The professional composition of the population of the Kalmyk steppe of the Astrakhan province based on the materials of the 1897 census: source analysis

Okonova Ludmila Vyacheslavovna ORCID: 0000-0003-3819-7032 PhD in History Associate Professor; Department of Russian History, Documentation and Archival Studies; Kalmyk State University named after B.B. Gorodovikov 11 Pushkin Street, Elista, Republic of Kalmykia, 358000, Russia okonova.lv@gmail.com Other publications by this author

The materials of the First General Population Census of 1897 are the only historical source on the number and composition of the population of the Russian Empire in the pre-October period. In Russian historiography, research on the 1897 census is presented quite extensively. This is evidenced by the number of works published in the pre-revolutionary, Soviet and modern periods ^{[4, 5, 6, 8, 10, 17]}. The topic under consideration in Kalmyk historiography has been little studied, there is no fundamental scientific research. Some aspects of the study of the materials of the 1897 census of the Kalmyk steppe of the Astrakhan province are presented in a number of works by Kalmyk historians ^{[1, 2, 3, 9, 11, 12, 13]}.

In the published materials of the 1897 census, data on the occupations of the Russian population of the Astrakhan province provide a kind of information characterizing, firstly, their differentiation into main and secondary, i.e. basic and auxiliary means of life support for the interviewed persons. Secondly, the heads of families turned out to be those who were engaged in productive work, family members were those who were inherently dependent. Thirdly, the gender (type) of occupation, position (position or service) of the interviewees were necessarily recorded, indicating the gender. At the same time, if at the time of registration one or another person was not employed, i.e. did not work, then the previous position, service, occupation were indicated. All this explains the presence of such entries in the "Main occupation" column in the census forms, for example, "farmer-owner", "farmer with his father", "coachman without a place", "reserve ensign", etc., etc. All entries in the forms of the census forms were entered in one column, for filling in which the most comprehensive, but insufficiently accurate explanation was given in the instructions for the survey of the population.

So, A. Kotelnikov, who took part in the development of census materials, gave an example: An officer living on income from a large monetary capital should show himself in the main occupation: "income from capital", and in the secondary one — "military service", and not vice versa ^{[10, p. 34]}. Anyway, in this and similar cases, the recording made depended on the competence of both the interviewees and the interviewers. As noted by another participant in the census, V. Plandovsky, the names of the types of occupations in the census forms were not quite clear and precise. Therefore, the correct answer to them was very often impossible even with careful study of the rules for filling out the sheet. In addition, a number of headings in the names of classes in the questionnaires contained several questions each, and one column was left for answers, or some columns were too small and inconvenient to make entries. Moreover, the rules for filling out the sheet were very lengthy, besides, sometimes abbreviations of words established by the census compilers, various symbols were difficult for the enumerators, who were often poorly educated persons. Plandovsky believed that if the vertical cells were replaced with horizontal ones, and the questions were divided into 2-3 and placed on the side, as in the economic statement of the North American States, it would greatly facilitate filling out the answers in the census forms ^{[17, p. 348]}. However, one way or another, with all the significant and minor shortcomings, starting with what to consider classes, how to group them and, finally, how to make entries in the census forms more correctly, all the information collected with certain errors served as the basis for the compilation and publication of statistical tables "Distribution of the population by occupation groups and ages", XXI "Distribution of the population by occupation groups", XXII "Distribution of the population by occupation groups and by nationalities based on the native language", XXIII "Distribution of the population engaged in rural [settled agricultural - L. O.] or nomadic farming(s), fishing and hunting, by secondary commercial occupations (by counties with cities)" ^{[14, pp. 88-89; 90-93; 94-141; 142-147]}.

For the first time, the final provincial indicators in these tables were briefly analyzed by N. Dubrovsky, who proceeded from the division of occupations into commercial and non–commercial ^{[7, pp. XII-XIV]}. Let's look at them in more detail. Firstly, it turns out that the entire registered population was divided into persons who had independent main and secondary occupations and the rest, who were conditionally named, in all probability, family members of the former. Note that this classification of occupations was not included in the rules for filling out blanks in the census forms. Secondly, all classes were grouped. 390 types of occupations were registered in the country, combined by the compilers into 65 groups ^{[8, p. 19]}. The Astrakhan province had the same number of groups, but they included 157 types of activities. In the Kalmyk steppe, the number of the latter did not exceed 42 species. Thirdly, Table XXII "Distribution of the population by occupation groups and by nationalities based on the native language" is the only one in the entire tabular complex in which the ethnic composition of the population of all administrative—territorial components of the Astrakhan province is indirectly specifically represented. Based on the preliminary sample, recalculations of its numerical indicators, following their formulary designations in the names, the following table 1 is compiled:

Table 1 Distribution of the population of the Kalmyk steppe by occupation based on the native language

These tabular indicators are significant because, firstly, they give a concrete idea of the number of steppe representatives of each nationality, determined by their native language. Secondly, it turns out that the Kalmyks were the predominant majority of them, making up a total of 95.3% (122573 people) of the registered population in the steppe. Since it was actually about the entire number of Kalmyks living in the steppe, which we established earlier, it turns out that there were generally no persons among them who were not independently managing. This cannot but be in doubt, because there could not be cases when, at the time of the census, for one reason or another, a certain number of people did not have any occupation or an independent business person was necessarily a family one. The same can be said about representatives of other 9 nationalities registered in the Kalmyk steppe. Of these, the Great Russians (Great Russians) prevailed, making up only 3.3% of the entire steppe population (12,8573 people), i.e. 4,280 people. Among the rest of the ethnic groups, in total, there were slightly more than 2% of self-employed persons (2,605 people). Be that as it may, in all tabular indicators, not only the number of people who independently carried out one or another type of activity, but also the quantitative composition of their families were actually recorded for the nationalities registered in the Kalmyk Steppe. Considering them as terms that give in total the total number of persons for each nationality separately, and in total the figure of 12,8573 people, it turns out that it coincides with the total population of the Kalmyk steppe, its differentiation by native languages, indicated in the Capital, Summary and other tables of published census materials analyzed by us.

The conclusions follow from this: 1. The indicators for persons who had independent studies presumably reflected the number of families for each nationality both individually and in their final calculation with the rest of their members, who made up the total population of the Kalmyk steppe (12,8573 people).;

2. In this case, it is quite legitimate to consider these indicators as characterizing the ethno-linguistic composition of the steppe population, which at first glance was not a specific task in the case under consideration and did not find special instructions in her questionnaire. Considering that the indicators for the Kalmyk steppe were compiled in the same way as those for the districts of the Astrakhan province and other administrative-territorial formations of the empire, it is quite necessary to evaluate the data in Table XXII as one of the statistical sources on the ethnic composition of the provincial population, which in turn proceeded from clarifying its differentiation by native language. To do this, it is enough to calculate the number of people who independently studied with their family members for each nationality separately, and if necessary, summarize them within the boundaries of a specific administrative-territorial entity. This is also confirmed by the indicators of the tables of the above-mentioned and XXI "Distribution of the population by occupation groups", the total count of which, on the one hand, coincides with the total population in the province and in its administrative-territorial formations, and on the other hand, they indicate (Table 2) the following:

Table 2 Population distribution

Astrakhan province by occupation

The Kalmyk steppe was in third place in terms of the number of self-employed people, behind Astrakhan and Tsarevsky counties by 2.5 and 1.3 times, respectively, but it was ahead of the Inner Kyrgyz Horde, Chernoyarsky, Enotaevsky and Krasnoyarsk counties by 1.07, 1.77, 2 and 2.09 times, respectively. There were fewer family members of these individuals in the Kalmyk Steppe than in the Inner Kyrgyz Horde, Tsarevsky and Astrakhan counties by 1.94, 1.62 and 1.34 times, respectively, but more than in Chernoyarsk, Enotaevsky and Krasnoyarsk counties — 1.16, 1.6 and 1.9 times.

A selection from tables XXI and XXII of combined indicators for grouped occupations of the population of the Kalmyk steppe allowed them to be concretely presented in the following form:

Table 3. Distribution of the population of the Kalmyk steppe

by class groups

According to these indicators, a total of 34065 self-employed persons were registered from the grouped types of occupations in the Kalmyk steppe. Of these, 31660 people spoke the Kalmyk language. Together with 94508 and 90913 members of their families, they made up the total population of the steppe in 128573 people, of whom 122573 were people with their native Kalmyk language

The most common occupation was cattle breeding, also referred to as animal husbandry. 13699 (40.21%) self-employed persons were engaged in it. They, along with their families, made up slightly more than half of the entire population of the steppe — 67,221 people (52.26%). Of the last to speak the Kalmyk language, there were a total of 66480 people. They were followed by a group called "Activity and Service Private. Servants, day laborers", which employed 12,372 people (36.32%), respectively, and including 11,834 people with Kalmyk (37.37%) and who, together with their family members, made up slightly less than one quarter of the steppe population (39,746 people and 38,874 people). More than one fifth of the total number of people employed in cattle breeding (2,602 people) were engaged in fishing and hunting. or 7.64% and 1,912 people . or 6.04%). They, together with their family members, made up a total of 7,111 people, of whom the majority of 7,430 people were persons with a native Kalmyk language, i.e. they were Kalmyks. Of the religious ministers, representatives of non-Christian confessions prevailed (1,658 people. or 4.87%). All of them, with the exception of 1 person, were with their native Kalmyk language. Only 833 people were engaged in agriculture, and together with their family members 3361 people, which was 2.45%. Of this number, 78% were people with a native Kalmyk language. In each of the other types of activities, a much smaller number of independent subjects were registered, up to 1 person. In total, they made up about 20,000 people together with their family members.

The secondary occupations of Russians who lived in the Astrakhan province are reflected in Table XXIII "Distribution of the population engaged in rural [settled agricultural - L. O.] or nomadic farming, fishing and hunting, by secondary commercial occupations (by counties with cities)", the final indicators of which, as a result of the conducted total calculation of indicators by gender, look as follows how:

Table 4a Distribution of the population of the Astrakhan province engaged in agriculture and nomadic farming, fishing and hunting, by secondary fishing activities

According to Table 4a, in these types of economic activity, the Kalmyk steppe, being in fourth place, was 1.9 times inferior to the Tsarevsky District, the Inner Kyrgyz Horde — 1.7 times, the Astrakhan District — 1.1 times, but ahead of the Chernoyarsk, Krasnoyarsk and Enotaevsky counties, respectively, by 1.2, 1.3 and 1.4 times. There were 1.1, 1.3 and 1.4 times more family members of these individuals in the Kalmyk Steppe than in Astrakhan, Enotaevsky and Krasnoyarsk counties, respectively, but less than in the Inner Kyrgyz Horde, Tsarevsky and Chernoyarsk counties — 2.9, 2.2 and 1.2 times. As for the secondary industries in the province, the Kalmyk steppe had the lowest rate both in terms of the number of people who were self-employed (5.07%) and in terms of the number of their family members (1.71%). At the same time, in the province, according to the number of named persons, the highest figure was in Tsarevsky county (28.82%), and their family members — in Enotaevsky (27.85%). Attention is drawn to the fact that less than a quarter of the provincial able-bodied population employed in these economic sectors were independently engaged in side activities. In addition, it should be assumed that not all of them were family. This is clearly evidenced by the indicators for the Kalmyk steppe.

Table 4b Secondary occupations of the population of the Kalmyk steppe

A detailed examination of the 55 registered types of side occupations in table 4b suggests that agriculture was most widespread, followed by cattle breeding with a lag of 2 or more times, and from different types of trade, the sale of fuel (most likely the trade of dung). In most of the types of side jobs, from one to several people worked.

The conducted structural and tabular analysis of the information collected during the census on occupations allows, on the one hand, to believe that its purpose was to collect information about the labor activity of the population, all its types, on the other — to identify the main and subsidiary (side) professional occupations of persons who actually ensured the viability of their family members, on the third — to establish the number of people who had independent occupations, both in the main and in subsidiary economic and other purposes, as well as the quantitative composition of their families. In other words, the aim was to find out the state of labor (human) reserves, the degree of its employment in various types of activities. In the process of preparing, conducting and processing the data of the questionnaires, mistakes were made in determining, for example, occupations, their species differentiation, etc., etc. Therefore, the information obtained as a result does not give a completely reliable idea. The very division of classes into independent and secondary is very conditional, as well as conditionally presumably equating the number of people who had independent studies with their family members to the total population. As far as the indicators of the analyzed tables indicate, the compilers of the census materials clearly thought so. Based on this, all information about the occupations of the population can be assessed as relatively reliable, giving a generalized idea of the main labor and other occupations and the population participating in them. As for the registration of military personnel and military retirees, they did not find any significant reflection in the census materials we reviewed, in particular regarding the Kalmyk steppe, which can be explained by the non-involvement of its main population of Kalmyks in military service. Military, among other reforms of the era of Alexander II, was not extended to them, because it was originally supposed to abolish feudal law, which was implemented only by the end of the reign of Alexander III in 1892. However, both then and later, until the October revolution of 1917, compulsory military service was not extended to Kalmyks. It is no coincidence that during the First World War they were involved only in logistical work, with the exception of those who were assigned to the Cossacks.

As a result, according to the statistical data of the census, it turns out that 246798 people were involved in labor and other activities in the Astrakhan province, i.e. persons who had independent studies; including 34065 people in the Kalmyk steppe. Of the latter, there were 31660 Kalmyks. In the province, 1/3 of the main occupations of the working population (55,480 people) were farmers, 50,601 people. cattle breeders, 31899 people were engaged in fishing, respectively, in the Kalmyk steppe 833 people, 13699 people, 2602 people, including hunting. Of the secondary occupations in the province, cattle breeding prevailed, in which 10,398 people worked. (with family members of 12360 people), in fishing — 10950 people. (6330 people), in the Kalmyk steppe, respectively, 194 people. (63 people), 28 people . (10 people). In general, these indicators indicated that the Astrakhan province has been in economic development since the beginning of its successful colonization in the XVI century. it became an agricultural and cattle-breeding region of Russia, in which the migrant population from virtually agricultural provinces, while continuing to preserve the traditional type of their occupations, was reorganized, adapting to local types of management in the new conditions of the capitalistically transforming All-Russian market. This could not but affect the nomadic economy, in particular the Kalmyks.