The Science Work
Site is for sale:
Category: History

Agrarian development of the St. Petersburg province in the XIX century

s. F. Sushkov, M.V. Bruleva


Short characteristic of agrarian history of the St. Petersburg province in the 19th century is presented in article. Authors revealed top trends and regional differences in development of the separate branches of agriculture. The close interrelation of noted phenomena with social and economic and natural factors is established. The detailed description of the so-called "model farms" which played a progressive role in development of local agrarian production is provided. Article is written on the basis of the careful analysis of available statistical materials.

The St. Petersburg province is formed by Peter I in 1710 godu1. The territory it originally considerably exceeded that which developed by the beginning of H1H of a century. Traditions of agriculture were in many respects broken by the long Swedish domination which was followed by desolation of lands here. With construction of the new capital the agrarian development went in other way, than in pre-Pertine Russia. For implementation of grandiose plans of Peter the Great for creation of the brilliant city of the European sample under the royal decree on the Nevsky coast more than one thousand noblemen from Moscow and the different provinces of the Russian state which became not only residents of St. Petersburg moved, but

and local landowners and also thousands of peasants for construction works, cultivation of the earth and development of natural wealth of edge. Immigrants introduced the traditions of housekeeping, adapting them for local conditions. At the same time at Peter's insistance the European experience of agriculture widely took root.

The proximity to the capital defined features of development of the different branches of agriculture of the province and further, including in H1H a century. Suburban manors had to provide needs of citizens for food, and the new lifestyle of the St. Petersburg nobility left a mark on structure of agrarian production.

At the same time in the southern part of the province (in the Luga and Gdov Counties) traditions of housekeeping since the Novgorod state remained.

The main changes in agrarian economy of edge in H1H were defined a century by transition from a feudal way of its development to capitalist. This process considerably accelerated after an abolition of serfdom in 1861, having resulted in growth rates of hardware, labor productivity unprecedented earlier, to new methods of the organization of production, to development of a number of the industries in agriculture which more and more got commodity harakter2.

At the same time the social composition of land owners changed. Until the end of H1H of a century the nobility continued to remain the main owner of land, but steadily there was a process of formation of bourgeois land property and stratification of the peasantry. Remnants of a serfdom remained before the end of the century in the form of working off, and in the village the community slowed down formation strong independent country hozyaystv3.

Many landowners in new conditions appeared incapable to make the manor profitable and were ruined. Their possession were repeatedly put in banks and then were auctioned. By the end of H1H of a century the noblemen sold 1.8 times more land, than got, and merchants and peasants who got more became the main buyers, than sold, respectively in 2 and 4.5 raza4. Only the few landowners managed to create large-scale model enterprises of capitalist type in the manors.

Also natural factors affected agrarian development and specialization of the province. A crude frigid and changeable climate with short to the earth -

a delchesky season, poverty of sandy soils, considerable marshiness and woodiness complicated work of the rural toiler. The variety of soil, geomorphological, hydrological and microclimatic conditions in different parts of the province caused unevenness of agricultural development of the territory.

The fullest data on existence and structure of private possession of the St. Petersburg province were collected and published according to the solution of the Provincial justice in the 1880-1890th years.

In 1886-1889 7356 manors with a total area of 1861,678.35 desyatin5 are recorded. From them more than a half of manors (3392) was the share of the St. Petersburg County: 3315 — small, 62 — garden (without indication of the area) and only 15 — more than 10 tithes everyone.

According to the destination manors were subdivided into agricultural (3484 — 47.5%) and nonagricultural (3872 — 52.5%). The area of the first was 99.67% of privately owned lands, the second — 0.33%. The majority of manors of nonagricultural character was concentrated in S. - the St. Petersburg County (91.7% of total number of manors in the county), Peterhof (65%) and Tsarskoye Selo (52%). These are houses, dachas, taverns and benches, trade warehouses, factories and the plants, gardens and kitchen gardens, pits, the empty lands, etc.


Throughout the 19th century in the St. Petersburg province, as before, a primary branch of agriculture was agriculture. In "A military and statistical review of the Russian Empire" of 1851 (further) it was noted VSO that the St. Petersburg province prinadle-

zhit "to a strip of a northern constant zemlepashestvo, that is to a strip of a rye and flax... Agriculture, and in general province agriculture, is in a weak state". Such situation was promoted in many respects by features of local climate and low fertility of arable soils. In some areas there were not enough arable and haying grounds, especially in the Peterhof, Yamburg and Gdov Counties.

According to materials VSO, arable farming in the Gdov and Luga Counties yielded small results on the reason of poverty of sand-marshy soils, periodic flooding of the fields adjacent to Lake Chudskoye, and not zeals of peasants. In the Yamburg and Peterhof Counties within Izhora Upland the dry argillo-arenaceous, shchebnisty and zavalunenny soil lying quite often thin layer on limestone plates did not promote harvests without intensive fertilizer and careful processing of the soil. In the New Ladoga County with quite fertile loamy and clay soils interfered with increase in profitability of agriculture otvle-

cheniye of peasants navigation and drugi-


mi crafts.

Province cropland for the first half of HEH of a century reached 543,170 des. (tab. 1). At the same time about 50% of grounds (278,000 des.) it was the share of the Luga and Gdov Counties while in S. - St. Petersburg they made a little more than 10,000 des. By 1863 the cropland equaled 674,855 des.7. Its pure gain in Luga was the most essential (42,000 des.) and New Ladoga (34,900 des.) counties whereas in the Peterhof County the noticeable reduction (20,000 des was observed.).

After an abolition of serfdom the gradual reduction of an arable land both in landowner, and in country farms began. Only at the end of H1H of a century with development of rent and emergence of farms this process slowed down a little. In the western counties the farm economy became widespread among natives of the Baltics — Estonians and Latvians. By 1905 the cropland were reduced in comparison with 1863 almost on 200,000 des. (29%), especially in the Gdov, Luga and New Ladoga Counties. In the next

Table 1

The area of arable grounds in S. - Peterbur of the gsky province in H1H — the beginning of the XX century

Counties Years Reduction of an arable land from 1863 to 1905

1837 - 1847 1863 1905

des. %

1. Gdov 132,770 152,145 94,023 58,122 39
2. Luga 145,590 187,860 146,625 41,235 22
3. New Ladoga 38,530 72,989 40,512 32,477 45
4. Peterhof 72,890 52,920 45,817 7,103 14
5. Page - St. Petersburg 10,590 26,717 17,382 9,335 35
6. Tsarskoye Selo 58,320 77,705 67,116 10,589 14
7. Shlisselburg 22,220 20,268 19,743 525 3
8. Yamburg 62,260 84,251 53,793 30,458 37

Province in general 543,170 674,855 485,011 189844 29

to the capital counties (S. - St. Petersburg, Peterhof and Tsarskoye Selo) absolute reduction of the area of arable grounds did not exceed 7000 — 10 000 des. Obviously, the proximity to St. Petersburg was the decisive factor determining rates and scales of this process.

As a part of crops of the province throughout H1H the centuries prevailed a rye, oats and barley. The amount of the sowed grain in the second quarter of H1H of a century was 500 thousand quarters (tab. 2).

Maximum size of crops grain (153,600 chetv.) it was noted in the Luga County. Quite high they were also in other peripheral counties — Yamburg, Gdov, New Ladoga, and minimum — in S. - the St. Petersburg and Shlisselburg Counties. These distinctions are explained, first of all, by the number of country people, the sizes of administrative units of that time and specifics under - capital counties. Sharp increase in crops of oats over a rye is connected with the fact that norms of seeding of oats on one tithe exceeded those for a rye by more than two times. The greatest average annual crops of a rye and oats are characteristic of Luga (45,400 and 97,000 chetv.), and cell -

me — for Yamburg (17,200 chetv.) counties.

During H1H of a century there was a change of structure of crops. Gradual reduction of a share grain and the steady growth of landings of potatoes was noted. This culture rather new to the Northwest of Russia, in the 1830-1840th years became widespread most in Tsarskoye Selo, Luga and New Ladoga Counties where annually landed about 20,000 chetv. "second bread" (tab. 2). In four years, since 1842 on 1846, landing of potatoes in the province increased by 30%.

At the end of H1H centuries crops of a rye made about 40%, oats — 34%, barley — 6.9%9. Many farms cultivated a flax, a buckwheat and peas, and winter and summer wheat, along with hemp — cultivated extremely seldom.

The largest areas occupied with the listed crops were characteristic of the Luga and Gdov Counties where in structure of crops they made about 910% (tab. 3). By Lnovodstvo it was developed in the southern volosts of these counties. Local peasants, ostzeyets and petty bourgeoises were engaged in him.


Crops of grain crops and potatoes in 1837-1847 ggodakh10

Counties Crops in quarters

A rye Barley Oats All specified grain Potatoes

1. Gdov 30,700 10,509 30,250 71,459 15,200
2. Luga 45,400 11,200 97,000 153,600 20,000
3. New Ladoga 16,500 5250 40,500 62,250 19,500
4. Peterhof 19,700 8750 22,250 50,700 13,300
5. Page - St. Petersburg 3800 500 14,000 18,300 9500
6. Tsarskoye Selo 14,500 4,500 23,500 42,500 21,000
7. Shlisselburg 6200 400 9600 16,200 10,000
8. Yamburg 28,200 17,200 40,500 85,900 16,500

Province in general 165,000 58,309 277,600 500,909 125,000

Structure of crops of privately owned farms in 1887-1888 godakh11

Cultures, %

Counties: A rye Oats Barley Potatoes Herbs Steam and other cultures Total on counties

1. Gdov 25.6 14.7 11.3 4.8 8.2 26.3 9.1 100
2. Luga 26.8 21.6 4.7 1.8 7.9 26.5 10.7 100
3. New Ladoga 26.3 26.6 2.2 1.6 16.2 26.2 0.6 100
4. Peterhof 17.5 21.9 6.4 2.7 31.3 17.9 2.3 100
5. Page - St. Petersburg 3.8 21.2 0.8 2.5 68.7 2.7 0.3 100
6. Tsarskoye Selo 12.8 22.9 3.9 1.9 44.5 12.9 1.1 100
7. Shlisselburg 10.2 27.5 1.6 6.2 40.8 11.9 1.3 100
8. Yamburg 19.1 20.8 7.7 5.9 25.1 19.7 1.7 100

Province in general 17.8 22.1 4.8 3.8 30.3 18.0 3.3 100

(average) 44.7

At the end of H1H of a century nearly a third of acreage of the St. Petersburg province was occupied with artificial herbs. Their quantity increased as approaching the capital, to the cities and country places of Tsarskoye Selo and Peterhof Counties, on coast of Neva in the Shlisselburg County, to locations of garrisons, to the railroads, in larger manors with a big plowing and in farms of colonists (42.8%) and noblemen (29.4%) 12.

Remained the dominating system of agriculture throughout H1H of a century traditional to a trekhpolya. It demanded obligatory introduction of manure, but in connection with limited development of livestock production of the field were dunged very poorly, and peasants of prilesny places fertilized fields by means of combustion of brushwood and dead wood. However such way did not replace "a manure utuchneniye". Along with trekhpoly the forest relog, and here and there and a podseka was used.

Attempts of improvement of agriculture were made only in the Yamburg County where local landowners, mainly natives from ostzeysky

provinces, began to practice mnogopolny crop rotations.

After an abolition of serfdom the gradual transition from a traditional trekhpolya to more progressive system of agriculture — mnogopolny was outlined. First of all it concerned privately owned farms. Trekhpolye prevailed in the New Ladoga and Luga Counties, and in S. - St. Petersburg by 1886 in general ceased to exist. Free crop rotations were most characteristic of the Tsarskoye Selo county, subordinated to a travoseyaniye — for S. - St. Petersburg, and uncomfortable — for Shlisselburg (tab. 4).

At free crop rotations the number of fields (wedges) was changeable and crops alternated irregularly. Uncomfortable crop rotations arose at gradual development by parts of again bought land where the sequence of a plodosmen yet not slozhilas13.

Mnogopolny crop rotations most intensively took root in landowner manors of the Peterhof and Yamburg Counties (tab. 5).

Table 5

Mnogopolny crop rotations in privately owned farms, by quantity imeniy15

A ratio of various types of crop rotations in privately owned hozyaystvakh14

Crop rotations, %

Counties Much Free Subordinated Neustro- Trekhpol-

polny to a travoseyaniye unlimited ny

1. Gdov 35.7 1.7 0 5.0 57.6
2. Luga 12.3 1.9 0 3.0 82.8
3. New Ladoga 3.3 0 1.7 5.0 90.0
4. Peterhof 62.8 19.2 1.3 7.7 9.0
5. Page - St. Petersburg 3.4 22.7 68.2 5.7 0
6. Tsarskoye Selo 25.6 31.7 13.4 0 29.3
7. Shlisselburg 9.8 26.1 17.4 33.7 13.0
8. Yamburg 37.2 12.4 3.1 3.1 44.2

Province in general 21.3 6.3 4.6 5.1 62.7

> Number water counties

1. Gdov 109 51 11 7 5 5 5 — 1 —
2. Luga 47 17 17 10 7 4 2 1 3 —
3. New Ladoga — — — 1 1 — — — — —
4. Peterhof — — 4 5 5 4 11 3 1 —
5. Page - St. Petersburg 1
6. Tsarskoye Selo 1 — 4 2 — 1 — 4 — —
7. Shlisselburg — — — 2 — — — — — —
8. Yamburg 2 1 9 7 4 8 8 5 2 1

Province in general 159 69 46 34 22 22 26 13 7 1

Classical to a trekhpolya prevailed in the counties, most remote from the capital, in manors, small on the area, and at the small size of a plowing. The these indicators are larger, the mnogopolny crop rotation was applied more often. On class accessory of manors to a trekhpolya Mnogopolye met in farms of peasants and petty bourgeoises more often, and — at noblemen and ostzeytsev16.

However derogation from a traditional trekhpolya was outlined also in country farms. So, in the Yamburg County began to take root to a chetyrekhpolya with domination of a clover, in subcapital volosts of the Shlisselburg County appeared

two-polye (potatoes — oats, potatoes — a summer rye, barley — oats), and in the village of Morye — an odnopolya: "rest the earth is not given, but fertilize it annually" 17

By the end of H1H of a century in the province still prevailed to a trekhpolya (63% of all manors with a plowing), Mnogopolye was noted in 21% of privately owned farms, and in 16% — free and uncomfortable sevooboroty18.

The steam system trekhpolya led to decline as agriculture (because of fast exhaustion, dispersion and an erosion of podsolic and cespitose and podsolic soils poor in organic matter without their sufficient fertilizer), and livestock production

(because of deprivation of the cattle of productive pastures with long-term herbs) 19.

Application of travopolny and mnogopolny crop rotations, introduction of the organic and mineral fertilizers promoting the gradual growth of productivity became widespread more only in the second half of H1H of a century (tab. 6). In general throughout all century the productivity in the province was low in comparison with indicators of the European Russia. In

it made the 1840th years sootvetst-

venno-2.75 and-3.5, and in the 1860th years —-3.1 and-3.6" 20.

It was defined by adverse soil climatic conditions, introduction of small amount of manure because of poor development of livestock production and processing of the earth without due assiduity. In the second quarter of H1H of a century even in the most favorable years the productivity did not exceed itself-3 for winter and itself-4 — for summer (oats and barley).

Only in some private (landowner) and state manors the productivity reached higher level.

The biggest harvests were characteristic of colonists — the natives of Germany who lodged in Catherine the Great's reign in the Yamburg County and suburbs of the capital (Srednerogatin-Skye, New Saratov and Fridental-Skye colonies). The productivity grain at the level of-6-8 was noted at the English colonists who received lands on Moskovskoye Highway which in the past represented impassable Shushary swamps. (More-7) the manor of the count Kushelev located near the present station Ligovo was famous for record harvests of a rye.

The high productivity of grain crops in the second quarter of H1H of a century on lands of colonists was caused "by an opportunity to receive a good unavozhivaniye from the capital" 21. For the same reason rather good results on collecting grain and potatoes received in all four suburban counties. S. - the St. Petersburg and Shlisselburg Counties, and minimum — Gdov differed in the greatest productivity (tab. 6).

Table 6

Productivity grain and potatoes (in "catfishes") 2

1837-1847 1864 1887- -1888

Counties e 3 l e f about e 3 l e f about e 3 l e f about

zh about in about r I t are " zh about Rch in about r I t are " zh about Rch in about r I Oats t are "

1. Gdov 1.50 1.75 3.00 2.50 3.00 4.00 3.22 3.55 2.66 4.47
2. Luga 2.00 2.50 3.00 2.00 3.50 3.75 4.00 4.00 2.75 5.30
3. New Ladoga 3.00 3.00 4.00 1.75 2.25 3.25 4.50 4.50 2.70 5.40
4. Peterhof 2.50 3.00 5.50 2.75 3.50 4.75 4.67 5.53 4.37 6.08
5. Page - St. Petersburg 3.00 4.00 5.50 5.25 4.75 6.00 5.45 5.14 4.26 6.03
6. Tsarskoye Selo 3.00 3.00 5.00 3.75 4.00 5.50 5.03 4.60 3.52 6.84
7. Shlisselburg 3.50 4.00 5.00 4.00 3.00 4.75 4.30 4.83 3.25 5.50
8. Yamburg 2.50 3.00 4.00 3.00 3.75 4.00 3.30 — — —

Province in general (average) 2.75 3.00 4.50 3.10 3.47 4.50 4.31 4.59 3.36 5.66

"" — a measure of productivity of culture.

The close interrelation between existence of the cattle and the received harvest does not raise doubts. According to V.V. Morachevsky's data (1900), in the farms making crops of a winter rye without application of fertilizers, the productivity did not exceed-2.9; and in the presence of four beasts it increased to-4. For conducting profitable agriculture on one tithe of an arable land it was necessary to bring not less than 2400 poods of manure. Respectively those counties and volosts where its receipt to the soil approached norm, had big productivity.

Throughout all H1H of century the Tsarskoye Selo county belonged to group of high-yielding areas. At the end of H1H of a century the productivity of a winter rye was itself-5 (tab. 6) here, and in Pulkovsky, Dudergofsky, Mozinsky and Kolpino volosts where more than 3000 poods of manure were the share of tithe —-6-723. It is natural that in landowner manors it was even higher —-7-824 V the 1880-1890th years differed in the greatest productivity of a winter rye (itself)-5.45) S.'s farms - the St. Petersburg County (see tab. 6). In two of its volosts (Pargolovsky and New Saratov) it reached itself-825. The most big crops of summer were characteristic of the Peterhof County (see tab. 6) in a number of which volosts the oat crops made itself-5, and barley —-626. A production surplus went on sale. In 1864 to the market it was directed 65,000 chetv. spring crops and 96,500 chetv. potatoes. 27 Production of commodity oats and barley gained the greatest development in Luga (20,000 chetv.), Gdov (17,600 chetv.) and New Ladoga (17,100 chetv.) uyezdakh28.

Despite reduction of acreage after 1861 in the province

gradual growth of gross collecting grain was observed. In the second quarter of the century the production of grain was near

1450 000 chetv., and by the end of century it reached 1700 000 chetv. Annual production of oats equaled 850,000 chetv., a rye — 650,000 chetv., and barley — 200,000 chetv. Gathering potatoes for the II half of H1H of a century increased twice and reached
1150 000 chetv. S. - St. Petersburg were the main producers of potatoes at the appointed time (40,000 chetv.), Peterhof (27,000 chetv.) and Tsarskoye Selo (20,000 chetv.) counties. Kartofe-levodchesky specialization of subcapital counties remained also during the subsequent period. So, in 1873 the harvest of "the second bread" in the New Saratov volost of S. - the St. Petersburg County made 68,000 chetv., in the Koltushi volost of the Shlisselburg County — more than 34,000 quarters, and in the Shungorovsky volost of the Peterhof County — more than 30,000 chetvertey31. In Shungorovsky and Oranienbaum volosts of the Peterhof County the peasants completely planted with potatoes the allotments, and rented haymakings and pastures at landowners.

The highest productivity of potatoes (itself)-6.8) was characteristic of farms of the Tsarskoye Selo county where in a number of volosts (Kolpino, Koshelev-sky, Krasnoselsky, Mozinsky, Pulkovsky, Staroskvoritsky and Fedorovsky) it reached-832. Such productivity is noted only in three volosts of the province: New Saratov and S. Osinovoroshchinskoy - the St. Petersburg County and Hvalovskaya of the New Ladoga County.

Thus, during the post-reform period there was a differentiation of counties on productivity and specialization of agricultural production. In

the most advantageous situation there were privately owned and country farms of subcapital counties. Due to introduction of various crop rotations and a plentiful unavozhivaniye (from the sabers deployed in vicinities of St.-Petersburg, and the "human garbage" sold by so-called goldsmiths) 33 in a residential suburb was more favorable economic situation, than in peripheral districts of the province.

In the II half of H1H of a century near St.-Petersburg and in some remote large privately owned manors began to apply mineral fertilizers regularly: phosphorite, Thomas phosphate, kainite, ashes and mineral tuk. Also introduction of organic chemistry (manure) thanks to the gradual growth of a livestock of the cattle increased. It, certainly, led to increase in efficiency of agriculture in the St. Petersburg province.

Livestock production

Throughout all H1H of century the development of livestock production in the considered territory went slow rates. Bad condition of a food supply and the subordinated position of the industry to the crop production needing organic fertilizer was the reason of it.

Grassland culture was developed extremely poorly that was explained by a lack of haying grounds, poor quality of herbage and poor fertilizer of meadows, frequent adverse weather conditions preventing hay drying and also the high prices of hay in St.-Petersburg owing to what land owners supplied it to the market, and the cattle was left on half-starved



Domination trekhpolya over the relog deprived livestock production of productive pastures with long-term herbs, leaving to the cattle poor spring shoots before raising of vapors and a zhnivya with weed vegetation. Small pastures at villages lost vegetation because of an intensive pasture in the spring. Use of the grass woods, mainly in the water protection zone, glades and valleys of the rivers led to their fast exhaustion, degradation and an erosion of soils, to violation of resumption of wood and shrubby vegetation because of


subgrowth destructions.

For preparation of hay also state meadows on which from one tithe about 6070 poods of hay were removed were often used. At limited development of cattle breeding the surplus of hay (8 million poods) were taken out to St.-Petersburg and were on sale on 15-20 kopeks for pood, that is income from one tithe of a mowing was about 10-14 rubles. Still big profit (75,100 rub from tithe) was made by hay crops of artificial herbs which began to take root into landowner and kolonistsky

& #34;36

farms of subcapital volosts.

Post-reform reduction of cropland, clearing of new haymakings and gradual development of a travoseyaniye promoted improvement of a food supply of local livestock production. If in 1863 the area of haying grounds was 478,295 des., then by the beginning of the XX century it increased to 558,237 des. (tab. 7). The most provided haying grounds was the New Ladoga County in which there were about 25% of meadows of the province that considerably exceeded the area of haymakings of more inhabited Gdov and Luga Counties.

The quality of forages affected a livestock of horses and cattle (tab. 8).

The area of haying grounds (in tithes) 37

Counties The end of the 18th century (on General land surveying) 1863 1905

1. Gdov 27,560 50,378 92,690
2. Luga 24,540 73,172 85,704
3. New Ladoga 18,480 107,859 125,881
4. Peterhof 28,370 52,970 44,852
5. Page - St. Petersburg 14,720 20,506 31,688
6. Tsarskoye Selo 31,620 80,757 59,541
7. Shlisselburg 8. 160 23,932 39,733
8. Yamburg 29,060 68,721 78,148

Province in general 182,510 478,295 558,237

Table 8

Quantity of horses (without S. - the St. Petersburg County) 38

Counties 1846 1864 1866 1872 1893 1896

1. Gdov 16,900 17,120 20,930 18,376 28,385 31,091
2. Luga 25,100 22,800 22,855 20,133 25,247 25,108
3. New Ladoga 20,300 13,906 13,875 11,221 12,562 13,146
4. Peterhof 5200 7883 9,440 7444 8439 11,349
5. Tsarskoye Selo 9900 10,841 14,170 9048 9887 14,274
6. Shlisselburg 3000 4496 6010 4214 5020 5448
7. Yamburg 8650 9617 9500 8208 11,154 11,064

On only seven counties 89,050 86,663 96,780 78,644 100,694 111,470

In the province happened over H1H of a century, though insignificant, but steady increase in a livestock of horses (tab. 8). Such trend is characteristic of Tsarskoye Selo, Peterhof and Gdov Counties. Only in New Ladoga their quantity in 1896 was significantly smaller, than at the beginning of H1H of a century (see tab. 8). The fact is that field husbandry had the subordinated value here, and the main income of local community the burlachestvo, fishery and forest about -


mysla. At the end of H1H centuries about 33% of the new Ladoga peasants were horseless, and the maximum number of horses on one yard (four heads) was available in farms of colonists.

Unlike other regions of the Northwest of Russia, the number of cattle in the province was insignificant. In the second quarter of H1H of a century there were about 162,000 cows (tab. 9) here. Scot was small and lean as owners sold a considerable part of hay to St.-Petersburg. Also small number of pastures and pastures interfered with development of cattle breeding. Despite this, during H1H of century there was a gradual increase in number of cattle. In the II half of H1H of a century it increased in all counties of the province, except New Ladoga where reduction was observed twice about which reasons it was told above. Together

with that for the expired period in the Gdov County the livestock of cows doubled, and in Luga — increased by one quarter (see tab. 9).

Sharp reduction of a livestock of the cattle in all counties in 1872 attracts attention that was connected with plentiful precipitation of 1871 and impossibility in such conditions to prepare enough hay and also with the frequent epizooty taking place during the specified period.

For many years local land owners looked at the cattle as on the producer of fertilizer for grain hozyayst-va40, and only at the end of H1H of a century in the subcapital volosts and areas adjoining to the Irinovsky, Baltic and Warsaw railroads the intensive development of dairy livestock production began.

The dairy farming became the main occupation of villagers S. - the St. Petersburg County and yielded to peasants 25% of revenues. This direction became widespread in Koltushi, Toksovsky, Ryabovskoy, in Ivanovskaya and Matoksky volosts of the Shlisselburg County, especially successfully local Finns were engaged in it. The dairy livestock production was developed also in

Oranienbaum, Konstantinovsky and Ropshinsky volosts of the Peterhof County. On the Baltic railroad there was a so-called "dairy train" delivering to St.-Petersburg dairy products from Estlyandiya and roadside areas Yamburg and Peterhof uyezdov41. Dairy products were delivered to the capital in the form of milk and "skop" — cottage cheese, sour cream, oil, cheeses. During the summer period the local peasants sold these products to numerous summer residents.

In peripheral counties — Gdov, Luga and New Ladoga from which sale of perishable dairy products was complicated — the vypoyka of calfs became widespread. In the New Ladoga County 3500 families were engaged in it. Vypoyka of one calf yielded to country family revenue from 33 to 45 rubles. In the Luga County the peasants gave a ride to vypoyenny calfs by land or on the Luga Rivers and Oredezhu on the Preobrazhenskoye station (nowadays Tolmachevo) where there was an assembly point, and


sold them to buyers. At the end of H1H of a century in the province about 12% of total number of country farms — about 6%43 were engaged in a vypoyka of calfs in sale of dairy products.

Table 9

Livestock large horned skota44

Counties 1846 1864 1866 1872 1893 1896

1. Gdov 23,650 32,576 37,055 31,282 49,279 50,133
2. Luga 29,500 36,588 37,750 35,577 42,715 41,584
3. New Ladoga 47,700 30,605 32,720 27,884 23,662 22,403
4. Peterhof 10,500 14,146 14,870 12,427 14,061 14,473
5. Page - St. Petersburg 9600 11,317 13,970 10,036 12,971 14,846
6. Tsarskoye Selo 16,700 17,975 17,190 14,952 14,628 17,926
7. Shlisselburg 10,750 12,095 9885 12,338 12,537 14,794
8. Yamburg 13,500 19,098 18,900 14,540 17,209 15,132

Province in general 161,900 174,400 182,340 159,036 187,062 191,291

In landowner manors the large-scale dairy farms met in subcapital counties already in the middle of H1H of a century. For example, in S. - the St. Petersburg County: in Ligov — at the count Kushelev, in Aleksandrovka — at Shlippenbakh, in the Peterhof County: in Voronin — at Engalychev, etc. The aims of dairy trade were generally pursued. For agriculture the landowners cared for cultivation of the thoroughbred cattle a little. Only one manor of the baroness Kompen-gauzen in the Gdov County with the best breeds of cows is known: Swiss, Tyrolean, Dutch, holmogorsky and drugimi45. Even at the end of the century the basis on farms was formed by a cattle of local breeds (71%), and improved — only 29%.

Sheep breeding and pig-breeding in the St. Petersburg province in H1H was developed a century poorly, and kept goats only in single farms.

Development of sheep breeding, especially fine-fleece, restrained lack of suitable pastures and need to have a sufficient stock of forages and tep-


ly placements on long winters.

Despite this, throughout H1H of century the gradual growth of number of sheep though in the second half of the century the change of a livestock was minor — within 80-90 thousand, with obvious prevalence in the Luga and Gdov Counties (tab. 10) was observed.

The livestock of pigs in the province did not exceed a century almost all second half of H1H 15,000 and only in the last decade increased up to 23,000 (tab. 11).

Table 10

Livestock ovets47

Counties 1846 1864 1866 1872 1893 1896

1. Gdov 5660 15,600 14,700 14,996 24,652 23,762
2. Luga 18,950 9976 18,120 16,548 18,419 16,727
3. New Ladoga 6000 4740 11,400 13,007 7256 6,287
4. Peterhof 3500 10,540 9520 9348 11,139 13,022
5. Page - St. Petersburg 1,060 5673 4620 5667 5051 3786
6. Tsarskoye Selo 15,195 12,620 11,540 8900 10,058 7814
7. Shlisselburg 1060 5,673 4620 5667 5051 3786
8. Yamburg 5200 12,013 12,000 13,389 17,023 16,454

Province in general 57,275 73,199 83,150 83,438 95,520 89,741

Table 11

Livestock sviney48

Counties 1846 1864 1866 1872 1893 1896

1. Gdov 2480 4670 3950 5157 5371 7459
2. Luga 2830 3806 4100 3909 7282 5712
3. New Ladoga 3000 1048 1100 216 293 538
4. Peterhof 800 904 730 991 869 1591
5. Page - St. Petersburg 2125 1026 1670 789 3980 1926
6. Tsarskoye Selo 970 1563 650 275 502 965
7. Shlisselburg 420 1269 1450 982 1741 1957
8. Yamburg 550 814 930 1091 2166 2862

Province in general 13,175 15,100 14,580 13,410 22,204 23,010

Growth of a livestock of pigs was constrained by the high prices of bread therefore as a forage used waste from dairy production and held pigs mainly at dairy farms. Their number was the greatest where the maximum number of cattle was noted — in Luga and Gdov uyezdakh49.

Gardening and truck farming

In the first half of H1H of a century gardening and truck farming in the province was developed extremely poorly. Small gardens met generally in its southern part — in landowner manors of the Luga County. At the same time in the neighborhood of St.-Petersburg the area of intensive garden and berry country economy for supply of the capital was created. Here saplings for sale in the St. Petersburg gardens and parks were grown up.

By the end of H1H of a century gardening begins to become the important industry of agrarian production. In landowner and country gardens grew up local grades of apples: Antonovka, anisette, white filling, Titovka, borovinka, rennet, Miron and korobovka and also cherries, plums and pears (bergamot, bessemyanka and tonkovertka). In the Gdov County the gardens leased during blossoming with a payment for all garden, is more rare — from a root on the 13th than ruble apiece. In the Luga County in so-called "model" privately owned farms of the area of gardens

About P 50

reached 5-7 tithes.

In subcapital volosts the locals grew up white and red currant, raspberry, a gooseberry, were engaged in a distillation of strawberry and a wild strawberry. The suburban berry economy was developed in the southern part of the Karelian Isthmus (Koltushi and Ryabovsky in -

lost) and also in subcapital volosts of S. - the St. Petersburg, Tsarskoye Selo and Peterhof Counties (in villages Vysots-koye, Gorky, Gostilitsa, Koporye, Ropsh, Rybatskoye, Ust-Izhora, Pasad Fedorovsky, Royal Slavyanka). Berries came true to St.-Petersburg, Pavlovsk, Tsarskoye Selo and to the numerous summer residents who had a rest in the neighborhood of the capital.

In the second half of H1H of a century in a residential suburb the intensive development of truck farming began. In hotbeds, greenhouses and the open ground grew up cabbage (white, red, Savoy, Bruxelles and color), beet, cucumbers, swede, onions, "roots" (carrots, parsley, a celery, horse-radish and a leek) and greens (salad, spinach, fennel). These products came true on the markets of St.-Petersburg, and from there — in green and greengroceries.

The natives of the Yaroslavl province renting the earth at the price from 100 up to 200 rubles for tithe were engaged in cultivation of garden cultures mainly. To Vskopk of kitchen gardens and stuffing of hotbeds generally hired workers, too residents of Yaroslavl, and all main works on a kitchen garden — the women called "koporka" — inhabitant S. - the St. Petersburg, Olonets and Novgorod provinces carried out. They were employed for the summer with payment on 8 rubles a month and lived "on master's grubs with a bath and washing" 51. Hotbeds filled at the beginning of February horse manure, through ten days sowed and in a month took out early products (garden radish and greens) on the market. In the released hotbeds in March sowed cabbage seeds on seedling, and in April-May — cucumbers. In large-scale greenhouse and greenhouse enterprises the distillation of garden food, including an asparagus and champignons, was carried out during everything goda52.

Inhabitants Koporya, Krasnoye Selo and Russian-Vysotsky were famous for high quality of products. Except cultivation of vegetables they were engaged in seed farming of a white cabbage of "koporka", swede "krasnoselsky", turnips "Petrovsky", etc.

In process of removal from St.-Petersburg the natural decrease in a role of truck farming in economy of country people and private owners was observed. Only in the neighborhood of Lodeynoye Pole the peasants were engaged in cultivation of cabbage which was on sale on all coast of Lake Onega.

The large gardeners delivering cabbage in troops prepared it in huge barrels the "domnik" containing from 2000 to 10 000 poods. Salting such quantity of cabbage on one "domnik" required not less than 30 poods soli53.

Model farms

At a boundary of H1H-HH vekov the group of the farms differing in high profitability and the level of development of agricultural production was distinguished from a set of privately owned manors of the province. Such model farms were created in the Yamburg, Peterhof, Luga and Gdov Counties. Most often representatives of aristocratic and well-born surnames were their owners: barons Tiesenhausen, Zhirard-de-Sukanton, Korf, background Beale-derling, Velio and also N.I. Girs, K.Ya. Pal, A.V. Panteleev, M.N. Speranskaya, E.N. Pelttser, A.A. Polovtsev, N.A. Nechayev and others.

Model manors differed with specialization of agriculture. In some the livestock production, in others — field husbandry prevailed, in the third — it was combined that and another.

It is possible to carry a manor to farms of the first type Andromer of the Luga County (nowadays Plussky district of the Pskov region). Here the cattle breeding, pig-breeding and poultry farming was developed. On a farm 90 dairy cows contained. In the winter milk pererabatyvalos

Nicole Miller
Other scientific works: