Date: 1913-06-20
Source: ru:LS/v39

PREFACE
The collection includes several tables containing detailed calculations of financial contributions received by the newspaper Iskra and the journal Zarya, as well as by Rabochaya Pravda, Severnaya Pravda, and Nash Put’. Among this group of documents are the “Preparatory Materials for the Articles ‘Objective Data on the Strength of Various Currents within the Workers’ Movement’” and “The Workers’ Response to the Formation of the Russian Social-Democratic Labor Fraction in the State Duma.” These are extensive, meticulously compiled materials documenting the painstaking efforts to raise funds for workers’ press outlets and to tally signatures collected in workers’ resolutions endorsing Bolshevik deputies in the Fourth State Duma. Through his analysis of these materials, Lenin arrives at the conclusion that only Pravda and other Bolshevik newspapers can truly be regarded as the workers’ press.
The materials on the agrarian question published in this collection supplement works already widely known to readers, as well as the preparatory materials that were included in the Complete Collected Works of V. I. Lenin and in the supplementary volume “Notebooks on the Agrarian Question.” In crafting his programmatic works—“The Agrarian Question and the ‘Critics of Marx,’” “The Agrarian Program of Social Democracy in the First Russian Revolution of 1905–1907,” “New Data on the Laws of Capitalist Development in Agriculture,” and others—Lenin conducted a profound study of agrarian relations in Russia, Western Europe, and the Americas. In these works, he consistently defended the Marxist theory of the agrarian question, elaborated an agrarian program and agrarian policy for the proletarian party, and further developed the Marxist theory of the alliance between the working class and the peasantry—and their joint struggle against landowners and the bourgeoisie.
The newly published materials—including “Notes and Excerpts from the Books ‘Württemberg Statistical Yearbooks’ and ‘Statistics of the Kingdom of Bavaria,’” “Excerpts from G. Bang’s Article ‘The Standard of Living of the Lower Classes of the Danish Rural Population,’” and “Notes on the Nature and Content of the U.S. Department of Agriculture’s Publication ‘Monthly List of Publications’”—provide compelling evidence that Lenin approached the agrarian question through a scientific synthesis of agrarian relations not only in Russia but also in other countries around the world.
Among the materials in the collection is an insert to the draft speech “On the Question of Agrarian Policy (General) of the Contemporary Government,” written by Lenin for the speech delivered in the Fourth State Duma by Bolshevik deputy N. R. Shagov. Also included here is an addendum to the draft speech of deputy G. I. Petrovsky, which was delivered on May 28 (June 10), 1914, during the debate on the budget committee’s report concerning the estimate for the Department of State Landholdings for 1914.

PREFACE

The drafts of these speeches were published in Volume 23 of the Complete Collected Works of V. I. Lenin, pp. 260–277; Volume 25, pp. 171–176. The addendum contains a conclusion of programmatic significance: “The so‑called ‘smallholding’ among the peasantry is, in fact, the large estate of the landed gentry. The peasant ‘smallholding’ is, in essence, the vast estate of the highest nobility and the bureaucratic elite.”
Some believe that transferring landlord-owned lands into the hands of the peasants constitutes a socialist measure. This is a mistake. There is no socialism whatsoever in this undertaking. Yet, for the genuine abolition of serfdom and feudal oppression, such a transfer of land—especially when carried out without redemption—is the only truly rational measure, one that fully serves the interests of the peasantry, the interests of the country’s overall development, and the interests of progress and culture” (p. 127).
A number of documents pertain to international affairs on the eve of the First World War. Among them are materials related to the Balkan Wars (1912–1913), which Lenin viewed “as one link in the chain of global events” (Complete Collected Works, Vol. 23, p. 38). The Russian Social-Democrats opposed this war. The collection includes a translation into Russian of the circular issued by the International Socialist Bureau against the war—a document to which Lenin appended notes and suggested alternative titles when forwarding it to Pravda: “This is an important document: the circular of the International Socialist Bureau Against the War…” or “The International Against the War… The International Bureau of Workers’ Parties Against the War” (p. 85).
The article “Armaments and the German Reichstag” sheds light on Lenin’s struggle against imperialist war, militarism, and the arms race.
It was published in Pravda in 1913 under the pseudonym “NN.” Until recently, this article had been listed among the lost works. Its authorship has now been established through scholarly research. The article exposes the Junker government of Germany, which, according to Lenin, sought to push through parliament a 20% increase in the army’s size—thereby expanding armaments and, consequently, raising taxes on the working people. Pointing to the projected tax amount—one billion marks—Lenin writes: “How much sensible and reasonable could be accomplished with this money—to aid the working people, to alleviate their plight—if only… if only the working people were not wage slaves of capitalists who profit so splendidly from ‘patriotic’ armaments!” (pp. 91–92).
During the First World War, Lenin waged an uncompromising struggle against social-chauvinism. On this issue, he published

PREFACE
a great many works, including: “Covering Up Social-Chauvinist Politics with Internationalist Phrases,” “Does OK Have Its Own Line—and Does the Chkheidze Faction?”
In these articles, Lenin synthesized the data he had gathered into the table “The Natural History of Our Social-Chauvinist Breeds,” which was printed on June 10, 1916, in the newspaper Sozial-Demokrat.
The table presents a comprehensive overview of opportunist tendencies both in Russia and abroad, along with critical analyses of those tendencies.
When studying Lenin’s method of scientific creativity, the numerous excerpts from newspapers, journals, and books, as well as bibliographic notes and other preparatory materials, are of great interest. They serve as vivid testimony to the extraordinary thoroughness with which Lenin investigated the problems under consideration.
The collection includes: a notebook containing bibliographic information for the years 1901–1902; lists of foreign literature on economic issues and on agricultural statistics in the United States during the 19th and 20th centuries; a list of socialist newspapers and journals from England, France, and Germany, compiled at a meeting of editors and publishers held in Stuttgart in 1907.
Numerous Lenin extracts from works on economics, modern history, politics, diplomacy, and the workers’ movement are published. Among them are excerpts from the pamphlet “German Imperialism and the Working Class” (1912); from articles published in the journal Die Neue Zeit on the subject of trade unions; from French newspapers reporting on the London Conference of Socialist Parties of the Entente Powers (1915); and from reports on the Congress of the Swiss Social Democratic Party (1916).
Some of the extracts are published in Lenin’s own translations.
For example, while studying F. Engels’s book The Origin of the Family, Private Property, and the State, Lenin undertook a translation, explaining that Russian translations were “for the most part either incomplete or rendered in a highly unsatisfactory manner” (Complete Collected Works, Vol. 38, p. 6).
While in exile in the village of Shushenskoye, Lenin translated from English into Russian in 1898–1900 Sidney and Beatrice Webb’s work The Theory and Practice of English Trade Unionism. The translation of this work was undertaken with the aim of familiarizing the Russian reader with the theory and practice of the English workers’ movement. Lenin not only translated the book but also wrote marginal notes—which are published in the collection—and compiled a subject index.
Among the pre-Soviet period documents published in the collection, preparatory materials occupy a central place: plans and

PREFACE

outlines, extracts, and marginal notes on the pages of read books, articles, and newspapers, tables and lists of numerous calculations concerning party funds, editorial revisions made to party materials, and so forth. While these materials do not constitute finished works, they hold great scientific significance, forming an integral part of Lenin’s ideological legacy and serving as a valuable complement to the works and materials published in the volumes of the Complete Collected Works, in the volumes of the Biographical Chronicle, and in other publications of the Institute of Marxism-Leninism under the Central Committee of the Communist Party of the Soviet Union.
The largest number of documents included in the Lenin Collection pertains to the activities of V. I. Lenin during the years of Soviet power. They contain new insights into his tireless work in guiding the construction of a socialist society.
The collection features several Lenin documents concerning the role of the Party as the leading and guiding force of the Soviet state. For instance, in his speech on March 16, 1920, delivered in memory of Ya. M. Sverdlov, Lenin summarized the two-year experience of Soviet power, demonstrating that the victory of the Great October Socialist Revolution had united the workers and peasants of multiethnic Russia, ensured successes both on the military front and in socialist construction, and engaged the masses of working people in the active creation of a new society.
Highly appreciating the work of Ya. M. Sverdlov and other professional revolutionaries nurtured by the Party—their outstanding role in the fate of the revolution and in the building of socialism—Lenin set the task of identifying new organizational talents among the working masses, of “raising from among workers and peasants all those capable of becoming organizers and administrators,” and of properly utilizing their skills in the various spheres of socialist construction.
Lenin’s practical activities in the Sovnarkom and the STO, the formation and operation of these central organs of Soviet power, and the establishment of People’s Commissariats and various government commissions were reflected in numerous documents, including: the record of G. M. Krzhizhanovsky’s report on the work of Gosplan at the STO meeting on July 8, 1921; the notes taken during a meeting with a delegation from the workers’ section of the conference of representatives of metallurgical and metalworking enterprises slated for nationalization in May 1918.
Numerous Lenin records of speakers’ remarks at various meetings, conversations with delegations of workers, peasants, scientists, and cultural figures, as well as notes on drafts of various documents, are published.

PREFACE
A number of new publications bear witness to Lenin’s style of party and state work—and to his consistent adherence to the principle of collective leadership: “I will call the members of the PBureau over the phone,” Lenin writes in response to the proposal from the People’s Commissariat for Foreign Affairs to begin negotiations for the return of interned soldiers from other countries to Russia (p. 298); upon receiving reports of uncoordinated actions between departments regarding the procurement of goods abroad, Lenin requests that the relevant Central Committee members be briefed on the matter; he informs the members of the Politburo about a letter in which an auditor exposed shortcomings and abuses in certain economic bodies; in response to Lenin’s directive, a letter from I. I. Khodorovsky, Chairman of the Kazan Provincial Executive Committee, is sent to all People’s Commissars, containing criticism directed at the People’s Commissars for their weak ties to local areas.
Here, too, materials are published that reflect Lenin’s concern for creating the necessary conditions for scientific institutions and for scientists themselves—along with notes and suggestions for drafts of the reorganization of the People’s Commissariat of Education. More than 50 such suggestions are contained in the latter document alone, forming the basis for a new regulation concerning the People’s Commissariat of Education.
Through his correspondence with People’s Commissars, party officials, and state employees, Lenin’s care for the development of productive forces, for improving the performance of administrative bodies, and his unwavering commitment to combating any violation of revolutionary legality, any manifestation of bureaucracy, red tape, or irresponsibility in work, run like a common thread. On May 9, 1918, Lenin issued a reprimand “to all employees, secretaries, and higher-ranking officials in the Administration of Affairs of the Council of People’s Commissars” for delaying a telegram for more than ten days.
He admonished VChK employee Davydov for taking three days to respond to a telegraph message. From all workers in the party and state apparatus, Lenin demanded impeccable discipline, clarity, and promptness.
Particularly great attention was paid by Lenin to matters of national defense, to organizing the defeat of interventionists and White Guards. Under his leadership, the Red Army achieved world‑historical victories over the coalition of forces comprising international imperialism and domestic counterrevolution. A number of documents in the collection attest that, even in the most complex circumstances, Lenin found solutions that ensured the Red Army’s triumph.
At the same time, Lenin devoted undiminished attention to the implementation of a policy of peace and to establishing mutually beneficial economic relations with capitalist countries. The collection includes documents:
the reply to the German pacifist Hermann

PREFACE

Fernau, in which the Bolshevik position on the question of peace and disarmament is explained; a letter to Emerson Jennings, head of a machine‑building firm in Pennsylvania—one of the first to lead a commercial association dedicated to fostering trade between America and Soviet Russia. In letters to G. V. Chicherin, instructions are given to the trade representatives of the RSFSR in Germany, who were conducting negotiations with German industrialists.
In an interview with S. X. Agursky, Lenin drew the attention of American communists to the need to work within the American Federation of Labor, within the organization Industrial Workers of the World, and among the ranks of the Farmer‑Labor Party.
A special place in the collection is occupied by Lenin’s notes and those of the duty secretaries, recorded on the pages of desk calendars from his office in the Kremlin. These records provide documentary evidence of the many visitors and delegations that Lenin received.
The published records name more than 600 surnames of visitors with whom Lenin conversed in 1920–1922. These include workers and peasants, leaders of the Communist Party, of the Soviet state, activists in the international communist and workers’ movements, and representatives of business circles in capitalist countries. Lenin’s brief calendar entries and those of the secretaries reflect one aspect of Lenin’s multifaceted activities—each day consumed by concerns about the development of industry, transport, and agriculture, about the advancement of science and culture, about the conduct of foreign policy, and about the state of the international communist movement. The entries in the calendars allowed us to establish a number of new facts about Lenin’s life and activities, to supplement existing materials, and to refine certain details of V. I. Lenin’s biography.
Alongside Lenin’s materials, the collection also publishes accompanying documents. Lenin often had to issue directives, resolutions, and make notes on official papers.
These materials are printed in small type. In some cases, they are presented in footnotes.
Each new Lenin Collection represents a contribution to Leninology, to the treasury of Marxist–Leninist thought.
*
*
*
The materials included in the XXXIX Lenin Collection are arranged, as a rule, in chronological order—with the exception of Lenin’s notes in the desk calendar for 1920–1921 and the notes of the duty secretaries for 1921–1922.
In documents dated by V. I. Lenin or by his

PREFACE
secretaries, the placement and formatting of dates are preserved in accordance with the originals.
Documents written in Russia before February 14, 1918, are dated using the dual calendar system; documents written abroad are dated according to the new calendar. The dates of the documents, as determined by the editorial staff, are indicated in square brackets.
The titles of the documents belong to the editorial staff.
Most of the documents are printed from manuscripts; other sources are noted at the end of each document.
Notes and biographical references are provided immediately after the text of the document. For names mentioned for the first time on the pages of the collection, a brief biographical note is given. When the same name is mentioned again, only the position held at that particular moment is indicated.
Text underlined by V. I. Lenin in the manuscript with a single line is reproduced in italics; with two lines—italicized in succession; with three lines—boldface; with four lines—boldface in succession.
Words inserted into the text by the editorial staff, where necessary for the sake of meaning, are given in square brackets in body text.
At the end of the collection, indexes of names and thematic indexes are printed.
The collection was prepared for publication by the scientific staff of the Institute of Marxism–Leninism under the Central Committee of the Communist Party of the Soviet Union: K. F. Bogdanov, M. Ya. Pankratova, E. F. Polkovnikova, E. B. Strukova, F. I. Firsov, and N. M. Yurova.
Assistant editor L. B. Vinogradova.
The translation of documents from German into Russian was carried out by A. E. Ivanov.
Records of receptions and notes on the pages of tear-off calendars, as well as the notes of the duty secretaries for 1920–1922, were prepared by: M. S. Veselina, V. A. Lyubisheva, E. I. Polyakova.
In preparing the notes of the duty secretaries (for 1921), materials from E. G. Podvigina were used. The speech dedicated to the memory of Ya. M. Sverdlov was prepared by M. M. Wassser and T. V. Panchenko.
In
the work on the collection, significant assistance was provided by
Yu. A. Akhapkin, A. I. Gorbacheva, L. I. Kosheleva, N. I. Krutikova, K. A. Ostroukhova, I.
I. Sanin, A.
N. Sokolov, V. N. Stepanov, L. N. Tsulimova.
Editorial Board: D. I. Antonyuk, G. N. Golikov, M. P. Mchedlov, G. D. Obichkin.
The collection is published under the general editorship of Academician A. G. Egrov.
The Institute of Marxism–Leninism under the Central Committee of the Communist Party of the Soviet Union

189é–April 1917

TRANSLATION FROM F. ENGELS’S BOOK
THE ORIGIN OF THE FAMILY, PRIVATE PROPERTY,
AND THE STATE 1
[Before April 1894]
... * a fixed sum—or what were called partiarii
[those who worked for hire], rather clerks than tenants, who received one-sixth or even one-ninth of the annual produce for their labor. But mostly, these small plots of land were granted (ausgethan) to coloni, who paid a fixed annual sum for them, were tied to the land, and could be sold together with their holdings; they were not slaves, but neither were they free—they could not marry free persons, and their marriages among themselves were considered not genuine (vollgültige) marriages, but—as with slaves—merely cohabitation (contubernium). They were the precursors
of the medieval serfs.
Antique slavery had outlived itself...
Christianity bears absolutely no responsibility for the gradual extinction of ancient slavery. For centuries, it had supported (mitge
macht) slavery in the Roman Empire, and later never stood in the way of Christian slave traders—not the slave trade of the Germans in the north, nor the Venetian slave trade in the Mediterranean, nor the later trade in Black slaves. Slavery was no longer profitable—it was, therefore, doomed to extinction.
Things were no better in the provinces. We have relatively more information about Gaul. Alongside the coloni there were also free, small-scale peasants. To protect themselves from the violence of [local magistrates and governors], officials, judges, and usurers, they often placed themselves under the protection of
* The beginning and end of the manuscript remain undiscovered.