The Science Work
History
Site is for sale: mail@thesciencework.com
Category: History

Vectors of an urbanization of Ciscaucasia of the period of capitalist modernization (on the example of the Kuban region, the Black Sea and Stavropol provinces)



UDK 9 (C16)

VECTORS of the URBANIZATION of CISCAUCASIA of the PERIOD of CAPITALIST MODERNIZATION (on the example of the KUBAN REGION, the BLACK SEA AND STAVROPOL PROVINCES)

© 2010 S.N. Ktitorov

Armavir state pedagogical university, Armavir State Pedagogical University,

R. Luxemburg St., 159, Armavir, 352900 R. Lyuksemburg St., 159, Armavir, 352900

The main directions and factors of an urbanization of Ciscaucasia of the middle of XIX-of the beginning of the 20th century are considered. Elements of city infrastructure of the region are analyzed, change of functions of the cities turning from military and administrative into the commerce and industry centers is traced.

The article considers main directions and factors of urbanization in the Ciscaucasia of the mid-19th - beginning of the 20th centuries. The author analyzes the region&s urban infrastructure elements, and traces the changes in the functions of the cities while their transformation from military and administrative centers into trade industrial ones.

In the context of modern processes of regionalization of domestic historical science the consideration of dynamics of an urbanization in regions of Russia and in particular to Ciscaucasia is of great importance. The second half of XIX - the beginning of the 20th century when the state chose the path of large-scale transition from mainly rural agrarian to industrial city society is of special interest for this scientific perspective. In the North Caucasus where the majority of the cities arose during the specified period, this transition was made especially quickly that allows relyefny to show its main qualitative signs and consequences. Formation and gradual complication city infrastruktu-

ry on the Ciscaucasian lands turned out to be consequence of the end of long process of entry of the region into the structure of the Russian state.

Studying evolution of city infrastructure helps to prove a basic conclusion about a progressive role of the Russian state in arrangement of the southern outskirts. Emergence and rather fast distribution in the region of network of the urbanized settlements, the systems of various means of communication and also such elements of infrastructure as various types of urban development and planning, modern and more comfortable dwellings, electricity, a water supply system, the sewerage, phone, pavements and sidewalks, green plantings,

new types of vehicles, numerous administrative, religious, cultural and educational and spectacular and entertaining agencies, the trade and industrial enterprises, recreational and sporting venues, the positive value for destinies had predominantly both radical, and alien inhabitants of these territories.

From the middle of the 19th century the intensive resettlement colonization and fast development of new southern lands amplifies therefore there is a modernization of all aspects of life of the region. The end of the Caucasian war (1864), an abolition of serfdom and carrying out bourgeois reforms (1860th), permission to nonresident inhabitants became the major events which defined vectors of development of the North Caucasian outskirts of the empire to lodge and acquire the property in lands of the Cossack troops (1868), completion of construction of the region's first Growth and Vladikavkaz railroad (1875).

The main content of modernization processes in Russia was made by the urbanization representing transition from traditional rural to industrial and at the same time to city society [1]. As its universal manifestations growth of quantity and the sizes of the cities, constantly increasing concentration of the mass of the population in them and the most various potential and distribution of a city way of life both among various population groups, and in new territories acted. In the cities the special infrastructure representing a complex system of elements of the material environment of activity of people was formed.

Rapid growth of population of the cities and expansion of their network became the most evident investigation of an urbanization and nationally, and in the territory of Ciscaucasia that was closely connected with laying of new thoroughfares. As a result in the region the basic framework of resettlement expressing geographical vectors of urbanizatsion-ny processes [2] is formed. According to the first general population census of the Russian Empire 1897, within the Kuban region, the Stavropol and Black Sea provinces there were only 10 cities which by the number of inhabitants were ranged as follows: Ekaterinodar - 65,606 people; Stavropol - 41 590, Yeysk - 35 414, Maykop - 34,327 people; Novorossiysk-16,897 people; Temryuk - 14 734, Anapa - 6944, the Sacred Cross - 6583, Tuapse - 1392 and Sochi - 1352 people [3]. It should be noted that many small cities of the region on the functions and level of infrastructure then practically did not differ from rural settlements.

Mass colonization of Ciscaucasia, intensive evolution of its economic and economic system which focuses were the cities led to rapid growth of number of their population. By 1914 when World War I which generated negative demographic trends in Ekaterino-dare broke out 108,420 people lived; Novorossiysk - 66 130, Maykop - 54 442, Yeysk - 53 992, Stavropol - 50 515, Temryuk - 20 392, Sochi - 17 611, Anapa - 16,449, Tu -

an apsa - 16,158, the Sacred Cross (in 1910) - 14,691 people [4]. Quickly also those points which, without having the official status of the city, actually performed its main functions grew. Most of all such urbanized settlements were in the Kuban region. For example, in the village of Armavir in 1897 there were 18,113 inhabitants, and by 1914 - already about 57,480 people [5]; in the village Labinsk in 1898 - 22,816 people, and by 1914-32,239 people [6]; in the farm of Romanovskom in 1897-10,599 people, and by 1914 - 32,200 people [7].

Gradually also the number of the cities increased though their network in the region (especially in the Stavropol province) still remained quite rare. Besides already existing by the time of the revolution of 1917 in the Black Sea province there were cities of Romanovsk, Khosta and Ermolovsk [8]. In 1904 the resort of Gagra in which on the eve of World War I the simplified municipal government began to work [9] was a part of the province. In 1915 the settlement of Gelendzhik was transformed to the city [10]. In the Kuban region in 1914 the status of the city was received by the village of Armavir, and in 1917 - the town the Hot Key [11]. Thus, by the end of 1917 in Kuban, in Stavropol Territory and in Black Sea Coast there were 17 cities.

- the beginning of the 20th century the urbanization of Ciscaucasia was stimulated in the second half of XIX with a number of closely interconnected factors among which commerce and industry, transport, agricultural (agrarian), resettlement, administrative, recreational, resource (connected with production and processing of fossil natural resources).

Become the leading reasons of growth and evolution of the cities economic. It was shown in strengthening of a role of the cities as commerce and industry points and knots of transport communications [12]. The major economic incentive not only fast development old, but also emergence of the new city centers was construction Growth and Vladikavkaz, and subsequently the Armaviro-Tuapsinsky, Yeysk, Black Sea and Kuban, Black Sea railroads. Construction of Novoros-siysko-Sukhumskogo Highway was of great importance for an urbanization of Black Sea Coast. These highways formed a formation basis in the region of a basic framework of resettlement, having connected Ciscaucasia with the all-Russian and world markets.

Powerful inflow here of immigrants from the different regions of Russia became one more essential factor of an urbanization. In the Black Sea province the state policy and activities of the private capital for development of the recreational sphere had decisive impact on growth of the majority of the cities. For evolution of the major centers of the region - Ekaterino-dara, Novorossiysk and Stavropol - important value had the administrative factor connected with imperious functions of these cities which were the capitals of extensive territories.

Since the end of the 19th century the development of natural wealth of Ciscaucasia begins that led to emergence of one more factor of an urbanization which it is conditionally possible

to define as resource. Its role was especially big in the history of Novorossiysk where on the basis of production and processing of marl the center of the cement industry, largest in Russia, is formed. Development of oil resources of Kuban stimulated growth of Maykop and partly Ekaterinodar. Also military-political, religious and ethnographic factors had certain impact on development of some cities of the region.

The city infrastructure which is formed in the course of an urbanization of Ciscaucasia represented difficult integrity which the interacting and interdependent subsystems entered: spatial (residential territory and planning, division into districts and topography), town-planning (building complex, architectural appearance of the settlement), transport (external and intracity communications, vehicles), communication (mail, phone and telegraph), economic (commerce and industry and commercial institutions, fairs and markets, power), administrative (bodies of the state, regional and local government), improvement (artificial gardening and lighting, pavements and sidewalks, plumbing and sanitary, fire service), vra-chebno-sanitary (hospitals and pharmacies, removal and recycling, dumps, cemeteries), information (printing houses and periodicals, information and address bureaus, advertizing), service and consumer services (baths, hairdressing salons, laundries, photographer's studio, taverns, hotels, inns, dosshouse shelters, public institutions), social (shelters, kindergartens, houses of diligence, labor exchange, almshouse, prison), cultural (educational institutions, libraries, theaters, museums, people's houses, temples), leisure (spectacular and entertaining, sporting and recreational facilities, clubs, attractions).

Components of the material environment of the city were closely interconnected. The same object quite often was included in several subsystems of infrastructure at once. In the different cities of Ciscaucasia set, a ratio and value of the specified components sometimes strongly varied. Functioning of all elements of infrastructure represented special physiology of the city with the regularities of development. At the people integrated into this complex multilevel system the specific city way of life gradually was formed. Not only citizens, but also many inhabitants of rural areas supporting intensive contacts with the city joined it. This phenomenon of an urbanization was connected with such universal cultural sign of the city as its openness. The cities involved new people in the sphere, influence of such centers extended to extensive territories [13].

Infrastructure level directly depended on the sizes, quantity and value of functions and the official status of the settlement. The most difficult infrastructure was created in the largest administ-

the rativny centers of Ciscaucasia which municipalities possessed both more solid budgets, and powers of authority for the solution of essential city needs.

The government and local institutions of the power, public organizations and representatives of the private capital took part in creation and development of subsystems of city infrastructure. In the cities, especially such big as Ekaterinodar, Novorossiysk and Stavropol, a priority role in this activity belonged to municipal administration. In large commerce and industry settlements the main cares of development of infrastructure were assumed by public organizations and representatives of the private capital.

In the second half of XIX - the beginning of the 20th century Ciscaucasia was one of those regions of the country where the spontaneous urbanization which cornerstone the development of economy on a capitalist basis was entered a sharp contradiction with the principles of a class system enshrined in the legislation and the approved order of formation of the new cities. This situation characteristic and for other regions of Russia, showed inability of bureaucracy of autocracy to understand and consider inevitability of processes of social and economic evolution of the state and to pursue in relation to them more adequate policy [14].

The real course of an urbanization overstepped the bounds of the official cities. Comprehensive development of new North Caucasian territories by the state and first of all construction of the railroads led to rapid growth not only the former administrative centers, but also caused emergence of a number of the commerce and industry points which were acquiring the main functions and signs of the city, but not having the corresponding legal status. This phenomenon relyefny all is fixed within the Kuban region differing in the highest level of economic development, the most dense network of settlements and railroads in the North Caucasus. Exactly here at busy highways such large commerce and industry settlements as the village of Armavir, the farm of Romanovsky and the village Labinsk were created. After Accusative of Semenovym-Tyan-Shanskim such points can be ranked as category of "the true cities" which example clearly demonstrates distribution of processes of an urbanization in rural areas [15].

similar trends were characteristic

In smaller scale of the farm Tikhoretsk, the settlement at the railway station Gulkevichi, villages Slavic, Umansky, Old Minsk, Korenovsky, Batal-pashinsky, Pavlovsk, etc. In the Black Sea province city lines the settlement of Gelendzhik, in Stavropol - villages Medvezha gradually got, Praskovey Grateful and Petrovsky. On the other hand, some official cities actually did not perform functions inherent in the status and kept patriarchal rural shape. Those

there were the unimportant town of the Stavropol province a Sacred Cross, the Kuban Temryuk, the Black Sea cities of Romanovsk and Khosta.

During capitalist modernization there is a radical transformation and expansion of functions of the cities of Ciscaucasia. The military and administrative value dominating before is changed by the economic role which turned the cities into the commerce and industry, economic, financial and transport centers of extensive territories. If in the first half of the 19th century the cultural capacity of the cities consisted mainly in activity of educational institutions, then in post-reform years and at the beginning of the 20th century it significantly amplifies and assumes a big scale in connection with emergence of theaters, concert halls, libraries, museums, cinemas, periodicals, scientific organizations, etc. [16]. In certain areas, especially in the Black Sea province, recreational acts as a leading role of the cities into the forefront. Modification of functional specifics of city settlements was followed by derivation of their inhabitants from agrarian classes and distribution of various crafts which are not connected directly with agriculture.

Transformation of elements of their infrastructure and appearance became visible result of change of functional roles of the cities of the region. Sharply differentiation of topography of city settlements goes deep. Railway building, development of the sphere of trade and production base lead to formation of specific industrial, transport and depository and port regions. Closely interconnected territorial complexes of factory objects, railway and port constructions turned into an important factor of city planning. They set vectors of its spatial growth, often deformed the developed system of streets and changed a natural natural relief and a landscape. Most brightly these processes of functional heterogeneity of urban areas were observed in pre-revolutionary Novorossiysk which square literally was dismembered on several isolated city organisms [17].

Strengthening of a commerce and industry role of the city settlements of Ciscaucasia changes their appearance and an architectural silhouette radically. At the end of XIX - the beginning of the 20th century in building of the cities the principal value of the high-rise reference points organizing space is occupied more and more by not traditional bell towers and domes of temples, and constructions of a new capitalist era - profitable houses and hotels, water towers, multy-storey elevators, mills, high pipes and buildings of factories and plants [18].

In the Russian society including at the regional level, the cities served as conductors of achievements of a civilization and world technical progress. All innovations in activity of the person appeared at first in the cities, and already from there gradually got also into rural areas, Ob -

which tatel perceived the nearest city center as peculiar "window" to the big world. Here neighboring villagers learned latest Russian and foreign news, joined the last styles, got acquainted with such innovations as electricity, phone, cinema, the tram, the car and many other things. According to A.S. Akhiyezer, the urbanization accumulated all creative power in the leading centers, and on the other hand - it led to distribution of this highest cultural synthesis on all society and the population [13].

Urbanistic infrastructure, special information space of the city broadened horizons of the person, changed the settled ideas of quality of life, set new ideals and aspirations. Even continuing to be engaged in habitual agricultural work, villagers quickly adopted separate forms of a city way of life and life. Reorienting the crafts on connection with foreign market as which symbol the next city market acted, a fair or grain ssypk at the railway station, country society was integrated into uniform Russian economic space that objectively destroyed the closed natural nature of agriculture, promoted penetration into this sphere of the advanced receptions and achievements of agrarian science.

The cities of Ciscaucasia served as points of an attraction of the most diverse including the multinational population of the region. They were the main arena of intensive interethnic and interfaith contacts [19]. The city centers played an important role of the key links fastening extensive territories of the empire in a whole. The representatives of indigenous people of the North Caucasus who were drawn towards the cities in the economic, cultural and administrative relations were involved here in various processes of integration into the Russian society. Their polyethnicity became specific feature of the population of the cities of the region. The close international interaction which was based on the basis of partnership and neighborliness is as a result shown. Ethnic heterogeneity of the contingent of inhabitants had certain impact on city infrastructure of the region.

Many elements of infrastructure of the cities of Ciscaucasia up to establishment were in the region of the Soviet power at a formation stage. It should be noted that in the majority of settlements the level of improvement remained extremely low, branches of municipal services did not satisfy to requirements of bulk of inhabitants, insanitary conditions and a shortcoming available to the simple population of medical assistance were the real scourge of the cities. Municipal authorities catastrophically did not have means for the solution of the most pressing city problems. Even in the largest Ciscaucasian cities, such as Ekaterinodar, Novorossiysk and Stavropol, only the few central streets and quarters where were rather equipped

there were cobblestone roads, squares and boulevards, electric illumination, phone, lines of a water supply system, houses with steam heating, the sewerage and other conveniences. Inhabitants of other urban areas could only dream of these benefits of a civilization. Impassable dirt in an impassability of roads and darkness of night which at best scattered poor light of rare kerosene lamps was destiny not only the outskirts, but the majority of streets of the cities. In shape practically all cities of the region remained many patriarchal rural lines: on intra quarter sites, gardens and kitchen gardens were located, a considerable part of building consisted of the adobe and turluchny huts which were almost not differing from dwellings of neighboring villages on streets, boulevards and waste grounds vypasat the cattle [20].

In general it is possible to draw a conclusion that in the middle of XIX - the beginning of the 20th century to Ciscaucasia the main subsystems of city infrastructure were only put. At the same time this process was very fast and intensive, and in it the main vectors of future large-scale development of an urbanization of the region and all state accurately were defined.

Literature and notes

1. A.S. Senyavsky. The concept of modernization and its research potential in studying the Russian history of the 20th century (teoretiko-methodological and instrumentarny aspects)//Actio Nova 2000: sb. nauch. metro station, 2000. Page 224.
2. G.M. Lappo. Geography of the cities. M, 1997. Page 117.
3. L.V. Kupriyanova. The cities of the North Caucasus in the second half of the 19th century. M, 1981. Page 205 - 206.
4. Archive of administration of Novorossiysk. F.74. Op.1. 15. L.2; The Cities of Russia in 1910. SPb., 1914. 7 Page. Page 886; The Caucasian calendar for 1915. Tiflis, 1914.
1 Page. Page 123,166,261; The Kuban calendar for 1914. ESA-terinodar, 1914. Page 454.568; Stavropol in figures: anniversary to become. sb. to the 60 anniversary of the Soviet power and the 200 anniversary of the city. Stavropol, 1977. Page 17.
5. The first general population census of the Russian Empire. 1897. T.65. Kuban area. SPb., 1905. Page 1; The Caucasian calendar for 1915. Tiflis, 1914. 1 Page. Page 90.
6. Statistical data on space, the structure of the population, land tenure forms, the sizes of a plowing, a harvest, quantity of the cattle, etc. in the settlements located to paradise -

they, limited to average and lower currents of the Urupa and Beloy Rivers and top the Kuban River//the Kuban collection. 1900. T.6. Ekaterinodar, 1900. Page 144; The Caucasian calendar for 1915. Tiflis, 1914. 1 Page. Page 150.

7. State Archive of Krasnodar Krai (SAKK). F.R-1547. Op.1. 11a. L.18; The Caucasian calendar for 1915. Tiflis, 1914. 1 Page. Page 175.
8. Archive of administration of Novorossiysk. F.74. Op.1. 14. L.20 - 21.28.
9. Kuban and Black Sea coast. The reference book for 1914. Ekaterinodar, 1914. Page 302.
10. Russian state historical archive. F.1276. Op.19. 352. L.66 - 68.
11. In the same place. Op.2. 55. L.249; GAKK. F.R-1547. Op.1. 11. L.54.
12. The North Caucasus as a part of the Russian Empire. M, 2007. Page 240.
13. A.S. Akhiyezer. The city - focus of urbanizatsionny process//City as the sociocultural phenomenon of historical process. M, 1995. Page 25.
14. P.G. Ryndzyunsky. Peasants and the city in capitalist Russia of the second half of the 19th century (relationship of the city and village in a social and economic system of Russia). M, 1983. Page 258.
15. Semenov-Tyan-Shansky V.P. Gorod and the village in the European Russia. An essay on economic geography with 16 cards and cartograms. SPb., 1910. Page 72 - 73.162 - 163.
16. B.N. Mironov. The social history of Russia of the period of the empire (XVIII - the beginning of the 20th century). Genesis of the personality, democratic family, civil society and constitutional state. T.1. SPb., 2000. Page 309 - 310.
17. V.P. Kazachinsky, Cooper V.V. Arkhitektura and town planning of Kuban the XIX-XX centuries of Ch.3. Town planning in Kuban till 1985 (essay). Krasnodar, 2003. Page 32 - 33.
18. E.I. Kirichenko, E.G. Shcheboleva. Russian province. M, 1997. Page 123; Town planning of Russia the middle of XIX - the beginning of the XX century. Prince 1. General characteristic and theoretical problems. M, 2001. Page 18.
19. M.G. Rabinovich. To definition of the concept "city" (for ethnographic study)//the Soviet ethnography. 1983. No. 3. Page 22.
20. This feature was characteristic also of the majority of the cities of Russia. See: N.P. Antsiferov. Ways of studying city as social organism. Experience of an integrated approach. L., 1926. Page 34; The City and the village in the European Russia: hundred years of changes. M, 2001. Page 74.

Came to edition On November 11, 2009

Eriksson Jan-Erik
Other scientific works: