The Science Work
Site is for sale:
Category: History

The Russian mentality of managing on the earth and its transformation in modern conditions



Before speaking about the Russian mentality of managing on the earth, it is necessary to remind that Russia long since was considered and continues to be considered as the agrarian country, first of all. Nevertheless, the mentality of the farmer passed rather difficult way in the development and formation. Therefore the mentality of the Russian peasant, not only is specific and various, but sometimes and is unclear for foreigners.

However its main advantage is in what the Russian farmer got used to work and manage on the earth, to resolve various issues of the life not only in the most difficult environment including sharply continental climate of Siberia, but also in many peripetias of economic, political, spiritual, cultural and social development that promoted transformation of the peasantry of the Russian land into a certain new social community.

As for mentality, the peasant Russian loves the earth, knows it, is able to work at it and to take care of her wellbeing. So on the earth the Russians are adapted for managing long ago and well that is an indispensable condition of their correct relation to the earth - the mother.

Certainly, to an abolition of serfdom in Russia in 1861, peasants were engaged in agriculture, following instructions and desires of the land owner, that developing the abilities and skills not only in branches of crop production and livestock production, but also in other most various types of "vodstvo".

And therefore not accidentally peasants, having received freedom, went in search of the earth to the central regions of provinces and to the outskirts of Russia to create the better future own work. Proceeding from it, it is possible to claim that the problem of historical fate of the vast majority of peasants of Russia, its especially central part, is one of the features of specifics of national history and mentality of managing, main for fuller understanding, on the earth.

However as show researches, a considerable part of new settlers was engaged not only agricultural work, but also active use of the acquired trade abilities and knowledge of craft business at arrangement of the economy on the new place. Thus, the Russian colonization of the outskirts of the Russian territories was purposefully carried out, bearing the benefits.

At the same time it is necessary to notice that long before an abolition of serfdom (to the first quarter of the fifteenth century) the sizes of economic grounds were practically not controlled by local authorities. According to N.A. Bolyuk, the data confirming possession of peasants of an allotment on the basis of a purchase with a formulation occur in patrol and boundary books on the Tobolsk, Verkhoturye and Tyumen Counties for 1623"... lives on the bought land." [1].

By data A.R. Grigorieva, V.R. Filippova, in 1689. The Tobolsk voivode A.P. Golovin reported in the formal reply that 423 persons of married and 160 single are sent from Tobolsk to Irkutsk and to Yeniseisk new alien people. At the same time arrived to the settlement had to create the personal economy and after 2-3 preferential years to leave the state duties. In the first years of settling of the Angara region the delivery of help in a natural form prevailed: on tithe on 6 quarters of a rye and on 6 quarters of barley.

Help was given at first to exiled, idle and industrial people. Since 1689, restrictions were introduced: help was given in the form of a loan only by the exiled on 4 rub for tithe [2]. That is the government of the Russian state rendered to farmers at all times the help which had to stimulate their practical activities and respect for the earth.

So, at ancient Slavs the country community existed long since. It consisted of 50 - 60 people who were among themselves in kindred and together worked. Later not only kindred, but also joint possession of the arable land and stocks for farm animals began to unite community. All arable land was divided into sites taking into account its fertility and remoteness from the village.

And, each yard had several sites depending on that how many in family of adult family members whom men from 15-17 to 60-65 years, and women up to 45 years admitted. Depending on the number of adult family members one yard (family) could have several dozen such land plots which were in various places on the neighborhood of the village. But such approach to providing each yard with land gave the chance to each family of a message the personal economy, to breed the cattle, to make different types of agricultural products, without fail to pay the share of taxes, using wholly those far years of a possibility of refalse agriculture.

It is necessary to notice that the country community at Slavs was not labor collective in his today's understanding. Land was cultivated by each yard separately, and the peasant entering into community was the owner of results of the work who took care not only of food

safety of the family, but always counted on production of such production volumes which would allow it to develop, to live normally, increasing the family capital.

To peasants of Siberia and the West Siberian region, for example, the earth was taken away and given not in property to concrete households, and in use and the order to societies and settlements. For this earth the peasants were obliged to make the annual payment determined by the law which was called "the state quitrent tax" in the state treasury. Collecting this tax was provided with "mutual responsibility".

At the end of the XIX century, the allotment which was assigned to the peasant made 15 tithes on each male soul. But if an opportunity was represented (depending on the region), then over an allotment the forest area from calculation on three tithes on male soul could be allocated to peasants. For these tithes the peasants had to bring the extraordinary forest tax in treasury.

Peasants could dispose of the plot of the earth: to lease it, to descend or sell. But it was possible to dispose of a plot only from approval of all community. Therefore the peasant spoke" our earth", but not "my earth". And, the purchase - sale of land between peasants was not considered as the legal transaction because the authorities such actions did not admit, besides in this respect there was no legal act.

However in those far times the community was not only the independent tool of economic board, but also resolved many other issues which had a direct bearing on specifically taken territory. For example, the community had the right according to the decision of a general meeting of community, to carry out repartition of the fixed arable lands, haying grounds, to regulate use of the woods and reservoirs (lakes, ponds), to hand over in land lease which were not used on what - or to the reasons.

Researches show that investment with the earth of the country yards happened taking into account many factors. But main of them was that production capabilities of country economy and also an economic state, age and even physical abilities of the peasant to work were considered without fail. Thus, the country (Slavic) community took care not only of increasing production of various products of agriculture and of food security of the territory, but also of efficiency use of land grounds, without allowing their throwing and deterioration in fertility.

Thus, the community contributed not only to the development of agriculture and its industries, improvement of life of the peasantry, but also solved the separate arising problems. So, the community could construct through joint efforts the road, the bridge, a pond, a dam, to okanavit the territory, to invite to the village of the doctor or teacher. Besides, the community granted the right to all peasants to use pastures, meadows the woods. It means that each of peasants could use nature gifts: berries, mushrooms, officinal herbs, game, fish, etc.

However lesookhranitelny practice of community extended, mainly, to the forests which were in the lodged sides. Generally it were invaluable deciduous groves though at considerable number of settlements which lay on the pine-forest outskirts a part of pine forests entered planned country dachas. Administration of the district, allowing to use the deciduous wood in all parts of the dacha which did not enter pine forests, did not recognize for peasants of the right of the order the pine forests which were in the lodged sides. At the same time, it was not made prosecutions for felling of a bush or the birch and aspen kolok which are not exceeding 50 dessiatins [3].

At the same time, it should be noted that the Slavic community in essence was a convincing basis of conservative traditional country way in which strongly and validly elements of isolation and steady functioning of subsistence economy as derivatives of collective land use and compulsory combination of efforts of each of peasants entering into community remained.

For example, for agriculture was the intensive way of development is inherent that found reflection, first of all, in use of refalse agriculture. This system was that the field was used three years, then was left without processing for independent recovery of fertility, and the new field was developed nearby and also used within three years (these years the earth yields the greatest harvest, especially grain crops). As a result the first thrown field "for restoration" can undergo processing and introduction into circulation only in 12 - 15 years again. It means that the being empty lands in Russia including in the West Siberian region, there was much.

In spite of the fact that the Slavic community constantly was exposed to restrictions, all life and practical activities of the Russian peasantry was not only vital institute of its daily development and working off of mentality of managing, but also knowledge of opportunities and also a genuine ideal of optimum world order, reflection of the truth, good, justice, active work and high responsibility. Therefore everyone who got to the village or the settlement was always fed, given to drink, laid on rest. Such here Russian soul - open, kind and mysterious.

Development of agriculture promoted considerably the increasing distribution of the commodity-money relations. Yes differently could not be. Increase in the importance of a monetary rent assumed not only realization of surplus of the made products

agriculture and also livestock production in a personal farmstead, but also accumulation of money for payment to the state of land tax, including.

Because at the beginning of the 19th century in Siberia the process of public division of labor only began, the need for products of agriculture and livestock production was small, and state department which included proviantsky shops, state distilleries, mines and steel works of Altai was their main consumer. Northern not agricultural areas, but urban population, cartage and external export were consumers of grain products (products of agriculture) also.

In the second half of XIX - the beginning of the 20th century the resettlement movement in Siberia gets the huge sizes. Siberia becomes the main migration center of Russia. The number of the immigrants installed to Siberia during a post-reform era precisely cannot be defined: immigrants it began to be recorded only since 1855. The weather number of the immigrants crossing overland border of Siberia was various. According to resettlement management, from 1861 to 1910 to Siberia a little more than four million people moved.

At the same time the vast majority of the European peasants were well familiar with trade professions. From all types of trade classes among peasants of the European Russia crafts of handicraft craft group prevailed. The skill and professionalism of the peasants occupied in kustarnoremeslenny crafts brought glory to the whole industries. Nizhny Novgorod it was well-known for the metal crafts, Vyatka, Perm, Vologda, Kazan, Arkhangelsk - woodworking, Smolensk, Ryazan, Vladimir - sheepskin fur-coat, felting and felt [4].

Besides, immigrants, reaching Siberia, were determined by its territory unevenly. The explanation for it can be unconditional prirodno - a climatic factor as existence of lakes and rivers, an oblesennost, fertility of the earth and also remoteness from the railroad and steppe open spaces was considered as the most attractive.


Since 1861 the Government of the Russian Federation undertook the appropriate measures promoting increase in efficiency in activity of a rural producer. For example, at the time of P.A. Stolypin. (1908-) the serious attempt on improvement of a system of farming, including through use of measures of the state support was made 1911. But only because in the country there were extremely not enough funds in the form of the agricultural credits for implementation of the drawn-up plans, a lot of things did not manage to be made. However P.A. Stolypin, supporting economic wellbeing of the peasantry, did not suggest to liquidate landowner (country) farms, fairly seeing in them the centers of culture and an agriculture in the country country [5].

In the report on works of resettlement management of Russia for 1912 it was noted that the number of points of sale in a year grew from 226 to 253, and a turn reached 8437969 rub, against 6798063 rub obtained from sale in 1911. Continuous increase in turns is an evident indicator of improvement of agricultural machinery beyond the Urals. Good distribution is received even by such expensive tools. as cultivators, ordinary seeders, kukleotbornik, disk harrows with which to the last years the Siberian old residents were not familiar at all. in 1911 it was given out in loans for all-useful needs, behind an exception tserkovno - school, - 403890 rub, in 1912 - 797611 rub

This help was Turgaysko - to the Ural, Akmola, Semipalatinsk, Semirechensky, Syr Darya, Tobolsk, Yenisei, Tomsk, Irkutsk, Transbaikal and Amur districts. And, the most significant increase in sale was noted concerning tools more difficult and expensive: snopovyazok, samosbrosok, factory threshers. Only in 1910 it was sold separators, threshers and other accessories of dairy farming for 13000 rubles, in 1911 - for 26000 rubles, in 1913 - for 39000 rubles.

Table 1. Data on issue of loans for all-useful needs on the regions of Russia in 1912

A delivery subject Number of deliveries For the sum, (rub)

On vnutrinadelny land surveying 605 539196

On volost boards 27 55406

On hlebozapasny shops 24 98663

On mills 43 34470

On creameries 10 3475

On smithies, etc. the enterprises 16 3470

On roads and bridges 6 3060

On wells and aryk 29 11252

On the breeding cattle 8 3080

On agricultural tools, 1 225

On fire trucks and other accessories 25 45314

However settling of the sites allocated to peasants in 1911 - 1914 became the final stage of a resettlement era in the territory of, for example, Shcherbakulsky district of the Omsk region. Experts - agrarians considered that acquisition by economy requires not less than 450 rubles

and the exit to profitable production is possible only in 6 - 8 years. But about only 125 rubles of grants and loans for family [7] were given for acquisition of the cattle, stock and to families from treasury.

According to D.N. Belyanin, the beginning of the 20th century became a turning point for agriculture of Russia. The government headed by P.A. Stolypin from policy of support of community passed to policy of its destruction. After declaration of a new course in 1906 the priority was given to individual forms of managing: to farms and junctures. In the Tomsk province, for example, of the farm and juncture were created in two ways: the first - the organization of already ready farm sites from among lands of kolonizatsionny fund for immigrants, the second - by means of a vnutrinadelny razverstaniye of starozhilchesky settlements and resettlement sites.

But the aspiration of the country population to disengagement in the Tomsk province, for example, began at the initiative of the population and at the expense of the population in 1905. And, by the beginning of 1906 on the Tomsk resettlement district there were already about 100 petitions for a razverstaniye of country plots on the farm and juncture. At the end of 1906 at regional resettlement management of the Tomsk province the special meeting which set the object - to find out possibilities of satisfaction of petitions of immigrants and ways of rendering the boundary help to them took place. However it was considered that a razverstaniye of any community - process labor-consuming, difficult and expensive. To demarcate the earth of any village, daily work of 1 5 - 16 people and 6 - 7 horses within a month, and even more was necessary. Between the settlement and the land surveyor the contract on a razverstaniye of lands on condition of payment from the settlement was formed. In addition the settlement paid presence of witnesses. In 1909 - 1910 the reward with the witness in one day of work on the Tomsk province fluctuated from 1 rub in the Tomsk County up to 2 rub in some settlements of the Barnaul County. But, as a rule, the total amount necessary for the partition of the village on the farm and juncture could be more considerable. For example, for disengagement of the village Lukoshkinsky of the Kuznetsk County the sum of 4733 rub of Podesyatinnaya was necessary payment to the private land surveyor in this case made the 40th cop [8].

Thus, considering value of country community and its influence on development and formation of rural economics of Siberia including Zapadno - the Siberian region, it should be noted their huge importance not only for the initial stage of settling of territories of the Novosibirsk, Omsk, Tomsk and Tyumen regions, but also for further formation of mentality of managing of Russians on the earth and also uses of the saved-up capacity of the region with difficult prirodno - climatic conditions for accommodation and implementation of practical activities in the territory which is specifically taken and allocated for this purpose.

First of all, the abolition of serfdom in Russia in 1861 gave the chance to peasants to move to other regions of the country. And not simply. And in search of free lands on which it was possible to be engaged in arable farming, livestock production and to produce food for satisfaction of the requirements, that creating settlements and villages.

The history of Siberia confirms that the significant role in agriculture of Priirtyshje belongs to livestock production. So, in the 17th century the cattle breeding was widespread on all territory of Western Siberia. In northern areas it retained a role of the main source of welfare of the population. More than a half of cattle come an elk to Tyukalinsky and Tarsky Counties. The local cattle had a number of valuable signs: at good feeding and keeping of a cow quickly got divorced, the Siberian cattle differed in big endurance and high percent of content of fat in milk. So on an equal basis with agriculture the immigrants were engaged also in cattle breeding.

And, for many households the cultivation of animals allowed not only to provide the needs for draft power (bulls for work in the field), but also for production of meat, milk, sour cream, oil, cottage cheese and other products, a part of which went for sale within the territory and also for the market of the European part of Russia. Butter manufacture was considered as a special type of activity, and the product differed in high consumer qualities.

According to V.I. Baloshenko, P.T. Sugutov, at the end of the 19th century in the village of Reshetnikovo of Bolsherechensky district of the Omsk region, butter manufacture began to develop. In 1899 the private butter plant opens here. After a while other same plant opens. In 1909 560 people lived in the village. 10.2 tithes of an arable land and 8.6 tithes of haying grounds were the share of one yard. At this time in the village there was a hlebozapasny shop and two dairy benches. The church and school were stirred for seven versts, but there was the chapel. In 1910 at the private butter plant 152 poods of oil were produced. During the period from 1913 to 1916 about 280 - 330 tithes grain were sowed. The abundance of sound mowings and pastures allowed to hold a lot of cattle. In 1916 it was the share of the yard on average in 6 milk cows, three and more harnessed horses [9].

It means that peasants well worked and the personal labor created the wellbeing. Many of which, by the way, the most hard-working, were announced much later by fists and dispossessed, and some lost also the most expensive in the world - life.

In the late twenties - the beginning of the 40th years of the XX century in the Soviet Union the elimination of a kulachestvo as class will be organized, i.e. the raskrestyanivaniye was almost begun. But according to V.A. Ilinykh, the raskrestyanivaniye is not only radical social-class transformation, but also the policy of the state defining the main direction, the course and the end results of the occurred metamorphosis [10].

As showed life, elimination of a kulachestvo submitted to the purposes of elimination of the peasantry as class of independent rural producers. To be fair we will tell that fists - it were not individuals, but the whole families (and big families) who were the real sloggers - "workaholics". Here they - that also lived better than others, they had practically everything for family and children, for satisfaction of their requirements.

Similarly, as well as at the time of the Soviet Union were in the village of family which had everything: all of them liked to work, were not lazy, were not fond of vodka. And, worked not only responsibly in collective farm or in state farm, but also were engaged in kitchen gardens and cultivation of the cattle and a bird, got wild plants. Therefore such category of people had practically everything. And they went to shop to buy sugar, candies, material, ready-to-wear clothes and that - that on trifles.

Speaking about wild plants, would like to remind that it is specified in popular scientific literature that quality indicators of the cedar growing in northern areas are much higher, than in more southern. Still v1792 wrote P.S. Pallas to year that fruits of the Siberian cedar restore male power and return to the person youth, considerably increase the organism resilience to a number of diseases. The needles of a cedar possess a high fitontsidnost, ability to disinfect air, and wood of a cedar has characteristic, very pleasant balsam smell. The small piece of a cedar tree placed in the house frightens off mol [11].

Recently scientists, are more often historians, show interest in a question of difficulties of functioning of the Soviet village. For example, V.M. Rynkova "strikes refinement of pressure of the power upon the collective-farm village, scales of pumping of resources from it. Sometimes it becomes unclear how it managed to villagers to survive in such conditions" [12].

Question, of course, rhetorical. But the answer can be very simple and too in the form of a question. How peasants could survive during a time of "reorganization" and live now. With transition to the market relations too nothing remained to people how to survive. Collective farms disappeared, state farms too. The help from the state and local authorities was stopped. There is no place to work and earn a living. Here also the mentality of a rural producer of the Russian type worked.

A kitchen garden, a farmstead, wild plants - here a saving shirt. But the rural handyman is capable also of bigger. He became more competent now. If, is more quick-witted, understands a situation more deeply. Therefore in an age of scientific and technical progress he can do any equipment which as necessary it can adapt for matter in crop production and livestock production, to successfully solve the most difficult problems facing toilers of the village irrespective of a situation.

But now we are witnesses of a paradoxical picture and situation. If at the end of XIX - the beginning of the XX century in Russia the peasants developed new territories, also birds cared for increase in a livestock of all species of farm animals, increased production of agriculture, built settlements and villages, built objects of education and culture, then practically everything repeats now too. but only all on the contrary.

So, in Russia for the last nearly 20 years the livestock of all types of the cattle and a bird is repeatedly reduced, production of all types of agricultural products is reduced many times, the village to unrecognizability, as well as people, and not to the best changed. In many settlements there are no medical institutions, there are no kindergartens and schools, the importance of recreation centers and clubs, etc. at all is lost. It can be observed also in areas of the West Siberian region.

For example, at the end of February, 2008 by consideration at a meeting of Legislative assembly of the Omsk region of the question "About the Administrative Territorial Device of the Omsk Region and an Order of Its Change" it became clear that only in 2007 seven villages disappeared from the map of the area: Zudilovo (Bolsheukovsky district), Voskresenka, Swing (Isilkulsky district), settlement Distant (Kormilovsky district), travel Novosarzhanovsky station Sibiryak, aul of Shortambay (Russian-Polyansky district).

Unfortunately, "cross" on existence of settlements in the region - not an isolated case, but a trend. Only for 2006-2007 in the region, together with the called settlements 76 villages stopped the existence. Therefore statement of disappearance of villages from the map of the region, it only confirmation that villages in the West Siberian region die for that simple reason that agricultural production endures the deepest crisis [13].

On the basis of the conducted researches it is possible to draw some conclusions and offers.

First, despite difficulties of financial crisis the village needs the emergency help: rescue and rise in agriculture - rescue of the Russian state.

Secondly, the farmer will not feed the country. For Zapadno - the Siberian region only the collective form of managing (irrespective of form of ownership) can be the most acceptable form.

Thirdly, in rural areas it is necessary to build immediately settlements (rural agrotowns) with all necessary infrastructure (school, hospital, policlinic, stadium, Recreation center, library, etc.). And for this purpose finance of the state, region and local authorities, but only not on residual sign have to be allocated.


1. N.A. Bolyuk. To a problem of formation of country agriculture in Western Siberia in

XVIIv. / Siberian village: history, current state, prospects of development. / OmGAU. - Omsk: Publishing house of OmGAU, 2000. - Ch.1. - Page 37

2. A.R. Grigorieva, V.R. Filippova. Agricultural development of Baikal region in XVIIv. | Siberian village: history, current state, prospects of development: Sb. nauch. tr. \Ohm of GAU, 2000. - Part 1. - Page 35-36.
3. Tyapkin M.O. Lesookhranitelnaya activity of country community in the country district in the second half the XIX beginning of the 20th century: Siberian village: history, current state, prospects of development: Sb. nauch. tr./Ohm GAU. - Omsk: Publishing house of OmGAU, 2002. - Page 121.
4. Water N.V. Trade orientation of resettlement farms depending on natural geographical zones of Siberia. Siberian village: history, current state, prospects of development: Collection of scientific works of Ohms of GAU. - Omsk: GAU Ohm publishing house, 2002. - Page 52.
5. V.O sandpipers of a private property on the earth.... Russian economic magazine. Finance and statistics. 2000, No. 3. - Page 53.
6. Resettlement and agriculture beyond the Urals in 1912. - SPb.: 1913.-Page 12.
7. Kolesnikov to A.D. Shcherbakul 100 years. History essays. Omsk: Newspaper editorial office Omsk bulletin, 1993. - Page 69-70.
8. Belyanin D.M. Vnutrinadelnoye land surveying of country farms of the Tomsk province in the years of Stolypin agrarian reform of 1906 - 1914. Siberian village: history, current state, prospects of development: Collection of scientific works of Ohms of GAU. - Omsk: GAU Ohm Publishing house, 2002. - Part 1. - Page 74.
9. V.I. Baloshenko, P.T. Sugutov. From the history of the village of Reshetnikovo of Bolsherechensky district. Siberian village: history, current state, prospects development: Collection of scientific works of Ohms of GAU. - Omsk: GAU Ohm publishing house, 2002. - Page 77.
10. V.A. Ilinykh. Policy of a raskrestyanivaniye of the Soviet village: nalogopodatny taxation of the village in the late twenties - the beginning of the 1940th / the Siberian village: history, modern state, prospects of development: Collection of scientific works/Ohm of GAU. - Omsk: GAU,2002 Ohm publishing house. - Part 1. - Page 7.
11. Megre V. Anastasius. I exist for technical for whom I exist. - M.: Moscow Series printing house. The ringing cedars of Russia. The first book, No. 11.1998. - Page 12.
12. V.M. Rynkov. Resistance or adaptation? ("Shadow" economy in the Siberian collective-farm village in the second half 1930 beginning of the 1940th. Siberian village: history, current state, prospects of development: Sb. nauch. tr \GAU Ohm. - Omsk: GAU Ohm publishing house, 2000. - ch1. - Page 9.
13. L. Mikhaylenko. Seven more villages down with. Red way. 2008, No. 9 (681), on March 5. - Page 3.
Gene Young
Other scientific works: