Russian Peasants

ETHNONYM: Great Russians

Orientation

Identification. The Russian peasants are part of the eastern branch of the Slavic ethnic unit. This population is generally called simply "Russian," both by itself and by others "Great Russian" is a more specific term that distinguishes the Eastern Slavs from other Slavic groups inhabiting the historical territory of the Russian Empire—Belarussians ("White Russians") and Ukrainians ("Little Russians"). There are also many local ethnonyms.

Location. The population discussed in this article inhabits the territory extending from the White Sea in the north to the northern shore of the Black Sea and the northern slope of the Great Caucasus Mountains in the south. The territory is bounded on the east by the Ural Mountains and on the west by territories inhabited by the Baltic peoples, Poles, Ukrainians, and Belarussians. Russian territory consists of a very large plain dissected by ranges of hills and ravines, by many rivers, and (particularly in the north) by a large number of lakes. The plain was originally heavily wooded and is still wooded and marshy in many places. The climate is continental—marked by hot summers and cold winters, particularly in the north.

Demography. In 1989, 34 percent of the population of the USSR was rural, although the proportion of rural residents varied from region to region. Much of the increase in the urban population is accounted for by out-migration from rural areas. In many places, there is a shortage of young women. The out-migration of women occurs, in many cases, because of the lack of potential marriage partners in the countryside but also because of limited opportunities for high-status employment and perceived poorer living conditions. Public-health facilities in rural areas are significantly worse than in the cities, and consequently infant mortality is higher. The rural population—including the work force—is aging. Much of the work in agriculture is now done by people on pensions and with relatively low levels of education and skills. Recent economic and social reforms have yet to make a dent in this problem.

Linguistic Affiliation. The Russians speak one of the three major languages of the East Slavic Division of the Slavic Branch of the Indo-European Linguistic Family.

History and Cultural Relations

The Russian ethnos was consolidated during the course of the first millennium c.e. from a large number of small tribes living in the northern part of present-day Russian territory. Beginning in the fourteenth and fifteenth centuries, they spread out to the south and east, occupying the Don region, the northern Black Sea coast, the valley of the Terek River, and parts of the Transcaucasus and Siberia. In the process, the Russians absorbed many small originally Finnic-speaking and Turkic-speaking ethnic groups, which are now indistinguishable from them in language and culture. (Other groups remain encapsulated within Russian territory; some of them had autonomous status under the Soviet government.) During the southward migration, the Russian ethnos also absorbed large numbers of people who were originally Ukrainian or belonged to other local ethnic groups. It is worth emphasizing, however, that the Russians remain a northern people by origin and traditions, and that the extreme north of the country is their ethnic heartland.

Before the creation of the Russian Empire, Russian territory included a number of independent and semi-independent princedoms and republics—Novgorod, Pskov, Tver, and others. During the history of the empire, other Russian groups were formed in the outlying segments of the territory, from populations of runaway serfs and peasant migrants. These groups were distinguished in social status and organization from the peasants of the central Russian territory, and some of these distinctions, based in part also on religious differences, persist to this day.

The peasant population of the central Russian territory is marked by a strong sense of ethnic identity and separation from other groups, both Western European (predominantly Roman Catholic) and Eastern (predominantly Turkic and Muslim). The outlying Russian groups absorbed much of the culture of the people among whom they settled, however, and carried on extensive trade with them. Some groups of Russian religious dissidents, in fact, even crossed over into Romanian, Turkish, or Chinese territory.

Settlements

The Russian peasant settlement pattern varied widely, depending both on the configuration of the landscape and on the type of economic activity characteristic of a particular area. Perhaps the most typical pattern in the central Russian territory was the arrangement of houses on both sides of a single street, surrounded on all sides by cultivated fields (except where a swamp or a forest intervened). There were also "cluster villages," without a regular street pattern, and individual homesteads in forests. Larger villages with churches and small market towns usually had some public buildings and public squares with rows of stalls for the sale of agricultural products and other goods. Increased population and industrialization under the Soviet regime led to the urbanization of many areas and to the establishment of "settlements of urban type," with regular street grids, trolley lines, utilities, and the like. Many of the older villages are losing population or were in the past declared "unpromising," and new facilities were not built in them. Toward the end of the Soviet regime, this policy was reversed in an attempt to revitalize agriculture. To attract needed workers, collective and state farms and other enterprises undertook ambitious programs to develop social, educational, and medical facilities.

The spatial organization of houses and farmsteads varied from region to region but generally reflected the family organization. In northern Russia, where large extended families were common, the dwelling house, outbuildings, and farmyard were united under one roof, and access was obtained through a large and sometimes elaborate gate. In the more southerly regions, both the residential unit and the buildings housing it were usually smaller. The standard house-type in northern and central Russia was the "five-walled house" (with a central dividing wall), built of logs, with a thatched roof. The ritual center of the house was the hearth, usually located opposite the entrance, where guests were seated. The central and most important item of furniture was the clay stove, which served for heating, cooking, and bathing (unless there was a separate bathhouse). Near the stove, wooden shelves, which served in place of beds for sleeping, were attached to the wall.

In southern Russia, whitewashed adobe was used in place of logs for building houses. The layout and furnishing was broadly similar, but standards of convenience and cleanliness were markedly higher. For example, livestock were not admitted inside the house, as was common in the north.

At present, except in the most remote regions, the traditional log-and-thatch house has been replaced by a modern frame or brick structure, with furnishings of the urban type (chairs, iron bedsteads, kitchen ranges, and the like). Electricity, piped water, and indoor plumbing are available on the more advanced collective and state farms.

Economy

Subsistence and Commercial Activities. Economic activity traditionally varied widely but fell into several rather well-defined categories. In the "Black Earth" regions in the central and southern parts of the country, large-scale grain farming was practiced, with the use of horse-drawn and, later, motorized equipment and large contingents of hired labor. Under the Soviet regime, these same territories were occupied by large collective and state farms. In recent years, conversion of collective farms to state farms has been widespread in many areas. In the non-Black Earth regions, in the northern and northeastern parts of the country and along the Volga, the farms were smaller, and the emphasis was on root crops, vegetables, dairying, and relatively small amounts of grain, chiefly rye. In many places, the fertility of the soil and the length of the growing season did not permit the production of enough grain to ensure a year-round food supply, and a large proportion of the male population was employed in seasonal migrant labor—mining, lumbering, barge hauling, factory work (especially from the mid-nineteenth century on), and various migrant crafts. In addition, market-gardening operations existed near the cities; fishing in lakes and rivers and year-round lumbering and rafting of timber in the northern forests either supplemented agricultural activity or replaced it entirely.

Industrial Arts. Traditionally, Russian peasants engaged in a large number of crafts, producing both utilitarian articles (small wooden and metal tools and utensils) and objects of art (carved rock crystal, lacquer work, wood carving, embroidery, decorated metal trays, and the like). The more artistic branches were centered in specific villages and small towns, such as Palekh and Gus'-Khrustal'nyi, northeast of Moscow. The utilitarian articles were produced by peripatetic craftsmen on a part-time basis. Most of these crafts have now died out, although the artistic varieties have been organized into cooperatives under state sponsorship, with the fully accredited master artisans belonging to the national union of artists.

Trade. Historically, trade in agricultural produce, lumber, industrial raw materials, and other categories of goods was handled by merchants who were organized into "guilds," according to the amount of capital they commanded. In some parts of the country—chiefly the grain-producing areas and the Volga region—this system was well developed from the mid-nineteenth century on and handled large volumes of goods. On the other hand, many areas produced little if any surplus and supported only individual pedlars traveling on foot or with a horse and cart. Agricultural surpluses were often sold in market towns by the producers themselves. Under the Soviet regime, agricultural products were bought by state purchasing agencies from collective farms and individual farmers and distributed through the trade network. This distribution system operated inefficiently, however, and shortages of foodstuffs were frequent throughout the Soviet period, sometimes because of crop failures but sometimes independently of such events. Lack of the necessary infrastructure—roads, transport, well-sited storage and processing facilities—and anti-quated equipment are also responsible for many of the shortages in particular places. A large proportion of the foodstuffs reaching consumers comes from the private plots of collective-farm members and state-farm workers. The marketing of foodstuffs resulting from private production can be expected to increase with the full implementation of reforms that are now planned to move the country toward a market economy.

Division of Labor. In the traditional rural community, each peasant was able to carry out all of the functions necessary to maintain a fanning operation. Only a few crafts, such as the building of the traditional clay stove, were entrusted to specialists. On the other hand, there was a sharp division of labor by gender, domestic tasks within the farm enclosure being regarded as specifically female. Women were entitled to the proceeds of all such activities, which were inherited in the female line separately from the farm itself and the rights to land. Small domestic animals such as poultry and rabbits were managed by women, who generally were also in charge of the marketing of agricultural goods. This division of labor by gender appears to have persisted more or less unchanged, despite the creation of new female occupations—schoolteacher, bookkeeper, cultural worker, physician or physican's assistant, agricultural technician, and administrator—in the countryside.

Land Tenure. The system of land tenure characteristic of the Russian peasantry passed through a complex historical evolution. Traditionally, the basic iandholding unit was the peasant commune, within which land allotments were periodically redistributed in strips. Membership in the commune was vested in households, each of which was represented in the governing body of the commune by its senior male member; in most places, women had no voice in this gathering. In some villages, where there were or had once been both serfs (belonging to individual landlords) and state peasants, two communes existed side by side. In the late nineteenth and early twentieth centuries, the czarist government made a conscious attempt to break up the commune and set up individual family farms. This program, known as the Stolypin land reform, after a prime minister of the period, was rescinded after the 1917 Revolution. The land code of 1922 provided for what was called "laboring tenure": each peasant household was entitled to as much land as it could work with its members and working stock. Some of the more prosperous peasants employed hired labor, at least seasonally, but this was actively discouraged and, by the end of the 1920s, entirely forbidden. From the early 1930s, the rural population was organized into collective farms—juridically independent cooperatives that owned the means of production and paid their members for labor, in cash or in kind (predominantly the latter until recently)—and state farms, in which the state conducted the entire operation, assumed all risks, and paid the workers money wages. The land itself is entirely owned by the state. Each collective-farm household was entitled to a plot of land for its own use (the size of which varied from one area to another) and could own livestock within certain limits. This system of land tenure remained basically unchanged until the reforms introduced in the late 1980s. The structure of the countryside is now in a state of flux, and its ultimate form cannot be predicted at this time, although the proposed new land code envisages permanent rental of land by household units, with inheritance of rights to the use of private plots.

Kinship

The largest kin group was the patrilineal extended family. Descent was reckoned in the male line. Kinship terminology followed the standard European pattern, except that affinal kin were denoted by different terms, depending on the gender of the speaker. Kinship relations outside the nuclear family remain important even today, in terms of mutual assistance, the distribution of goods, and the pattern of rural migration.

Marriage and Family

Marriage. Historically, marriage among the Russian peasantry, as in most peasant populations, was the result of a deal, struck between two kindreds, involving exchanges of goods, rights to land, and rights to the labor power of individuals. Marriage was marked by highly elaborate ceremonial, some of it of pagan origin, with a markedly theatrical bent. It was also typically marked by a religious ceremony, but this was quite separate, and in many places cohabitation was assumed to begin with the completion of this peasant ritual cycle, whereas the religious ceremony might be delayed until the services of a priest were available or until the birth of the first child.

Marriage was normally virilocal, but in some cases, when there were no other males available, the bridegroom moved in with his in-laws, taking charge of their farm and inheriting it upon their death.

Formal divorce was extremely rare in the traditional peasant community and was usually accompanied by some degree of scandal and conflict. The Orthodox church, in particular, made no provision for divorce.

Domestic Unit. The domestic unit was a patrilineal extended family, often incomplete. The household unit usually persisted until the death of the senior male, after which the brothers separated and set up new households.

Inheritance. Inheritance applied only when the household broke up, or when a given individual separated from it, since the peasant household traditionally was a corporate unit that survived the death of any particular individual. Both specifically female property and certain kinds of male property (larger tools and craft equipment) were inherited separately and were not subject to division on the breakup of the household. Under modern conditions, the corporate nature of the household has been severely qualified, though it has not disappeared entirely. Inheritance of personal property was subject to the norms of general Soviet law.

Socialization. In the pre-Revolutionary Russian village, peasant children learned from their parents all the peasant skills appropriate to their gender. Formal education was unavailable in most places and, where it did exist, included only two or four years of instruction. Children who were considered promising might be sent to the church school in the nearest large town.

The Soviet regime instituted a system of primary and secondary education. Postsecondary schooling is also widely available, particularly for those with the proper sponsorship and political credentials. On the other hand, available sources reveal very little about the mechanisms of informal socialization and training in traditional peasant skills. The development of the modern Russian village is hindered by the fact that there is a pronounced drain of young people out of rural areas to the cities and also by the fact that agriculture and rural occupations generally have very low prestige.

Sociopolitical Organization

Traditionally, there was a sharp division between the sociopolitical organization imposed from above by the state through landlords or local officials and that which was administered by the peasants themselves through their village assembly. This assembly was the governing body of the local community; normally, only males had a voice. The assembly controlled rights to land (arable, pasture, or forest), allocated community tasks, and was responsible to the landlord for feudal dues and to the state for the collection of taxes and the provision of recruits for the army.

Lines of authority were specified either through general Soviet law or through the charter of the collective farm. The governing agency of the local community was the village soviet, which, at least in theory, maintained a staff of workers to handle day-to-day matters. In most instances, however, actual power was wielded by the local committees of the Communist party on various levels. This situation may soon change, pursuant to the current political reform, but there is little firm indication as yet that the local soviets will be given any real power, such as would make them a countervailing force against chairmen of collective farms and their governing boards or against directors of state farms or the heads of other important economic organizations.

Social Control. In the pre-Revolutionary Russian village, two basic forms of social control, with sometimes conflicting aims, were operative: the national law, as enforced by officials, and local custom, as enforced by the community acting through informal groups or, in some instances, as interpreted by the courts. Specific data on the workings of community-based enforcement are extremely scarce for European Russia proper, but in Siberia, where there was no serfdom, the local community had a fairly well-developed system of criminal investigation and enforcement, staffed by constables, messengers, and so forth chosen from the local community. Ethnographic sources show that community standards of morality were enforced by groups of young people who, for example, vandalized the property of those who were considered guilty of violating them, and that persistent thieves and people guilty of assaultive behavior were sometimes dealt with by being murdered or driven out of the community. On the other hand, the national law was enforced by a uniformed constable, who typically did not live in the village, and a small group of other officials subordinate to him. Corruption of such minor officials was considered a matter of course by the peasants.

Religion and Expressive Culture

Religious Beliefs. The formal religion of the Russian peasants was traditionally Russian Orthodoxy. There was a marked social distance between the peasantry and the Orthodox clergy, however, who functioned in the countryside as officials and were regarded as such. Russian Orthodox observance was for most peasants largely a formal matter, confined to certain festivals during the year and certain important life transitions. The pre-Christian Slavic folk religion operated as a substrate; its observances were given Orthodox form and tied to appropriate occasions in the Orthodox calendar.

Throughout the Soviet period all forms of religious observance were actively discouraged, although the degree and kind of antireligious activity varied over time. Late Soviet policy changes led to a decrease in the pressure against religious observance in general and against individual religious believers. The number of functioning Russian Orthodox churches has increased somewhat, and new churches are being built. At present Russian Orthodox observance is characteristic primarily of some members of the older generation, although, depending on the demographics of the area, more young people are participating than was previously admitted—in part because Russian Orthodoxy is regarded by many as an expression of Russian ethnic allegiance. Pre-Christian rituals have died out except in extremely remote places.

Super naturals in the folk religion included a wide variety of nature spirits—the domovoi (house spirit), the leshii (wood goblin), and the rusalka (water sprite)—most of whom were considered malevolent, although they could be mollified by proper treatment. These beings, except for the house spirit, were subsumed under the general heading of "unclean power."

Certain individuals had the reputation of being skilled in dealing with these folk supernaturals and were consulted on an informal basis. Some of them also functioned as medical practitioners, herbalists, and the like and, in some cases, possessed actual knowledge of effective remedies.

Folk Ritual. There was an elaborate complex of rituals tied to the various stages of the agricultural year and, more generally, to the succession of the seasons. By tying the more important of these festivals, which retained significant pre-Christian elements, to Russian Orthodox festivals, the church attempted to co-opt and control them. For example, Trinity (Troitsa), celebrated in early spring, was marked by cleaning and decoration of the homestead area with flowers and cut grass. Maslennitsa (corresponding to the European Mardi Gras) featured feasting, pagaentry, and the setting up of traditional straw and wooden figures carried on carts. Most of these rituals have now died out, but certain traditional elements were incorporated into Soviet civil observances in an attempt to give them ethnic coloration and a more festive character. The observances of the traditional agricultural cycle show clear connections with those that are typical of the Indo-European peoples generally and clear signs of belief in sympathetic and imitative magic.

Arts. The tradition of Russian decorative folk art is extremely rich and has given rise to an immense literature. Its most prominent practices are wood carving (both in relief and of freestanding figures), embroidery, decorative painting on trays and other household articles, and architectural decoration. Many of the typical motifs of Russian folk art derive from the pre-Christian religious system. The tradition of folk decorative art has now lost much of its vitality, except in those instances in which it was deliberately cultivated by the state and placed in the hands of specialists. On the other hand, Russian folk music, which also has an old and rich tradition, still enjoys great popularity and is cultivated on many levels, from professional ensembles to local amateur groups.

Death and Afterlife. Funerary ceremony was in the hands of the Russian Orthodox clergy. However, certain features of the handling of the dead—particularly those who for one reason or another were not considered eligible for Christian burial (suicides, chronic alcoholics, and those who during life had been known as sorcerers)—show traces of the influence of pre-Christian religious cults.

Bibliography

Anokhina, L. A., V. Iu. Krupianskaia, and M. N. Shmeleva (1973). "On the Study of the Russian Peasantry." Translated by Stephen P. Dunn and Ethel Dunn. Current Anthropology 14:143-157.

Chizhikova, L. N. (1966). "Dwellings of the Russians." Soviet Anthropology and Archeology 5:32-55.

Dunn, S. P., and E. Dunn (1967). The Peasants of Central Russia. New York: Holt, Rinehart & Winston. Corrected ed., with new introductory material and new reading list. 1988. Prospect Heights, Ill: Waveland Press.

Hubbs, J. (1988). Mother Russia: The Feminine Myth in Russian Culture. Bloomington and Indianapolis: Indiana University Press.

Ivanits, L. (1989). Russian Folk Belief. Armonk, N.Y.: M. E. Sharpe.

Pushkareva, L. A., and M. N. Shmeleva (1974). "The Contemporary Russian Peasant Wedding." Introduction to Soviet Ethnography 1:343-362.

STEPHEN P. DUNN AND ETHEL DUNN