The Science Work
Site is for sale:
Category: History

Social structure of the petty-bourgeois population of the Area of army of Donskoy at a boundary of XIX - The XX centuries

 © 2007 I.N. Smirnov


In the 1990th history of various social groups of the population began to be of great interest to domestic scientists. Their attention was riveted by the boundary of the XIX-XX centuries - time of active formation of new public order. The narrow-mindedness was one of such social groups. In a type of the fact that it was not a subject of serious historical study the opinion on it was limited to ethical representations and formed under the influence of publicistic works, there was a need to develop the scientific attitude towards this concrete historical group of people.

Many researchers tried to define what social groups at different times belonged to the petty-bourgeois population. However from the methodological party this problem in perfection is not worked out still. Only unambiguous understanding was created that the petty-bourgeois population was not limited to those who were called in fact petty bourgeoises who were the full-fledged representative of estate, the member of the petty-bourgeois organization.

The researcher V.V. Zakharova emphasized full class relationship between representatives of petty-bourgeois societies, "working" people and shop handicraftsmen [1]. The point of view of historians L.V. Ostanina and O.V. Mezhenina who considered a whole of petty bourgeoises and tsekhovik became widespread. These scientists saw only professional and fiscal differences between them and did not try to prove their socio-political and cultural features [2]. The historian V.S. Chutchev, agreeing with them, noticed that "shop, formally continuing to exist in Russia in the second half of the 19th century, neither legally, nor actually by the situation did not differ from petty bourgeoises" [3]. However convincing arguments for justification of this point of view were not offered.

The point of view B.S. Akkurato-va and V.M. Bukharayeva, two groups allocating petty bourgeoises in structure is more constructive. They carried the petty bourgeoises, on characteristic who are most approaching members of petty-bourgeois estate to one of them called "ideal type" of inhabitants. Other group which representatives had no relation to estate of petty bourgeoises included both shop, and a part of honourable citizens, and some number of merchants and also lumpens and peasants in "a petty-bourgeois appearance". However historians did not manage to consider all legallistic living conditions of estates in Russia and carried to the last those who under the law had no relation to them [4].

The inconsistency of the points of view of researchers is explained, partly, by lack of appropriate clearness of formulations in normative documents [5] and also insufficiently attentive relation of historians to the maintenance of a concept what it was in the Russian legislation at different times.

For identification of categories of the petty-bourgeois population it is more correct to be guided by the formal bases existing at a boundary of the XIX-XX centuries in Russia of a legal system, to proceed from reasons of proximity of any given population groups to possession of full range of the class prerogatives peculiar to petty bourgeoises. Economic indicators cannot play the predominating role here. If to take only economic criterion into consideration, then the risk of wrong reference to petty bourgeoises of those who could pass in statistical documents as the representative of other social rank increases. The economic criterion cannot be accepted as the leading indicator of belonging to petty bourgeoises also because "meshchanstvennost" was not the unconditional status standard. In particular, in the territory of the Area of army of Donskoy it circulated in an economic context of time in a format of petty-bourgeois trade, one of types of business activity, along with the petty, delivery and peddling bargaining on which trade certificates and tickets [6, l were granted to merchants. 1 about.-2, 15, 69 about.-70, 220-223, 241, 334-347]. The possibility of the Don merchants to be engaged in petty-bourgeois trade of different categories and classes was never considered as the basis to carry them to petty bourgeoises.

The impossibility of use of economic criterion as the main sign in allocation of categories of the petty-bourgeois population does not allow to call narrow-mindedness a class. In the years of the existence it had all signs of legal, legal autonomy and represented uniform sociocultural type. From the class point of view of such integrity never was. Due to professional accessory, an occupation sort, the relation to means of production, a role in public organization of work, ways of receiving and the size of that share of public wealth which they had the narrow-mindedness least of all looks klassovo the isolated association of people. In the petty-bourgeois environment there is no that ideological, social and political and economic unity, uniform social space which, for reasons of Marxists, are inherent in each class.

Economic interests did not bring together petty bourgeoises so strongly that it was possible to speak about their class uniformity. One their part divided the standards of life peculiar to exclusive classes, another - completely corresponded to parameters of the classes humiliated. In the narrow-mindedness between its various social categories and layers there were contradictions which on depth and scale of expansion are comparable to contradictions antagonistic (by definition of Marxists) classes.

Proceeding from told application of the term "class" to category of petty bourgeoises and netsele-seems wrong

corresponding allocation of economic criteria for their definition in the isolated group. It will be more correct to see acting through petty bourgeoises only estate, but not a class and the more so, not a class estate. Attempts to combine two concepts of one in relation to petty bourgeoises are illegal. The narrow-mindedness is not that case where class and class criteria connect with each other. There is no coincidence of the legal status of social group of people and its actual economic and social situation in the system of economic communications. Therefore it is difficult to agree with the point of view allowing application to petty bourgeoises of the hybrid concept "class estate".

Thus, the concepts "class" and "class estate" of Marxist understanding lead to strong simplification that makes impossible their use at characteristic of petty bourgeoises. Therefore in relation to them it is necessary to refuse these terms and at the mention of the petty-bourgeois population to use only the concepts "petty-bourgeois estate" and "extra class petty-bourgeois layers". Such methodological approach provides division of the petty-bourgeois population into two social groups and will completely be coordinated with contents of laws of the Russian Empire. It does not generate contradictions between scientific judgments and historical reality.

At the end of XIX - the beginning of the 20th century researchers noticed that petty bourgeoises not everything were identical in class sense of the word. Among them distinguished actually petty bourgeoises, full representatives of estate, members of the class public union, or petty bourgeoises as "estate in close sense" [7], and petty bourgeoises, from the class party not full, outsiders.

The persons who had class rights belonged to the first category of the petty-bourgeois population. They were members of the petty-bourgeois organizations. At the same time it was absolutely unimportant, they lived in the cities or places, villages, villages. Inhabitants who had no class rights of petty bourgeoises and were not members of the petty-bourgeois organization belonged to the second category.

The group of class petty bourgeoises was not uniform. In it the petty bourgeoises ranked and attributed were visibly allocated. Both views reflected two ways of replenishment of numerical structure of estate of petty bourgeoises. Legal conditions of formation of petty-bourgeois estate demanded observance of a number of the major provisions. Some of them depended on standards of the Russian legislation and were most of all considered during an addition. Others were in direct dependence on rigid preferences of the petty-bourgeois organizations and were considered during reckoning.

Reckoning gave the natural nature of development to petty-bourgeois estate. It was more perfect channel of finding of the class petty-bourgeois status because, according to Article 563 of "Code of laws" of 1899, was based on free will of petty-bourgeois society and provided access to a full range of class prerogatives [8, page 27, 28]. The addition was connected with governmental activities on

mechanical recording in estate of new faces. It was means of bureaucratic dictatorship in class affairs. During it the opinion of petty-bourgeois society was not taken into consideration. At the same time it did not provide access to the main class privileges. The petty bourgeoises who appeared in petty-bourgeois society on an addition had no access to work of bodies of petty-bourgeois self-government as voters and chosen. The reception sentence as criterion of full belonging to petty-bourgeois estate could be received only during reckoning.

Despite obvious shortcomings of appearance of the person as a part of the petty-bourgeois class organization for an addition, such inhabitants made the social platform of people closer other standing to full petty bourgeoises. Article 566 of "Code of laws" allocated 1899 for them 5 years for obtaining the official visa of petty-bourgeois society marking transition from situation attributed in situation ranked [8, page 31].

Domestic researchers did not tend to consider structure of the petty-bourgeois population in a legallistic format. Especially strongly it is noticeable in definition of those groups of the petty-bourgeois population which were outside a class range. In the scientific environment began popular to carry to petty bourgeoises of all handicraftsmen or all tsekhovik. However from the legal point of view it is not right. There were no laws which would give a reason so to consider. It the valid demographic borders of the petty-bourgeois population illegally extend, indistinct is its social framework.

We inevitably conflict to reality when we squeeze social groups of the population which did not belong to it in the past on petty-bourgeois Wednesday is legallistic, actually. Petty bourgeoises and handicraftsmen in the majority were mentioned in official documents of public authorities as two separate estates that proves lack of any precept of law allowing us to think differently. Besides petty bourgeoises showed more than once the ability to act as a uniform system at the solution of many questions, including not so considerable and not basic on which people with more various aspirations could hardly unite and show the self-identification level, sufficient for a joint social protest.

Acquaintance to the reception sentences given as a sign of inclusion of the person in petty-bourgeois society gives the grounds to claim that there were petty bourgeoises who were not members of petty-bourgeois societies of citizens [9]. But it is incorrect to attach to them all who on external signs, for example economic functions, are close to petty-bourgeois life. In particular, it is inadmissible to unite under one concept of petty bourgeoises and members of the petty-bourgeois organizations and city handicraftsmen. In 1895 in reasonings of the Central statistical committee on drawing up the project of Polozheniya on a general national census of the Russian Empire with -

recognition of big differences between them keeps. In the report it was directly stated that petty bourgeoises and handicraftsmen - two unequal estates in the city [10].

According to Article 46th of Polozheniya's project the decision in statistical reporting to carry to petty bourgeoises eternal shop and working people [10] was made on the general national census made by the Commission of senator Girs. "Eternal shop and working people, - it is specified in the text of the Note, - have to be designated in questionnaires by petty bourgeoises, and the first register the petty bourgeoises attributed to shop societies, and the second - the petty bourgeoises consisting on a working salary (italics of a bus - I.S.)" [11].

The most amorphous and up to the end not clear category of the petty-bourgeois population was made by so-called "working people". It was carried to petty bourgeoises for reasons statistical for clarity of the account and simplification of generalizations on the population. There are no visible reasons to consider it a part of narrow-mindedness. Authors of the Small dictionary of F.A. Brockhaus and I.A. Efron believed that it was the most unpleasant category of city dwellers consisting of people vicious and bad behavior unworthy to be presented in the petty-bourgeois environment [12]. Article 499 of "The code of laws about states" directly said editions of 1876 that this group consists of the persons of bad temper which became those for faulty payment of taxes which, besides, petty-bourgeois society did not wish to have among the members [13].

The situation around belonging of tsekhovik to the petty-bourgeois population looks clearer. In 1873 the official report craft the heads of the Taganrog craft Justice, addressed to the Taganrog city's mayor took place. Shop handicraftsmen both eternal, and temporary were directly mentioned in it under a name of shop petty bourgeoises [14, 16]. However such identification can hardly be read out correct from the legal point of view. The opinion of the chairman of statistical Council of senator P.P. Semyonov expressed in the report on a population census of Russia deserves bigger trust. Based on much wider actual basis, it does not give a reason for similar statements and divides both categories of handicraftsmen.

The Russian legislation in the 19th century does not leave us the place for doubts in illegality of identification under the general concept of petty bourgeoises of members of the class unions and one and all handicraftsmen of the city. In Article 498 of "The set of the law on states" 1876 it is told: "Shop are understood as masters, the journeymen and pupils who fitted into the shop for production of the craft; they are divided into eternal and temporary; to the first petty bourgeoises to the shop entered, as the last - foreigners and rural inhabitants who, without changing the rank, registered to the shop temporarily" (italics of a bus - I.S.) are ranked [15]. From contents of laws follows that only eternal shop, they are the petty bourgeoises attributed to shop societies (as they are mentioned by the commission on drawing up the project the organization of elections), are an integral part

narrow-mindedness in Russia together with full petty bourgeoises, members of the city petty-bourgeois unions.

Thus, petty bourgeoises and eternal shop handicraftsmen, shop petty bourgeoises can actually be considered as a kernel of the Russian narrow-mindedness.

The first were the main social force of the Russian narrow-mindedness on an end of the 19th century. They made class society, the petty-bourgeois organization, had the right for creation of bodies of petty-bourgeois self-government after reckoning therefore true can be considered as members of one estate. In 1873 in the official report the petty-bourgeois head of this city I. Vukov told the City's mayor of the city of Taganrog that all representatives of petty-bourgeois estate are united under uniform management [14, l. 17].

The second represented petty bourgeoises outside organized class petty-bourgeois life. Their existence was poorly coordinated with logic of class development what directly it was stated by the researcher N. Lazarevsky at the end of the 19th century [16]. If to take into consideration that emergence in it of all attributes of class isolation, a full range of formal signs of estate has to turn out to be direct consequence of development of each large feudal group, then shop petty bourgeoises cannot be considered as typical full-fledged representatives of petty-bourgeois estate. They can make only a part of the petty-bourgeois population. The main sphere of their activity was limited to craft. Therefore they often acted under a name of handicraftsmen, however, exclusive city, so-called "eternal", differing from the handicraftsmen usual appearing from time to time among city handicraftsmen from among peasants both in the most shop organization and beyond its limits [17].


However in domestic historical science did not create tradition of the differentiated research of two categories of narrow-mindedness. In works they merged in unity of meanings under the name of petty-bourgeois society [18], contrary to legal standards of that time which only to the person from the petty-bourgeois organization allowed to be called automatically as the member of this estate [9]. Therefore many researches contrary to assurances of their authors were connected most of all with study not separately petty-bourgeois estate, and the petty-bourgeois population.

It is impossible to call shop petty bourgeoises together with members of the petty-bourgeois organizations by petty-bourgeois estate. Such simplification can be applied to the period since the end of the 19th century only because at that time the shop narrow-mindedness because of process of decomposition of a shop system became noticeable to decrease and exist under guardianship of the class petty-bourgeois organizations. This process began to proceed especially actively since 1900, since direct elimination of the shop device in Russia by the Ministry of Internal Affairs. The number of shop petty bourgeoises at the beginning of the 20th century already was not so essential to make noticeable social association of people in the city. In the field of Donskoy's army in 1897 their share among all petty bourgeoises of the cities of Rostov and

Taganrog made 7.1 - 7.4%, and in the city of Nakhchivan did not exceed 1%. In Novocherkassk and Azov they do not appear at all [6, l. 1 about., 2].

Despite social proximity between full petty bourgeoises and petty bourgeoises shop there were serious distinctions. First, among the second the level of inheritance of the professional status was higher in comparison with "ideal" petty bourgeoises. They were malosposobna to change the profession inherited from ancestors within the corporate organization considerably. As a result of it practical knowledge for maintenance of desirable skill level was more appreciated, and need for theoretical knowledge was pushed into the background. Secondly, the indicator of corporate "openness" of shop petty bourgeoises was lower, and degree of economic horizontal attachment from each other was higher. Their life acquired a large amount of conventions which strictly regulated economic activity. Shop petty bourgeoises were closer to these to the feudal time consigning to the past to its smaller space of freedom. Thirdly, the numerical structure of two categories of the Russian narrow-mindedness was absolutely different. In spite of the fact that the quantity of both those, and others could influence directly their situation in society, the small number made a problem only for tsekhovik as because of it they, for example, had no right to create the shop. Therefore shop petty bourgeoises, so-called eternal handicraftsmen, always felt the need to support the organization by handicraftsmen temporary.

During the separate periods of time the shop petty bourgeoises willingly performed in the union with all handicraftsmen of the city and created the city craft unions controlled by them. They tried not to miss an opportunity to put at the head of them the representative. For example, in 1890 in the field of Donskoy's army they tried to advance the master of the sartorial shop, the petty bourgeois A.L. Shashkov to a position of the craft city of Taganrog of the head, using all possible tricks, including breaking the law. However intervention of the honourable citizen D. Bolgako-va upset them plans [19]. But, having lost an opportunity to take the leading place in the craft organization in at one time, did not miss it during later period, were able to win back a situation. In 1893 the same A.L. Shashkov already appeared the official head of the Taganrog craft organization [20], and the order of activity of other handicraftsmen considered requirements only of a limited circle of shop petty bourgeoises. Sometimes the last found proximity of interests with class petty bourgeoises, came with them into close contacts and even invited especially talented of them to a position of heads of the city craft organizations. So, in 1889 the petty bourgeois A.H. Jansson, the person, by definition of the mayor A. Baykov, in all from - was invited to a position of the head of craft society in the city of Rostov-on-Don

carrying "honest, sensible and highly respected" and also "politically reliable" [21].

Comparing position of class and shop petty bourgeoises, one may say, that the situation developed not in favor of the second. The first had the high level of self-sufficiency, successfully coped with vital problems. The last, torn apart by vital collisions, often appeared incapable to resolve the issues which had exclusive value for their survival. In this regard they made unstable group of the petty-bourgeois population. On the one hand, could perform in the union with other handicraftsmen of the city, as a rule, from among peasants, than showed proximity to rural culture in the territory of the city. With another - could cooperate with petty bourgeoises, full members of estate, and thanks to it showed proximity to full-fledged city culture.

Fourthly, force of impact of two fronts of petty bourgeoises on public life was various. It directly depended not so much on their quantity how many from organizational full value, ability to resolve the issues mentioning everything spheres of human life. Here full members of petty-bourgeois estate were in more advantageous situation.

Organizational structures of activity of petty bourgeoises shop and petty bourgeoises full were independent, existed, as a rule, in a separation from each other. However the order of life of the organization of shop petty bourgeoises was mainly connected with economic professional activity and felt the big need for political experience which the estate of petty bourgeoises had. Owing to the developed conditions of a tsekhovika did not develop the culture of political activity. In political arena, for example, of Area of army of Donskoy they acted from the sanction and under direct guardianship of the full-fledged class petty-bourgeois organizations of edge which coped with various problems better.

Perhaps, because of political insolvency of shop petty bourgeoises in the Russian legislation of the XIX-XX centuries there was no unambiguous opinion on whether it is possible to consider them the valid citizens. It gives in this respect contradictory information. In Article 494 of "Code of laws" of 1876 of tsekhovik call just citizens [22], and Article 547 suggests that all shop are not citizens and are called just as residents [23]. At the end of the 19th century the author of the collection of legalizations "About petty-bourgeois and craft managements", the barrister M.I. Mysh, dealing closely with issues of a legal status of city population groups, did not find it possible to call shop petty bourgeoises the valid citizens, but only members of city society on property and residence [24].

The political horizon of shop petty bourgeoises was narrow because they had no chances to grow in this direction. On the one hand, they had no opportunities to influence political life of the city which was known to the class unions of petty bourgeoises. About Wad Dra -

the gy party, many of them had no right to register from the shop in guild, under the law lost the right to become merchants and lost an opportunity to hold the leading posts in the system of the municipal government [25]. For example, they had no rights not only for the mayor's position, but also to apply for smaller. All their life has to be inseparably linked with economic activity.

Under the pressure of new spirits of the times of a tsekhovika tried to change, be updated, however, without having managed to reconstruct according to spirit of bourgeois society, remained in the past. At the beginning of the 20th century the shop petty bourgeoises continued to exist only under the care of the strong petty-bourgeois organizations in the large cities of Area of army of Donskoy - Rostov, Taganrog, Nakhchivan [6, l. 1 about., 2]. In a separation from them the creative public role of shop petty bourgeoises was not of great importance any more.

The petty-bourgeois organizations willingly acted as trustees of the becoming obsolete shops, being guided at communication with them by mercantile logic. From the economic party the shop societies were a little coordinated by the economic isolation with the formed free market. Meanwhile they were the best suppliers of new members in the petty-bourgeois organizations with already available skills of life in the city. By definition of "eternal handicraftsmen", shop petty bourgeoises had to live in the city, but not rural areas. It they found steady proximity to city tenor of life and, despite all shortcomings, created the reliable platform for growth of an urbanization of petty-bourgeois culture.

Thus, existing in Russia at the end of XIX - the beginning of the 20th century the legal system allows to mark out four categories in structure of the petty-bourgeois population: petty bourgeoises, members of the class organization; ranked, having all class rights; attributed, appeared in the union of petty bourgeoises for the account. They were adjoined by petty bourgeoises shop and the petty bourgeoises existing on a working salary, so-called "working people". All of them formed two groups of the petty-bourgeois population which covered also members of petty-bourgeois estate with various opportunities for use of the rights of this estate, and petty bourgeoises beyond its limits.

Literature and notes

1. V.V. Zakharova. Petty-bourgeois estate of post-reform Russia: Yew.... edging. east. sciences. M, 1998. Page 79-80.
2. L.V. Ostanina. Narrow-mindedness of Western Siberia at the end of XVIII - the 60th of the 19th century: Yew.... edging. east. sciences. M, 1996. Page 45. Cf.: O.V. Mezhenina. Narrow-mindedness of the South of Western Siberia during the prereform period: The last quarter of XVIII - the beginning of the 60th of the 19th century: Yew.... edging. east. sciences. Barnaul, 2005. Page 63.
3. V.S. Chutchev. Petty-bourgeois estate of Western Siberia in the second half of XIX - the beginning of the 20th century: Yew.... edging. east. sciences. Barnaul, 2004. Page 6.
4. B.S. Akkuratov. A narrow-mindedness phenomenon in the Russian social and political thought and the political theory: Yew.... edging. east. sciences. Kazan, 2002. Page 44-45, 48. Cf.: Bukharayev VM. The provincial inhabitant in the face of revolution (on materials of the Kazan province)//the Academician P.V. Volobuyev. Unpublished works. Memoirs. Articles. M, 2000. Page 265.
5. If in some places of the Policeman Polozheniya of 1785 all policemen inhabitants were called as petty bourgeoises, then already 100 years of similar synthesis of all city population groups later in imperial laws will not meet. 494 Articles IX of volume of the Code of laws, though announce all city dwellers a neutral gender of people, citizens, nevertheless intentionally distinguishes from them five leading categories of inhabitants. Petty bourgeoises began to make among them only some part. See: Code of laws. T. IX. Article 494. SPb., 1876. Page 101.
6. GARO, t. 353, op. 1, of a 479-. Statistical data on number of factories and the plants, educational institutions, etc. for 1897, l.1 about.-2, 15, 69 about.-70, 220223, 241, 334-347.
7. Encyclopedic dictionary: In 86 t. / F.A. Brockhaus, I.A. I.A.//http://www. cultinfo. ru/fulltext/1/001/007/066/66683. htm.
8. Systematic collection of laws on petty-bourgeois managements / Sost. Ya.M. Vileyshis. Kherson, 1914.
9. GARO, t. 588, op. 2, 50. Case of the Taganrog petty-bourgeois management of delivery of Reception sentences to different persons, l. 2-3, 10, 12-13, 15, 18.
10. GARF, t. 102, op. 53, 148, Part 1. About the first general population census of the Russian Empire, l. 423 about. Cf.: Ministry of Internal Affairs. Central Statistical Committee. An essay of development of a question of a general national census in Russia. SPb., 1890. Page 14.
11. Polozheniya's project about a general national census developed in the special commission at the Ministry of Finance//the Annex to an essay of development of a question of a general national census in Russia. SPb., 1890. Page 15.
12. Brockhaus and I.A.'s small Encyclopaedic dictionary. T. 2. Issue IV. SPb., 1909. Article 1308.
13. The code of laws about a state. T. IX. Article 499. SPb., 1876. Page 102.
14. GARO, t. 579, op. 1, 358. Case of change of management of petty-bourgeois society on new "To the policeman to situation", l. 16.
15. Code of laws. T. IX. Article 498. SPb., 1876. Page 102. Cf.: Code of laws. Article 464. SPb., 1842. Page 87.
16. N. Lazarevsky. Estates//Encyclopaedic dictionary: In 86 t. / F.A. Brockhaus, I.A. Efron. T. 60. SPb., 1890. Page 913.
17. Code of laws. T. IX. Article 498. SPb., 1876. Page 102.
18. M. Shatsillo. To Social composition of the bourgeoisie in Russia at the end of the 19th century. M, 2004. Page 84-97.
19. GARO, t. 685, op. 1, 32. Donskoy's troops Presence, Regional on city affairs. A case on complaint of the honourable citizen Daniil Bolgakov of cancellation of elections to a position Taganrog the craft petty bourgeois Shashkov of the head for 1890, l. 1, 4-5.
22. 23.

The reference book on Don for Area of army of Donskoy. Novocherkassk, 1893. Page 138-150. GARO, t. 46, op. 1, 3000. Case of the statement of officials of petty-bourgeois management in Rostov, Taganrog, Nakhchivan, Azov for 1889, l. 24. Code of laws. T. IX. Article 494. SPb., 1876. Page 101. Code of laws. T. IX. Article 547. SPb., 1876. Page 118.

24. About petty-bourgeois and craft managements. Collection of legalizations, government and judicial explanations / Sost. M.I. Mysh. SPb., 1896. Page 1.
25. Code of laws. T. IX. Article 547. SPb., 1876. Page 118.

Taganrog state Pedagogical Institute

On June 25, 2007

Bauwens Irma
Other scientific works: