text:
Yale, British Columbia

Yale is an unincorporated town in the Canadian province of British Columbia, which grew in importance during the Fraser Canyon Gold Rush.

Located on the Fraser River, it is generally considered to be on the dividing line between the British Columbia Coast and the Interior regions of the British Columbia Mainland. Immediately north of the town, the Fraser Canyon begins and the river is generally considered unnavigable past this point. Rough water is common on the Fraser anywhere upstream from Chilliwack and even more so above Hope, about 20 mi south of Yale. However, steamers could make it to Yale, good pilots and water conditions permitting, and the town had a busy dockside life as well as a variety of bars, restaurants, hotels, saloons and various services. Its maximum population during the gold rush era was in the 15,000 range. More generally, it housed 5,000-8,000. The higher figure was counted at the time of evacuation of the Canyon during the Fraser Canyon War of 1858.

Most of today's population are members of the self-governing Yale First Nation. Non-native businesses have included a couple of stores, restaurants and a few motels and other services, as well as a gas station, and automotive repair and rescue outfits. The town's only gas station closed in 2021 or 2022 and their general store closed in December 2023. The Yale area is the lowest main destination for the Fraser River rafting expedition companies; several have waterfront campgrounds and facilities near town. All Hallows is now a campground and hostel. Not much of gold rush-era Yale survives, as the docks vanished long ago. The railway was built in the 1880s down the main street of what had been the waterfront town. The Yale Museum is located on old Front Street, adjacent to the tracks. Next to it is the Anglican Church of St. John the Divine, among the oldest in British Columbia.

The town has its own natural landscape. Every summer, a historical reenactment group visits Yale to celebrate the Royal Engineers, who had served under Richard Clement Moody during McGowan's War. They also worked on the Cariboo Wagon Road (later improved as the Trans-Canada Highway) and the Douglas-Lillooet Trail. The men were an integral part of Yale's life from the gold rush to the end of the 1870s.

History

The town was founded in 1848 by the Hudson's Bay Company as Fort Yale by Ovid Allard, the appointed manager of the new post, who named it after his superior, James Murray Yale, then Chief Factor of the Columbia District. In its heyday at the peak of the Fraser Canyon Gold Rush, it was reputed to be the largest city west of Chicago and north of San Francisco. It also earned epithets such as "the wickedest little settlement in British Columbia" and "a veritable Sodom and Gomorrah" of vice, violence and lawlessness.

Yale played an important role in certain events of the gold rush period which threatened British control in the region with annexation by the United States: the Fraser Canyon War and McGowan's War. The Governor came to Yale during the first crisis, and government officials Matthew Baillie Begbie, Chartres Brew and Richard Clement Moody during the second, to address American miners and take control of matters. The unrest threatened the rule of the Crown over the Mainland (or "New Caledonia" as it was called before the creation of the mainland colony. (New Caledonia was usually applied to the fur district northwest from present-day Prince George).

As Yale was the head of river navigation, it was the best location to be designated for the start of the Cariboo Wagon Road, as there were no usable roads between Yale and the settlements nearer the Fraser's mouth. The Cariboo Road, built in the early 1860s, ran from Yale to Barkerville via Lytton, Ashcroft and Quesnel.

By the start of the 1870s, an overland route from New Westminster was finally built – the Yale Road along the south side of the river. It was formerly known as the Grand Trunk Road and in the 21st century as Old Yale Road; it survives in sections from Surrey through Abbotsford and Chilliwack (though no longer entirely a continuous "highway"). Its counterpart on the north side of the river was the Dewdney Trunk Road, built in the same period in advance of railway construction in the 1880s. That road ran only to Dewdney, just east of Mission City.

Because of its unique role as a transshipment point for the Cariboo Road, Yale prospered for another twenty years after the gold rush. Although it declined in population, it retained some prestige and such sophistication as had grown up within the rough gold town. It was as familiar to early provincial high society as were New Westminster and distant Barkerville. During the construction of the Canadian Pacific Railway, construction ran directly through the village, built on flatland by the river. It destroyed the town's old commercial core and the connection of the town life to the waterfront.

As Yale was handy for travel to and from New Westminster and Gastown (soon after named Vancouver) on Burrard Inlet, it became the headquarters and residence of the American railway contractor Andrew Onderdonk, who supervised its construction. The town boomed with population and new businesses because of railway spending and employment. Yale and nearby Emory City, in the vicinity of Hill's Bar, where the gold rush had begun, as well as all the major Fraser Canyon towns to Ashcroft, thronged with temporary residents and business of various kinds and legitimacy.

Three-times daily rail service to Vancouver – begun in the early 1880s before construction in the Canyon was finished in 1885 –  made Yale a popular excursion run. With construction ended, however, the population dropped dramatically in Yale by 1890, and continued to decline afterwards. Daily return service remained in effect until World War I. When Onderdonk moved on in 1886, he donated his estate for a girls' school, All Hallows. This was ranked as one of the main society schools in the colony and continued to operate for decades, into the 1920s.

Construction of the railway destroyed parts of the Cariboo Wagon Road, which was severed between Yale and Boston Bar and between Lytton and Spences Bridge. A new highway north from Yale was not built until the Cariboo Highway in 1922, partly built using surviving roadgrades of the original waggon road and since upgraded to the Trans-Canada Highway. For a long time, this was the main route between the Interior Plateau and the Lower Mainland. After major reconstruction of the Cariboo Highway in the 1950s, involving the construction of several major tunnels, the difficult old canyon stretch of the route achieved highway quality (instead of in name only), and towns such as Yale boomed once again. With the opening of the faster Coquihalla Highway in the 1980s, Yale's economy and population fell off as traffic bypassed it.

Demographics
In the 2021 Canadian census conducted by Statistics Canada, Yale had a population of 162 living in 86 of its 118 total private dwellings, a change of NaN% from its 2016 population of 143. With a land area of 3.38 km2, it had a population density of in 2021.

The average age of Yale residents is 56.8 giving a median age of 62.4. This is older than British Columbia as a whole with an average age of 43.1 and a median of 42.8. The predominant language is English with no French listed in the 2021 census. However, 15 people reported Indo-European languages as their mother tongue (5 women Ukrainian, 5 speakers German, 5 Low German, 5 Italic language).

Television
Yale has been featured on the historical television series Gold Trails and Ghost Towns, season 1, episode 7.

title: Yale, British Columbia


text:
Getting My Brother Laid

Getting My Brother Laid (Mein Bruder, der Vampir) is a 2001 German romantic comedy-drama film directed by Sven Taddicken.

Premise
Josch Klauser (Roman Knižka), Mike (Hinnerk Schönemann) and their younger sister Nic (Marie-Luise Schramm) experience ups and downs in search for their first love. Josch, the oldest of the three, is a big fan of Dracula, and mentally handicapped. He falls in love with Nadine (Julia Jentsch), who is the girlfriend of his brother Mike.

license: Creative Commons - Attribution Share-Alike - https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/4.0/

title: Getting My Brother Laid


text:
St. Margarets Bay, Nova Scotia

St. Margarets Bay is a bay located on the Atlantic coast of Nova Scotia, Canada on the border of Halifax County (Halifax Regional Municipality) and Lunenburg County (Municipality of the District of Chester).

Description
Opening south directly onto the Atlantic, the bay's eastern shore is formed by the Chebucto Peninsula and its western shore by the Aspotogan Peninsula, while the head of the bay (the northern shore) is the main part of the Nova Scotia peninsula.

The bay's shoreline is mostly rocky, although the head of the bay offers several sandy beaches at Queensland, Black Point and Cleveland; another sandy beach exists on the western shore of the bay at Bayswater and there is a small sandy beach along the eastern shore on Micou's Island. St. Margarets Bay is a cruising destination for sailing yachts as its picturesque shorelines offer protection in many natural harbours, as well as anchorages in coves and near small islands.

Eastern Shore
Along the Chebucto Peninsula (from south to north):
 * Peggys Cove
 * Indian Harbour
 * Hackett's Cove
 * Glen Margaret
 * Seabright
 * French Village
 * Glen Haven
 * Tantallon
 * Whynacht's Point
 * Upper Tantallon

Northern Shore
Along the head of the bay (from east to west):
 * Allen Heights
 * Todd's Island
 * Head of St. Margarets Bay
 * Mason's Point
 * Boutilier's Point
 * Ingramport
 * Black Point
 * Queensland
 * Hubbards

Western Shore
Along the Aspotogan Peninsula (from north to south):
 * Fox Point
 * Mill Cove
 * Birchy Head
 * The Lodge
 * Northwest Cove
 * Southwest Cove
 * Aspotogan
 * Bayswater

Islands
St. Margarets Bay contains numerous islands, particularly along its eastern shore. These islands were historically used by the Mi'kmaq Nation and some contain burial sites.

The bay's larger islands are listed below:

 * Southwest Island
 * Horse Island
 * Shut-in Island
 * Croucher Island
 * Owls Head Island (connected to the mainland by a small bridge)
 * Moser's Island
 * Micou's Island

Swissair 111
The Swissair Flight 111 Memorial is located at The Whalesback, a promontory approximately 1 km northwest of Peggys Cove. It is one of two memorials built to commemorate the victims of the Swissair Flight 111 disaster, which crashed into St. Margarets Bay on 2 September 1998. The crash site is roughly equidistant between the Whalesback Memorial and another memorial at Bayswater, Nova Scotia, located on the Aspotogan Peninsula on the western shore of the bay, opposite Peggys Cove.

The monument reads in English and French: "In memory of the 229 men, women and children aboard Swissair Flight 111 who perished off these shores September 2nd, 1998. They have been joined to the sea, and the sky. May they rest in peace."

The site of the crash and the two monuments form a triangle. The three notches on the monument at Whalesback represent the numerals 111. The sight line from the three grooves in the stone points to the crash site, while the markings on the facing stone point to the memorial at Bayswater. The memorial wall at Bayswater lists the names of the passengers and crew. The facing stone points to the crash site.

War Plan Red
In the period between World War I and World War II, the US military drew up a series of Colour Coded War Plans based on likely global threats. War Plan Red denoted a planned attack against the British Empire and by extension War Plan Crimson which called for an invasion of Canada. The plan involved an attack on many fronts starting with a seabourne invasion of Halifax and Canada's Maritime provinces via St. Margarets Bay.

title: St. Margarets Bay, Nova Scotia


text:
Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/2005 Hudson Valley Mall shooting incident

 This page is an archive of the discussion about the proposed deletion of the article below. This page is no longer live. Further comments should be made on the article's talk page rather than here so that this page is preserved as an historic record. The result of the debate was ambiguous.

I count 12 clear "delete" votes (minus one anon), 12 clear "keep" votes (minus one troll), 12 "transwiki" votes and one anon comment too unclear to interpret.

Noting that Transwiki does not destroy history and therefore does not require the same degree of overwhelming concensus that deletion does and further noting that even the article's main author and defender is now suggesting that this should be transwiki'd, I am going to be bold and add it to the transwiki queue. Rossami (talk) 03:44, 23 Feb 2005 (UTC)

2005 Hudson Valley Mall shooting incident
I don't think this article is encyclopedic enough SYSS Mouse 02:08, 14 Feb 2005 (UTC)

 * Transwiki - change of mind after some updates in the story. Turns out to be one one gunman and not five. Keep, obviously. Notable, important, verifible, informative. Good news search shows 338 articles about it. We (rightly) have articles far more obscure. Reports indicate that there may have been as many as five gunmen. Surely this is more notable than about 85 percent of the articles on Unusual articles, or other crime related articles (e.g., Scott Peterson)? This is an absurd VfD. Neutralitytalk 02:09, Feb 14, 2005 (UTC)
 * P.S.: Full disclosure: I am the author of the article. Neutralitytalk 02:29, Feb 14, 2005 (UTC)
 * What got you interested in this shooting in the first place? silsor 10:35, Feb 14, 2005 (UTC)
 * It was on CNN all last night, so I write an article. Neutralitytalk 15:09, Feb 14, 2005 (UTC)
 * Transwiki to WikiNews —Neuropedia 02:15, 2005 Feb 14 (UTC)
 * It's written in an encylopedia style, not a news style. A transwiki is inappropriate. Neutralitytalk 02:18, Feb 14, 2005 (UTC)
 * Keep for now, review in a month. This may turn out to be important; it may be forgotten entirely next week. Right now it's too early to say. (and please add a reference or two, thx.) —Charles P. (Mirv) 02:18, 14 Feb 2005 (UTC)
 * Four sources have been added. Thanks. Neutralitytalk 02:25, Feb 14, 2005 (UTC)
 * Strong keep. Most major news stories like this are notable enough for Wikipedia even though we do have WikiNews. Szyslak 02:19, 14 Feb 2005 (UTC)
 * Keep. Seems perfectly appropriate. Tuf-Kat 02:23, Feb 14, 2005 (UTC)
 * Keep. This type of article has a long history on Wikipedia. Since it is written in an encyclopedic style, it should be kept. Andrew pmk 02:28, 14 Feb 2005 (UTC)
 * Keep. Notable and encyclopedia. - BanyanTree 02:31, 14 Feb 2005 (UTC)
 * Keep! ✏ Oven Fresh  ²  02:38, 14 Feb 2005 (UTC)
 * Comment. This is breaking news.  At this point, it is hard to know whether this is going to be like the Columbine High School incident and have enduring encyclopedic value, or whether it is going to be forgotten in a couple of news cycles.    I think it would be better to keep breaking news out of the Wikipedia, and leave it for Wikinews, except in those cases where it is clear from the outset that an incident will be of encyclopedic interest in the future. --BM 03:05, 14 Feb 2005 (UTC)

JesseG 18:41, Feb 14, 2005 (UTC)
 * Comment A week on VfD may allow this to resolve into a more stable article. Neutrality's contributions have been sufficient that I think s/he can be trusted to stay on top of this one. Denni ☯ 03:35, 2005 Feb 14 (UTC)
 * Delete. This was a local shooting. No one was even killed.  What is its significance?  Should I start writing up articles on all the shootings and murders in my area? BLANKFAZE | (что??) 04:06, 14 Feb 2005 (UTC)
 * This is the USA: people shoot people. Utterly unnotable. Delete. -- Hoary 05:15, 2005 Feb 14 (UTC)
 * Delete. Sad though it is, violent crime occurs all the time in this country. I don't see why this non-fatal incident is any more notable than these murders from my region that have turned up in the news lately:  . So the perpetrators chose a public setting and fired at random people instead of people they knew. That doesn't establish it as encyclopedic in my opinion. — Ливай | ☺ 05:22, 14 Feb 2005 (UTC)
 * Delete in view of other shooting incidents in the United States this isnt really all that notable, no-one was killed. Megan1967 05:56, 14 Feb 2005 (UTC)
 * Wikipedia is not a newspaper. Delete.  RickK 06:04, Feb 14, 2005 (UTC)
 * Transwiki. Wikipedia is not Wikinews.  No evidence that this is a "topic of historical significance". —Korath (Talk) 06:23, Feb 14, 2005 (UTC)
 * Transwiki to wikinews. This isn't currently notable. If it becomes notable later, we can make an article about it. --Sillydragon 08:26, 14 Feb 2005 (UTC)
 * Transwiki to wikinews. While the article has got goos writing, this shooting isn't any different from the hundreds happening in the US on a daily basis. I think it's got enough of a news style to be transwikied, but it could always be edited before the move. That shouldn't stop transwiki from being an option. Mgm|(talk) 08:56, Feb 14, 2005 (UTC)
 * Delete. Not yet notable, and given the number of more lurid/murderous evnts, unlikely to be so.  HowardB 09:31, 14 Feb 2005 (UTC)
 * Delete, if every violent incident that resulted in two people being injured was written up in Wikipedia, there's be more articles of that nature than everything else combined. —Stormie 10:59, Feb 14, 2005 (UTC)
 * Transwiki to wikinews. As above. If this event proves to be notable then the article can be recreated. Lan3y - Talk 11:48, Feb 14, 2005 (UTC)
 * Delete. Violent crimes occur every day. What makes this one special? —Lowellian (talk) 12:17, Feb 14, 2005 (UTC)
 * Keep. Important and interesting. - Darwinek 14:51, 14 Feb 2005 (UTC)
 * Transwiki as noted above. The event got some major coverage immediately afterward, but it's pretty evident this isn't another Columbine shooting, nor a terrorist attack. As noted above, if later events prove this to be a notable event (outside the immediate vicinity) it's easy enough to put together a new article. 23skidoo 16:35, 14 Feb 2005 (UTC)
 * Transwiki as noted above. 63.198.46.74 17:27, 14 Feb 2005 (UTC)
 * Don't know how I got logged out ... the above is my vote. HyperZonk 17:30, Feb 14, 2005 (UTC)
 * I'm a little new to Wikipedia so I am unclear why you wouldn't keep an article like this... Although it current reads a tad like a news article it is factual and there are articles on similar events (Columbine, Montreal) so I would say keep it. emackinnon  (edit - after reading all these posts and seeing the points of both sides I can now see why an article like this is questionable... thanks)
 * Transwiki doesn't seem to be quite on the same level as Columbine, 9-11, Waco, etc. This is why wikinews is important, so that the main WP doesn't get deluged with daily news events. Andrew Lenahan - St ar bli nd  17:45, Feb 14, 2005 (UTC)
 * It's ridiculous to say that an event needs to be on the "same level as Columbine, 9-11, Waco, etc" to merit an article. People are voting as if this were a mugging or something. Neutralitytalk 01:13, Feb 15, 2005 (UTC)
 * Well, nobody was killed or even very seriously injured. Not to undermine its obvious importance to those who were there, but it's basically a case of some guy going postal and unloading a weapon in a public place.  If we say this deserves an article, then why not the hundreds of thousands of murders and non-fatal acts of violence that happen all over the world every year? If this happened on the street in the inner city instead of in a mall, it would just be another footnote in the police blotter.  Wrong?  Right?  Maybe so, maybe not, but that's how our society assigns importance to things.  Andrew Lenahan - St ar bli nd  02:03, Feb 15, 2005 (UTC)
 * I would say to either keep this article, or merge it into the Hudson Valley Mall article that deals with the mall itself and make it a section of the article.
 * Keep. No valid reason was provided to delete.  GRider\talk 20:19, 14 Feb 2005 (UTC)
 * Several valid reasons were given. RickK 20:49, Feb 14, 2005 (UTC)
 * Delete. No valid reason was provided for having the article in the first place. Maybe it belongs in the Poughkeepsiepedia but not here. --Calton 20:41, 14 Feb 2005 (UTC)
 * Transwiki to wikinews. In general, breaking local news should appear there. Once it has stood the test of time, someone will write a Wikipedia article. Jonathan 21:40 14 February 2005 (UTC)
 * Agree with Neutrality. Keep. This is a notable current event article. --Lst27 ( t a l k )  23:33, 14 Feb 2005 (UTC)
 * Delete. People are shot and killed every day. This does not stand out. JoaoRicardo 02:39, 15 Feb 2005 (UTC)
 * Keep please, not very notable, but notable enough to sustain an article. silsor 10:27, Feb 15, 2005 (UTC)
 * Transwiki to WikiNews. I respect Neutrality's contributions but this is nothing particularly special about this crime.  Rossami (talk) 03:45, 16 Feb 2005 (UTC)
 * Transwiki. ComCat 01:58, 19 Feb 2005 (UTC)
 * Delete. It would NOT be a good news story -- Five gunmen? The kind of gun is unknown? The number of shots fired is unknown? Wrong, it was one guy with an AK-47 "knockoff" and approx. 60 shots were fired. This barely made the news here in SoCal, but a brief search shows that its facts are wrong and no one cares enough to update it. The fact that this info was not available when it was written underlines the difference between news and an encyclopedic article. Should our friends in the UK post similar half-baked stories about stuff that we have never heard of?
 * keep Yuckfoo 03:36, 20 Feb 2005 (UTC)

This page is now preserved as an archive of the debate and, like some other VfD subpages, is no longer 'live'. Subsequent comments on the issue, the deletion, or the decision-making process should be placed on the relevant 'live' pages. Please do not edit this page.


text:
Man of the Hour

"Man of the Hour" is a song by the American rock band Pearl Jam. Written by vocalist Eddie Vedder, "Man of the Hour" accompanies the closing credits of the 2003 film Big Fish, and is the first track on the film's soundtrack album. It was released as a single on November 26, 2003. The song was included on Pearl Jam's 2004 greatest hits album, rearviewmirror (Greatest Hits 1991–2003).

Origin and recording
Director Tim Burton approached Pearl Jam in 2003 to request an original song for the soundtrack of his new film, Big Fish. After screening an early print of the film, Pearl Jam vocalist Eddie Vedder went home, wrote "Man of the Hour", and had a demo ready by the next day. It was recorded by the band four days later. Guitarist Mike McCready stated, "We were so blown away by the movie... Eddie and I were standing around talking about it afterwards and were teary-eyed. We were so emotionally charged and moved by the imagination and humanity that we felt because of the movie."

Lyrics
The wistful song is a young man saying farewell to his father: "The man of the hour has taken his final bow/Goodbye for now." According to Billboard magazine, the "acoustic-tinged track is accented by wistful slide guitar work, with lyrics reflecting how the father/son bond can be rocked by what seem like insurmountable obstacles."

According to Vedder at a June 1, 2006 concert in East Rutherford, New Jersey at Continental Airlines Arena, "Come Back" from the band's 2006 album, Pearl Jam, is set with the same young man from "Man of the Hour" talking to the departed two months later.

Release and reception
"Man of the Hour" was released as a single on November 26, 2003, just prior to the release of the film. The single of this song features a demo version of Vedder alone on vocals and guitar as a B-side. The single was made available for purchase through the band's official website as well as through Amazon.com. It was Pearl Jam's first release without a label, in partnership with Amazon.com.

"Man of the Hour" was nominated for the 2004 Golden Globe Award for Best Original Song, but lost to Annie Lennox's "Into the West" from The Lord of the Rings: The Return of the King. It was also nominated for a 2003 Broadcast Film Critics Association Award, and a 2004 World Soundtrack Award.

Heather Phares of Allmusic said, "Though Burton's quirky, eerie aesthetic would normally be at odds with Pearl Jam's earnestness, the two work well together here, with the song touching on the film's warmth and adding a bit of earthiness to its daydreamy nature." Barry Walters of Rolling Stone said that "the star is the film's end-titles' closer, Pearl Jam's "Man of the Hour", which captures the darkness of Big Fish's central Oedipal conflict." In the director's commentary for the DVD release of Big Fish, director Tim Burton raves about the song, calling it "beautiful" and "so right" and noting how well it "matched and mirrored" the film.

Live performances
"Man of the Hour" was first performed live at the band's October 22, 2003 concert in Seattle at Benaroya Hall. Since the death of Ramones guitarist Johnny Ramone, Vedder has dedicated live performances of the song to him. Live performances of "Man of the Hour" can be found on the live album Live at Benaroya Hall, various official bootlegs, the Live at the Gorge 05/06 box set and the Eddie Vedder DVD Water on the Road. On October 27, 2013 at their show in Baltimore, the band dedicated the song to Lou Reed who had died earlier that day.

During a show in Chicago on August 22, 2016, Vedder dedicated the song to his late friend Layne Staley, lead singer of Alice in Chains. That day would have been Staley's 49th birthday; "It’s the birthday of a guy called Layne Staley tonight, and we’re thinking of him tonight too. 49 years old", Vedder told the crowd before dedicating the song to his friend.

Track listing
All songs written by Eddie Vedder.
 * 1) "Man of the Hour" – 3:46
 * 2) "Man of the Hour" (demo) – 3:53

title: Man of the Hour


text:
Serfdom in Russia

The term serf (крепостной крестьянин), in the sense of an unfree peasant of tsarist Russia, meant an unfree person who, unlike a slave, historically could be sold only together with the land to which they were "attached". However, this stopped being a requirement by the 19th century, and serfs were practically indistinguishable from slaves. Contemporary legal documents, such as Russkaya Pravda (12th century onwards), distinguished several degrees of feudal dependency of peasants. While another form of slavery in Russia, kholopstvo, was ended by Peter I in 1723, the serfdom (крепостное право) was abolished only by Alexander II's emancipation reform of 1861; nevertheless, in times past, the state allowed peasants to sue for release from serfdom under certain conditions, and also took measures against abuses of landlord power.

Serfdom became the dominant form of relation between Russian peasants and nobility in the 17th century. Serfdom most commonly existed in the central and southern areas of the Tsardom of Russia and, from 1721, of the subsequent Russian Empire. Serfdom in Little Russia (parts of today's central Ukraine), and other Cossack lands, in the Urals and in Siberia generally occurred rarely until, during the reign of Catherine the Great (r. 1762–1796), it spread to Ukraine; noblemen began to send their serfs into Cossack lands in an attempt to harvest their extensive untapped natural resources.

The emperor and the highest state officials feared that the peasants' emancipation would be accompanied by popular unrest, given the reluctance of the landlords to lose their serf property, but took some actions to alleviate the situation of the peasantry.

Emperor Alexander I ((r. 1801 – 1825)) wanted to reform the system but moved cautiously, liberating serfs in Estonia (1816), Livonia (1816), and Courland (1817) only. New laws allowed all classes (except the serfs) to own land, a privilege previously confined to the nobility. Emperor Alexander II abolished serfdom in the emancipation reform of 1861, a few years later than Austria and other German states. Scholars have proposed multiple overlapping reasons to account for the abolition, including fear of a large-scale revolt by the serfs, the government's financial needs, changing cultural sensibilities, and the military's need for soldiers.

Terminology
The term muzhik, or moujik (мужи́к) means "Russian peasant" when it is used in English. This word was borrowed from Russian into Western languages through translations of 19th-century Russian literature, describing Russian rural life of those times, and where the word muzhik was used to mean the most common rural dweller – a peasant – but this was only a narrow contextual meaning.

Origins
The origins of serfdom in Russia may be traced to the 12th century, when the exploitation of the so-called zakups on arable lands (ролейные (пашенные) закупы, roleyniye (pashenniye) zakupy) and corvée smerds (Russian term for corvée is барщина, barschina) was the closest to what is now known as serfdom. According to the Russkaya Pravda, a princely smerd had limited property and personal rights and his escheat was given to the prince.

From the 13th century to the 15th century
From the 13th century to the 15th century, feudal dependency applied to a significant number of peasants, but serfdom as we know it was still not a widespread phenomenon. In the mid-15th century the right of certain categories of peasants in some votchinas to leave their master was limited to a period of one week before and after Yuri's Day (November 26). The Sudebnik of 1497 officially confirmed this time limit as universal for everybody and also established the amount of the "break-away" fee called pozhiloye (пожилое). The legal code of Ivan III of Russia, Sudebnik (1497), strengthened the dependency of peasants, statewide, and restricted their mobility. The Russians persistently battled against the successor states of the Golden Horde, chiefly the Khanate of Crimea. Annually the Russian population of the borderland suffered from Tatar invasions and slave raids and tens of thousands of noblemen protected the southern borderland (a heavy burden for the state), which slowed its social and economic development and expanded the taxation of peasantry.

Transition to full serfdom
The Sudebnik of 1550 increased the amount of pozhiloye and introduced an additional tax called za povoz (за повоз, or transportation fee), in case a peasant refused to bring the harvest from the fields to his master. A temporary (Заповедные лета, or forbidden years) and later an open-ended prohibition for peasants to leave their masters was introduced by the ukase of 1597 under the reign of Boris Godunov, which took away the peasants' right to free movement around Yuri's Day, binding the vast majority of the Russian peasantry in full serfdom. These also defined the so-called fixed years (Урочные лета, urochniye leta), or the 5-year time frame for search of the runaway peasants. In 1607, a new ukase defined sanctions for hiding and keeping runaways: the fine had to be paid to the state and pozhiloye – to the previous owner of the peasant.

The Sobornoye Ulozhenie (Соборное уложение, "Code of Law") of 1649 gave serfs to estates, and in 1658, flight was made a criminal offense. Russian landowners eventually gained almost unlimited ownership over Russian serfs. The landowner could transfer the serf without land to another landowner while keeping the serf's personal property and family; however, the landowner had no right to kill the serf. About four-fifths of Russian peasants were serfs according to the censuses of 1678 and 1719; free peasants remained only in the north and north-east of the country.

Most of the dvoryane (nobles) were content with the long time frame for search of the runaway peasants. The major landowners of the country, however, together with the dvoryane of the south, were interested in a short-term persecution due to the fact that many runaways would usually flee to the southern parts of Russia. During the first half of the 17th century the dvoryane sent their collective petitions (челобитные, chelobitniye) to the authorities, asking for the extension of the "fixed years". In 1642, the Russian government established a 10-year limit for search of the runaways and 15-year limit for search for peasants taken away by their new owners.

The Sobornoye Ulozhenie introduced an open-ended search for those on the run, meaning that all of the peasants who had fled from their masters after the census of 1626 or 1646–1647 had to be returned. The government would still introduce new time frames and grounds for search of the runaways after 1649, which applied to the peasants who had fled to the outlying districts of the country, such as regions along the border abatises called zasechniye linii (засечные линии) (ukases of 1653 and 1656), Siberia (ukases of 1671, 1683 and 1700), Don (1698) etc. The dvoryane constantly demanded that the search for the runaways be sponsored by the government. The legislation of the second half of the 17th century paid much attention to the means of punishment of the runaways.

Serfdom was hardly efficient; serfs and nobles had little incentive to improve the land. However, it was politically effective. Nobles rarely challenged the tsar for fear of provoking a peasant uprising. Serfs were often given lifelong tenancy on their plots, so they tended to be conservative as well. The serfs took little part in uprisings against the empire as a whole; it was the Cossacks and nomads who rebelled initially and recruited serfs into rebel armies. But many landowners died during serf uprisings against them. The revolutions of 1905 and 1917 happened after serfdom's abolition.

Rebellions
There were numerous rebellions against this bondage, most often in conjunction with Cossack uprisings, such as the uprisings of Ivan Bolotnikov (1606–1607), Stenka Razin (1667–1671), Kondraty Bulavin (1707–1709) and Yemelyan Pugachev (1773–1775). While the Cossack uprisings benefited from disturbances among the peasants, and they in turn received an impetus from Cossack rebellion, none of the Cossack movements were directed against the institution of serfdom itself. Instead, peasants in Cossack-dominated areas became Cossacks during uprisings, thus escaping from the peasantry rather than directly organizing peasants against the institution. Rich Cossacks owned serfs themselves. Between the end of Pugachev's Rebellion and the beginning of the 19th century, there were hundreds of outbreaks across Russia, and there was never a time when the peasantry was completely quiescent.

Slaves and serfs
As a whole, serfdom both came and remained in Russia much later than in other European countries. Slavery remained a legally recognized institution in Russia until 1723, when Peter the Great abolished slavery and converted the slaves into serfs. This was relevant more to household slaves because Russian agricultural slaves were formally converted into serfs earlier in 1679.

Formal conversion to serf status and the later ban on the sale of serfs without land did not stop the trade in household slaves; this trade merely changed its name. The private owners of the serfs regarded the law as a mere formality. Instead of "sale of a peasant" the papers would advertise "servant for hire" or similar.

By the eighteenth century, the practice of selling serfs without land had become commonplace. Owners had absolute control over their serfs' lives, and could buy, sell and trade them at will, giving them as much power over serfs as Americans had over chattel slaves, though owners did not always choose to exercise their powers over serfs to the fullest extent.

The official estimate is that 23 million Russians were privately owned, 18.3 million were in state ownership and another 900,000 serfs were under the Tsar's patronage (udelnye krestiane) before the Great Emancipation of 1861.

One particular source of indignation in Europe was Kolokol published in London, England (1857–65) and Geneva (1865–67). It collected many cases of horrendous physical, emotional and sexual abuse of the serfs by the landowners.

Eighteenth and nineteenth centuries
Edicts of 1718, 1734, 1750, 1761, and 1767 obliged landlords to feed their peasants in times of crop failure and famine and to prevent their impoverishment. Since 1722 landlords were responsible for the correct payment of the per capita tax by their peasants (the tax was collected from the peasants and paid to the treasury by the landlord himself or his clerk). It was forbidden to put peasants on torture for their master's debts. In order to suppress fraudulent practices of landlords, who during audits recorded persons who did not belong to serfs, allegedly with their consent, decrees of 1775, 1781 and 1783 prohibited voluntary registration of serfs. The legislation stipulated conditions that allowed peasants to leave the serf state. Edicts of 1737, 1743, 1744, 1745, 1770, and 1773 declared free those who returned from captivity, as well as foreigners who accepted Eastern Orthodoxy. The children of foster homes and those who had graduated from the St. Petersburg Academy of Arts could not be enserfed. Freedom was granted to retired soldiers who were serfs. Peter III created two measures in 1762 that influenced the abolition of serfdom. He ended mandatory military service for nobles with the abolition of compulsory noble state service. This provided a rationale to end serfdom. Second, was the secularization of the church estates, which transferred its peasants and land to state jurisdiction. In 1775 measures were taken by Catherine II to prosecute estate owners for the cruel treatment of serfs. These measures were strengthened in 1817 and the late 1820s. There were even laws that required estate owners to help serfs in time of famine, which included grain to be kept in reserve. These policies failed to aid famines in the early nineteenth century due to estate owner negligence.

As the ideas of Enlightenment and humanism spread among the Russian nobility at the turn of the 18th and 19th centuries, a conviction developed that the system of serfdom was flawed and hindered economic development and urban growth. Tsar Alexander I and his advisors quietly discussed the options at length. Obstacles included the failure of abolition in Austria and the political reaction against the French Revolution. Cautiously, he freed peasants from Estonia and Latvia and extended the right to own land to most classes of subjects, including state-owned peasants, in 1801 and created a new social category of "free agriculturalist", for peasants voluntarily emancipated by their masters, in 1803. The great majority of serfs were not affected (under this decree by 1858 152,000 male souls, or 1.5 per cent of serfs, had been bought out to freedom ). Alexander I forbade to advertise the sale of serfs without land (1801), to sell peasants at fairs (1808), cancelled the right of landlords to exile peasants to katorga ('hard labour'); 1807) and to settle them in Siberia (1809). In 1818 Alexander I gave secret instructions to 12 dignitaries to develop projects to abolish serfdom (among the authors of the projects were A. A. Arakcheev, P. A. Vyazemsky, V. N. Karazin, P. D. Kiselyov, N. S. Mordvinov, N. G. Repnin). All these projects were united by the principle of gradual emancipation of peasants without infringement of economic interests of landlords. However, in 1822–23, due to changes in the domestic political course, Alexander I again forbade serfs to complain to the authorities about the cruelty of their masters, to bring lawsuits for emancipation, and also restored the right of landlords to exile peasants to Siberia at their discretion.

The Russian state also continued to support serfdom due to military conscription. The conscripted serfs dramatically increased the size of the Russian military during the war with Napoleon. With a larger military Russia achieved victory in the Napoleonic Wars and Russo-Persian Wars; this did not change the disparity between Russia and Western Europe, who were experiencing agricultural and industrial revolutions. Compared to Western Europe it was clear that Russia was at an economic disadvantage. European philosophers during the Age of Enlightenment criticized serfdom and compared it to medieval labor practices which were almost non-existent in the rest of the continent. Most Russian nobles were not interested in change toward western labor practices that Catherine the Great proposed. Instead they preferred to mortgage serfs for profit. Napoleon did not touch serfdom in Russia. In 1820, 20% of all serfs were mortgaged to state credit institutions by their owners. This was increased to 66% in 1859.

To discuss the peasant question, Nicholas I successively created 9 secret committees, issued about 100 decrees aimed at mitigating serfdom, but did not affect its foundations. From 1833 it was not allowed to sell serfs at public auction "with the splitting of families", "to satisfy public and private debts", paying for them with serfs with their detachment from the land, as well as to transfer peasants into household serfs, taking away their plots. The right of landlords to exile peasants to Siberia at their discretion was restricted (1828). A decree on obliged peasants was issued (1842), according to which landlords could let their peasants go free, but peasants' plots were transferred not into ownership, but into the use of peasants, for which they had to perform duties in favour of the landlord. The landlords were given the right to let the peasants go free by mutual agreement with them (1844). The peasants of the landlord's estates sold at auction for the owner's debts were allowed to buy out at will (1847; in 1848–52 964 male peasants used the right). Emperor Nicholas I also banned the trade of African slaves in 1842, though there were almost no Russians who participated in it.

Bourgeois were allowed to own serfs 1721–62 and 1798–1816; this was to encourage industrialisation. In 1804, 48% of Russian factory workers were serfs, 52% in 1825. Landless serfs rose from 4.14% in 1835 to 6.79% in 1858. They received no land in the emancipation. Landlords deliberately increased the number of domestic serfs when they anticipated serfdom's demise. In 1798, Ukrainian landlords were banned from selling serfs apart from land. In 1841, landless nobles were banned also.

Poland–Lithuania
According to certain Polish sources, increasingly in the 18th century Russian peasants were escaping from Russia to the Polish–Lithuanian Commonwealth (where once harsh serfdom conditions were improving) in significant enough numbers to become a major concern for the Russian Government and sufficient to play a role in its decision to partition the Commonwealth (one of the reasons Catherine II gave for the partition of Poland was the fact that thousands of peasants escaped from Russia to Poland to seek a better fate). Jerzy Czajewski and Piotr Kimla wrote that until the partitions solved this problem, Russian armies raided territories of the Commonwealth, officially to recover the escapees, but in fact kidnapping many locals.

Abolition
In 1816, 1817, and 1819, serfdom was abolished in Estland, Courland, and Livonia respectively. However all the land stayed in noble hands and labor rent lasted until 1868. It was replaced with landless laborers and sharecropping (halbkörner). Landless workers had to ask permission to leave an estate.

The nobility was too weak to oppose the emancipation of the serfs. In 1820, a fifth of the serfs were mortgaged, half by 1842. By 1859, a third of noble's estates and two thirds of their serfs were mortgaged to noble banks or the state. The nobility was also weakened by the scattering of their estates, lack of primogeniture, and the high turnover and mobility from estate to estate.

The Tsar's aunt Grand Duchess Elena Pavlovna played a powerful role backstage in the years 1855 to 1861. Using her close relationship with her nephew Alexander II, she supported and guided his desire for emancipation, and helped mobilize the support of key advisors.

In 1861, Alexander II freed all serfs (except in Georgia and Kalmykia ) in a major agrarian reform, stimulated in part by his view that "it is better to liberate the peasants from above" than to wait until they won their freedom by rising "from below". Between 1864 and 1871 serfdom was abolished in Georgia. In Kalmykia, serfdom was not abolished until 1892.

Serfdom was abolished, but not always on favorable terms to the peasants. Even after emancipation, feudal agriculture practices continued. Most former serfs had to pay a land redemption fee (redemption payments were not abolished until 1907), and could only purchase less fertile, less profitable plots of land that weren't necessarily contiguous. Peasants often had to pay more than the market price for land, with the percentage varying by location. 90% of the serfs who got larger plots were in Congress Poland, where the Tsar wanted to weaken the szlachta. Many peasants remained indebted and bound to landowners. Nobility didn't lose their privileges.

Impact
A 2018 study in the American Economic Review found "substantial increases in agricultural productivity, industrial output, and peasants' nutrition in Imperial Russia as a result of the abolition of serfdom in 1861".

Labour and obligations
In Russia, the terms barshchina (барщина) or boyarshchina (боярщина), refer to the obligatory work that the serfs performed for the landowner on his portion of the land (the other part of the land, usually of a poorer quality, the peasants could use for themselves). Sometimes the terms are loosely translated by the term corvée. While no official government regulation to the extent of barshchina existed, a 1797 ukase by Paul I of Russia described a barshchina of three days a week as normal and sufficient for the landowner's needs.

In the black earth region, 70% to 77% of the serfs performed barshchina; the rest paid levies (obrok).

Marriage and family life
The Russian Orthodox Church had many rules regarding marriage that were strictly observed by the population. For example, marriage was not allowed to take place during times of fasting, the eve or day of a holiday, during the entire week of Easter, or for two weeks after Christmas. Before the abolition of serfdom in 1861, marriage was strictly prohibited on Tuesdays, Thursdays, and Saturdays. Because of these firm rules most marriages occurred in the months of January, February, October, and November. After the emancipation the most popular marrying months were July, October, and November.

Imperial laws were very particular with the age in which serfs could marry. The minimum age to marry was 13 years old for women, and 15 for men. After 1830 the female and male ages were raised to 16 and 18 respectively. To marry over the age of 60, the serf had to receive permission, but marriage over the age of 80 was forbidden. The Church also did not approve marriages with large age differences.

Landowners were interested in keeping all of their serfs and not losing workers to marriages on other estates. Prior to 1812 serfs were not allowed to marry serfs from other estates. After 1812 the rules relaxed slightly, but in order for a family to give their daughter to a husband in another estate they had to apply and present information to their landowner ahead of time. If a serf wanted to marry a widow, then emancipation and death certificates were to be handed over and investigated for authenticity by their owner before a marriage could take place. Before and after the abolition of serfdom, Russian peasant families were patriarchal. Marriage was important for families economically and socially. Parents were in charge of finding suitable spouses for their children in order to help the family. The bride's parents were concerned with the social and material benefits they would gain in the alliance between the two families. Some also took into consideration their daughter's future quality of life and how much work would be required of her. The groom's parents would be concerned about economical factors such as the size of the dowry as well as the bride's decency, modesty, obedience, ability to do work, and family background. Upon marriage, the bride came to live with her new husband and his family, so she needed to be ready to assimilate and work hard. Serfs looked highly upon early marriage because of increased parental control. At a younger age there is less chance of the individual falling in love with someone other than whom his or her parents chose. There is also increased assurance of chastity, which was more important for women than men. The average age of marriage for women was around 19 years old. During serfdom, when the head of the house was being disobeyed by their children they could have the master or landowner step in. After the emancipation of serfs in 1861, the household patriarch lost some of his power, and could no longer receive the landowner's help. The younger generations now had the freedom to work off their estates; some even went to work in factories. These younger peasants had access to newspapers and books, which introduced them to more radical ways of thinking. The ability to work outside of the household gave the younger peasants independence as well as a wage to do with what they wanted. Agricultural and domestic jobs were a group effort, so the wage went to the family. The children who worked industrial jobs gave their earnings to their family as well, but some used it as a way to gain a say in their own marriages. In this case some families allowed their sons to marry whom they chose as long as the family was in similar economic standing as their own. No matter what, parental approval was required in order to make a marriage legal.

Distribution of property and duties between the spouses
According to a study completed in the late 1890s by the ethnographer Olga Petrovna Semyonova-Tian-Shanskaia, husband and wife had different duties in the household. In regards to ownership, the husband assumed the property plus any funds required to make additions to the property. Additions included fence, barns, and wagons. While primary purchasing power belonged to the husband, the wife was expected to buy certain items. She was also expected to buy household items such as bowls, plates, pots, barrels and various utensils. Wives were also required to purchase cloth and make clothes for the family by spinning and using a dontse. Footwear was the husband's responsibility - he made bast shoes and felt boots for the family. As for crops, it was expected for men to sow and women to harvest. A common crop harvested by serfs in the Black Earth Region was flax. Husbands owned most of the livestock, such as pigs and horses. Cows were the property of the husband, but were usually in the wife's possession. Chickens were considered to be the wife's property, while sheep was common property for the family. The exception was when the wife owned sheep through a dowry (sobinki).

Material culture
Typical Russian serf clothing included the zipun (зипун, a collarless kaftan) and the smock.

A 19th-century report noted: "Every Russian peasant, male and female, wears cotton clothes. The men wear printed shirts and trousers, and the women are dressed from head to foot in printed cotton also."

The extent of serfdom in Russia

By the mid-19th century, peasants composed a majority of the population, and according to the census of 1857, the number of private serfs was 23.1 million out of 62.5 million citizens of the Russian empire, 37.7% of the population.

The exact numbers, according to official data, were: entire population $60,909,309$; peasantry of all classes $49,486,665$; state peasants $23,138,191$; peasants on the lands of proprietors $23,022,390$; peasants of the appanages and other departments $3,326,084$. State peasants were considered personally free, but their freedom of movement was restricted.

Russian serfdom depended entirely on the traditional and extensive technology of the peasantry. Yields remained low and stationary throughout most of the 19th century. Any increase in income drawn from agriculture was largely through increasing land area and extensive grain raising by means of exploitation of the peasant labor, that is, by burdening the peasant household still further.

% peasants enserfed in each province, 1860 >55%: Kaluga Kyiv Kostroma Kutais Minsk Mogilev Nizhny Novgorod Podolia Ryazan Smolensk Tula Vitebsk Vladimir Volhynia Yaroslavl

36–55%: Chernigov Grodno Kovno Kursk Moscow Novgorod Oryol Penza Poltava Pskov Saratov Simbirsk Tambov Tver Vilna

16–35%: Don Ekaterinoslav Kharkov Kherson Kuban Perm Tiflis Vologda Voronezh

In the Central Black Earth Region 70–77% of the serfs performed labour services (barshchina), the rest paid rent (obrok). Owing to the high fertility, 70% of Russian cereal production in the 1850s was here. In the seven central provinces, 1860, 67.7% of the serfs were on obrok.

In literature, Russian serfdom provided both a backdrop and a source of dramatic tension for the works of prominent authors like Leo Tolstoy and Fyodor Dostoevsky. Characters drawn from the serf population were portrayed with profound emotional depth, their stories shedding light on the harsh realities of serfdom. These narratives served to amplify calls for social reform and underscored the deep inequalities of the Russian societal structure.

The influence of serfdom was also notable in Russian music and art. Folk songs and dances, often performed by serfs, contributed significantly to Russia's unique cultural tradition. At the same time, works of art often depicted serfs and their lives, either romanticizing their existence or highlighting the cruelty of the serf system.

title: Serfdom in Russia


text:
Shadow Realm

Shadow Realm may refer to:

 * Shadow Realms, a cancelled video game
 * The Shadow Realm, a fictional location in English-language localizations of the Yu-Gi-Oh! series
 * The Shadow Realm, a fictional location in the video game Spyro: Shadow Legacy
 * The Shadow Realm, a fictional location in the film Thor: Love and Thunder
 * The Shadow Realm, a fictional location in the video game Shadow Warrior and its sequels

title: Shadow Realm


text:
Talk:Serfdom in Russia

Untitled
I started some work on serfdom in Russia in serf, but moved it here, since that article deals with no other particular cases. I listed this article as a COW; this is quite an important topic in explaining Russia's political and economic development, so I hope to see the article ready for FAC soon. 172 02:13, 14 Feb 2005 (UTC)

Translated term
krepostnoi krestyanin (крепостной крестьянин), is translated as serf
 * Could a Russian speaker offer a more precise translation? A quick check of an online dictionary suggests the terms are separately translated as bondsman and peasant, respectively. I'm not disputing this; I simply think the Russian compound should be broken out as an explanation. --Dhartung | Talk 05:12, 14 Feb 2005 (UTC)
 * The word крепостной comes from the word прикреплять, which means "to attach". The peasants were "attached" to their land and prohibited from abandoning it. KNewman 23:03, Feb 14, 2005 (UTC)
 * I don't understand this definition of the word. Certainly serf doesn't mean "peasant" in the English sense of the word. Serfs were much closer to slavery, tied to the land, forced to work not only for the landlord and pay taxes, but work the landlord's personal land. They could not legally own property, marry, inherit, move, sell, testify, bring charges, and lots of others, often, without their lord's approval. This goes beyond the idea of peasants as small farmers, owning their own small land, or renting someone else's. Even to medieval peasants it was a much more consentual relationship. Indeed, good proof of this difference is that after emancipation, the serfs are referred to as peasants, making the distinction.--Dmcdevit 23:25, 15 Feb 2005 (UTC)
 * "The English sense of the word" does not go much beyond the "agricultural worker", "country person". Land ownership, degree of freedom, etc., vary from country to country and from epoch to epoch. Mikkalai 07:39, 6 Mar 2005 (UTC)

Dmcdevit: The Russian word "krestyanin" means someone who works on the land, but does not necessarily own it. "Krepostnoj krestyanin" then means "land-bound peasant", which has also been translated as "tenant", though I believe that last translation to be very vague.

Russian serfs had the legal status of property, although each peasant family was given a small plot of land, which they could till after completing their daily shift ("urok") on the lord's personal land. The lord kept all the harvests from his personal land and collected a 1/10 fee from the serfs' plots. Thus, even while working for the lord, the serfs were required to provide for themselves with the 9/10 of the harvest from "their" plots, and could even have some disposable income of their own in good years. Of course, serfs had virtually no access to courts, and in the 18th century, Catherine the Great went as far as to criminalize complaining against one's lord, so even the limited property rights that the serfs had were, as a practical matter, illusory. The lord could take anything and as much as he wanted, and there was nothing the serfs would be able to do about it.

Moreover, at the height of serfdom in Russia, not all serfs worked on the land at all. Wealthy landed aristocracy sat up elaborate households, fine art shops, even permanent theater troups and opera companies. Many serfs became full-time domestic servants, painters, sculptors, chefs, actors, singers, and even teachers to their masters' children. There were even factories (like the Demidov enterprise) staffed with serfs as full-time industrial workers. Needless to say, they were not given any land to till and had no income of their own, except what they received as largesse. For those people, serfdom was really Roman-style slavery.

So, I guess neither the word "peasant" nor "serf" are entirely accurate when applied to all "krepostnye" accross the board. However, we must use them for lack of better terms in English. This is, unfortunately, where vocabulary is limited by history.--Redisca 14:40, 26 August 2005 (UTC)

 * A serf is the correct translation. The number of serfs who worked as domestic servants was negligible- 4- 7% of the serfs by the official data. A very important thing was omitted in the article. Owners never had the right to kill their serfs (legally,formally, at least). That is why "Saltychikha" went to prison for life and other cruel landlords were punished. I advise you to read the book by Richard Pipes "Russia under old regime" "Peasants"...He was a GREAT specialist. It is not an exaggeration. The book is available in English and in Russian. Besides, the Government tried to prohibit selling serfs without land several times- the edicts of 1771, 1808 and 1833. You can find this information in all the open sources. As for the pictures describing "selling house serfs", they were created many years later and do not have any scientific value, though they are inserted everywhere. For some "Soviet propaganda" reasons such pictures are associated with the "heavy fate" of the Russian peasants but the percent of such "house serfs" was small, almost negligible (4- 7%)...In the Centre of Russia the majority of serfs paid a quit-rent and corvee was not wide-spread (Richard Pipes) Though serfdom CANNOT and must not be justified..... If you read Richard Pipes "Russia under old regime" the difference between slaves and serfs will be apparent. Read Pipes and if you know Russian you can read В. Семевский "Крестьяне в царствование Екатерины 2", том 1 103.25.248.253 (talk) 04:07, 22 December 2023 (UTC)
 * Hi, I've reverted your edits since you removed several sources.
 * If two sources disagree, we need to mention both viewpoints, giving them due weight. Could you provide the page numbers so that I can review the two sources you've mentioned? Alaexis¿question? 20:43, 22 December 2023 (UTC)

Slave turned into Serf
"Slavery remained a major institution in Russia until 1723, when Peter the Great converted the household slaves into house serfs." You mean it was that easy to trick people into thinking they were no longer slaves by changing their title to serf? Wow. Now slaves & serfs are "employees" & told they're not slaves, they're free. Stars4change (talk) 05:01, 31 August 2009 (UTC)
 * Close but incorrect. Slavery did exist as a separate institution, indeed more akin to Roman slavery. Serfs, unlike slaves, were entitled to use of land to which they were bonded; slaves were not. Later sources also used "slave" for those serfs who were house servants, grooms etc. and thus lost their connection to farmland that was defining of "true" serfs. In both cases the term applied to a fairly thin social class, although as the Petrine nobility grew in numbers, so did the number of servants. NVO (talk) 10:16, 10 October 2009 (UTC)
 * Slave = serf — Preceding unsigned comment added by 212.124.19.7 (talk) 18:47, 27 December 2016 (UTC)

Article Name Change?
Because this could incorporate serfdom among Ukrainians and other non-Russian peoples in the Russia, would anyone object to a more accurate name such as "Serfdom in Russia"?Faustian (talk) 13:59, 2 March 2010 (UTC)

I disagree with "Ukrainians and other non-Russian peoples",because in those times,Malorus (not Ukraine) was still part of Russian nation,as well as Belarus.This "national awakening" happened later in history,during early XX century.After all,Kievan Rus' is a place where Russian nation started its growth,isn't it?Having that in mind title "Serfdom in Russia" is correct,but there's no need for national divisions,since all were loyal subjects as one,Russian people - of Russian Tsardom/Empire at the time. 109.111.231.92 (talk)

So loyal, in fact, that they all, collectively of course, tossed the buggers out. LOL. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 173.51.145.103 (talk) 09:24, 12 June 2016 (UTC)

Merge with Muzhik
Actually in the Muzhik which should be merged with this article.

"I understand the mean of having a article just for this word. But really is just a trasliteration of the russia word. We have to see that the only reason to having a whole article for this word is because it apear a lot in the translations of the russian literature of the XIX century.

I belive it should be merged with serfdom in russia, because it was a kind of rude mean for commoner, peasant, serf etc. at that time. So if a person is looking for this name, he really want to now what is to what it was related in that moment. This person, was a peasant, and all the peasants were a kind of "serfs" in the XIX century russia" — Preceding unsigned comment added by Faladh (talk • contribs) 00:11, 26 February 2011 (UTC)

The statement on the meaning of muzhik in the article is mysterious ("The term muzhik . . . was used to mean the most common rural dweller (a peasant) but that was only a narrow contextual meaning of the word." So what was the broader, truer meaning of muzhik? Alexandrow's A Complete Russian-English Dictionary(London and St. Petersburg, 1904) defines muzhik as "peasant, countryman; ''fig.' boor, clown, clod-hopper" (p. 277, available at https://openlibrary.org/books/OL13507727M/A_complete_Russian-English_dictionary). Linguistatlunch (talk) 20:30, 27 April 2014 (UTC)

I think there may be a separate English wiki article "Muzhik", based on the ru:Мужик. That is because in modern Russian "muzhik" means "a male" in general, with the same connotations as "macho".109.252.201.217 (talk) 16:50, 5 March 2021 (UTC)

Assessment comment
Substituted at 05:47, 30 April 2016 (UTC)

External links modified
Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 3 external links on Serfdom in Russia. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20060216141906/http://www.nupi.no/cgi-win/Russland/etnisk_b.exe?Kalmykian to http://www.nupi.no/cgi-win/Russland/etnisk_b.exe?Kalmykian
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20061231050914/http://www.worldwideschool.org/library/books/hst/russian/Russia/chap42.html to http://www.worldwideschool.org/library/books/hst/russian/Russia/chap42.html
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20070911093816/http://occawlonline.pearsoned.com/bookbind/pubbooks/stearns_awl/chapter24/objectives/deluxe-content.html to http://occawlonline.pearsoned.com/bookbind/pubbooks/stearns_awl/chapter24/objectives/deluxe-content.html

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot  (Report bug) 02:53, 27 December 2017 (UTC)

Delete edits
Explain why my edits were deleted. What is so untrue there? Serfdom and slavery are two different things? Yes. Serfdom changed in essence under different rulers? Yes. In Russia, serfdom was canceled (1861) only 13 years later than Austria (1848)? Yes. So what are your complaints?--Александр Ашкаров (talk) 06:20, 12 May 2020 (UTC)
 * Thank you for commenting so that we can discuss this. Serfdom and slavery are two different things -- I agree, Yes.  This is why, if you look at your original edit (here), I did not revert the entire thing.  The category and infobox relating to slavery were not re-added after you removed them; it is inaccurate to conflate the two things. The problems with the paragraph added at the end of the lead:

 * Most difficult under Catherine the Great (This may be true, but needs to be cited. The article never says this, so where is the information coming from?  Moreover, when I referred to a "contradiction" it was because in the article it mentions (with a cited source) certain reforms passed under Catherine the Great (section: 18th and 19th centuries), but it does not mention that conditions were "most difficult."  Surely, things could have been "most difficult" despite her reforms, but, again, it would need reliable cited source, just like every claim added to Wikipedia (See WP:V).
 * "There are several things to keep in mind" is not a good tone for Wikipedia. Avoid "Consider that..." "Remember that..." "It's important to realize..." etc.  These things either address the reader directly or give Wikipedia an editorial voice above and beyond the sources it relies on, which we should not do.  These phrases can be included if they're directly quoting a source, but not otherwise in the normal prose of an article.
 * The parts about serf's rights to ownership, etc., are good, and I have no doubt that they are true ... but they need sources if they are not already supported by sources in the rest of the article. Feel free to re-add those if you can cite them!
 * If you look at the section called "slaves and serfs" in the article, notice that the claims that serfs and slaves has similar rights is supported by Kolchin, a historian, and a WP:RS. This is another reason that the material you added was removed.  It's possible that the wording in the article was too strong ("no different from chattel slaves"), so I have changed it.  Still, the material you add would need to be supported by a source.
 * Please review my last three edits carefully; I have done more than just remove your content.
 * I very much appreciate your contributions as this page has not seen much activity recently. To summarize, though, sources are absolutely necessary for changing the info in the article, even the comparison to slavery, which I happen to agree may be over-emphasized in the article's current state.  We shouldn't (and can't) argue with experts, so expert sources are needed in order to make the changes you are attempting.--MattMauler (talk) 14:11, 12 May 2020 (UTC)
 * Actually, the serfdom specifically in Russia was very much a slavery, as sources tell. This is because the serfs were very literally owned, sold, physically punished or tortured and had no rights whatsoever. Hence the stable expression "krepostnye raby" in Russian language, etc. My very best wishes (talk) 05:34, 1 August 2020 (UTC)

title: Talk:Serfdom in Russia


text: Talk:Audiobook

title: Talk:Audiobook


text:
Slouching Towards Bedlam

Slouching Towards Bedlam is an interactive fiction game that won the first place in the 2003 Interactive Fiction Competition. It is a collaboration between American authors Daniel Ravipinto and Star Foster. Slouching Towards Bedlam was finalist for eight 2003 XYZZY Awards, winning four: Best Game, Setting, Story, and Individual NPC (for the protagonist's cybernetic assistant, Triage). The game takes place in a steampunk Victorian era setting. Its title is inspired by a line from "The Second Coming", a poem by W. B. Yeats.

Summary
The player character awakens in an office in Bedlam Asylum. From context it appears that the character is Doctor Xavier, a doctor at the Asylum. The Doctor, however, has no memory of his past. After investigation, it becomes clear that a now deceased patient, Cleve Anderson, has infected the player character with a mental virus known as the "Logos". The virus spreads by spoken language, taking the form of a glossolalic babble uttered by the vector. The patient tried to stop the spread of the virus by not speaking to others, not realizing that the player character (in the back-plot) had been secretly listening in on the patient. Part of the result of being infected with the virus is that the character recognizes and has access to some ability to control time, as represented by the normally meta-game commands "undo", "save", "restore", and "restart". Throughout the game the player is given cryptic messages that come from the Logos. Investigation can optionally reveal that a secret society accidentally released the Logos while experimenting with magic.

The game has five distinct endings. There are three endings in which the virus is stopped; either by having the player character commit suicide before interacting with any other people (Ending A), by having the player character kill any characters he interacted with before committing suicide (Ending D), or by having the player character kill any characters he interacts with then waiting (Ending E). The virus's end is explained in the endgame for Ending E: the player character goes home and cuts out his own tongue – and asks all his written works to be destroyed, afraid that the Logos will reproduce by writing. There are two endings in which the virus spreads: the player character can willfully transmit the virus over a wireless broadcast (Ending C), quickly spreading it across the world, or the player character can simply infect several other people who will slowly spread the virus (Ending B). Each ending comes with an appendix that provides additional information on it.

Authors
Slouching Towards Bedlam was Daniel Ravipinto's second publicly released game after 1996's Tapestry. Ravipinto works professionally as a computer programmer. Co-author Star Foster was a newcomer to writing Interactive Fiction. Foster worked professionally in marketing. She died in December 2006. The two both lived in Philadelphia and met there. They collaborated on design and development. Actual programming was entirely done by Ravipinto.

title: Slouching Towards Bedlam


text: User talk:68.3.143.53

title: User talk:68.3.143.53


text: User talk:67.70.150.222

title: User talk:67.70.150.222


text:
Ancient (disambiguation)

Ancient or ancients may refer to:

People or things from antiquity:
 * Ancient history, from the beginning of writing to the Middle Ages
 * Prehistory, from the use of the first stone tools until the beginning of writing

It may also refer to:

As a proper name

 * Ancient (band), a melodic black metal musical group
 * Ancient (company), a Japanese software developer
 * Ancients (art group), a group of English artists in the 1820s and 1830s
 * Ancient (album), a 2001 album by Kitarō

In fiction

 * Ancient (Stargate), a race who built the Stargates in the Stargate universe
 * Ancient (Traveller), a mysterious race that once dominated the galaxy in the Traveller role-playing game
 * Ancients (Eternal Darkness), a god-like race in Eternal Darkness: Sanity's Requiem
 * Ancients (Legacy of Kain), a race in the Legacy of Kain games
 * Ancients, an advanced species in the FreeSpace space simulation computer game series
 * Ancients, a race in the Farscape TV series
 * Ancients, a variety of creatures and structures in Defense of the Ancients and Dota 2
 * Ancients or Cetra in Final Fantasy VII
 * The Ancients, a race of highly advanced worldcrafters in the Might and Magic universe

Other

 * A corrupt form of the military rank of ensign used during the 16th century in Britain

title: Ancient (disambiguation)


text:
User talk:VirenVaz

Articles you might like to edit, from SuggestBot
Note: All columns in this table are sortable, allowing you to rearrange the table so the articles most interesting to you are shown at the top. All images have mouse-over popups with more information. For more information about the columns and categories, please consult the documentation and please get in touch on SuggestBot's talk page with any questions you might have.

SuggestBot picks articles in a number of ways based on other articles you've edited, including straight text similarity, following wikilinks, and matching your editing patterns against those of other Wikipedians. It tries to recommend only articles that other Wikipedians have marked as needing work. We appreciate that you have signed up to receive suggestions regularly; your contributions make Wikipedia better — thanks for helping!

If you have feedback on how to make SuggestBot better, please let us know on SuggestBot's talk page. -- SuggestBot (talk) 23:39, 29 October 2018 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free image (Image:Adult antlion.JPG)
Thanks for uploading Image:Adult antlion.JPG. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently orphaned, meaning that it is not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

If you have uploaded other unlicensed media, please check whether they're used in any articles or not. You can find a list of 'image' pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "Image" from the dropdown box. Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. Aksibot 09:41, 1 June 2007 (UTC)

Awesome derivative work, dude
Hey dude, loved the image. Place it in the four species wiki please. Great idea. And totally free! BTW, Satyrinae is done and all Nymphalids less Liminetidinae done. Regards, AshLin 13:14, 11 July 2007 (UTC)

Welcome back dude
WP Lepidoptera was not cool without you. AshLin 13:56, 20 July 2007 (UTC)

WikiProject Lepidoptera policy - Assessment of importance of articles
Hi,

I've brought up a policy issue for discussion on WikiProject Lepidopterahere. May I request your valuable contribution and counsel, as a member of WikiProject Lepidoptera, in this regard. AshLin 21:57, 26 July 2007 (UTC)

WikiProject Lepidoptera policy - Draft categorisation guidelines & Common vs scientific names
Hi ,

I've brought up two policy issues for discussion on WikiProject Lepidoptera here. May I request your valuable contribution and counsel, as a member of WikiProject Lepidoptera, in this regard. AshLin 18:07, 7 August 2007 (UTC)

Taxonomists
Hi Viren Vaz Are you aware of this excellent resource and would you like me to update your taxonomists wwho have workd in India page, variously listed elsewhere in W but not always under their main interest. Best wishes from Ireland Robert (Nash) 20:11, 19 April 2008 (UTC)

A long deserved Lepidoptera barnstar awaits you when you return
AshLin (talk) 09:47, 25 August 2009 (UTC)

Your view sought
As a member of WP Arthropods, you might have a view on this discussion. Thanks in advance. Heds (talk) 03:56, 21 November 2009 (UTC)

Welcome back
Nice to see you back... Shyamal (talk) 15:36, 18 October 2014 (UTC)
 * back and raring to go. I see u 'r mainly on the birds section now. What's the situation with the lep pages. Anything in particular to be done?Viren (talk) 12:03, 19 October 2014 (UTC)
 * Lots to do. Standards have changed. More info available. Taxonomy now stable. I suggest we start family-wise. What say? AshLin (talk) 14:21, 19 October 2014 (UTC)
 * Begun on Pieridae. Nice to see that the situation has changed hugely since I was active. First thing is family page itself. Type images are required. Ashwin do you have a page with references, like lep index and such. I know lep index is in the ref section, but you probably have more. Shyamal whatever happened to that brilliant idea of yours of having a linked image gallery. Not gallery. An identification page. Viren (talk) 17:04, 26 October 2014 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for December 9
Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Osmeterium, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Graphium. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ* Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 09:08, 9 December 2014 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for December 19
Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Osmeterium, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Graphium. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ* Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 11:42, 19 December 2014 (UTC)

ArbCom elections are now open!
MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 12:58, 23 November 2015 (UTC)

title: User talk:VirenVaz


text:
Trafalgar Square (disambiguation)

Trafalgar Square is a square in central London, England that commemorates the Battle of Trafalgar.

Trafalgar Square may also refer to:
 * Trafalgar Square, a painting by Piet Mondrian
 * National Heroes Square in Barbados, formerly known as Trafalgar Square
 * Trafalgar Square Publishing, a publishing house and distribution company specialising in UK publishers

title: Trafalgar Square (disambiguation)


text:
Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Elephantum

 This page is an archive of the discussion about the proposed deletion of the article below. This page is no longer live. Further comments should be made on the article's talk page rather than here so that this page is preserved as an historic record. The result of the debate was DELETE. jni 11:56, 24 Feb 2005 (UTC)

Elephantum
Article contains press release. Google search turns up a few hits that refer to the band, but does not appear to warrant an article. --jag123 02:17, 14 Feb 2005 (UTC) This page is now preserved as an archive of the debate and, like some other VfD subpages, is no longer 'live'. Subsequent comments on the issue, the deletion, or the decision-making process should be placed on the relevant 'live' pages. Please do not edit this page.
 * Delete band promo, article as it stands is un-encyclopaedic. Megan1967 02:35, 14 Feb 2005 (UTC)
 * Delete Not notable enough. Wikipedia is not a place for people to post press releases. Zzyzx11 06:55, 14 Feb 2005 (UTC)
 * Delete, and wouldn't a press release be copyvio? Radiant! 08:24, 14 Feb 2005 (UTC)
 * Delete Brookie 19:26, 14 Feb 2005 (UTC)
 * Delete, possible Copyvio, self-promotion. Wyss 21:17, 14 Feb 2005 (UTC)
 * Delete Jwanders 20:26, 15 Feb 2005 (UTC)


text:
Talk:Stabyhoun

Untitled
The original contributor of this text is the owner of the source site: http://www.geocities.com/stabyhoun_dogs/index.html This has been confirmed by email (via Jimbo) -- sannse (talk) 02:17, 14 Feb 2005 (UTC)

holland/the netherlands
iirc holland is only part of the netherlands though the name is often incorrectly used for the whole contry. does anyone know which is more correct here. Plugwash 14:47, 22 Jun 2005 (UTC)
 * I know for a fact that Holland is the correct one.Igglybuff63 (talk) 12:47, 5 February 2008 (UTC)
 * It's a province in the Netherlands. But we used to call the country Holland until the 18th century or so. Foreigners still do. (85.145.139.80 (talk) 15:45, 13 August 2008 (UTC))

Pierrot is so cute!
just look at him!Igglybuff63 (talk) 12:47, 5 February 2008 (UTC)

instructions
I just stumbled across this by hitting the random article button. The article seems fairly solid for the most part, but there are sections that read like how-to or instructional content, which is not what Wikipedia is for. It would be helpful if someone with more familiarity with the subject removed this material. Beeblbrox (talk) 03:20, 9 February 2008 (UTC)

Stabijna
The dog on the image in this article (bubby) is what we call in the Netherlands a Stabijna (a contraction of the words stabyhoun and bijna, the dutch word for almost) This is because they are often mixed up with wetterhouns or other dogs (like the the drenste patrijshond), you cant see this on the pup because he hasn't the curly fur but a stabyhoun has no curled tail and no white marks on the head. The white mark is probably from the origin of a Drentse patrijshond, who has this white mark. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 84.24.157.209 (talk) 14:16, 20 February 2011 (UTC)

title: Talk:Stabyhoun