facebook
twitter
vk
instagram
linkedin
google+
tumblr
akademia
youtube
skype
mendeley
Wiki

ABOUT NEW INTERPRETING OF RUSSIAN HISTORY OF XVI CENTURY IN LIGHT OF THE DEMOGRAPHIC CYCLES THEORY

Автор Доклада: 
L. Stepanova
Награда: 
ABOUT NEW INTERPRETING OF RUSSIAN HISTORY OF XVI CENTURY IN LIGHT OF THE DEMOGRAPHIC CYCLES THEORY

УДК 947

ABOUT NEW INTERPRETING OF RUSSIAN HISTORY OF XVI CENTURY IN LIGHT OF THE DEMOGRAPHIC CYCLES THEORY

Liliya Stepanova, cand. of history, head of Social Sciences and Regional Studies department
Academy of Marketing and Social Information Technologies 


The article deals with the application of the theory of demographic cycles of Russian history in XVI c century. The statement that in pre-crisis period there were land reserves for foundation of the new settlements and cultivation of ploughed fields in Novgorod lands is being examined and proved. The crisis broken in Russia in the second half of XVI c, became the effect of political, social and economic development of the country.
Кеуwords: the theory of demographic cycles, Russia, crisis period, Novgorod writing books, pyatinas, settlements.

В статье рассматривается применение теории демографических циклов к российской истории XVI в. Обосновывается положение о том, что докризисное время в Новгородской земле имелись еще земельные резервы для основания новых поселений и возделывания пашни. Сам кризис, разразившийся в России во второй половине XVI в., стал следствием многих причин политического и социально-экономического развития страны.
Ключевые слова: теория демографических циклов, Россия, кризис, Новгородские писцовые книги, пятины, поселения.

Recently Structural demographic theory developed by J. Goldstone has begun to be used for studying the history of Russia.[1] The Researcher involves all crisis situations in a state with intensification of the fight between state itself, folk and its elite for available facility. The main idea of the structured-demographic theory by J. Goldstone is that the growing amount of population is the cause of any crisis. This is greatly reflected on all its structured elements as the increase of the population causes the reduction peasant allotments, increase the prices, reduction of the consumption of the products, ravaging of peasant farms, fall of the harvest and total impoverishment. All this, in turn, leads to social dissatisfaction, including riot and revolution.[2]

In the opinion of an American historian Chester Dunning, structured-demographic theory can be used for explaining events, occurred in Russia at the beginning of XVII century.[3] At this time the state crisis had been, it can be compared with the model of J. Goldstone.
There was the growth of the population, the prices increasing, financial crisis, impoverishing of people and the schism of elite in the state. However, Chester Dunning considers that this question needs for additional study. As we see, the interpretation made by west scientists of the events in Russian history is far ambiguous. Moreover the followers of the structured-demographic theory, trying to find the explanation for the crisis of middle ages and new time for Eurasian continent, speak about such reason as overpopulation of the certain territory, causing lack of the land. This, in turn, leads to crisis in peasant farms, increasing of the prices on agricultural product and lean year. In such condition peasant farms turned out to be insolvent that influenced on the total economic position of separate regions and countries and, finally, leads to systematic catastrophe, expressing in reduction of population because of epidemics, assaults of weakened territory by external enemy and lord's civil strives.
The Russian researcher S.A. Nefedov has recently tried to apply structured demographic theory to the history of Russia of XVI century. His study is based on the most extensive Russian historiography and is complemented with his own calculations, the base of which is the digital material, taken from the works of the most authoritative Russian historians having studied economic history of Russia in epoch of the middle ages for a long time.
Thus according to the structured-demographic theory some signs of restoration that is reduction of population number, appearing of new lands, high salary happened to be on the territory of Novgorod at the end of XV century. At the beginning of XVI c. on this territory the signs of so called period of the compression existed: absences of the vacant lands in consequence of the total overpopulation, peasant lack of land, low level of the consumption, reduction to number of the population, growing bread prices , frequent reports about hunger and epidemics. By the middle of XVI c., according to the followers of the theories, similar signs were observed on the whole territory Moscow state, but the events 1560-1570s years correspond to all signs of an ecosocial crisis moreover hunger caused terrible epidemic and death of the greater masses of the population. However, as the followers of this theory acknowledged, its social manifestations did not exist at this time in the manner of rebellion and revolts on the territory of Russia.[4]
On the basis of the analysis of the digital material and own calculations S.A. Nefedov concluded that in XVI c. relative overpopulation exists in Russia in its separate regions.[5] In the opinion of researcher, by that time there had been the problem of the land lack especially on NORTHWEST of Russia. However, had it been so? Let us address to the historic source directly and to some figures also, made up by Russian researchers. Really, in XVI c. significant space-demographic change occurred in Novgorod pyatina. Before joining to Moscow state Novgorod land occupied the enormous space, covered whole north and northwest East-European plain. At the end of XV c. the main territory of Novgorod land was divided on five areas - "пyatina", each of which had its name: Shelonskaya, Derevskaya, Vodskaya, Obonezhskaya and Bezheckaya. The Authors of this study have named an approximate number of the population in all Novgorod pyatinas that was 520000 persons.[6] Thereby, in average approximately two persons lived on one square kilometer in Novgorod pyatinas.
However indeed density of the population in pyatina was different as using of Novgorod lands was uneven. All Novgorod pyatinas, with the exception of Bezheckiy land, began near Novgorod and enlarged around it together increasing the territory of Novgorod land. Vodskaya and Obonezhskaya lands stretched far to the north, where the severe climate and less fertile ground did not favour to the setting of people. The most density of the population by the time of the joining Novgorod land to Moscow was in Shelonskiy land, which was more fertile and better developed by people - density of the population was 3,3 persons per sq. km. The most amount of the people lived in south country churchyards, where density of the population was 7 persons per sq. km, north country churchyards were developed worse by people, in which on one square kilometer happened to be 0,07 persons.[7] In XV - XVI cc. Shelonskoy land numbered 6200 settlings, in most cases inhabitants of these lands lived in one yard or two yards villages (the amount of such few yards villages exceed 70% in these pyatinas).[8] According to the calculations of the authors of "Agrarian history of the NORTHWEST of Russia" in average 5 boxes of rye were sowed that formed 15 tithes in three fields in one yard of Shelonskiy land. According to our information 5, 4 boxes of rye were sowed in this land.16
The density of the population of Derevskiy land varied from 7 to 0, 8 persons per sq.km, decreasing from northeast to south-west, reaching in average 3,2 persons per sq. km.17 At this time there were 8 898 settlings in the pyatina, which basically were also one or two yards.[9] The area of peasant plough-land in Derevskiy land was 2,26 boxes of rye in a field or 6-7 tithes in three fields according to the authors "Agrarian history".[10] According to our information 2, 6 boxes of rye were sowed in this land.[11]
Bezheckaya land, situated on the southeast of Novgorod land, bordered on the lands of Obonezhskiy pyatina on the northwest, but on south-west - on Derevskiy pyatina. Density of the population in it was 2,4 persons per sq. km.[12] As we see, it cannot be spoken about overpopulation of these lands, especially in Vodskiy, Obonezhskiy lands. However all these average values level the regional differences, having been in each land and depending on conditions of the local surroundings, which peasant farms based on. Really, at first the best lands were developed in every pyatina, using manure fertilizers on the fields, and only after that worse lands were used. The period of intensive ploughing up of new lands became XV c. according to many sources of information. A new principle of the taxation, in base of which was the area of the processed land, introduced by the end of this century, meant that the main criterion for determining the amount of the tax in favour of grand duke became not the number of the families but the land.[13] To determine how much the peasant lands in Novgorod were exhausted for plough in the middle of XVI c. we can use comparative analysis of succession of the rural settling on the lands of better quality, made on the basis of comparison of mass data of cadastres of the b end of XV and the middle of XVI centuries.[14]
In XVI c. significant space-demographic changes have occurred in Novgorod lands. According to the calculations of the authors of "Agrarian history of the NORTHWEST of Russia" for the first half of the age 700 new settlings have appeared in Shelonskiy land, in Zaonezhskiy country churchyard - 611 new villages, but in Tverskiy half of Bezheckiy land the amount of the settlings increased in half more then, having reached 1637 villages.[15] In whole 3500 of new settlings were founded on Novgorod lands for half a century and the total amount of the populated places was 40000. According to the majority of historians, the given number of the settlings, really, was the largest for the whole history of this region. Moreover, the density of locations of the settlings on the territory was already great: the average distance between villages in Derevskiy land was 2,1 km, in SHelonskiy and Bezheckiy lands it was 2,4 km, in Zaonezhskiy country churchyards of Obonezhskiy land - 3, 5 km, in Vodskiy land - 4,7.[16] However these average values do not take into account real climatic and soil conditions of the settling on the territory.
However settlings in Novgorod pyatinas in XVI c. differed with its qualitative features from rural settlings, which had been on the given territory in the following ages. And the main their difference was in little amount of yards. The Researchers, having studied rural settling on NORTHWEST of Russia and demographic changes in XVI-XVII с. have revealed the certain dynamic. For the first half of XVI c. the amount of one yard settlings increased, but average number of yards per a village decreased in Derevskiy pyatina and Porhovskoiy district of Shelonskiy land. On the contrary, the amount of yards per a village increased and the amount of one yard villages decreased In Starorusskiy and Novgorodskiy regions of Shelonskiy pyatina. However, according to A.Ya. Degterev and A.L. SHapiro, mass data from cadastres in the first half of XVI c. do not show the ubiquitous trend of the integration of the villages. [17]We shall remind that exactly this trend of the integration of the settlings with simultaneous reduction of their number and growing population of a yard will become the leading one in the following centuries. Pochinok - a new settlement was going to be founded as whole in Novgorod pyatinas in the first half of XVI c. Moreover, there was another tendency - with increasing amount of yards in a village the number new settlements grew, with reducing amount of yards or weak increasing the population densities in villages the number of new settlements was not high. [18]
The data which we have say that peasants were involved in plough of fields different in fertility at that time and besides there were free resources. Even with taken into account of ploughed and "uncomfortable" for agriculture lands in XVI c. in Shelonskiy pyatinas there were vacant lands for mastering though in some cases economic areas of villages, being in the most favorable climatic and soil region of Novgorod land, had already began to touch. In the first half of XVI c. peasants continued to master the territory of Derevskiy pyatina though there were neglected lands. Separated nature of neglected lands speaks about the consequences of the epidemics. However, there were the other reasons for neglecting ploughed lands, first of all, peasants left landed lands for quit-rented ones and monastic lands because of high payments (they were twice larger on landed lands than on quit-rented ones), as well as consequences of the ravaging large landowner's inherited estates, what influenced on peasant farms. In Derevskiy pyatina there was another tendency of involvement in agricultural turn abandoned area of ploughed fields and ploughing new lands at that time. Thereby, during before crisis period there were land reserves for foundation of the new settlements and cultivation of ploughed fields in Novgorod lands.
The crisis broken in Russia in the second half of XVI c, became the effect of the many reasons. Social-economic transformations in country, connected with formation of the autocracy and centralization authorities were not easy. The Supreme power tried to subordinate completely itself inherited estates, to consolidate the estate system, used as state lever of the influence on lord. Livonskay war, having lasted for 25 years, year by year ruined the economy and caused the increase of the state taxes, oprichnina terror caused ruins and peasants leaving for better conditions to the North, or South or southeast of the country. The constant attacks of Tatars, burning Moscow in 1571by them and begun in this time epidemic made the situation worse. Grown worse political and economic situation in the country, in turn, caused great loss during an epidemic, poor harvest and hungry year. A great migration of population from the centre and northwest of the country to its new areas led to economic crisis and neglected earlier inhabited places.

References:
1. Goldstone J.A. Revolution and Rebellion in the East Modern World.Berkeley, 1991; Dunning Ch. Does Jack Goldstone’s Model of Early Modern State Crises Apply to Russia? //Comparative Studies in Society and History, 39, 3 (1997). - p.572-592; Dunning Ch.The Precoditions of Modern Russia's First Civil War // Russians History, 25. 1998.- p.119-131.
2. Goldstone J.A. Revolution and Rebellion in the East Modern World.- p. 459-462.
3. Dunning Ch. The Preconditions of Modern Russia's First Civil War.- p.123-125.
4. Нефедов С.А. Демографически-структурный анализ социально-экономической истории России. Екатеринбург, 2005.
5. Нефедов С.А. О возможности применения структурно-демографической теории при изучении истории России XVI в. // Отечественная история, 2004. №.5. С. 70-71.
6. Аграрная история Северо-Запада России. Вторая половина XV-начало XVI в. Л., 1971. С. 321.
7. Ibid, p. 322.
8. Ibid, p. 323.
9. Ibid, p. 126.
10. Степанова Л.Г. Новгородское крестьянство на рубеже XV- XVI столетий (уровень развития хозяйства). М., 2004. С.122; Степанова Л.Г.Новые подходы в статистической обработке массивов данных писцовых книг конца XV в. (О характере дифференциации крестьянства) //Зажиточное крестьянство России в исторической ретроспективе. Материалы XXVII сессии Симпозиума по аграрной истории Воcточной Европы. Вологда, 2001. С. 66-77.
11. Аграрная история Северо-Запада России. Вторая половина XV-начало XVI в.С. 321.
12. Ibid, p. 79.
13. Ibid, p. 94.
14. Степанова Л.Г.Сравнительный анализ преемственности сельского расселения на основании качества земли // Северо-Запад в аграрной истории России. Калининград, 2008. С.5-25.
15. Аграрная история Северо-Запада России. Новгород. Пятины. Л.,1974. С. 185, 244; Аграрная история Северо-Запада России XVI века. Север. Псков. Общие итоги развития Северо-Запада. Л., 1978. С.149.
16. Аграрная история Северо-Запада России XVI века. Север. Псков. Общие итоги развития Северо-Запада. С.153.
17. Дегтярев А.Я., Шапиро А.Л.Демографическая характеристика системы поселений Северо-Запада Руси в XVI в.// Проблемы исторической демографии СССР. Таллин, 1977. С. 38-39.
18. Аграрная история Северо-Запада России. Вторая половина XV-начало XVI в. С.112-113.     

5.33333
Your rating: None Average: 5.3 (3 votes)
PARTNERS
 
 
image
image
image
image
image
image
image
image
image
image
image
image
image
image
image
image
image
image
image
image
image
image
image
image
image
image
image
image
image
image
image
image
image
image
image
image
image
image
image
image
image
image
image
image
image
image
image
image
image
image
image
image
image
image
image
image
image
image
image
image
Would you like to know all the news about GISAP project and be up to date of all news from GISAP? Register for free news right now and you will be receiving them on your e-mail right away as soon as they are published on GISAP portal.