Potekhina E. Everyday life of a peasant old-believer (based on the manuscript “Rite of Confession”) // The Russian Peasant Studies. 2017. V.2. №2. P. 77-89.

DOI: 10.22394/2500-1809-2017-2-2-77-89

Annotation

The article attempts to complement the image of the life of villagers who dwelled in Old Believers’ communities in Masuria, Poland which has so far been presented in the ac­ademic literature of the subject. The life of priestless (bezpopovtsy) Old Believers at the turn of the 19th and 20th century was regulated on the basis of church laws. One of such documents was “A Rite of Penance”, which a nastavnyk (a preceptor elected by the community) followed while performing the sacrament of confession. The current analysis concerns a manuscript from the former Saviour and Holy Trinity monastery in Wojnowo, Masuria. The main part of the manuscript was written as a collection of questions which allow the researcher to explicate the system of orders and permissions encompassing all spheres of life of an individual member of Old Believers’ community. The form of the text was conditioned by its character and purpose. The questions were structured with the use of a particle “li” which requires an unambiguous positive or negative answer in every question. The text analysis was performed applying the procedure of profiling. While profiling, the author did not take into consideration dogmatic questions directly re­ferring to the Christian teaching in the priestless Old Believers’ strains.

Keywords

Old Believers in Poland, book heritage of the monastery in Wojnowo, sacrament of penance, social history of village religious community, profiling of text

About the author

Helena A. Potekhina, Dr habil., Associate Professor, Head of Department of Slavic Linguistics at the University of Warmia and Mazury in Olsztyn (Poland). ul. Michała Oczapowskiego 2; 10–719 Olsztyn.
E-mail: This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it. 

Merl S. The pre-1941 local administration in the Soviet countryside: How effectively it worked, and what rules of political communication followed to prevent peasant rebellions // The Russian Peasant Studies. 2017. V.2. №2. P. 53-76.

DOI: 10.22394/2500-1809-2017-2-2-53-76

Annotation

When it comes to the local administration in the Soviet countryside, we see a surprisingly uniform picture in the historical research—the so-called “rural undergovernment”. In the article, the author questions this perception and shows how strongly it was influenced by the official discourse, i.e. of the 1930s Stalin’s interpretation. The author believes that rural administration, on the contrary, functioned as it was designed to, and that its obvious incompetence was the most important part of Stalin’s strategy of governance. To understand the functioning of rural administration on the eve of the German occupation, we have to consider the decisive changes in the local management that took place under the collectivization in the 1930s, and the real aims of the state, i.e. Stalin’s dictatorship. The local administration was not limited to purely bureaucratic tasks but had to solve specific economic and political problems to keep up political stability. To evaluate the efficiency of rural administration we have to consider first the political priorities of the regime for even economic inefficiency and the abuse of office could be inevitable by-products of a highly efficient system of keeping up the regime. After the German occupation, it became evident that rural administration was not suitable to deliver what the new rulers expected: to deliver just grain. The author starts with a chronology focusing on the significant ruptures affecting the local rural administration between the mid-1920s and the German occupation in 1941. The second part of the article discusses what the state under Stalin really wanted the local administration to achieve. The third part of the article considers the bases of the rural management in the second half of the 1930s to reveal the intersection of the Party, the state and state security apparatus interests in the countryside. In the conclusion, the author presents his general findings, pointing out as well why the German Occupational Regime failed to take as much grain as Stalin’s administration before.

Keywords

local administration, Soviet countryside, incompetence, “rural undergovernment”, German occupation, Stalin’s dictatorship, political and economic aims, efficiency

About the author

Stephan Merl, DSc (History), Professor, Bielefeld University. 25 Universitätsstr., 33615, Bielefeld, Germany.
E-mail: This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it. 

Kuznetsov I.A. Alexei Fedorovich Fortunatov and the development of Peasant Studies in Russia in the late XIX — early XX centuries // The Russian Peasant Studies. 2017. V.2. №1. pp. 66-89.

DOI: 10.22394/2500-1809-2017-2-1-66-89

Annotation

The article considers the biography and works of the Russian agricultural economist  and statistician A. F. Fortunatov (1856–1925), and focuses on the paradoxical duality  of the contemporaries’ estimates of this scientist as an empirical researcher and at  the same time as a bright thinker. The author traces the influence of Fortunatov’s ideas  on the formation of the ideology and theory of “social agronomy”, his contribution to  the theory of non-capitalist economy, his new forms and methods of teaching “agricultural  economy” and statistics, which became the intellectual preconditions for the development  of the “organization-production approach”. Based on the archival data the  author claims that Fortunatov introduced the term “biological technology”; emphasizes  the unique ideological position of Fortunatov, who was an expert in the theoretical and  empirical shades of marxism, liberalism and populism in the agrarian question, and an  adherent of populism who never expressed his personal criticism or approval of the turbulent  social-political changes and reforms in Russia in the early XX century. The article  identifies the milestones in the research and teaching career of professor Fortunatov,  considers the encyclopedic diversity of his interests and publications, however sometimes  of too propaedeutic-popular character. The author believes that Fortunatov was  an outstanding teacher of the Russian higher school, and his grateful students can be  found not only among a number of famous professors of the organization-production  school, but also among hundreds and even thousands of Russian agrarians — famous  and unknown, who made a significant contribution to the modernization and development  of rural Russia in the first half of XX century. One of the key achievements of Fortunatov  is that he reconsidered the object of the Russian agrarian economics and reoriented  it from the organization of large private farms to the study of peasant economy.

Keywords

history of agrarian-economic thought, theory of peasant economy, social agronomy, organization-production school, A. F. Fortunatov, Petrovskaya Academy

About the author

Igor A. Kuznetsov, PhD (History), Senior Researcher, Center for Agrarian Studies, Russian Presidential Academy of National Economy and Public Administration. 119571, Moscow, prosp. Vernadskogo, 82.
E-mail: This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it. 

Rodnov M.I. Large agribusiness of the Ufa Province (the second half of XIX — early XX century) // The Russian Peasant Studies. 2017. V.2. №1. pp. 51-65.

DOI: 10.22394/2500-1809-2017-2-1-51-65

Annotation

In the second half of XIX — early XX century in the Ufa Province there already was (as part of the mixed regional economy) large agribusiness, at first only in the form of nobles’ latifundia. Later merchants (urban entrepreneurs) started active investments in the agricultural production, although until the end of the empire the merchants’ agricultural enterprises had not surpassed in scale those of the nobles. At the same time, both peasant farms and large enterprises of rural entrepreneurs developed rapidly. The article considers the general statistical information on landlord, merchant and large peasant (virtually farmers) enterprises of American type, and presents some examples of the most outstanding agricultural enterprises of landlords, merchants and peasants. The author believes that after the abolition of serfdom there were two obvious tendencies in rural Russia — on the one hand, the collapsing landlord economy, on the other hand, quite successful integration of a number of large landed estates into capitalist agricultural production together with even more impressive growth of merchant and large peasant capitalist agricultural enterprises. All this indicates a significant potential for the development of large capitalist agricultural enterprises in post-reform Russia, which the author considers on the example of the Ufa Province to re-evaluate the prospects of the large agricultural production in the Russian history. 

Keywords

agriculture, large agribusiness, landlord economy, mixed economy, agricultural enterprise, the Southern Urals, the second half of XIX— early XX centuries

About the author

Mikhail I. Rodnov, DSc (History), Senior Researcher, Institute of History, Language and Literature, Ufa Scientific Center of the Russian Academy of Sciences. 450054, Republic of Bashkortostan, Ufa, October prosp., 71.
E-mail: This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it. 

Savinova T.A. “…The case will be over by me preferring Saratov…” // Russian Peasant Studies. 2016. V.1. №1. P. 167-170

DOI: 10.22394/2500-1809-2016-1-1-167-170

Annotation

This publication introduces into the scientific discourse two letters of Nikolai Ivanovich Vavilov to Nikolai Pavlovich Makarov, which help to clarify one episode of his biography related to the choice of a place of teaching and scientific work in 1917.

About the author

Tatyana A. Savinova, PhD (Economics), Chief Researcher at the Personal Funds Department of the Russian State Archive of Economy. 17, Bol'shaya Pirogovskaya Str., Moscow, 119435.
E-mail: This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it..

Il’inykh V.A. The star and death of Siberian grassland farming // Russian Peasant Studies. 2016. V.1. №1. P. 93-121

DOI: 10.22394/2500-1809-2016-1-1-93-121

Annotation

The article considers the attempts to introduce the grassland farming system in Siberia in the context of the Soviet agricultural policy and the ideological and theoretical struggle in the agronomy. In the early xx century in Siberia, there was a threat of the transition from the fallow farming to the three-field system, which could lead to a crisis in the agriculture. By the mid-i920s, the leading specialists of the land authorities and government leaders of the region believed that the crisis could be prevented only by introducing the grassland farming system. At the beginning of the 1930s, this system was given up for it contradicted the task of solving the grain problem. The oblivion of agro-technological bases under the collectivization led to the decrease in soil fertility, thus, in 1937 the grassland farming was introduced in most regions of the country. Its implementation was interrupted by World War 11 and continued in the late 1940s. After the start of the virgin lands development campaign, the grassland farming was declared ineffective and rejected. After the campaign ended, the grassland farming system was not revived—the bid was made for more intensive technologies and chemicals.

Keywords

agricultural policy, farming systems, grassland farming, agricultural engineering, collective-state farms system, Siberia

About the author

Vladimir A. Il’inykh, D. Sc (History), Head of the Department of Agrarian History of the Institute of History of the Siberian Branch of Russian Academy of Sciences. 8 Akademika Nikolaeva Str., Novosibirsk, 630090.
E-mail: This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it.

Contemporary Peasant Studies, and Agrarian History of Russia in the XX Century. Round table. // Russian Peasant Studies. 2016. V.1. №1. P. 68-92

DOI: 10.22394/2500-1809-2016-1-1-68-92

Annotation

This publication is a transcript of the round table dedicated to the presentation of the book “Contemporary Peasant Studies, and Agrarian History of Russia in the XX Century” that took place on March 18, 2016 at the Moscow School of Social and Economic Sciences within the XXIII International Symposium “The Paths of Russia. North–South”. The book consists of the materials of the theoretical seminars “Modern Theories of Agrarian Development” that worked in 1992–2000 under the direction of Viktor Danilov and Teodor Shanin, made a significant contribution to the development of post-Soviet agrarian historiography, and for several decades united Russian and foreign researchers of different generations. The participants of the round table discussed the development of Russian and foreign Peasant Studies in the 1960s — 1990s, their current state, problems and prospects. In particular, it was repeatedly noted that one can argue about whether or not there are real peasants in today’s Russia, however, there is no doubt about the preservation of peasant consciousness features in the Russian population. The round table participants shared their personal memories about theoretical seminars of Shanin-Danilov, their experience of the field anthropological and sociological research and scientific discussions.

Keywords

Peasant Studies, agrarian seminar, peasantry, rural sociology, agrarian history, Russian history, post-Soviet agrarian historiography

Participants

Участники круглого стола: Валерий Георгиевич Виноградский, д-р филос. наук, Институт аграрных проблем РАН (Саратов); Александр Владимирович Гордон, д-р  ист. наук, профессор, ИНИОН  РАН ; Василий Васильевич Зверев, д-р ист. наук, профессор РАНХиГС ; Николай Алексеевич Ивницкий, д-р ист. наук, профессор; Виктор Викторович Кондрашин, д-р ист. наук, профессор, член Совета Федерации (Пенза); Авенир Павлович Корелин, д-р ист. наук, профессор, ИРИ РАН ; Павел Петрович Марченя, канд. ист. наук, Московский университет МВД России; Сергей Анатольевич Никольский, д-р филос. наук, профессор, ИФ РАН ; Сергей Юрьевич Разин, Институт гуманитарного образования и информационных технологий;  Игорь Николаевич Слепнёв, канд. ист. наук, РГНФ ; Сергей Иванович Толстов, канд. ист. наук (Томск);  Теодор Шанин,  профессор,  Манчестерский  университет,  Московская  высшая школа социальных и экономических наук; Галина Александровна Ястребинская, канд.  экон.  наук,  Всероссийский  институт  аграрных  проблем  и  информатики.  Ведущий — редактор  книги  «Современное  крестьяноведение  и  аграрная  история  России  в XX веке» д-р ист. наук, профессор РАНХиГС Владимир Валентинович Бабашкин.