贝壳电子书 > 英文原著电子书 > lecture iii >

第3章

lecture iii-第3章

小说: lecture iii 字数: 每页4000字

按键盘上方向键 ← 或 → 可快速上下翻页,按键盘上的 Enter 键可回到本书目录页,按键盘上方向键 ↑ 可回到本页顶部!
————未阅读完?加入书签已便下次继续阅读!



forests and wastes。
    Whilst this was the state of things on the banks of the
Dnieper; a similar evolution took place on those of the Don。 An
area; even larger than that of the south…western steppes in the
middle of the sixteenth century; awaited the arrival of those
Great Russian colonists; who founded the so…called Territory of
the Don…Cossacks。 For a while the ground was declared to be the
common property of the whole community; and each family was
allowed to sow and mow wherever it liked; but by…and…by large
villages called 〃stanitza〃 were formed; and the first division of
the ground took place。 Each village received its own area of
arable and meadow ground; pasture and waste land remained the
common property of the whole people; or; as it was said; of the
whole 〃army。〃
    The unlimited right of private homesteads to appropriate as
much soil as each required was scrupulously maintained by these
stanitzas; a fact which in the end produced great inequality in
the distribution of the land。 This inequality was established in
favour of a minority of families out of which the elders of the
people were regularly chosen; but as those who were possessed of
but small parcels of land formed the majority; various economic
arrangements were regularly made at the village folkmotes where
this majority was all powerful; redistributions of land in order
to equalise the shares were very often prescribed and the system
of run…rig tenure made its first appearance。 This took place
almost in our own time; some few stanitzas continuing even now to
maintain their ancient privilege of private appropriation。
    I might continue my survey of the beginnings of the modern
system of village communities by a description of the economic
arrangements still in use among the Cossacks of the Terek or of
the Oural; but if I did so; I should only have to repeat the same
facts; and that in order to deduce the following conclusions。
That the modern system of periodical redistribution of land in
equal shares was quite unknown when colonisation first began; but
that this did not prevent a peculiar kind of agrarian communism;
the foundations of which are to be traced in the internal
constitution of the undivided household; and that this form of
social existence was known to Russia at the beginning of her
history; and was diffused all over her empire; as may be seen
from the frequent occurrence in medieval documents of terms like
〃the hearth;〃 〃the fire〃 (pechische; ognische)。
    All the districts we have passed in review had one thing in
common; serfdom was almost unknown to them。 The peasants of
Archangel for instance were always named 〃svoiezemzi;〃 which
means independent possessors of the soil。 Social distinctions
remained almost unknown to the Little Russians down to the end of
the eighteenth century when Catherine the Second introduced
amongst them the notions of a feudal nobility and serfdom。 The
Cossacks of the Don remained free up to the time of Nicholas。 I
am; therefore; right in saying that agrarian communism is not the
direct result of serfdom; since it has been shown to exist in
regions where serfdom was unknown。
    A careful study of old Russian documents does not add much to
the strength of this argument。 The illiterate peasants could not
consign to writing the economic arrangements they entered into;
and in this fact lies the true reason why; out of the various
categories into which the Russian peasantry was divided during
the middle ages; none is less familiar to us than the free
villager; the occupier of the so…called 〃black hundreds〃 (chernia
sotni)。 The commune was completely independent in matters of
internal concern; there was no need for the government or for
judicial charters to meddle in its system of land tenure。 What
information we can gather from them of the external organisation
of the volost or commune proves however the prevalence of a
communistic and democratic mode of existence。 The assembly of the
people; the folkmote; called in the South Western provinces of
Russia the 〃veche;〃 more often 〃the copa;〃 was formed of all the
house…elders of a volost。 It possessed the right of making local
bye…laws; of choosing the elders of the commune or 〃starostas〃;
of distributing among its members the direct taxes which the
government imposed on agriculture and on the different industries
of the nation (sochi i promisli)。 Persons were also chosen by the
commune to assist the judges in the exercise of their duties;
playing n this occasion the part reserved in medieval Germany to
the so…called Schoffen and in old Sweden to the 〃nemd。〃*
    As to the relation in which the volost stood to the ground
that it occupied; this subject is partly illustrated by the
following facts。
    We possess a small number of private charters and judicial
records; belonging to the fifteenth and the sixteenth centuries;
from which we may see; that the true owner of the soil was partly
the village and partly the 〃volost;〃 or association of villagers。
To give you an instance of what I am saying; I will cite the
precise text of some of these charters。
    In 1555 a lawsuit began between a squire (votchinnik) called
Nefediev and the peasants of eighteen villages all belonging to
the volost of Almesch。 The question which the judges had to
decide; was whether some pastures belonged to the volost or to
the squire。 Witnesses named by each party from among the oldest
inhabitants of the locality declared that the peasants were the
real possessors of the ground in dispute; and that their
ownership went back to a period beyond the memory of man; and the
judge decided that the claims of the squire were null and void。
    In the case just mentioned we find ourselves in presence of a
sort of undivided mark; composed; like that of Germany; of a
certain number of villages possessing lands in common。 These
lands are pastures。 Other charters of the same period show us
cases in which the undivided area of the mark or volost was
composed of forest ground。 Expressions like the following are
frequent in the documents just mentioned: 〃The forest belongs to
the commune (selo) and the villages in common (vopsche); or
〃this〃 piece of forest ground has been given to me by the volost
(the mark); the elder; and the peasants。〃
    No one had the right to clear the forest or reclaim the waste
land lying within the limits of a volost; unless authorised to do
so by the elders and the assembly of peasants。 This fact appears
clearly in the following instance: in 1524; three persons found
some salt wells on the shores of Dvina in the midst of a dark
forest。 They addressed a petition to the Government asking to be
recognized as the legal possessors of the place; and they
supported their demand by the following argument: 〃Not one of the
surrounding marks or volosts has any appurtenances in the place。〃
Had it been otherwise; had the wells been situated on the
appurtenances of a volost; no private person could have made the
demand just mentioned。 The marks or volosts jealously watched
over the integrity of their boundaries; and that from the
earliest times。 In the 〃Lives of the Saints;〃 those early
monuments of our written literature; complaint is sometimes made
of peasants doing their best to get rid of a hermit; established
in a neighbouring forest; 〃because;〃 says the hagiographer; 〃they
feared he would assign to some monastery a part of the ground
they owned。〃*
    The charters give; as I have already said; very little
information about the internal arrangements of the volost and
village; all we know is that the settlements were very far from
resembling those large assemblages of people which are known in
our days under the name of 〃slobodi。〃 As a rule the 〃derevnia〃 or
village contained few hearths; and the villages were scattered
over the whole area of the volost。 The wastes and forests were
used in common; while the meadows and arable fields became the
object of private appropriation。 No equality of shares seem to
have existed; the charters constantly mentioning the 〃best men;〃
〃the men of wealth;〃 (jitii liudi) side by side with the 〃smaller
men〃 (molodschii)。 Some few seem 

返回目录 上一页 下一页 回到顶部 0 0

你可能喜欢的