Views on agrarian question in the russian empire early twentieth century public don (on the example of V.I. Denisov)
Keywords:
Russian empire, the nobility of the Don, the agrarian question, V. Denisov
Abstract
The article highlights the essence of agrarian nobility Don initiatives as an example of marshal of the nobility of the Don area V.I. Denisova, draws attention to the radical changes large landowners understand the nature of the agrarian question. Detailed analysis of vision causes aggravation and solving agricultural problems under conditions of revolution «Union supporters peaceful resolution of the agrarian question», which was organized by Don autumn 1905 Union believed that the government should immediately allow farmers free access to the community with fixing them processed before this allotment in private ownership and the right of selling. The analysis looks marshal of the nobility area of the Don V. Denisov, according to which land reform must be focused on the transition from communal farmers to homestead entities on the basis of peasant private ownership of land, increasing the size of peasant land ownership through the purchase of additional land they or their resettlement intensification individual farm. A general conclusion is that the views of V.I. Denisov and other landowners reflect the general mood and position of large landowners on agricultural issues. Their analysis shows a major fact of evolution beliefs representatives of large estates. As the patriots of their country, they offered very real steps to address not only the agricultural problems and to improve general well-being of the population, increasing the efficiency of the economy and legal equality of different layers Russian imperial society and so on. A large estates in various regions of the country were unanimous that stop the deployment of revolutionary elements in the country is possible only on one condition - the resolution of the agrarian question.References
1. Hurko V.Y. Chertyi i siluetyi proshlogo. Pravitelstvo i obschestvennost v tsarstvovanie Nikolaya II v izobrazhenie sovremennika. (Features and silhouettes of the past. Government and the public in the reign of Nicholas II in a contemporary image). Moscow, 2000, 810 р.
2. Deravn archiv Rosijkoji Federaciji. F. 579. Op. 1. Spr. 2502.
3. Leontovy V.V. Ystora lyberalyzma v Rossyy 1762 – 1914. (History of Liberalism in Russia in 1762 – 1914). Moscow, 1995, 550 р.
4. Morozova O. M. Modeli ekonomicheskogo povedeniya v usloviyah mnogoukladnosti v poreformennyiy period (na materiale Dona) (Models of economic behavior in multiculturalism in the post-reform period (based on the Don)). Problemy istoriji Ukrajiny ХIХ – poatku ХХ st. Vyp. ChIV. Kyiv, 2007, Р. 77-87.
5. Sydenykov S.M. Ahrarnaja polytyka samoderava v peryod ymperyalyzma. (Ahrarnaja polytyka samoderava v peryod ymperyalyzma). Moscow, 1980, 289 р.
6. Sydenykov S. Agrarnaya reforma Stolyipina (Stolypin agrarian reform). Moscow, 1973, 335 р.
7. Symonova M.S. Kryzys ahrarnoj polytyky caryzma nakanune pervoj rossskoj revoliucyy (The crisis of the agrarian policy of tsarism on the eve of the first Russian revolution). Moscow, 1987, 254 р.
8. efner A. Novo-Yevka. Ystora sela [Elektronn resurs] (Novo-Yevka. Ystora sela). Regime to access: http://www.relga.ru/Environ/WebObjects/tgu-www.woa/wa/Main?textid=3057
2. Deravn archiv Rosijkoji Federaciji. F. 579. Op. 1. Spr. 2502.
3. Leontovy V.V. Ystora lyberalyzma v Rossyy 1762 – 1914. (History of Liberalism in Russia in 1762 – 1914). Moscow, 1995, 550 р.
4. Morozova O. M. Modeli ekonomicheskogo povedeniya v usloviyah mnogoukladnosti v poreformennyiy period (na materiale Dona) (Models of economic behavior in multiculturalism in the post-reform period (based on the Don)). Problemy istoriji Ukrajiny ХIХ – poatku ХХ st. Vyp. ChIV. Kyiv, 2007, Р. 77-87.
5. Sydenykov S.M. Ahrarnaja polytyka samoderava v peryod ymperyalyzma. (Ahrarnaja polytyka samoderava v peryod ymperyalyzma). Moscow, 1980, 289 р.
6. Sydenykov S. Agrarnaya reforma Stolyipina (Stolypin agrarian reform). Moscow, 1973, 335 р.
7. Symonova M.S. Kryzys ahrarnoj polytyky caryzma nakanune pervoj rossskoj revoliucyy (The crisis of the agrarian policy of tsarism on the eve of the first Russian revolution). Moscow, 1987, 254 р.
8. efner A. Novo-Yevka. Ystora sela [Elektronn resurs] (Novo-Yevka. Ystora sela). Regime to access: http://www.relga.ru/Environ/WebObjects/tgu-www.woa/wa/Main?textid=3057
Published
2014-09-01
How to Cite
Svyaschenko, Z. (2014). Views on agrarian question in the russian empire early twentieth century public don (on the example of V.I. Denisov). Grani, 17(10), 116-120. Retrieved from https://grani.org.ua/index.php/journal/article/view/727
Issue
Section
HISTORY
Authors retain copyright and grant the journal right of first publication with the work simultaneously licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution License that allows others to share the work with an acknowledgement of the work's authorship and initial publication in this journal.
When reporting experiments on human subjects, authors should indicate whether the procedures followed were in accordance with the ethical standards of the responsible committee on human experimentation (institutional and national) and with the Helsinki Declaration of 1975, as revised in 2000 (5). If doubt exists whether the research was conducted in accordance with the Helsinki Declaration, the authors must explain the rationale for their approach, and demonstrate that the institutional review body explicitly approved the doubtful aspects of the study. When reporting experiments on animals, authors should be asked to indicate whether the institutional and national guide for the care and use of laboratory animals was followed.
When reporting experiments on human subjects, authors should indicate whether the procedures followed were in accordance with the ethical standards of the responsible committee on human experimentation (institutional and national) and with the Helsinki Declaration of 1975, as revised in 2000 (5). If doubt exists whether the research was conducted in accordance with the Helsinki Declaration, the authors must explain the rationale for their approach, and demonstrate that the institutional review body explicitly approved the doubtful aspects of the study. When reporting experiments on animals, authors should be asked to indicate whether the institutional and national guide for the care and use of laboratory animals was followed.
