbes B i r k e t t - Russia from the Varangians to the Bolsheviks. (London - 1918) Too general a work to a f f o r d much d e t a i l . DRAGE GEOFFREY - Russian a f f a i r s -(London - 1904) Somewhat sensational - One good chapter on peasant a f f a i r s . Des- c r i p t i o n s of agrarian developement and of famines. FLORINSKY M.T. * End of the Russian Empire - (New Haven - 19J0) gr o u s f z a r i s t . Very guarded and c r i t i c a l of the p o l i t i c a l back- ground. Supplements Antaiferov. BIBLIOGRAPHY FARBMAN M.S. * Bolshevism i n Retreat One chapter on s i t u a t i o n before the r e v o l u t i o n . A good b r i e f summary. GRAHAM STEPHEN * Changing Russia - (London - 1918) Primary material. Sketches of Russian l i f e with personal interpretations Good summary for the atmosphere i n the country before the revolution. Russian character. Sketchy. Also other works by the same author. HINDUS MAURICE - Broken Earth ( New York - 1926) I n t e r s t i n g reading f o r Bolshevik era, but useful i n t h i s connection f o r character and customs. KORNILOV ALEXANDER - Modern Russian History (New Y8rk - 19l6.VolII, 1917 T r a n s l a t i o n from Russian. Last chapters by A.S.Kaun. Informally written and one o f the more de t a i l e d works. Some primary material made use of. S o c i a l h i s t o r y approach. One of best sources. Useful bibliography pg.555. KEYNES JOHN MAYNARD *>/A Shott View of Russia -(London - 1925) Discussion of the r e l i g i o u s approach of the young revolutionary party toward Communism, and s p e c i a l l y toward Lenin. KNIGHT U»f BARNES? FLUGEL * Economic History of Modern times Execellent chapter on the peasant problem, with a good Bibliography, KORFF S.A. - AUTOCRACY and Revolution i n Russia (New York - 192J) B r i e f , and lacking d e t a i l as a useful source, but a useful summary. LA?/TON LANCELOT - The Russian Revolution (London and N.Y. 1929) Well written and i n t e r e s t i n g . Useful comments upon character and custom. MAVOR JAMES - An Economic History o f Russia - 2 Vols. ( London and N.Y. L9l£ - Revised E d i t i o n 1924) By f a r the best reference upon the subject of a g r i c u l t u r e and economics generally, up to 1906. A most thorough study. Use i s made of Russian sources, and the author seems to have had access to every possible source. Can be accepted as the best authority. The Russian Revolution (London - 1928) Thorough, but very b i t t e r on the subject of the revolution. MAKEEF AND O'HARA - Russia (London and N.Y. * 1925) Best short summary of Buasian h i s t o r y . Well written and to the point. B i t t e r on the subject of the revolution. BIBLIOGRAPHY OGG F.A. * Economic Developement of Modern Europe. Chapter XV - thorough but b r i e f analysis of Russia's economics. PARES Bernard - A History of Russia - (N.Y. London - 1927) Clear s i n g l e volume work. L i t t l e d e t a i l . Also a r t i c l e s i n Cam- bridge Modern History. Simkhovitch V. - Agrarian Movement i n Russia Yale Review May 1907. I n t e r s t i n g reading. F i r s t hand contemporary information. Also h i s t o r i c a l sketch. Ross E.A. -Russian Soviet Republic ( N.Y. London 192^) Somewhat sensational. Some f i r s t hand material, but sketchy for the peasant problem. Repetition o f above sources. Stepmiak - Russian Peasantry (London 1888) A book written with a great deal of f e e l i n g . Forms a good back- ground for more recent developements. Character of Russians by a Russian. Long discussion of r e l i g i o u s groups. VERNADSKY G. -A History of Russia - (1$5°) Thorough, unprejudiced. Vinagradoff - A r t i c l e on Russia Encyc. B r i t a n n i c a , 12th E d i t i o n . Volume XXXII Pgs. 31* - 40. Wallace D. Mackenzie * Russia. (London 1877 - Revised 1912) Zimand Savel - State Capitalism i n Russia ( New York - 1926) S t a t i s t i c s . . . f o r aar and afterwards. GENERAL HISTORIES WITH CHAPTERS ON RUSSIA. HAZEN? FEUTER, SCHAPIRO, HAYES, ETC. NICHOLAS NEKRASSOV - Who can be Happy and Free i n Russia? English t r a n s l a t i o n World's C l a s s i c s S.AKSAKOFF - A Russian Gentleman 1856 World's C l a s s i c s L.Tolstoy - War and Peace , The Power of Darknesa,etc. DOSTOIEVSKY - Discourse on Pushkin. TURGENIEV - FATHERS AND SONS, Smoke, Sportsman's Sketches. 1897 1917. L 9 2 5 .

Cite

Citation Scheme:

    

Usage Statistics

Country Views Downloads
China 22 5
United States 13 3
United Kingdom 5 1
India 5 0
Canada 3 0
Japan 2 0
Germany 1 1
Australia 1 0
City Views Downloads
Beijing 22 0
Unknown 9 1
Aberdeen 4 0
Chicago 3 0
The Bronx 2 0
Victoria 2 0
Mountain View 2 0
Tokyo 2 0
Compton 1 0
Soldotna 1 0
Redmond 1 2
Perth 1 0
Newcastle-under-Lyme 1 1

{[{ mDataHeader[type] }]} {[{ month[type] }]} {[{ tData[type] }]}

Share

Share to:

Comment

Related Items