Notice: This is the official website of the All Empires History Community (Reg. 10 Feb 2002)

  FAQ FAQ  Forum Search   Register Register  Login Login

Russian economy in the 19th century

 Post Reply Post Reply
Author
Maju View Drop Down
King
King
Avatar

Joined: 14-Jul-2005
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 6565
  Quote Maju Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Topic: Russian economy in the 19th century
    Posted: 03-Apr-2006 at 06:41
This is a branch from the State vs. Market topic.

How was the Russian economy in the 19th century or, more precisely between the Congress of Vienna and the Revolution of 1917?

As far as I know, Russia was an underdeveloped giant that basically provided grain and other raw matters to the West, with a small and never consolidated industrial sector specially in St. Petersburg. Only the Stalinist 5-year plans actually develepoed Russia into an industrial power.

Yet some people (Ataman for instance) argue the opposite: that Tsarist Russia was quite developed, even comparable to France! (See the branched topic for details)

I can't find sources right now but in the Wikipedian History of Russia article, the term industrialization oly appears in the Bolshevik period, not before. I also think that the figures that Ataman gives for 19th century France are totally ridiculous, while the ones for Russia are inflated.


Edited by Maju

NO GOD, NO MASTER!
Back to Top
Constantine XI View Drop Down
Suspended
Suspended

Suspended

Joined: 01-May-2005
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 5711
  Quote Constantine XI Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 03-Apr-2006 at 06:49
I don't think Russia had a level of advancement comparable to France or Britain. The fact is that she was a massive nation, with massive potential, which needed massive investment to reach the potential.

Her railway system was large, but relative to the sheer size of the country she was well behind most contemporary European major powers. As I said though, she certainly had potential to exploit her industries in steel and oil. Not to mention the agricultural potential which she could have reached. However, Stalinist brutality deserves credit for the massive boost to agricultural productivity. Inspite of an early drop thanks to kulak persecutions and reorganisation, Stalin reformed agriculture into communes which ultimately were more productive. Under the Tsarist aristocracy there was no chance of such a radical reform in Russia's agricultural sector.

With regard to industry, Tsarist Russia was progressing at an impressive rate, dwarfing most of her European neighbours. Her urban population was growing (though Stalin's measures accelerated that growth), her industry was booming and her shabby workers' rights standards were not really much different from those experienced under Stalin. In the end the industrial boom of Russia was destroyed in the force of WWI, the Russian state being both too politically weak and too industrially underprepared to sustain the war. Had she enjoyed another 10 years of growth with the Russian duma being steadily given more power, it is quite feasible that her boom would have continued and allowed her to become a major industrial and military power via evolution rather than revolution.


Edited by Constantine XI
Back to Top
Isbul View Drop Down
Colonel
Colonel
Avatar

Joined: 04-Feb-2005
Location: Korea, North
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 542
  Quote Isbul Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 03-Apr-2006 at 07:10

From 1970 to 1913 Russin industrial production had increasing with 5% yearly and during 90s of XIXc reached 8% yearly.Russia prodused more steel than Austro-Hungary or France.And while her railways were 31 000 long in 1900, in 1914 they were 46 000 miles.Between 1890 and 1914 russian foreig trade had increased three times.But most of the russian economy was held by foreigh companies like Singer or by large number British engineers.90% of the mining industry, 90% of the  oil production, 40 % from metalurgy and 50% from the chemecal industry were not Russian.Not only that but russia had the largest foreign dept.The interest on this dept were bigger than the real russian trade balanse

Back to Top
mamikon View Drop Down
Sultan
Sultan
Avatar

Joined: 16-Jan-2006
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 2200
  Quote mamikon Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 03-Apr-2006 at 09:40
There is a joke (which is true btw) among historians that of all of the European countries in the 19th century, only Russia and England were spared the revolutions of 1848 and subsequent unrest of the bourgeoisie class, because England was already ahead of the rest of Europe in terms of its middle class and liberal economy, while Russia had none...
Back to Top
pikeshot1600 View Drop Down
Tsar
Tsar


Joined: 22-Jan-2005
Location: United States
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 4221
  Quote pikeshot1600 Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 03-Apr-2006 at 15:15
Originally posted by Subotai

From 1970 to 1913 Russin industrial production had increasing with 5% yearly and during 90s of XIXc reached 8% yearly.Russia prodused more steel than Austro-Hungary or France.And while her railways were 31 000 long in 1900, in 1914 they were 46 000 miles.Between 1890 and 1914 russian foreig trade had increased three times.But most of the russian economy was held by foreigh companies like Singer or by large number British engineers.90% of the mining industry, 90% of the  oil production, 40 % from metalurgy and 50% from the chemecal industry were not Russian.Not only that but russia had the largest foreign dept.The interest on this dept were bigger than the real russian trade balanse

The large rate of increase in production, etc. was due to the relatively low base upon which it was measured.

Also, the debt was largely held by the French government and banks.  I don't recall that the Germans encouraged or would approve of Russian loans much after 1890 when the Foreign Office and the General Staff became less friendly with Russia.

 

Back to Top
Isbul View Drop Down
Colonel
Colonel
Avatar

Joined: 04-Feb-2005
Location: Korea, North
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 542
  Quote Isbul Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 03-Apr-2006 at 16:46

Yes, the high increase was because of the low base.But if Russia had keep to advance so quikly it will soon cach the other european countries.Even von Moltke said in front of the Prussian gen. staff that if that continues the military and industrial power of the russians will be so great that he wouldnt know what to do.

And Russia had only 3 mil. factory wokers (1,75% of population).64% of the export were agrocultural products and 11% wooden.With these kind of stock russia payed for the american agrocultural equipment and german machineries and ofcourse the intersts for the dept.

And even that the agrocultural production had increased with 2% yearly it can not met the demands of the population wich had increased with 1,5%

Back to Top
 Post Reply Post Reply

Forum Jump Forum Permissions View Drop Down

Bulletin Board Software by Web Wiz Forums® version 9.56a [Free Express Edition]
Copyright ©2001-2009 Web Wiz

This page was generated in 0.078 seconds.