development in which Americans, including George Whistler, the father of the painter James McNeill Whistler, played a prominent part. But, considering the size of the country, the systems of transportation remained thoroughly inadequate. In particular, in 1850 Russia possessed only a little over three thousand miles of first-class roads. The Russian army in the Crimea proved to be more
isolated from its home bases than the allied forces, which were supplied by sea, from theirs.
Foreign trade - about which we have more precise data than we have concerning domestic commerce - grew swiftly in the first half of the nineteenth century. The annual value of Russian exports on the eve of the 'great reforms' has been estimated at 230 million rubles, and of imports at 200 million, compared to only 75 and 52 million respectively at the beginning of the century. Russia continued to export raw materials, such as timber and timber products, hemp, flax, tallow, and increasing quantities of grain. The grain trade resulted from the development of agriculture, notably the raising of wheat, in southern Russia; from the organization of grain export, largely in Greek ships, via the Black Sea; and from the pressing demand for grain in industrializing western Europe. From bare beginnings at the turn of the century, the grain trade rose to 35 per cent of the total value of Russian exports in 1855. It led to the rapid rise of such ports as Odessa and Taganrog and made the Black Sea rival the Baltic as an avenue for commerce with Russia. Russian manufactures, by contrast, found no demand in the West, but - a foretaste of the future - they attracted some customers in Turkey, Central Asia, Mongolia, and China. The Russian imports consisted of tropical produce, such as fruits and coffee, and factory goods, including machinery, as has already been noted.
The population in Russia continued to increase rapidly throughout the period: from 36,000,000 in 1796 to 45,000,000 in 1815 and 67,000,000 in 1851. At the same time its social composition underwent certain changes. While the serfs multiplied in the eighteenth century to constitute, according to Blum, 49 per cent of the total population of Russia in 1796 and as much as 58 per cent in 1811, they failed to keep pace with other social groups after that date. In 1858 they composed 44.5 per cent of the total. Indeed, some scholars have argued that the serfs did not increase in number at all during the decades preceding the emancipation. Semevsky and other students of serfdom have shown what a tremendous and progressively heavier burden of obligations the serfs had to carry, and how hard their life frequently was. These crushing conditions of existence limited the expansion of serfdom and somewhat diminished its relative social weight in Russia in the first half of the nineteenth century.
By contrast, Russian urban population grew both absolutely and as a proportion of the total between 1800 and the 'great reforms' - in this case continuing and accelerating an eighteenth-century trend. Townspeople
constituted about 4.1 per cent of the inhabitants of the empire at the turn of the century and 7.8 per cent in 1851.
To be sure, the upper class, the gentry, retained its dominant social and economic position and its leadership in most phases of Russian life. Yet, as our brief account of the economic evolution of the country indicated, its problems and difficulties increased. Most landlords failed to adjust effectively to the changing economic conditions, sank gradually deeper into debt, and often slid further toward poverty. The differentiation of the gentry, from successful landed magnates at one extreme to the numerous poor and even destitute gentry at the other, became increasingly prominent. If the reign of Catherine the Great represented the golden age of the Russian gentry, the reigns of Alexander I and Nicholas I witnessed the development of processes leading unmistakably to its decline.
There are several ways of looking at Russian economy and society in the first half of the nineteenth century. To many foreign observers, some older Marxist historians, and certain other critics the main characteristics of Russian life in the period preceding the 'great reforms' consisted of backwardness, stagnation, and oppression. As a reaction to this extreme view, many historians - ranging from Soviet specialists to such emigre scholars as Karpovich - have stressed the achievements of the Russians during those difficult decades. They have pointed to a wide variety of phenomena in support of their emphasis: the brilliant Russian literature and culture of the period - which we shall discuss in the next chapter - and Kiselev's reform of the condition of the state peasants; the early penetration of capitalism into the country and certain technological improvements made by the Russians; railroads and the cotton industry; the growing middle class and the expanding trade.
Yet this approach, in its turn, must be kept within its proper frame of reference. For, while Russian economy and society certainly did develop in the first half of the nineteenth century, the empire of the tsars failed to keep pace with other European countries. Whereas capitalism began to affect Russia, it was revolutionizing Great Britain, Belgium, and France. Russian industry was less important in the total European and world picture in 1860 than in 1800, and it had to be protected by very high tariffs. Although the Russian urban classes rose rather rapidly during the first half of the nineteenth century, they remained extremely weak compared to the bourgeoisie in different countries of western Europe. Whereas the country obtained some steamships and railroads, its transportation system failed to serve adequately either the peacetime needs or the needs of the Crimean War. The Russians' weapons and military equip-
ment proved inferior to those of their European opponents; the Black Sea fleet, composed of wooden sailing vessels, could not compete with the steam-propelled warships of the allies. And, obviously, in the middle of the nineteenth century Russia could afford even less than at the time of Peter the Great to disregard other states and to live entirely as a world apart. This international dimension of the Russian problem brings into clearer focus Alexander I's vacillations, Nicholas I's stubborn refusal to move, and the urgent need of 'great reforms.'
XXVIII
RUSSIAN CULTURE IN THE FIRST HALF OF THE NINETEENTH CENTURY
Pushkin represents an extraordinary and, perhaps, a unique manifestation of the Russian spirit, said Gogol. I shall add on my own: also prophetic… His appearance helps greatly to illuminate our dark road with a guiding light.
Every age, every nation contains in itself the possibility of original art, provided it believes in something, provided it loves something, provided it has some religion, some ideal.
It has often been noted that the farther east in Europe one goes the more abstract and general political ideals become. The English agitated for the particular and historic rights of Englishmen; the French for the universal and timeless rights of man; the Germans sought freedom in the realm of the 'pure' or 'absolute' idea… It is also roughly true that the farther east one goes, the more absolute, centralized, and bureaucratic governments become, while the middle groups between an ignorant peasantry and a military state grow smaller and weaker. Moreover, the greater the pressure of the state on the individual, the more formidable the obstacles to his independence, and the greater his social loneliness are, the more sweeping, general, and abstract are ideologies of protest or compensation.
In culture, the eighteenth century in Russia had represented a period of learning from the West. The learning, to be sure, continued in the nineteenth century and, in fact, became all the time both broader and deeper. But, beginning with the reign of Alexander I, Russia developed a glorious literary culture of its own, which in time became the accepted standard of excellence in its homeland and a model to be imitated by many writers in other
