Moscow, Nauka Publ. 1983. 576 p.

Until recently, there was a lack of a comprehensive study of the history of the Russian working class from its birth to its transformation into the hegemon of the liberation movement. The relevance of the topic also lies in the fact that there is a sharp political and ideological struggle against bourgeois falsifiers around its interpretation. In this connection, the monograph prepared by the Institute of the History of the USSR of the Academy of Sciences of the USSR in cooperation with the Higher School of the Trade Union Movement of the All-Union Central Council of Trade Unions (series "History of the Working Class of the USSR") is of great interest. Authors 1 used " a wide range of ip-

1 Authors ' collective: A. P. Bazhova, E. S. Vilenskaya, M. S. Volin, M. Ya. Volkov, N. F. Demidova, N. A. Ivanova, Yu. I. Kiryanov, A. L. Narochnitsky, Yu. Z. Polevoy, A. A. Preobrazhensky, O. D. Sokolov, A.M. Solovyova, A. S. Trofimov. Editorial Board: M. S. Volin, Yu. I.

page 133

tochnikov, a significant part of which is being introduced into scientific circulation for the first time.

The story begins in the middle of the 17th century, when feudal - serf relations still prevailed in Russia. Industrial production at that time was served by groups of the population, conventionally called work people, whose history for two centuries includes the periods of the formation of large-scale production (XVII-early XVIII c.) and the flourishing of the manufacturing industry (XVIII c.). The production where they were employed was divided into three main groups: one, the predominant, - industrial enterprises The first group consisted mainly of civil labor; the second group consisted of patrimonial enterprises that exploited forced labor; the third group consisted of state - owned and some registered enterprises that combined both types of labor. In the field of view of the authors were also attributed peasants engaged in manufacturing, and otkhodniki. Despite the conditions of serfdom, the labor market was gradually emerging and developing in Russia.

Changes in the Russian economy in the pre-reform decades of the 19th century, as indicated in the book, were marked by the development of a number of industries - sugar beet, coal mining, oil; St. Petersburg became the center of mechanical engineering. Gradually, new industrial areas emerged and became increasingly important in the Ukraine, Transcaucasia, and the Baltic States. The monograph shows that in contrast to the most advanced countries of Europe, Russia was characterized by the simultaneous, parallel development of small-scale production, capitalist manufactory and factory. The authors trace the spread of wage labor in the depths of feudal economy: by the mid-50s of the XIX century, the number of hired workers was estimated at half a million people. Their struggle against oppression became increasingly organized by the end of the eighteenth century. the features inherent in the working-class movement of later periods were already being revealed. The book provides a summary of the workers ' actions in the first half of the 19th century and during the revolutionary situation of 1859-1861. This struggle was of general democratic significance and helped to strengthen the pressure on tsarism and the landlords, forcing them to solve the peasant question.

Against the background of the growth of capitalist industry in Russia in the post-reform years up to the eve of the first bourgeois-democratic revolution, the authors consider the sources of formation of the working class, its position and struggle. An analysis of the development of individual economic regions and the country as a whole led to the conclusion that as a result of the industrial revolution in Russia, an industrial and technical base was created, which was characteristic at that time for states with an average level of development of capitalism. The size of the proletariat grew mainly in connection with the development of heavy industry. In large enterprises, workers became more aware of the commonality of their interests, developing collectivism and class solidarity. From 1861 to 1900, the number of workers increased 4.4 times. Particularly rapid growth was observed during the industrial boom of the 90s of the XIX century. The working class was also formed on the national outskirts. The Russian proletariat took the lead in the struggle of the working people against social and national oppression.

Considerable attention is paid to the economic and legal situation of the proletariat. The authors describe the material living conditions of workers: the length of the working day and year, the ratio of working and free time, the level of wages, occupational diseases and injuries, housing and living conditions and medical care, food, leisure, etc. It is very important that the situation of the proletariat is shown in dynamics. Although the economic situation of the Russian working class remained difficult throughout the capitalist era, it was still somewhat relieved over time. However, the gap between the actual living conditions of the workers and their increasing needs not only did not shrink, but, on the contrary, increased. The situation of workers was affected by unemployment, which reached large proportions during periods of economic crises, depressions and crop failures, remnants of serfdom, political disenfranchisement of workers and defenselessness against the arbitrariness of the state apparatus.

The proletariat has gone through a difficult path of struggle before its actions against

Kiryanov (editors-in-chief), N. A. Ivanova, V. Ya. Laverychev, V. I. Neupokoev, A. A. Preobrazhensky, P. G. Ryndzyunsky.

page 134

oppression and exploitation have become organized. Since the 70s of the XIX century, the leading form of its struggle has been the strike. Until the mid-90s, workers were mainly in favor of increasing wages, improving working conditions, everyday life, etc. But, as the book notes, the working-class movement of that time was not limited to economic demands, contrary to the claims of "economists", Mensheviks and bourgeois falsifiers. Back in the 70s of the 19th century, workers formed their own Unions that demanded political rights for the people and fought for these rights.

An outstanding milestone in the history of the working - class movement was the strike at the Nikolskaya manufactory in Orekhovo-Zuev in 1885, described by V. I. Lenin as the beginning of the modern history of our working-class movement .2 This conclusion is illustrated by the data (table on page 296), which shows the growth of the value of strikes and their scale. The strengthening of the workers ' struggle was also influenced by the activities of Marxist groups and circles that emerged in Russia in the 80s and 90s of the XIX century. The development of the proletarian struggle and the activity of social-democratic organizations prepared the ground for the unification of the working-class movement with scientific socialism and for the creation of a Marxist party, for the transformation of the proletariat into the leading force of the Russian revolutionary liberation movement.

The revolutionary actions of the Russian working class under the leadership of the Social Democrats at the beginning of the 20th century gained international significance. Coverage of this important aspect of the Russian labor movement, based largely on little-known material, is one of the book's obvious strengths. The book emphasizes that the activities of Lenin, Iskra, and the ideological defeat of Economism, the Social Revolutionaries, nationalists, and all pseudo-socialist trends that led the proletariat away from the path of political struggle were invaluable for the development of the proletarian struggle. It was precisely the victory of the Leninist-Iskra trend in the social-democratic organizations of Russia that made possible the creation of a revolutionary Marxist party of a new type.

The authors made an attempt to trace the stages of involvement of various groups of workers in the revolutionary movement and their further participation in it. The book is a well-reasoned critique of bourgeois falsifications of the history of the Russian workers ' and social - democratic movement.

It is noteworthy that there is a solid reference apparatus that makes up about a quarter of the volume's text (chronicle of events, list of archives, indexes of names, geographical names and enterprises, bibliography). The reference apparatus, as well as the illustrations placed in the book, raise the scientific level of the publication.

At the same time, there are some inaccuracies in the book. On pages 106-107, the authors gave different points of view on the beginning of the industrial revolution in Russia. But that doesn't make it any clearer to the reader. The authors adhere to the widespread opinion that the coup began in the 30-40s of the XIX century. The same point of view is expressed even more categorically in the conclusion. However, when presenting specific material, it turns out that the industrial revolution at the specified time already affected the "construction of railways", which is not confirmed by the available data. The level of mechanization of production in the sugar industry given as an example can hardly give grounds for such dating.

Covering the activities of the revolutionary narodnik organization of the Dolgushinites (p. 265-266), the authors point out that in the "proclamation on the demonstration on the square of the Kazan Cathedral in St. Petersburg", the Dolgushinites are ranked on a par with the Decembrists, Petrashevites and Chernyshevsky on their merits. It was necessary to comment on the proclamation: after all, its content is not well known to a wide range of readers.

Individual pages of the book are overloaded with numbers. When summing up the results of the general strike in Southern Russia in the summer of 1903, it is stated (p.389) that 120-130 thousand workers participated in it. The literature, as you know, provides other data - more than 200 thousand workers. At the end of the strike in Transcaucasia, Iskra (No. 47 )reported that 95-100 thousand workers were on strike there; in the Ukraine, more than 100 thousand workers were on strike. 3 Page 327 contains incomplete data (96 strikes) on the working-class movement in the Ukraine in the previous year.

2 See Lenin V. I. PSS. Vol. 9, p. 250.

3 Icтopiя paбiтничoro класу Украiськоi PCP. T. 1. Киiв. 1967, с. 261.

page 135

1895-1900. Meanwhile, the literature provides more reliable information (212 strikes and 14 riots); 120,000 workers took part in strikes and 17,000 people participated in riots .4
In such a fundamental publication as the peer-reviewed volume, all definitions should be precise and clear. The book states (p. 175) that "at the end of the 19th century, the Kiev region, encompassing the vast southwestern provinces of Ukraine, achieved significant industrial development." The footnote lists the provinces assigned by the authors to this region, including Chernihiv, Poltava, and Bessarabia. However, the historical and economic literature usually distinguishes the end of the XIX - beginning of the XX century in Ukraine. two industrial and economic districts: the coal and metallurgical district (essentially the former Ekaterinoslav province) and the south-western district, the second in economic importance, where light industry and its raw material sources were concentrated .5 Bessarabia Province was not part of the southwestern part of Ukraine. And the other two provinces listed above were part of the Kiev Factory district (but not the economic district). It also named the largest enterprise in Kiev, the South Russian Machine-Building Plant, which employed 2.5 thousand workers. But 2.5 thousand is the number of workers in the workshops of the South-Western Railway, and only 60 people worked at the plant6 .

It seems that the authors exaggerated the role of the writer P. D. Boborykin in "portraying the work and life of workers" (p. 422). There is no reason to put him next to A. M. Gorky and A. S. Serafimovich. Boborykin wrote more about landlords and nobles.

The publication of the peer-reviewed work is a significant event in our historiography, reflecting the large scale of tasks being solved by Soviet historical science.

4 Там же, с. 210; Iсторiя УкраIнськоI PCP. T. 3. КиIв. 1978, с. 487.

5 Essays on the history of the Communist Party of Ukraine. Kyiv. 1977, p. 10. On economic districts, see also: Lyashchenko P. I. Istoriya narodnogo khozyaistva SSSR [History of the National Economy of the USSR], vol. 2, Moscow, 1950, p. 159.

6 Istoriya Kiiva, Vol. 1, Kiev 1960, p. 398.

page 136

Permanent link to this publication: