At the request of our readers, we continue the series of articles dedicated to the pre-revolutionary history of our country.
Today's material is devoted to the state of the economy, science and education in tsarist Russia on the eve of the First World War. In 1910, an event took place that can be considered the beginning of the atomic program of pre-revolutionary Russia. IN AND. Vernadsky made a report at the Academy of Sciences on the topic "Challenges of the day in the field of radium."
“Now, when mankind is entering a new age of radiant - atomic - energy, we, and not others, should know, should find out what the soil of our native country contains in this respect,” Vernadsky said.
And what do you think, the "royal bureaucrats" spat on the lone genius, and his insight remained unclaimed? Nothing like this. A geological expedition is sent to search for radioactive deposits and finds uranium, research in the field of nuclear physics is rapidly developing. The Duma in 1913 is considering legislative initiatives in the field of studying the radioactive deposits of the empire … This is the everyday life of "bastard" Russia.
Everyone knows the names of such outstanding pre-revolutionary scientists as D. I. Mendeleev, I. P. Pavlov, A. M. Lyapunov and others. The story of their activities and achievements will take up whole volumes, but I would like now not to say about them, but to cite a number of facts directly linked to 1913.
In 1913, factory tests of the "Crab" - the world's first underwater minelayer M. P. Nalyotova. During the war of 1914-1918. "Crab" was in the Black Sea Fleet, went on military campaigns, and, by the way, it was on its mines that the Turkish gunboat "Isa-Reis" was blown up.
In 1913, a new page in the history of aviation opened: the world's first four-engine aircraft took off. Its creator was the Russian designer I. I. Sikorsky.
Another pre-revolutionary engineer, D. P. Grigorovich, in 1913 he built the "flying boat" M-1. One of the best seaplanes of the First World War, the M-5, became a direct descendant of the M-1.
In 1913, the gunsmith V. G. Fedorov began testing an automatic rifle. The development of this idea during the First World War was the famous Fedorov assault rifle. By the way, under the leadership of Fedorov, V. A. Degtyarev, who later became a famous designer.
At the beginning of the 20th century, our country was also on an economic upsurge. To prove this thesis, let us first turn to the fundamental research of Doctor of Sciences, Professor V. I. Bovykina "Financial Capital in Russia on the Eve of the First World War".
Even for the most developed countries of the world, the beginning of the 20th century is still a period of "coal, steam locomotives and steel"; however, the role of oil is already quite large. Therefore, the figures characterizing the situation in these areas are fundamental. So, coal mining: 1909 - 23, 3659 million tons, 1913 - 31, 24 million tons, growth - 33, 7%. Production of petroleum products: 1909 - 6, 3079 million tons, 1913 - 6, 6184 million tons, growth - 4.9%. Pig iron smelting: 1909 - 2.8714 million tons, 1913 - 4.635 million tons, growth - 61.4%. Steel smelting: 1909 - 3.1322 million tons, 1913 - 4.918 million tons, growth - 57%. Rolled steel production: 1909 - 2.6679 million tons, 1913 - 4.0386 million tons, growth - 51.4%.
Production of steam locomotives: 1909 - 525 units, 1913 - 654 units, growth - 24.6%. Production of wagons: 1909 - 6389 units, 1913 - 20 492 units, growth - 220.7%.
In general, statistics show that in the period 1909-1913. the value of industrial funds has increased markedly. Buildings: 1909 - 1.656 billion rubles, 1913 - 2.185 billion rubles, growth - 31.9%. Equipment: 1909 - 1, 385 billion rubles, 1913 - 1, 785 billion rubles, growth - 28, 9%.
As for the situation in agriculture, the total harvest of wheat, rye, barley, oats, corn, millet, buckwheat, peas, lentils, spelled, beans amounted to 79 million tons in 1909, in 1913 - 89.8 million tons, an increase - 13.7%. Moreover, in the period 1905-1914. Russia accounted for 20.4% of the world harvest of wheat, 51.5% of rye, 31.3% of barley, 23.8% of oats.
But, perhaps, against this background, the export of the above crops also increased sharply, as a result of which domestic consumption decreased? Well, let's check the old thesis "we will not finish eating, but we will take out" and look at the exported rates. 1909 - 12, 2 million tons, 1913 - 10, 4 million tons. Exports have declined.
In addition, Russia accounted for 10.1% of the world production of beet and cane sugar. The absolute numbers look like this. Granulated sugar production: 1909 - 1.0367 million tons, 1913 - 1.16 million tons, growth - 6, 7%. Refined sugar: 1909 - 505,900 tons, 1913 - 942,900 tons, growth - 86.4%.
To characterize the dynamics of the value of agricultural assets, I will give the following figures. Household buildings: 1909 - 3, 242 billion rubles, 1913 - 3, 482 billion rubles, growth - 7, 4%. Equipment and inventory: 1909 - 2.18 billion rubles, 1913 - 2.498 billion rubles, growth - 17.9%. Livestock: 1909 - 6, 941 billion rubles, 1913 - 7, 109 billion rubles, growth - 2.4%.
Important information on the situation in pre-revolutionary Russia can be found in A. E. Snesareva. His testimony is all the more valuable when we consider that he is an enemy of "rotten tsarism." This can be judged by the facts of his biography. The Tsar's major general in October 1917 became a lieutenant general, under the Bolsheviks he led the North Caucasian military district, organized the defense of Tsaritsyn, held the post of chief of the Academy of the General Staff of the Red Army, became the Hero of Labor. Of course, the period of repression of the 1930s does not bypass him, but the death sentence is commuted to a term in a camp. However, Snesarev is being released ahead of schedule, and this once again shows that he is not a stranger to the Soviet regime …
So, Snesarev in the book "Military Geography of Russia" operates with the following data relating to the beginning of the XX century. The amount of bread and potatoes harvested per person (in poods): USA - 79, Russia - 47, 5, Germany - 35, France - 39. Number of horses (in millions): European Russia - 20, 751, USA - 19, 946, Germany - 4, 205, Great Britain - 2, 093, France - 3, 647. Already these figures show the price of common cliches about "starving" peasants and how they "lacked" horses in the farm. It is worth adding here the data of a major Western expert, Professor Paul Gregory, from his book “The Economic Growth of the Russian Empire (Late 19th - Early 20th Centuries). New calculations and estimates”. He noted that between 1885-1889 and 1897-1901. the value of grain left by peasants for their own consumption in constant prices increased by 51%. At this time, the rural population increased by only 17%.
Of course, in the history of many countries there are many examples when economic growth was replaced by stagnation and even decline. Russia is no exception, and this gives a wide scope for biased selection of facts. There is always an opportunity to tweak the figures of the crisis period, or, on the contrary, use statistics related to several of the most successful years. In this sense, it will be useful to take the period 1887-1913, which was by no means simple. There was a severe crop failure in 1891-92, and the world economic crisis of 1900-1903, and the costly Russo-Japanese War, and massive strikes, and large-scale hostilities during the "revolution of 1905-07", and rampant terrorism.
So, as the doctor of historical sciences L. I. Borodkin in the article "Pre-revolutionary industrialization and its interpretations", in 1887-1913. the average industrial growth rate was 6, 65%. This is an outstanding result, but critics of the "old regime" argue that Russia during the reign of Nicholas II increasingly lagged behind the top four most developed countries in the world. They point out that direct comparisons of growth rates between economies of different sizes are inappropriate. Roughly speaking, let the size of one economy be 1000 conventional units, and the other - 100, while the growth is 1 and 5%, respectively. As you can see, 1% in absolute terms is equal to 10 units, and 5% in the second case - only 5 units.
Is this model correct for our country? To answer this question, let us use the book “Russia and World Business: Deeds and Fates. Alfred Nobel, Adolf Rothstein, Hermann Spitzer, Rudolf Diesel "under the total. ed. IN AND. Bovykin and the statistical and documentary reference book "Russia 1913" prepared by the RAS Institute of Russian History.
Indeed, on the eve of the First World War, Russia produced industrial products 2, 6 times less than Great Britain, 3 times less than Germany, and 6, 7 times less than the United States. And here is how in 1913 five countries were distributed according to their shares in world industrial production: USA - 35.8%, Germany - 15.7%, Great Britain - 14%, France - 6.4%, Russia - 5.3%. And here, against the background of the top three, domestic indicators look modest. But is it true that Russia lagged more and more behind the world leaders? Not true. For the period 1885-1913. Russia's lag behind Great Britain has decreased threefold, and behind Germany - by a quarter. In terms of absolute gross indices of industrial production, Russia is almost on par with France.
It is not surprising that the share of Russia in the world industrial production, which was in 1881-1885. 3.4%, reached 5.3% in 1913. In all fairness, it must be admitted that it was not possible to close the gap with the Americans. In 1896-90. the share of the United States was 30.1%, and that of Russia - 5%, that is, 25.5% less, and in 1913 the gap increased to 30.5%. However, this reproach to "tsarism" applies to three other countries of the "big five". In 1896-1900. the share of Great Britain was 19.5% against 30.1% among Americans, and in 1913 - 14 and 35.8%, respectively. The gap increased from 10.6 to 21.8%. For Germany, similar indicators look like this: 16.6% versus 30.1%; 15.7 and 35.8%. The gap has increased from 13.5 to 20.1%. And finally, France: 7.1% versus 30.1%; 6, 4 and 35, 8%. The lag behind the United States was 23%, and in 1913 it reached 29.4%.
Despite all these numbers, skeptics are not giving up, trying to gain a foothold on the next line of defense. Having acknowledged the impressive successes of tsarist Russia, they say that these successes were achieved mainly due to colossal external borrowings. Well, let's open the directory "Russia 1913".
So, our country in 1913 paid off 183 million rubles on foreign debts. Let's compare with the total revenues of the national budget in 1913: after all, debts are paid out of revenues. Budget revenues that year amounted to 3.4312 billion rubles. This means that only 5.33% of budget revenues were spent on foreign payments. Well, do you see here "enslaving dependence", "weak financial system" and similar signs of "decaying tsarism"?
They can object to this as follows: maybe Russia has collected huge loans, of which it paid off previous loans, and its own income was small.
Let's check this version. Let's take a few items of budget revenues in 1913, which are known to have been formed at the expense of their own economy. Account in millions of rubles.
So, direct taxes - 272.5; indirect taxes - 708, 1; duties - 231, 2; government regalia - 1024, 9; income from state property and capital - 1043, 7. I repeat that these are not all income items, but in general they will give 3, 2804 billion rubles. Let me remind you that overseas payments in that year amounted to 183 million rubles, that is, 5, 58% of the main income items of the Russian budget. Indeed, the state railways alone brought the budget of 1913 813.6 million rubles! Say what you like, no matter how you go on your ears, but there is no trace of bondage from foreign creditors.
Now let's turn to such a parameter as productive investments in Russian securities (joint-stock entrepreneurship, railways, municipal services, private mortgage loans). Let us again use Bovykin's work "Financial Capital in Russia on the Eve of the First World War."
Domestic productive capital investments in Russian securities for the period 1900-1908 amounted to 1, 149 billion rubles, foreign investments - 222 million rubles, and in total - 1, 371 billion. Accordingly, in the period 1908-1913. domestic productive capital investments increased to 3, 005 billion rubles, and foreign ones - up to 964 million rubles.
Those who talk about Russia's dependence on foreign capital may emphasize that the share of “foreign” money in capital investments has increased. This is true: in the years 1900-1908. it was 16, 2%, and in 1908-1913. increased to 24.4%. But note that domestic investments in 1908-1913. 2, 2 times exceeded even the total volume of investments (domestic plus foreign) in the previous period, that is, in 1900-1908. Is this not evidence of a noticeable increase in Russian capital proper?
We now turn to highlighting some of the social aspects. Everyone has heard the standard reasoning on the topic "how the damned tsarism did not allow the poor" cook's children "to study. From endless repetition, this cliche came to be perceived as a self-evident fact. Let us turn to the work of the Center for Sociological Research of Moscow University, which conducted a comparative analysis of the social “portrait” of a student at Moscow State University in 2004 and 1904. It turned out that in 1904, 19% of the students of this prestigious educational institution were from the village (village). Of course, we can say that these are the children of rural landowners, but we will take into account that 20% of the students of Moscow University came from families with a property status below the average, and 67% belonged to the middle strata. Moreover, only 26% of students had fathers with higher education (6% had mothers with higher education). This shows that a significant part of the students come from poor and poor, very simple families.
But if this was the case in one of the best universities in the empire, then it is obvious that the class barriers under Nicholas II were becoming a thing of the past. Until now, even among people skeptical of Bolshevism, it is customary to consider the achievements of the Soviet government in the field of education as indisputable. At the same time, it is tacitly accepted that education in tsarist Russia was at an extremely low level. Let's look at this issue, relying on the work of major specialists - A. E. Ivanov ("Higher School of Russia in the late 19th - early 20th centuries") and D. L. Saprykina ("The educational potential of the Russian Empire").
On the eve of the revolution, the education system in Russia took the following form. The first stage - 3-4 years of primary education; then another 4 years in a gymnasium or a course in higher primary schools and other relevant vocational schools; the third stage - another 4 years of complete secondary education, and, finally, higher educational institutions. A separate educational sector was educational institutions for adults.
In 1894, that is, at the very beginning of the reign of Nicholas II, the number of students at the gymnasium level was 224,100 people, that is, 1, 9 students per 1000 inhabitants of our country. In 1913, the absolute number of students reached 677,100, that is, 4 per 1,000. But this does not include military, private and some departmental educational institutions. Making the appropriate amendment, we get about 800,000 students at the gymnasium level, which gives 4, 9 people per 1000.
For comparison, let's take France of the same era. True, there are data not for 1913, but for 1911, but these are quite comparable things. So, there were 141,700 “gymnasium students” in France, or 3, 6 per 1000. As you can see, “bast shoes Russia” looks advantageous even against the background of one of the most developed countries of all times and peoples.
Now let's move on to university students. In the late XIX - early XX centuries. the absolute indicators of Russia and France were approximately the same, but in relative terms we were far behind. If we have in 1899-1903there were only 3, 5 students per 10,000 inhabitants, then in France - 9, in Germany - 8, in Great Britain - 6. However, already in 1911-1914. the situation has changed dramatically: Russia - 8, Great Britain - 8, Germany - 11, France - 12. In other words, our country has sharply reduced the gap with Germany and France, and the UK has completely caught up. In absolute terms, the picture looks like this: the number of university students in Germany in 1911 was 71,600, and in Russia - 145,100.
The explosive progress of the domestic education system is obvious, and it is especially vividly seen in specific examples. In the 1897/98 academic year, 3,700 students studied at St. Petersburg University, in 1913/14 - already 7,442; at Moscow University - 4782 and 9892, respectively; in Kharkov - 1631 and 3216; in Kazan - 938 and 2027; in Novorossiysk (Odessa) - 693 and 2058, in Kiev - 2799 and 4919.
During the time of Nicholas II, serious attention was paid to the training of engineering personnel. In this direction, impressive results have also been achieved. For example, 841 people studied at the Technological Institute of St. Petersburg in 1897/98, and 2276 in 1913/14; Kharkov - 644 and 1494, respectively. The Moscow Technical School, despite the name, belonged to the institutes, and here the data is as follows: 718 and 2666. Polytechnic institutes: Kiev - 360 and 2033; Riga - 1347 and 2084; Warsaw - 270 and 974. And here is a summary of students in agricultural higher educational institutions. In 1897/98 there were 1347 students, and in 1913/14 - 3307.
The rapidly developing economy also demanded specialists in the field of finance, banking, trade and the like. The education system responded to these requests, which is well illustrated by the following statistics: over six years, from 1908 to 1914, the number of students in the relevant specialties increased 2, 76 times. For example, 1846 students studied at the Moscow Commercial Institute in the 1907/08 academic year, and 3470 in 1913/14; in Kiev in 1908/09 - 991 and 4028 in 1913/14.
Now let's move on to art: after all, this is an important characteristic of the state of culture. In 1913 S. V. Rachmaninov finishes the world-famous musical poem "Bells", A. N. Scriabin creates his great Sonata No. 9, and I. F. Stravinsky - ballet "The Rite of Spring", the music of which has become classical. At this time, the artists I. E. Repin, F. A. Malyavin, A. M. Vasnetsov and many others. The theater is flourishing: K. S. Stanislavsky, V. I. Nemirovich-Danchenko, E. B. Vakhtangov, V. E. Meyerhold are just a few names from a long line of major masters. The beginning of the 20th century is part of the period called the Silver Age of Russian poetry, a whole phenomenon in world culture, whose representatives are deservedly considered classics.
All this was achieved under Nicholas II, but it is still customary to speak of him as an incompetent, mediocre, weak-willed tsar. If this is so, it is not clear how, with such an insignificant monarch, Russia was able to achieve outstanding results, which are irrefutably evidenced by the facts presented in this article. The answer is obvious: Nicholas II was slandered by the enemies of our country. Should we, people of the XXI century, not know what black PR is?..
