¹ For an excellent review of the literature and the main themes, see Gallman, Robert E., “Slavery and Southern Economic Growth,” Southern Economic Journal, 45 (1978–1979), pp. 1007–23;CrossRefGoogle Scholar a thorough and valuable discussion of many of the issues is contained in Wright, Gavin, The Political Economy of the Cotton South (New York, 1978).Google Scholar

² The debate begins with Brenner, Robert, “Agrarian Class Structure and Economic Development in Pre-Industrial Europe,” Past and Present, 70 (02 1976), pp. 30–75, and continues in a series of articles up to the present writing.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

³ For a historiographic review of the debate from its origins to 1972 see Baron, Samuel H., “The Transition From Feudalism to Capitalism in Russia: A Major Soviet Historical Controversy,” American Historical Review, 77 (06 1972), pp. 715–29.CrossRefGoogle Scholar The book which presents the report of the new school and the debates of the symposium at which the report was presented is Shunkov, V. I. et al. , eds., Perekhod ot feodalizma k kapitalizmu v Rossii: Materialy vsesoiuznoi diskussii [Transition from feudalism to capitalism in Russia: Materials from the All-Union discussion] (Moscow, 1969).Google Scholar For the nature of the debate up to 1982, including evaluation of several Western works, see Koval'chenko, I. D., Selunskaia, N. B., Litvakov, B. M., Sotsial'no-ekonomicheskii stroi pomeshchich'ego khoziaistva Evropeiskoi Rossii v epokhu kapitalizma; Istochniki i metody izucheniia [Social-economic structure of the landed estate of European Russia in the epic of capitalism: Sources and research methods] (Moscow, 1982), chap. 1. Other works are cited throughout this essay.Google Scholar

⁴ Several of the major works include Mendels, Franklin, “Proto-Industrialization: The First Phase of the Industrialization Process,” this JOURNAL, 32 (03 1972), pp. 241–315;Google ScholarMedick, Hans, “The Proto-Industrial Family to Industrial Capitalism,” Social History, 1(1976), pp. 291–315;CrossRefGoogle ScholarBraun, Rudolf, Industrialisierung und Volksleben: Die Veränderungen der Lebensformen in einem ländlichen Industriegebiet vor 1800 (Zürcher Oberland) (Zürich, 1960);Google ScholarMendels, Franklin, “La composition du ménage paysan en France au XIX^e siècle: une analyse ´eonomique du mode de production domestique,” Annales, 33 (07–08 1978), pp. 780–802;CrossRefGoogle ScholarKnedte, Peter, Medick, Hans, and Schlumbohm, Jurgen, Industrialisierung vor der Industrialisierung(Göttingen, 1977).Google Scholar

For east-central Europe under unfree labor conditions see Topolski, Jerzi, “Grand domaine et petites exploitations, seigneurs et paysans en Pologne au Moyen Age et dans les Temps Modernes,” in Gunst, Péter and Hoffmann, Tamás, eds., Grand domaine et petites exploitations en Europe au moyen age et dans les temps modernes: rapports nationaux (Budapest, 1982);Google ScholarKochanowicz, Jacek, Pańszcyźniane gospodarstwo chlopskie w Królestwie Polskim w 1 polowie XIX w. [Peasant households under serfdom in the Polish kingdom in the first half of the nineteenth century] (Warsaw, 1981);Google ScholarRudolph, Richard L., “Social Structure and the Beginning of Austrian Economic Growth,” East Central Europe/L'Europe du Centre-Est, 7 (1980), pp. 207–23,CrossRefGoogle Scholar and “Economic Revolution in Austria? The Meaning of 1848 in Austrian Economic History,” in Komlos, John, ed., Economic Development in the Habsburg Monarchy in the Nineteenth Century: Essays (New York, 1983).Google Scholar

⁵ The great variation in experience of different regions is quite readily seen in the numerous papers given at the Eighth International Economic History Congress. See Mendels, Franklin and Deyon, Pierre, eds., VII^e congrès international d'histoire économique. Budapest 16–22 août 1982. Section A-2: La proto–industrialisation: Théorie et realité. Rapports, 2 vols. (Lille, 1982), mimeographed;Google Scholar and Mendels, Franklin, “Proto-industrialization: Theory and Reality. General Report,” Eighth International Economic History Congress. Budapest 1982. “A” Themes (Budapest, 1982), pp. 69–110.Google Scholar

⁶ “Proto-Industrialization and Pre-Colonial South Asia,” Past and Present, 98 (February 1983), p. 43.Google Scholar

⁷ See also Baron, “The Transition From Feudalism to Capitalism,” p. 718.Google Scholar

⁸ Rudolph, Richard L., “Social Structure and the Beginning of Austrian Economic Growth,” East Central Europe/L'Europe du Centre-Est, 7 (1980), pp. 207–23.CrossRefGoogle Scholar A key work of the new school is Koval'chenko, I. D., Russkoe krepostnoe krest'ianstvo v pervoi polovine XIX v. [Russian serfs in the first half of the nineteenth century] (Moscow, 1967).Google Scholar Koval'chenko utilizes inventories for 183 estates in 21 provinces of European Russia with some 115,000 male serfs. He provides a wealth of analysis and statistical material. A helpful review of this work is Brower, Daniel R. in Journal of Social History (Winter 1968), pp. 177–82.CrossRefGoogle Scholar Also see Koval'chenko, I. D., Krest'iane i krepostnoe khoziaistvo: Riazanskii i Tambovskoi gubernii v pervoi polovine XIX veka [Peasants and the serf economy: Riazan and Tambov provinces in the first half of the nineteenth century] (Moscow, 1959);Google ScholarIndova, E. I., Dvortsovoe khoziaistvo v Rossii [The palace economy in Russia] (Moscow, 1964);Google ScholarKleiankin, A. V., Khoziaistvo pomeshchichikh i udel'nykh krest'ian Simbirskoi gubernii v pervoi polovine XIX veka [Economy of the peasants of the service nobility and appanage peasants in the Simbirsk province in the first half of the nineteenth century] (Saransk, 1974);Google ScholarLitvak, R. G., Russkaia derevnia v reforme 1861 goda [Russian countryside in the reform of 1861] (Moscow, 1972);Google ScholarKoval'chenko, I. D., ed., Massovye istochniki po sotsial'no-ekonomicheskoi istorii Rossil perioda kapitalizma [Popular sources on the social-economic history of Russia in the capitalistic period] (Moscow, 1979);Google ScholarAnfimov, A. M., Krest'ianskoe khoziaistvo evropeiskoi Rossii, 1881–1904 [Peasant economy of European Russia, 1881–1904] (Moscow, 1980);Google ScholarDruzhinin, N. M., Russkaia derevnia na perelome 1861–1880 gg. [Russian countryside at the turning point: 1861–1880] (Moscow, 1978);Google ScholarProkof'eva, L. S., Krest'ianskaia obshchina v Rossii vo vtoroi polovine xviii pervoi polovine xix veka [The peasant commune in Russia in the second half of the eighteenth century to the first half of the nineteenth century] (Leningrad, 1981).Google Scholar

⁹ Koval'chenko, I. D. and Milov, L. V., Vserossiiskii agrarnyi rynok XVIII-nachelo XX veka [The All-Russian agricultural market from the eighteenth to beginning of the twentieth century] (Moscow, 1974), pp. 211–40;Google ScholarRyndziunskii, Pavel G., Utverzhdenie kapitalizma v Rossii 1850–1880 gg. [The establishment of capitalism in Russia, 1850–1880] (Moscow, 1978).Google Scholar

¹⁰ See sources cited in footnote 8. For substantial arguments for the profitability of serfdom, see Struve, P. B., Krepostnoe khoziaiszvo. Issledovaniia po okonomicheskoi istorii Rossii v XVIII iXIX vv. [Serfdom. Research on the economic history of Russia in the eighteenth and nineteenth centuries] (St. Petersburg, 1913);Google Scholar and Skerpan, Alfred A., “The Russian National Economy and Emancipation,” in Ferguson, Alan D. and Levin, Alfred, eds., Essays in Russian History: A Collection Dedicated to George Vernadsky (Hamden, Conn., 1964).Google Scholar Evsey D. Domar and Mark J. Machina also make a strong argument for the profitability of serfdom on the eve of emancipation. See Domar, and Machina, , “On the Profitability of Russian Serfdom,” this JOURNAL, 44 (12 1984).Google Scholar

¹¹ Koval'chenko, Russkoe krepostnoe krest'ianstvo [Russian serfs], p. 380.Google Scholar

¹² Alexander Gerschenkron, “Russia: Patterns and Problems of Economic Development, 1861– 1958,” in Gerschenkron, Alexander, Economic Backwardness in Historical Perspective (Cambridge, Mass., 1962), pp. 124ff;Google ScholarPortal, Roger, “The Industrialization of Russia,” in Habakkuk, H. J. and Postan, M. M., eds., The Cambridge Economic History of Europe (Cambridge, 1966), vol. 6, part 2, p. 51;Google ScholarKahan, Arcadius, “Capital Formation During the Period of Early Industrialization in Russia, 1890–1913,” in Mathias, Peter and Postan, M. M., eds., The Cambridge Economic History of Europe (Cambridge, 1978), vol. 7, part 2, pp. 265–75;CrossRefGoogle ScholarVon Laue, Theodore H., Sergei Witte and the Industrialization of Russia (New York, 1963), chap. 1.Google Scholar William Blackwell has pushed the date back to a drive for industrialization in the 1850s. See his The Industrialization of Russia (New York, 1970), chap. 2.Google ScholarKahan, Arcadius, “Continuity in Economic Activity and Policy During the Post-Petrine Period in Russia,” this JOURNAL, 25 (03 1965), pp. 61–85;Google ScholarTuganBaranovskii, M.I., Russkaia Fabrika v proshlom i nastoiashc hem, istoricheskoe razvitie russkoifabriki v XIX v. [The Russian factory in the past and present; the historical development of the Russian factory in the nineteenth century] (3rd ed., Moscow, 1922).Google Scholar

¹³ See also Robinson, Geroid T., Rural Russia Under the Old Regime (New York, 1949).Google Scholar

¹⁴ von Haxthausen, August, Studien über die innern Zustände, das Volksleben und insbesondere die ländlichen Einrichtungen Russlands, 3 vols. (Hanover, 1847);Google Scholar Tugan-Baranovskii, Russkaia fabrika v proshlom i nastoiashchem [Russian factory]; de Tegoborski, M. L., Commentaries on the Productive Forces of Russia, 2 vols. (London, 1977);Google ScholarChayanov, A. V., The Theory of Peasant Economy (Homewood, Ill., 1966), pp. 101 passim.Google Scholar

¹⁵ Blum, Jerome, Lord and Peasant in Russia From the Ninth to the Nineteenth Century (Princeton, 1961), pp. 394f.Google Scholar

¹⁶ Crisp, Olga, Studies in the Russian Economy Before 1914 (London, 1976).CrossRefGoogle Scholar

¹⁷ Hicks, John, A Theory of Economic History (Oxford, 1969), pp. 28, 141.Google Scholar

¹⁸ Marx, Karl, Pre-Capitalist Economic Formations, ed. Hobsbawm, E. J. (New York, 1977), pp. 111, 116.Google Scholar For an elaboration on this theme see Rudolph, Richard L., “Light on the Dark Ages in Czech Economic History: The Work of Arnŝt Klíma,” East-Central Europe/L'Europe du CentreEst (1982), vol. 9, parts 1–2, pp. 39–42.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

¹⁹ For several recent discussions of aspects of proto-industrialization in Russia see Crisp, Olga, “Labour and Industrialization in Russia,” in The Cambridge Economic History of Europe, vol. 7, part 2, pp. 308–30;Google Scholar and Rudolph, Richard L., “Family Structure and Proto-Industrialization in Russia,” this JOURNAL, 40 (03 1980), pp. 111–18.Google Scholar

²⁰ This area utilized much wage labor and is left out of the present discussion which pertains primarily to serf labor. See Herlihy, Patricia, “Odessa: Staple Trade and Urbanization in New Russia,” Jahrbücher fur Geschichie Osreuropas, 21 (1973), pp. 184–95.Google Scholar

²¹ Gini coefficient based on data in Table 1. Gavin Wright shows a Gini coefficient for slaveholding in the cotton South of the United States of.793. See Wright, The Political Economy of the Cotton South, p. 27.Google Scholar

²² Tegoborski, Commentaries on the Productive Forces of Russia, vol. 1, p. 237ff.; and Wright, The Political Economy of the Cotton South, p. 31f.Google Scholar

²³ Gallman, Robert, “Self-Sufficiency in the Cotton Economy of the Antebellum South,” Agricultural History, 44 (01 1970), pp. 5–23;Google ScholarKula, Witold, An Economic Theory of the Feudal System (London, 1976), pp. 33ff, 44–61.Google Scholar Also see Kula, Witold, Problemy i metody historii gospodarczej [Problems and methods of economic history] (Warsaw, 1983), pp. 225–42 passim;Google Scholar and Rutkowski, Jan, “Badania nad podzialem dochodow w Polsce w czasach nowozytniych,” [Research on the distribution of income in Poland in modern times] in Wokol Teorii ustroju feudalnego [Concerning a theory of feudal organization] (Warsaw, 1982).Google Scholar

²⁴ Genovese, Eugene D., The Political Economy of Slavery: Studies in the Economy and Society of the Slave South (New York, 1965), p. 49.Google Scholar

²⁵ Kula, An Economic Theory of the Feudal System, pp. 33–35.Google Scholar

²⁶ Compare Khromov, P. A., Ekonomicheskoe razvitie Rossii [The economic development of Russia] (Moscow, 1967), p. 77.Google Scholar

²⁷ See Domar, Evsey D., “The Causes of Slavery or Serfdom: A Hypothesis,” this JOURNAL, 33 (03 1973), pp. 86–99.Google Scholar Stanley Engerman remarked that, with the high land/labor ratio, “indeed, to the economist the question probably should be why slavery, doesn't exist, rather than why it does.” Engerman, Stanley, “Some Considerations Relating to Property Rights in Man,” this JOURNAL, 33 (03 1973), p.57.Google Scholar In a recent article on serfdom in Poland, Robert Millward tends to gloss over the significance of relative labor scarcity in serfdom, but he never tackles the question head on, and by utilizing only a handful of translated sources seems to miss the vast literature in support of the labor shortage hypothesis: Millward, Robert, “An Economic Analysis of the Organization of Serfdom in Eastern Europe,” this JOURNAL, 42 (09 1982), p. 515f. passim.Google Scholar For the Russian case see sources cited in this article. For Poland see Jacek Kochanowicz, Pańzczyźniane gospodarstwo chlopskie [The peasant household] and ‘The Peasant Family as an Economic Unit in the Polish Feudal Economy of the Eighteenth Century,” in Wall, Richard, ed., Family Forms in Historic Europe (Cambridge, 1983), pp. 161–65.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

²⁸ Blum, Compare, Lord and Peasant, p. 445f.; and Kolchin, “Reevaluating the Antebellum Slave Community,” p. 589.Google Scholar

²⁹ Compare Koval'chenko, Russkoe krepostnoe kresr'iansrvo [Russian serfs], p. 394; and I. D. Koval'chenko and L. V. Milov, “Ob intensivnosti obrochnoi ekspluatatsii krest'ian tsentral'noi Rossii v kontse XVIII-pervoi polovine XIX v.” [On the intensity of the obrok exploitation of the peasants of central Russia at the end of the eighteenth and first half of the nineteenth centuries], Istoriia SSSR, 4 (July-August 1966), pp. 55–80.Google Scholar

³⁰ Hoch, Steven L. and Augustine, Wilson R., “The Tax Censuses and the Decline of the Serf Population in Imperial Russia, 1833–1858,” Slavic Review, 38 (09 1979), pp. 403–25.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

³¹ Koval'chenko and Milov, “Ob intensivnosti” [On the intensity].Google Scholar

³² Engerman, “Some Considerations Relating to Property Rights in Man,” p. 60.Google Scholar

³³ Gerschenkron, Alexander, “Russia: Agrarian Policies and Industrialization, 1861–1914,”in his Continuity in History and Other Essays (Cambridge, Mass., 1968), p. 141.Google Scholar

³⁴ Gailman, Robert E. and Anderson, Ralph V., “Slaves as Fixed Capital,” Journal of American History, 64 (06 1977);Google Scholar and Millar, James R., “A Reformulation of A. V. Chayanov's Theory of the Peasant Economy,” Economic Development and Cultural Change, 13 (1969), p. 222.Google Scholar

³⁵ Tegoborski, Commentaries, vol. 1, p. 220.Google Scholar

³⁶ Millar, James R., “A Reformulation of A. V. Chayanov's Theory of the Peasant Economy,” Economic Development and Cultural Change, 13 (1969), p. 226.Google Scholar

³⁷ Rutkowski, Jean, “Le régime agraire en Pologne au XVIII^e siècle,” Revue d'histoire économique et sociale, 15 (1927), pp. 69–84;Google ScholarKahan, Arcadius, “The Infringement of the Market Upon the Serf Economy in Eastern Europe,” Peasant Studies Newsletter, 3 (04 1974), pp. 7–13.Google Scholar

³⁸ See Brower, Journal of Social History, p. 181.Google Scholar

³⁹ Ignatovich, I. I., Pomieschchich'i kresr'iane nakanunie osvobozhdeniia [Serfs on the landed estates on the eve of emancipation] (Moscow, 1910), pp. 128f., 132.Google Scholar

⁴⁰ Kahan, Arcadius, “The Infringement of the Market Upon the Serf Economy in Eastern Europe,” Peasant Studies Newsletter, 3 (04 1974), p. 127.Google Scholar

⁴¹ Kahan, Arcadius, “The Infringement of the Market Upon the Serf Economy in Eastern Europe,” Peasant Studies Newsletter, 3 (04 1974), p. 127.Google Scholar

⁴² Kahan, Arcadius, “The Infringement of the Market Upon the Serf Economy in Eastern Europe,” Peasant Studies Newsletter, 3 (04 1974), p. 127.Google Scholar

⁴³ Franklin Mendels, “Proto-Industrialization”; Jones, E. L., “Agricultural Origins of Industry,” Past and Present, 11 (1968), pp. 58–71;CrossRefGoogle ScholarThirsk, Joan, “Industries in the Countryside,” in Fisher, F. J., ed., Essays in the Economic and Social History of Tudor and Stuart England (Cambridge, 1961).Google Scholar

⁴⁴ Mendels, Franklin, “Seasons and Regions in Agriculture and Industry During the Process of Industrialization,” in Pollard, Sidney, ed., Region und Industrialisierung. Studien zur Rolle der Region in der Wirischaftsgeschichte der letzten zwei Jahrhunderte (Göttingen, 1980);Google ScholarGullickson, Gay, “Agriculture and Cottage Industry: Redefining the Causes of Proto-Industrialization,” this JOURNAL, 43 (12 1983), pp. 831–37.Google Scholar

⁴⁵ Von Haxthausen, Studien über die innern Zustände, vol. 1, pp. 173–76.Google Scholar

⁴⁶ Von Haxthausen, Studien über die innern Zustände, vol. 1, p. 176.Google Scholar

⁴⁷ Von Haxthausen,Studien über die innern Zustände, vol. 1, p. 177.Google Scholar

⁴⁸ Wright, Political Economy, pp. 55–62;Google ScholarFleisig, Heywood, “Slavery, the Supply of Agricultural Labor, and the Industrialization of the South,” this JOURNAL, 36 (09 1976), pp. 572–97.Google Scholar

⁴⁹ Gallman and Anderson, “Slaves as Fixed Capital,” pp. 27–32.Google Scholar

⁵⁰ Myška, Milan, “Pre-Industrial Iron-Making in the Czech Lands: The Labour Force and Production Relations Circa 1350–Circa 1840,” Past and Present, 82 (02 1979), p. 70.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

⁵¹ Ignatovich, Pomieshchjch'i krest'iane, p. 135f.; Kleiankin, Khoziaistvo pomeshchichikh, p. 6;Google ScholarBarel, Yves, Le developpement économique de la Russie tsariste (Paris, 1968), pp. 112, 118.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

⁵² Ignatovich, Pomieshchich'i krest'iane, p. 101f.; Kahan, “The Infringement of the Market,” p. 8.Google Scholar

⁵³ Ignatovich, Pomieshchich'i krest'iane, p. 135.Google Scholar

⁵⁴ Kleiankin, Khoziaistvo pomeshchichikh, p. 6.Google Scholar

⁵⁵ I. V. Ledovskaia, “Biudzhet russkogo pomeshchika v 40–60–x godax XIX v.” [Budget of a Russian landowner in 1840–1860], in Akademiia Nauk SSSR, Institut istorii, Materialy po isotorii, sel'skogo khoziaistva i krest'ianstva SSSR [Material on the history of agriculture and peasantry in the USSR] (Moscow, 1974), vol. 8, pp. 240–45.Google Scholar

⁵⁶ Koval'chenko, Russkoe krepostnoe krest'ianstvo, p. 394.Google Scholar

⁵⁷ See Rudolph, “Family Structure and Proto-Industrialization in Russia,” p. 111f.Google Scholar

⁵⁸ Brower, in Journal of Social History, p. 180.Google Scholar

⁵⁹ Hayami, Yujiro and Ruttan, Vernon W., Agricultural Development: An International Perspective (Baltimore and London, 1971), p. 24.Google Scholar

⁶⁰ Liashchenko, P. I., Istoriia narodnogo khoziaistva SSSR [History of the national economy of the USSR] (Moscow, 1956), vol. 2, p. 496.Google Scholar

⁶¹ Liashchenko, P. I., Istoriia narodnogo khoziaistva SSSR [History of the national economy of the USSR] (Moscow, 1956), vol. 2, p. 496.Google Scholar

⁶² Rudolph, “Family Structure and Proto-Industrialization in Russia.”Google Scholar

⁶³ Ignatovich, Pomieshchich'i krest'iane, p. 144.Google Scholar

⁶⁴ The view that peasant management was efficient is shared by many. See Blum, Lord and Peasant, p. 388; and Koichin, Reevaluating the Antebellum Slave Community, p. 589f.Google Scholar

⁶⁵ Wright, Compare, Political Economy, p. 82f.Google Scholar

⁶⁶ Koval'chenko, Russkoe krepostnoe krest'ianstvo, pp. 382–84.Google Scholar

⁶⁷ Mytka, Milan, “Pre-Industrial Iron-Making in the Czech Lands: The Labour Force and Production Relations Circa 1350–Circa 1840,” Past and Present, 82 (02 1979), p. 384;Google ScholarRyndziunskii, Utverzhdenie kapitalizma, p. 284.Google Scholar

⁶⁸ Koval'chenko, Russkoe krepostnoe krest'ianstvo, p. 384.Google Scholar

⁶⁹ Koval'chenko and Milov, Vserossiiskii agrarny rynok; Kafengauz, B. B., Ocherki vnulrennego rynka Rossii pervoipolovine XVIII veka [Essays on the internal market in Russia in the first half of the eighteenth century] (Moscow, 1958); Ryndziunskii, Utverzhdenie kapitalizma.Google Scholar

⁷⁰ Szczepaniak, Marian, Przemysl i rzemioslo wiejskie w Wielkopoisce w drugiej polowie xviii wieku [Manufacture and rural handicraft in Greater Poland in the second half of the eighteenth century] (Poznań, 1971), pp. 5–7 passim;Google ScholarKlíma, Arnostšt, “Agrarian Class Structure and Economic Development in Pre-Industrial Bohemia,” Past and Present, 85 (11 1979), pp. 58–83.Google Scholar

⁷¹ See Rudolph, “Family Structure and Proto-Industrialization in Russia,” p. 117f.Google Scholar

⁷² Milward, Alan S. and Saul, S. B., The Development of the Economies of Continental Europe 1850–1914 (Cambridge, Mass., 1977), p. 361f.Google Scholar

⁷³ Blackwell, The Industrialization of Russia, p. 24.Google Scholar

⁷⁴ See Wilbur, Elvira M., “Was Russian Peasant Agriculture Really That Impoverished? New Evidence From a Case Study From the ‘Impoverished Center’ at the End of the Nineteenth Century,” this JOURNAL, 43 (03 1983), pp. 137–44;Google ScholarKingson-Mann, Esther, “Marxism and Russian Rural Development: Problems of Evidence, Experience and Culture,” American Histori cal Review, 84 (10 1981), pp. 731–52;CrossRefGoogle ScholarSimms, James Y. Jr, “The Crisis in Russian Agriculture at the End of the NineteenthCentury: A Different View,” Slavic Review, 36 (09 1977), pp. 377–98;CrossRefGoogle ScholarSimms, , “The Crop Failure of 1891: Soil Exhaustion, Technological Backwardness, and Russia's ‘Agrarian Crisis,’” Slavic Review, 41 (Summer 1982), pp. 236–50;CrossRefGoogle ScholarPatniak, Utsa, “Neo-Populisni and Marxism: The Chayanovian View of the Agrarian Question and Its Fundamental Fallacy,” Journal of Peasant Studies, 6 (07 1979), pp. 375–420.CrossRefGoogle Scholar