Peasant farms of Western Siberia on the way to commodity-market relations: factor analysis of data from the Tomsk Provincial Agricultural Census of 1901

Antonova Evgeniia Konstantinovna PhD in History Director of the Information and Consulting Center of Tomsk State University of Architecture and Civil Engineering. 634021, Russia, Tomskaya oblast' oblast', g. Tomsk, ul. Lebedeva, 97, kv. 9 antonovatomsk@gmail.com

Zinov'ev Vasilii Pavlovich Doctor of History Professor, Department of National History, National Research Tomsk State University 634061, Russia, Tomskaya oblast', g. Tomsk, ul. Sibirskaya, 31, kv. 444 vpz@mail.tsu.ru

Introduction

The study of agrarian history is an important part of the study of the past of our country, since until the 1950s most of the population of Russia were peasants. Peasant farms of the Tomsk province, which are the object of study in this article, became part of the all-Russian agricultural market in the early twentieth century. in connection with the construction of the Trans-Siberian railway and the settlement movement. They represented a symbiosis of market and natural relations, developing along the path of gradual entry into the commodity market. However, historians could not assess the level of development of market relations in agriculture in Siberia at the beginning of the twentieth century (taking into account agricultural and livestock specialization) by traditional methods for a long time.

This possibility is provided by the use of mathematical and statistical methods for analyzing mass sources - censuses, statistical tables and other statistical materials ^[1]. In Siberia , the agricultural census of 1916 was most often the subject of study . ^{[2; 3; 4]}. Thus, L.M. Goryushkin's team processed 8.5 thousand primary forms of the 1916 census in the volosts of the Tomsk province, which served as their introduction into scientific circulation ^[5].

The materials of the Tomsk Agricultural Census of 1901 were identified by V.A. Buzanova while preparing a PhD thesis on wage labor in a Siberian village ^[6]. V.P. Zinoviev assessed the census as a source on family history and local lore and for a long time tried to attract the attention of historians to it ^[7]. P.F. Nikulin for the first time considered the census of 1901 as a source on the socio-economic history of the peasantry of the Tomsk province ^{[8; 9]}. She received a detailed assessment in the dissertation of E.K. Antonova ^[10].

The purpose of this article is to find out the level of marketability of the peasant economy of the Tomsk province in the tasks of processing data from the 1901 census using the capabilities of one of the effective directions of multidimensional statistical analysis – factor analysis.

Sources

In the late XIX – early XX centuries, a significant part of European Russia and Western Siberia was covered by a traditional drought. Tomsk province, like other provinces of Western Siberia, suffered a crop failure ^{[11, p. 4]}. The central government authorities found an opportunity to help those affected by drought and crop failure in Tomsk province by issuing 1.7 million pounds of grain. However, this state aid could not meet the needs of all the victims, since, according to the calculations of officials of the Tomsk province, 3.7 million pounds of rye were needed to replenish the peasants' food supplies, as well as an additional 2.4 million pounds for seeding ^[12]. Therefore, it was decided to identify the most affected areas by studying the condition of peasant farms throughout the province and conduct a household census of peasant farms of the Tomsk province, using the experience of zemstvo statistics ^{[13, pp. 107-108]}.

The Tomsk Provincial Agricultural Census of 1901 was organized by the decision of the Manager of the Ministry of Internal Affairs P.N. Durnovo with the support of the Minister of Internal Affairs D.S. Sipyagin. The general management and control over the census in the Tomsk province were under the jurisdiction of the provincial government, headed by the Vice-governor of the Tomsk province, D.N. Delvig ^[14]. The census of peasant farms in the first half of August 1901 was conducted by the zemstvo (land) department of the Tomsk Provincial Statistical Committee, which was part of the structure of the Tomsk provincial administration. Village elders and parish clerks interviewed peasant householders, the information received was checked with the parish books. Then the data were transferred to the peasant chiefs to the volost boards and foreign boards, and they in turn delivered them to the Tomsk provincial administration no later than September 15, 1901 ^{[15; 16, p. 4]}

Officially, the tasks of the census included collecting statistical information on the number of harvested loaves and herbs in the farms of old-timers, foreigners, immigrants, determining the general economic condition of peasant farms for taking further measures to prevent the consequences of disasters in the Tomsk province ^{[16, p. 3; 17; 18]}.

The object of statistical research of the 1901 census was the peasant farms of all counties and volosts of the Tomsk province. The event was held in 2123 villages of Biysk, Tomsk, Barnaul, Mariinsky, Kuznetsk, Kainsky, Zmeinogorsky counties. The main unit of accounting (description) was a separate peasant household – a yard. It was considered in the following sections:

– the name, patronymic and surname of the householder,

– the number of souls of both sexes,

– the number of eligible employees of both sexes,

– property (number of horses, heads of cattle, heads of small cattle),

– sowing sizes in tithes (winter rye and wheat, spring yaritsa, wheat and oats),

– stocks of bread (rye, wheat and oats in poods),

– the amount of hay in the haystacks or the assessment of sufficiency for feeding livestock,

 – arrears on state taxes, provincial zemstvo collection and worldly duties ^{[16, p. 4; 19]}.

The agricultural census program provided for several census forms that had the same content:

– form No. 1 – "List of old-timers and foreign villages",

– there was no form No. 2 at all, probably it was considered superfluous,

– Form No. 3 – "List of unaccounted immigrants living in old-age villages or resettlement settlements".

The title page of the bulletin No. 1 contained the name of the county, parish, old-resident village. The title page ended with the notes of the peasant chief, which were more like recommendations. The peasant chief at the end of the nominal list of householders indicated whether the rural society has worldly capitals, and how many of them; whether it has worldly tolls, and how much annual income from them; how many approximately pounds of rye, wheat, oats are supposed to be threshed from the tithe; what was the harvest of herbs, and how much was mown from one tithe. The list sheet according to form No. 1 contained the name of the county, parish, village or village. The nominal list of heads of peasant households with the indication of the first and last name became the information basis of the vedomosti. The order of enumeration of householders was free ^[20].

Currently, the materials of the agricultural census of peasant farms of the Tomsk province in 1901 are stored in the State Archive of the Tomsk Region (GATO), in the fund No. 3 (Tomsk Provincial Administration) ^{[21; 22; 23; 24; 25; 26; 27]}.

Research methodology

The study and evaluation of the information potential of the primary materials of the agricultural census of 1901 were carried out by us in several stages.

To identify typical zones and districts, we used the materials of the 1916 agricultural census for the Altai-Tomsk part of Siberia, which were collected and developed under the guidance of Professor V.Ya. Nagnibeda and published by the Siberian Regional Statistical Department. When processing census data, statistics divided Tomsk Province into five natural zones (steppe, forest-steppe, transitional, taiga, mountain-taiga) and twenty-two districts according to the composition of soils and vegetation. The materials of the 1916 census of Tomsk province, in contrast to the 1901 census, were processed with division into zones, districts, and volosts. The physico-geographical, district, and volost division of Tomsk province in the period from 1901 to 1916 has not undergone significant changes, so it can be considered suitable for analyzing the data of the 1901 census.

According to the materials of the agricultural census of 1916, the transition zone was chosen as the most typical from the point of view of geographical location. It is this zone that is most indicative for demonstrating the involvement of peasant farms in commodity-market relations. It included the eighteenth district of the Tomsk Uyezd and the twenty-first district of the Mariinsky Uyezd of the Tomsk province.

Based on the materials of the farmstead data of the agricultural census of 1916, in the eighteenth district of the Tomsk county, which belongs to the transition zone and where the selection of a typical parish was carried out according to average farmstead data, the Oyashinsky parish was identified (Fig. 1). As selection criteria, average farmstead data for 1 soul and 1 yard for sowing, working horses were taken, cows. The typicality and representativeness of the Oyashinsky volost was determined by the fact that it was the largest in the province, encompassed villages from Ob to Tom, gravitated to Tomsk and the Mariinsky gold mines, the Siberian Railway and the Siberian Tract passed through it. In the parish itself, villages of two specializations were allocated, average according to household data for 1 soul and 1 yard: typical agricultural – Baltinskaya (98 yards) and Novy Poros (85 yards), a total of 183 yards, and typical livestock – Tashara (85 yards) and Dubrovina – (121 yards), a total of 206 yards.

Data on typical villages were summarized in two descriptive and statistical tables, which included, respectively, peasant farms of agricultural and livestock specialization. The tables were processed by standard computer programs at the BIOSTATICS Center of Tomsk State University.

Fig. 1. Physical-geographical or natural-historical zones of Tomsk province in the late XIX – early XX centuries. The arrow highlights the Oyashinsky parish.

Source: ^{[28, p.84]}.

Factor analysis. The principal component method

The analysis of the primary materials of the agricultural census of 1901 was carried out on the basis of factor analysis, namely, the method of principal components, which provides "compression" of information, explaining the multitude of available features through a small number of generalized factors. The coefficient of the relationship between a particular trait and a common factor, expressing the measure of the factor's influence on the trait, is called the factor load of the trait for this common factor. The magnitude of the factor load does not exceed modulo one, and its sign indicates a positive or negative relationship of the attribute with the factor. The greater the absolute value of the factor load of a trait for a certain factor, the more this factor determines this trait. The factor model makes it possible to calculate the contributions of factors to the total variance of all features. The algorithm identifies factors sequentially, depending on their contribution to the total variance of all features. The value (measure of manifestation) of a factor in an individual object is called the factor weight of the object for this factor. Factor weights allow you to rank and arrange objects by each factor. Factor analysis is used in historical research ^{[29; 30]}.

Analysis results

Based on the digitized data of the 1901 census, tables were compiled and filled in for factor analysis of peasant farms. The economic activity of a peasant household is determined by a whole set of features taken into account in the 1901 census, including the number of cows, horses, the size of crops, etc. The analysis of such multidimensional data requires a transition from a large number of initial features to a small number of generalized factors that carry most of the information contained in the primary census data.

The economic analysis of peasant farms of agricultural and livestock specialization of Oyashinsky volost is based on the relationship between various indicators and common factors affecting them.

Let's consider the general factors identified using the principal component method and their maximum factor loads on the signs in the internal structure of the farm of agricultural and livestock specialization. These are the correlation coefficients between general factors and specific features "gravitating" to them, the value of which is in the range from 0.710 to 0.986 (Table 1).

Table 1.

Factors and their maximum loads on signs in the internal structure of the peasant economy of the agricultural and livestock specialization of the Oyashinsky volost according to the census of 1901.

In the course of factor analysis of data on peasant farms of agricultural-livestock and livestock specialization of Oyashinsky volost, the names of factors were formulated depending on the maximum loads of signs attributed to the corresponding factor (Table. 1 and 3). The number of identified factors varies depending on the specialization of peasant farms. In the aggregate of peasant farms of agricultural and livestock specialization, five factors are identified, and in farms of livestock specialization - four. In the farms of agricultural and livestock specialization, essentially two branches of agriculture were considered, which is reflected in the presence of combinations of signs of both types in the structure of factors. The factor is the more significant the greater its contribution to the total variance, i.e. the higher the degree of its impact on the level of development of the peasant economy. So, factor I is more significant and significant than factor II, and factor II is more significant and significant than factor III, etc. The values of factor loads are considered significant if their correlation coefficients with the factor are greater than 0.7. The sign of factor load indicates a positive or negative relationship between the attribute and the factor.

A meaningful interpretation of various factors and their constituent features with factor loads allows us to reveal the main characteristics of the socio-economic structure of peasant farms. The names of the factors are determined based on the meaningful meaning of the corresponding signs. Therefore, the factors reflecting the internal structure of peasant farms of agricultural and livestock and livestock specialization farms have received different names.

Indicators for 1 yard, 1 soul, 1 employee determined the essence of factor I in peasant farms of agricultural and livestock specialization as, respectively, economic, production-grain or family-natural, and in farms of livestock specialization – as the size and level of the production base of the livestock industry.

Indicators per unit of livestock or tithe of sowing determined the stock ratio, that is, the cost and volume of fixed assets of production in peasant farms. Factor II reflects the natural-market insurance (adaptation) subsystem. The source of accumulation of total capitalized production funds showed at what level of capitalization peasant farms are located – at the small-scale or already at the level of inclusion in the capitalist market.

The indicators "stocks of bread in poods" designated factor I as natural-economic or natural-insurance in peasant farms of grain and livestock specialization. This factor determined the grain reserves of peasant farms in poods. At the same time, it should be borne in mind that, according to S.A. Nefedov, "a pood of conditional "bread" contains 60% rye and 40% oats" ^{[31, p. 175]}.

 Thus, rye as the main food crop of Siberia was adjacent to the fodder product – oats. The significance of this factor in peasant farms of agricultural and livestock and livestock specialization lies in the fact that rye was often used to feed cattle and, first of all, dairy cows. Rye straw was used in peasant farms for bedding animals. Oats as a plant food was intended to feed not only horses and cows, but also pigs, geese, rabbits, etc.

Factor IV is the market–small-scale subsystem of the livestock industry, which forms the market-capitalist production funds of the livestock industry. It was formed under the influence of indicators of working, productive cattle, cows per 1 tithe of sowing. In farms of agricultural and livestock specialization, this factor (the provision of livestock with feed) reflected the livestock orientation of peasant farms, involvement in capitalist funds through the livestock system.

The funds of the grain industry in farms of agricultural and livestock specialization are represented by factor V - this is the market–small-scale subsystem of the livestock industry, which forms the market-capitalist production funds of the grain industry. It was through this small-scale factor that peasant farms entered into capitalist relations, which is reflected through grain indicators (crop sizes).

The strength of the peasant economy in the internal structure of peasant farms of agricultural, livestock and livestock specialization largely depended on the number of workers. As a result, the indicator of the number of workers per capita has become a key factor in determining such a factor as the level of provision of a peasant family with labor. However, the number of employees could not always translate into the quality and volume of agricultural products produced. This requires indicators such as the number of livestock, the availability of property, the number of crops, etc.

The contributions of factors to the total variance are expressed as a percentage and show the degree of influence of factors and their constituent features. Five factors cover 72.8% of all the information contained in the features used (this is the sum of the contributions of five factors to the total variance).

During the analysis of general factors and their maximum loads on the signs, it was found that the internal structure of peasant farms of agricultural and livestock specialization of the Oyashinsky volost indicates the predominant influence of factor I, characterizing the economic, production-grain or family-subsistence activities of the economy. The magnitude of the factor load here is not less than 0.711. At the same time, the greatest influence on the size and level of production and economic capacity of the farm are the signs "sowing rye per 1 soul" - 0.892; "total sowing per 1 soul" – 0.882; "number of cows per 1 employee" – 0.882; "number of cows per 1 soul" – 0.888. Slightly lower values of factor loads for the signs "the number of working cattle per 1 yard" – 0.772; "the number of cows per yard" – 0.782; "the number of productive cattle per yard" – 0.798. This factor played a system-forming role, it reflected the production and economic base of peasant farms. High factor loads reflect the involvement of peasant farms in the commodity market through natural family relations. The contribution of this factor to the total variance was 31.5%.

The second most important factor of the peasant economy of the agricultural and livestock specialization of the Oyashinsky parish is the natural market insurance (adaptation) subsystem. The contribution of this factor to the total variance was 13.8%. The factor included two signs: "the number of cows per 1 head of working cattle" and "the number of productive cattle per 1 head of working cattle". Factor loads on the signs amounted to more than 0.7, which indicates a fairly high level of the stock of peasant farms. This factor reflects the balanced development of the production base of peasant farms, their involvement in the capitalist market (through factor loads on attributes – 0.913 and 0.921, respectively).

The contributions of the first two factors to the total variance in the analysis of peasant farms of agricultural and livestock specialization amounted to 45.3%, which determined their predominant influence in the development of the internal structure of peasant farms of grain specialization.

It should be noted that the structure of factors II, III, IV, V characterizing peasant farms of agricultural and livestock specialization includes such production, market-capitalist signs as "the number of cows per 1 head of working cattle", "the number of productive cattle per 1 head of working cattle", "grain reserves per 1 head of working cattle", "stocks of bread for 1 head of productive cattle". As for the important feature "the number of working cattle per 1 head of productive cattle", it was not included in the selection, since the factor load was less than 0.7.

Thus, an integral market-capitalist fund in peasant farms of agricultural and livestock specialization by the beginning of the twentieth century. not yet formed, the signs of a market capitalist fund were scattered and were a simple working part of small-scale production. Comparing this observation with the results of factor analysis of grain farms in the forest-steppe zone of the Catherine parish of the Barnaul district of the Tomsk province, obtained according to the same census of 1901 by P.F. Nikulin and published in 2009 (Table. 2), we see that the farms of the transition zone of the Oyashinsky volost were somewhat less included in the agrarian-capitalist market.

Table 2

Factors and their maximum loads on signs in the internal structure of the peasant economy of the agricultural specialization of the Catherine parish according to the census of 1901 .

Source: ^{[4, pp. 303-304]}.

* * *

Let's move on to the farms of the livestock specialization of the Yashinsky volost. The predominant influence of the first and second factors is observed in the internal structure of the peasant farm of the livestock specialization of the Yashinsky volost (Table 3).

Table 3

General factors and their maximum loads on signs in the internal structure of a peasant farm of livestock specialization in Oyashinsky volost according to the census of 1901 .

The first factor – the size and level of the production base of the livestock industry, the small-scale way of life and the market capitalist funds of the livestock industry formed in it – included nine signs (Table 3). Factor loads on signs in farms of livestock specialization according to factor I were: "the number of cows per 1 yard" – 0.770, "the number of cows per 1 employee" – 0.765, "the number of cows per des. total sowing" – 0.779. The contribution of the first factor to the total variance in the analysis of livestock specialization farms amounted to 27.3%, it determined not only a sufficiently developed production and economic base of the peasant economy, but also a significant stock ratio.

The second factor of animal husbandry – the size and level of the production base (economic capacity) of the natural and small grain industry - included seven features. The contributions of factors to the total variance in peasant farms of livestock specialization for factor I and II totaled 47.1%. The influence of the second factor and its differ when comparing the internal structure of agricultural and livestock farms (Table. 1) and animal husbandry (Table. 2) specializations. In farms of agricultural and livestock specialization, much attention was paid to the growth of production funds, and in farms of livestock specialization - capitalized production funds.

In peasant farms of livestock specialization, the signs of market capitalist funds are even more clearly traced. Signs "number of cows per 1 des. total sowing", "the number of productive livestock per 1 des. total crops" entered the core of the small-scale way of life of the I factor. An important feature "the number of working cattle per 1 day of sowing" was not included in the selection and was not included in any factor, since the factor load was less than 0.7. Thus, market capitalist funds in the farms of the livestock specialization of the transition zone of the Oyashinsky volost of the Tomsk district of the Tomsk province did not develop sufficiently by the beginning of the twentieth century peasant farms focused mainly on small-scale production.

The contribution of the first factor in the analysis of farms of agricultural and livestock specialization to the total variance is 31.5%, the second is 13.8% (Table 1). When analyzing farms of livestock specialization, these contributions amounted to 27.3% and 19.8%, respectively (Table 3). All the maximum loads on the signs in the I and II factor of agriculturallivestock and livestock farms of the Oyashinsky parish had a positive value.

Thus, factor I and factor II played a leading role in the development of the internal structure of peasant farms of agricultural and livestock and livestock specializations (45.3% and 47.1%, respectively.). However, in the first two factors, different indicators with different factor loads prevailed in peasant farms of agricultural-livestock and livestock specialization.

The first factor in the internal structure of livestock and agricultural specialization farms, as well as the first and second factor in livestock specialization farms reflected the production base of the farm.

The second factor in farms of agricultural and livestock specialization reflected the level of capitalization of farms.

The first and second decisive factors in farms of agricultural-livestock and livestock specialization showed the small-scale, natural, traditional nature of peasant farms.

The third, fourth and fifth factors in the agricultural, livestock and livestock structure of peasant farms occupy a different place in terms of the degree of influence on the internal structure of the peasant economy, and their composition is also different.

The third factor in farms of agricultural and livestock specialization and in livestock farms indicates the internal development of the natural and economic adaptation (insurance) system.It is reflected through the sign "bread stocks". As fundamental features in farms of agricultural and livestock specialization, such as "stocks of bread in poods for 1 yard", "stocks of bread for 1 soul", "stocks of bread for 1 worker", "stocks of bread for 1 head of working cattle", "stocks of bread for 1 head of productive cattle" were identified, "stocks of bread for 1 des. total sowing".

The third factor of peasant farms of livestock specialization – the natural insurance adaptation subsystem - contains signs of "stocks of bread in poods for 1 yard", "stocks of bread for 1 worker", "stocks of bread for 1 head of working cattle", "stocks of bread for 1 head of productive cattle", "stocks of bread for 1 des. total sowing". This factor reflected the high stocks of grain in peasant farms. Factor loads of traits showed values from 0.709 to 0.973. The contribution to the total variance of the third factor for farms of agricultural and livestock specialization was 10.8%, in livestock farms – 13.1%. It should be emphasized that they have fairly well balanced indicators of various production assets.

In farms of agricultural and livestock specialization, factor loads on the attribute "bread stocks per 1 employee" amounted to 0.975; "bread stocks per head of working cattle" - 0.985; "bread stocks in poods per 1 yard" – 0.986. In farms of livestock specialization, factor loads on the attribute "bread stocks per 1 employee" amounted to 0.973; "bread stocks per head of working cattle" – 0.794; "bread stocks in poods per 1 yard" – 0.941. As we can see, the production funds of peasant farms of agricultural-livestock and livestock specialization of the Oyashinsky volost are characterized by a direct dependence of signs and factors.

The fourth factor – the market-small-scale subsystem of the livestock industry, which forms the market-capitalist production funds of the livestock industry in agricultural–livestock households - showed a total variance of 9.4%. It included the following indicators: "the number of working cattle per 1 des. total sowing", "number of cows per 1 des. total sowing", "the number of productive livestock per 1 des. total sowing". Factor loads on signs in the fourth factor in farms of agricultural and livestock specialization were: "the number of working cattle per des. total sowing" – 0.778; "the number of productive livestock per 1 des. total sowing" – 0.825; "number of cows per 1 des. total sowing" – 0.933.

The fourth factor in livestock specialization farms reflected the provision of livestock with feed, that is, the fodder base of peasant farms, through the signs of "grain stocks". Feed resources were reflected by loads on signs from 0.710 to 0.910. Grain stocks in peasant farms reflected their excess, a high balance of production and consumption of bread. In farms of agricultural and livestock specialization, the factor "provision of livestock with feed" is hidden in the production and grain first factor due to the fact that livestock indicators had subordinate importance in farms of agricultural and livestock specialization.

The fifth factor of peasant farms of agricultural and livestock specialization reflects inclusion in the market small-scale subsystem through the development of grain farming. The factor was named "the market-small-scale subsystem of the livestock industry, which forms the market-capitalist production funds of the grain industry." The total variance of the fifth factor was 7.3%. The fifth factor included four signs with factor loads: "the number of workers per 1 cow" – 0.832, "the number of workers per 1 head of productive cattle" – 0.835, "the size of the total sowing per 1 head" – 0.882, "the size of sowing per 1 head of productive cattle" – 0.892. They reflected the good production funds of peasant farms.

The total share of IV and V factors of peasant farms of agricultural and livestock specialization was 16.7%. Factor analysis shows that the structure of peasant farms of agricultural and livestock specialization was poorly balanced.

Conclusion

Let us proceed to the conclusions, using the research materials of one of the authors of this work for the interpretation of the results obtained ^[7].

In peasant farms of agricultural and livestock specialization, five main factors and twenty-nine signs were identified, in peasant farms of livestock specialization – four factors and twenty-four signs reflecting the socio-economic level of peasant farms and having different effects on peasant farms.

In farms of agricultural and livestock specialization, the influence of natural and economic and production-grain factors prevailed, while the determining role belongs to the development of crops, wheat and rye, as well as the harvesting of grain stocks and trade in them, a high level of crops.Productive cattle also played a great role. The sum of the contributions of the first, second, third, fourth factors of agricultural and livestock specialization amounted to 65.5% and reflected the development of the family-natural type of management.

In peasant farms of livestock specialization, the predominant influence was the small-scale way of life, which was formed through the provision of productive livestock. In other words, the most significant role in the life of a peasant family of livestock specialization was played by cattle, but productive animal husbandry was focused mainly on family consumption. The grain industry manifested itself in the indicators of sowing and stocks of bread, while all grain, as a rule, was used for its own consumption. The sum of the contributions of the three leading factors (the first, second and third) in the total dispersion of farms of livestock specialization amounted to 60.2%.

The analysis of the 1901 census data on the state of peasant farms of agricultural, livestock and livestock specialization of the 18th district of the Oyashinsky volost of the Tomsk district of the Tomsk province reflected their inclusion in two economic subsystems: traditional and commodity-capitalist. The traditional family-natural system formed the basis, the core of the economic and production relations of peasant farms, at the same time, the influence of commodity-capitalist relations stimulated the formation of an adaptive subsystem of peasant farms. This was reflected in their gradual entry into the commodity market.

The peasant farms of the transition zone lagged behind the peasant farms of the forest-steppe zone in the modernization processes. The basis of their economic activity was the local suburban market of Tomsk, Mariinsk, Novonikolaevsk. Despite this, the process of modernization of the peasant economy began: grain farms moved especially intensively along this path, and remote near-taiga livestock farms lagged behind. The peasant farms of the transition zone were mostly small-scale and natural.

The analysis of the socio-economic structure of peasant farms of agricultural and livestock specialization of the transition zone showed that the entrepreneurial way of life was leading in all peasant farms, but the general small-scale production of farms reduced the level of their involvement in capitalist relations. Peasant farms of agricultural and livestock specialization of the transition zone of Tomsk province at the beginning of the XX century . they never joined the developed capitalist relations.

Thus, the materials of the 1901 census make it possible to analyze in detail the influence of various factors on the state of the peasant economy of Siberia at the turn of the XIX–XX centuries. These materials are suitable as a mass source for studying the peasantry of Siberia and for local research. To fully substantiate the conclusions drawn, three more natural zones of the Tomsk province should be geographically expanded and included in the study: steppe, taiga, mountain-taiga, compare the results obtained and draw conclusions about the degree of involvement of peasant farms of agricultural and livestock specialization in capitalist relations, indicating the factors that played a decisive role in this process.