Skip to main content

Landless Crisis: Molotschna, 1840s to 1860s

The landless crisis in the mid-1800s in the Molotschna Colony is the context for most other matters of importance to its Mennonites, 1840s to 1860s. When discussing landlessness, historian David G. Rempel has claimed that the “seemingly endemic wranglings and splits” of the Mennonite church in South Russia were only seldom or superficially related to doctrine, and “almost invariably and intimately bound up with some of the most serious social and economic issues” that afflicted one or more of the congregations in the settlement (note 1).

It is important from the start to recognize that these Mennonites were not citizens, but foreign colonists with obligations and privileges that governed their sojourn in New Russia. For Mennonites the privileges, e.g. of land and freedom from military conscription, were connected to the obligation of model farming. Mennonites were given one, and then later two districts of land for this purpose. Within their districts or colonies, villages were to be created in which families received equal allotments of land in perpetuity. Each village had between 20 and 30 farmsteads (Wirtschaften) which could not be divided or sold, but only inherited by one son in perpetuity (note 1b).

A district also had reserve land for future villages according to population growth, or to be rented, e.g., for sheep grazing. Every village was also required to set aside 1/6 of their land as surplus land for other housing (e.g., the old and retired) and trades. Because other sons did not inherit a farm, a father was responsible to prepare them for other trades needed to create whole communities. Importantly, all land—surplus, reserve and ultimately each farmstead—belonged to the Mennonites as a whole, governed at the village and district levels. Under Russian law governing foreign colonists (the Ukaz of March 1764; note 2), and within the more specific obligations and privileges of their unique charter (Privilegium), and as diligently directed and supported by the Guardianship Committee for Foreign Colonists to meet their obligations, farmers could flourish—or also forfeit their family’s farmstead.

A person unfit to farm and fulfill the mandate of the charter at a local level—i.e., as a model, flourishing farming community—would after much assistance and warning be removed from the farmstead which would be given to another. Reasons varied: desire to farm, age, physical fitness, attitude, work ethic, willingness or ability to learn, etc. could be factors (examples in note 3). 

The Guardianship Committee could appoint special committees from within a colony with overriding authority in economic, agricultural or educational matters, e.g., directing exactly how and what to plant, how and what to build or teach for example. Johann Cornies was famously appointed as Chairman for Life of the Agricultural Society with overwhelming authority granted from the Guardianship Committee—which grew as his accomplishments and those of the Molotschna impressed authorities (note 4).

Decisions about surplus and reserve land and their rents were made locally, but policy, direction and pace were unclear from the start.

Only those with a farmstead could vote in village or district affairs. Items for decision might include use of reserve land in the village and surplus land for the district; the head-tax rate; contributions to communal grain storage (even by the landless), and imposed communal fines, labour or imprisonments—e.g., for inability of the landless to pay rent to graze a cow on common pasture land (note 5). Given the many children in a typical Mennonite family, villages soon had a significant minority—and by 1860 almost two-thirds—of residents who were not landholders and who could not vote. Surplus lands were slow to converted to new villages in part because they provided lucrative rental lands for farmers with wealth. Governing authorities were reticent to push colonies on the pace of these developments.

Cornies and others had a vision for commercial agriculture supported by labour-intensive cottage industries, which later included the establishment of the craftsmen’s village of Neu-Halbstadt in 1842; weavers, millers, blacksmiths, cartwrights, furniture-makers, carpenters, shoe-makers, and cobblers were the largest categories of its artisans (note 6). But by the 1840s as new markets developed, only a few of the landless artisans kept pace economically with their siblings or cousins who inherited the farm. Arguably this led to the development of small manufacturing industries (especially in the Chortitza Colony), but in Molotschna that was a minority, and soon there was a surplus of craftsmen as well (note 7).

Moreover, with the shift from sheep to grain farming, farms needed a pool of cheap local labourers and it was to the benefit of voting landholders to keep this supply high. Because of the proximity of a new harbour at Berdjansk and the growing price for wheat across Europe, those with a farm became wealthy.

Those without land could not easily leave the colony to find other land or a future in the cities of Berdjansk or Odessa; they required passports which were rarely granted, and still remained under the governance of the Mennonite charter.

For years cheap land could be rented by the landless for grazing from the neighbouring Nogai, but in the early 1860s they left en masse for Turkey (note 8) and Crown settled their land with emancipated Russian peasants and Bulgarian colonists.

Increasingly the smaller “cottager” village lots originally intended for the old and retired were filled with younger families. Not surprisingly by the early 1860s the Molotschna was on the brink of social collapse. Some criticized the craftsmen for their relative poverty—they should band together in societies or union, for example (note 9), and others the labourers for an apparent lack of effort. Opinions were polarized, even among the Kleine Gemeinde (note 10).

“Only in 1866 when the quarrel over this question was at its height in the Mennonite colonies [villages] on the Molochnaia did it interpret the colonists’ system of land ownership as obliging the communities to purchase land for their landless people. For one reason or another the government [had] never enforced the provisions of the [1764] March Ukaz …” (Note 11)

After the death of “enlightened despot” Johann Cornies in 1848, and with the illness of his heir in that role, son-in-law Philip Wiebe, “the control of the most important offices [of the colony] was now completely in the hands of the shortsighted, selfish men who in many instances could barely read and write” (note 12). David G. Rempel pulls no punches in his assessment of the new leadership:

“The new chairman of the Agricultural Commission, Peter Schmidt, was as egotistic and unscrupulous an individual as David Friesen, the district head [he was removed from office]. Both treated the [landless] petitioners with contempt, telling them bluntly that they would not permit the unoccupied land to be distributed as desired by the landless, since that would deprive the landowners of their source of cheap labour.” (Note 13)

District Chair Friesen was removed on corruption charges; State Assessor Islavin saw evidence of a clientele system, in which the chairman and the landowners who alone could elect him benefitted financially from each other’s support.

Land ownership determined social status—a problem in a community defined in its charter as Mennonite, ostensibly with all the church mechanisms needed to level social disparities (adult baptism for females and males; all baptized males could elect or be elected as ministers and elders and speak on church disciplinary [ethical] matters including banning from Lord’s Supper and expulsion). The landless in fact sought assistance from the clergy—who were mostly well-to-do, for there was no compensation; “but here, too, they found no better response to their grievances” (note 14).

Chortitza’s tensions around land were not as extreme, assisted in part by the early establishment of the Bergthal daughter colony and the Judenplan (note 15).

New villages were established on reserve lands in Molotschna the following years: 1851 Nikolaidorf, 1852 Paulsheim, 1854 Kleefeld, 1857 Alexanderkrone, Mariawohl, Friedensruh, and Steinfeld, 1862 Gnadental, and 1863 Hamberg and Klippenfeld (note 16). Yet the creation of new villages could hardly meet demand—190 weddings were celebrated in 1860 alone (note 17).

The state was compelled to intervene, and officials strongly condemned the Mennonite administration and landowners—though there were outliers, like Wiebe. Not only was all remaining surplus and reserve land to be reallocated to the landless, but smaller-sized farms, or “half farms,” were now possible as well (this reminds me of the movie!). Despite these moves, conflicts continued, e.g., about use of common grazing land.

In the 1870s daughter colonies became a defining characteristic of the Russian Mennonite story, though the legal and political situation (status of colonists now as citizens and land ownership laws) had changed drastically with the Great Reforms (note 18). Again complaints of favouritism arose with the selection of settlers for new colonies (note 19). Over the next decades before the First World War, Chortitza and Molotschna would establish some fifty daughter colonies across Tsarist Russia, including in the Ukraine, the Caucasus, the Volga Region, Siberia and Central Asia (note 20).

            ---Arnold Neufeldt-Fast

---Notes---

Note 1: David G. Rempel, “Disunity and schisms in the Mennonite Church ca. 1789 -1870.” Unpublished typed manuscript, p. 2. From David Rempel Papers, Box 39: 20, Thomas Fisher Rare Book Library, University of Toronto. Toronto, ON.

Note 1b: See James Urry, "Land Distribution" (1989), GAMEO, https://gameo.org/index.php?title=Land_Distribution_(Russia).

Note 2: In the provisions of the Russian Land Ukas of March 19, 1764 concerning land tenure and inheritance for foreign colonists, families were given land as an inheritable possession but “not personally to any one colonist, but to each colony as a whole, with every family merely enjoying the use of its allotted portion in perpetuity” (David Rempel, “The Mennonite Colonies in New Russia. A study of their settlement and economic development from 1789–1914,” PhD dissertation, Stanford University, 1933, 105, https://archive.org/details/themennonitecoloniesinnewrussiaastudyoftheirsettlementandeconomicdevelopmentfrom1789to1914ocr).

Note 3: See previous post (forthcoming)

Note 4: See previous post, https://russianmennonites.blogspot.com/2023/11/johann-cornies-enlightened-despot-of.html

Note 5: Alexander Klaus, Unsere Kolonien: Studien und Materialien zur Geschichte und Statistik der ausländischen Kolonisation in Rußland, translated by J. Töws (Odessa: Odessaer Zeitung, 1887), 269-269, 271-272, http://pbc.gda.pl/dlibra/doccontent?id=16863; OR https://media.chortitza.org/pdf/?file=Pis/KlausD.pdf.

Note 6: For complete statistics for 1844, cf. August von Haxthausen, Studien über die innern Zustände, das Volksleben und insbesondere die ländlichen Einrichtungen Rußlands, part II (Hannover: Hahn, 1847), 189, https://archive.org/details/studienberdiein03kosegoog/; and Friedrich Matthäi, Die deutschen Ansiedlungen in Rußland. Ihre Geschichte und volkswirthschaftliche Bedeutung (Leipzig: Fries, 1866), 200, https://archive.org/details/bub_gb_gCkEAAAAYAAJ/page/n225/mode/2up.

Note 7: Rempel, “The Mennonite Colonies in New Russia,” 184.

Note 8: See previous post (forthcoming)

Note 9: Samuel Kludt chastised the landless craftsmen for not banding in societies or unions to buy product, market, sell transport, for example, Mennonitische Rundschau (MR) 3, no. 14 (July 15, 1882), 1, https://archive.org/details/sim_die-mennonitische-rundschau_1882-07-15_3_14/page/n1/mode/2up?q=landlosen; continued in MR 3, no. 15 (August 1, 1882), 2, https://archive.org/details/sim_die-mennonitische-rundschau_1882-08-01_3_15/page/n1/mode/2up.

Note 10: Cf. Abraham Thiessen, Die Agrarwirren bei den Mennoniten in Süd-Rußland (Berlin: Wigankow, 1887), https://media.chortitza.org/pdf/kb/thiess.pdf; idem, Die Lage der deutschen Kolonisten in Russland (Leipzig, 1876), https://mla.bethelks.edu/books/289_747_T344L.pdf; Also: Cornelius Krahn, “Abraham Thiessen: A Mennonite Revolutionary?,” Mennonite Life, 24 (1969), 73-77, https://mla.bethelks.edu/mennonitelife/pre2000/1969apr.pdf; Delbert Plett, Storm and Triumph: the Mennonite Kleine Gemeinde, 1850-1875 (Steinbach, MB: D.F.P Publications, 1986), chapter 8, https://www.mharchives.ca/download/1575/.

Note 11: Rempel, “The Mennonite Colonies in New Russia,” 106f.

Note 12: Rempel, “The Mennonite Colonies in New Russia,” 186.

Note 13: Rempel, “The Mennonite Colonies in New Russia,” 186: “Schmidt's father had obtained from the Guardians Committee a long-term lease to 4,600 desiatine of the district’s reserve land, for which the son kept on paying two kopeks per desiatin State rent, but leased most of it to the landless colonists for three to four rubles per desiatin.” By subletting land that belonged to the entire community to the landless, Schmidt (and others) could generate significant profits which did not return to the community treasury. The poor became poorer and the rich richer.

Note 14: Rempel, “The Mennonite Colonies in New Russia,” 186.

Note 15: On the Bergthal Colony, cf. previous post (forthcoming); on the Judenplan, cf. previous post (forthcoming).

Note 16: Franz Isaac, Die Molotschnaer Mennoniten. Ein Beitrag zur Geschichte derselben (Halbstadt, Taurien: H. J. Braun, 1908), 26, https://mla.bethelks.edu/books/Molotschnaer%20Mennoniten/; OR https://archive.org/details/die-molotschnaer-mennoniten-editablea; English translation by Timothy Flaming and Glenn Penner, https://www.mharchives.ca/download/3573/.

Note 17: Mennonitische Blätter 8, no. 3 (May 1861), 34, https://mla.bethelks.edu/gmsources/newspapers/Mennonitische%20Blaetter/1854-1900/1861/DSCF0227.JPG.

Note 18: For this entire thematic, cf. James Urry, “Context, Cause and Consequence in Understanding the Molochna Land Crisis. A Response to John Staples,” Mennonite Life 62, no. 2 (Fall 2007), https://mla.bethelks.edu/ml-archive/2007fall/; and John Staples, “Putting ‘Russia’ back into Russian Mennonite History: The Crimean War, Emancipation, and the Molochna Mennonite Landlessness Crisis,” Mennonite Life 62, no. 1 (2007), https://mla.bethelks.edu/ml-archive/2007spring/staples.php.

Note 19: “Etwas über Landankauf,” MR 5, no. 2 (January 9, 1884), 1, https://archive.org/details/sim_die-mennonitische-rundschau_1884-01-09_5_2/mode/2up?q=landlosen.

Note 20: Besides the sources already noted above, cf. also Jeffrey Longhofer, “Specifying the Commons: Mennonites, Intensive Agriculture, and Landlessness in Nineteenth-Century Russia,” Ethnohistory 40, no. 3 (Summer 1993), 384–409; and Dmytro Myeshkov, Die Schwarzmeerdeutschen und ihre Welten: 1781–1871 (Essen: Klartext, 2008), 116-127.

---

To cite this page: Arnold Neufeldt-Fast, "Landless Crisis: Molotschna, 1840s to 1860s," History of the Russian Mennonites (blog), November 7, 2023, https://russianmennonites.blogspot.com/2023/11/landless-crisis-molotschna-1840s-to.html.

Comments

Popular posts from this blog

Vaccinations in Chortitza and Molotschna, beginning in 1804

Vaccination lists for Chortitza Mennonite children in 1809 and 1814 were published prior to the COVID-19 pandemic with little curiosity ( note 1 ). However during the 2020-22 pandemic and in a context in which some refused to vaccinate for religious belief, the historic data took on new significance. Ancestors of some of the more conservative Russian Mennonite groups—like the Reinländer or the Bergthalers or the adult children of land delegate Jacob Höppner—were in fact vaccinating their infants and toddlers against small pox over two hundred years ago ( note 2 ). Also before the current pandemic Ukrainian historian Dmytro Myeshkov brought to light other archival materials on Mennonites and vaccination. The material below is my summary and translation of the relevant pages of Myeshkov’s massive 2008 volume on Black Sea German and their Worlds, 1781 to 1871 (German only; note 3 ). Myeshkov confirms that Chortitza was already immunizing its children in 1804 when their District Offic...

"A Small Town near Auschwitz” – Chortitza Mennonite Refugee/ Resettlement Camps

Simple proximity to a place of horrors does not equal knowledge or complicity. Many Gnadenfeld-area Mennonite refugees were, for example, temporarily housed 20 km. away from the Bergen-Belsen Concentration Camp where 15-year-old Anne Frank died ultimately of typhus ( note 1 ). The day after liberation by British troops on April 15, 1945, camp survivors began to flow through neighbouring villages. “What a sight they were! They had been tortured and starved, and were swollen from lack of food. … We could hardly believe that the glorious country of Germany could commit such crimes against people,” Susanna Toews wrote ( note 2 ). My mother was only seven, but she remembers overhearing shocking descriptions given by their host family’s teenaged girls forced by the British to clean some of the camp buses. What about the much larger death camp at Auschwitz? There is a book entitled: A Small Town near Auschwitz: Ordinary Nazis and the Holocaust. It is about an administrator living near the ...

“Operation Chortitza” (Part II) – Resettler Camps in Danzig-West Prussia, 1943-44

Waldemar Janzen, my former German professor and advisee, turned eleven years old in 1943. He and his mother and 3,900 others from Chortitza and Rosenthal (Ukraine) were evacuated west to the ethnic German resettler camps in Gau Danzig-West Prussia in October that year (see Part I; note 1 ). Years later Janzen could still recall much from this childhood experience—including the impact of the visit by Professor Benjamin H. Unruh a few weeks after their arrival. “He was a man who had extended much help to his fellow Mennonites ever since they began to emigrate from Russia during the 1920s” ( note 2 ). Unruh was a father-figure to his people, and his arrival at their camp in West Prussia signaled to the evacuees that they were in good hands ( note 3 ). Unruh’s impact on 7,000 other Chortitza District villagers in Upper Silesia would be the same some weeks later ( note 4 ). Surprisingly Unruh’s West Prussian camps visit left an equally indelible impression on the Gau’s Operations Commande...

What is the Church to Say? Letter 4 (of 4) to American Mennonite Friends

Irony is used in this post to provoke and invite critical thought; the historical research on the Mennonite experience is accurate and carefully considered. ~ANF Preparing for your next AGM: Mennonite Congregations and Deportations Many U.S. Mennonite pastors voted for Donald Trump, whose signature promise was an immediate start to “the largest deportation operation in American history.” Confirmed this week, President Trump will declare a national emergency and deploy military assets to carry this out. The timing is ideal; in January many Mennonite congregations have their Annual General Meeting (AGM) with opportunity to review and update the bylaws of their constitution. Need help? We have related examples from our tradition, which I offer as a template, together with a few red flags. First, your congregational by-laws.  It is unlikely you have undocumented immigrants in your congregation, but you should flag this. Model: Gustav Reimer, a deacon and notary public from the ...

Village Reports Commando Dr. Stumpp, 1942: List and Links

Each of the "Commando Dr. Stumpp" village reports written during German occupation of Ukraine 1942 contains a mountain of demographic data, names, dates, occupations, numbers of untimely deaths (revolution, famines, abductions), narratives of life in the 1930s, of repression and liberation, maps, and much more. The reports are critical for telling the story of Mennonites in the Soviet Union before 1942, albeit written with the dynamics of Nazi German rule at play. Reports for some 56 (predominantly) Mennonite villages from the historic Mennonite settlement areas of Chortitza, Sagradovka, Baratow, Schlachtin, Milorodovka, and Borosenko have survived. Unfortunately no village reports from the Molotschna area (known under occupation as “Halbstadt”) have been found. Dr. Karl Stumpp, a prolific chronicler of “Germans abroad,” became well-known to German Mennonites (Prof. Benjamin Unruh/ Dr. Walter Quiring) before the war as the director of the Research Center for Russian Germans...

What is the Church to Say? Letter 1 (of 4) to American Mennonite Friends

Irony is used in this post to provoke and invite critical thought; the historical research on the Mennonite experience is accuarte and carefully considered. ~ANF American Mennonite leaders who supported Trump will be responding to the election results in the near future. Sometimes a template or sample conference address helps to formulate one’s own text. To that end I offer the following. When Hitler came to power in 1933, Mennonites in Germany sent official greetings by telegram: “The Conference of the East and West Prussian Mennonites meeting today at Tiegenhagen in the Free City of Danzig are deeply grateful for the tremendous uprising ( Erhebung ) that God has given our people ( Volk ) through the vigor and action of [unclear], and promise our cooperation in the construction of our Fatherland, true to the Gospel motto of [our founder Menno Simons], ‘For no one can lay any foundation other than the one already laid, which is Jesus Christ.’” ( Note 1 ) Hitler responded in a letter...

1929 Flight of Mennonites to Moscow and Reception in Germany

At the core of the attached video are some thirty photos of Mennonite refugees arriving from Moscow in 1929 which are new archival finds. While some 13,000 had gathered in outskirts of Moscow, with many more attempting the same journey, the Soviet Union only released 3,885 Mennonite "German farmers," together with 1,260 Lutherans, 468 Catholics, 51 Baptists, and 7 Adventists. Some of new photographs are from the first group of 323 refugees who left Moscow on October 29, arriving in Kiel on November 3, 1929. A second group of photos are from the so-called “Swinemünde group,” which left Moscow only a day later. This group however could not be accommodated in the first transport and departed from a different station on October 31. They were however held up in Leningrad for one month as intense diplomatic negotiations between the Soviet Union, Germany and also Canada took place. This second group arrived at the Prussian sea port of Swinemünde on December 2. In the next ten ...

Sesquicentennial: Proclamation of Universal Military Service Manifesto, January 1, 1874

One-hundred-and-fifty years ago Tsar Alexander II proclaimed a new universal military service requirement into law, which—despite the promises of his predecesors—included Russia’s Mennonites. This act fundamentally changed the course of the Russian Mennonite story, and resulted in the emigration of some 17,000 Mennonites. The Russian government’s intentions in this regard were first reported in newspapers in November 1870 ( note 1 ) and later confirmed by Senator Evgenii von Hahn, former President of the Guardianship Committee ( note 2 ). Some Russian Mennonite leaders were soon corresponding with American counterparts on the possibility of mass migration ( note 3 ). Despite painful internal differences in the Mennonite community, between 1871 and Fall 1873 they put up a united front with five joint delegations to St. Petersburg and Yalta to petition for a Mennonite exemption. While the delegations were well received and some options could be discussed with ministers of the Crown, ...

What is the Church to Say? Letter 3 (of 4) to American Mennonite Friends

Irony is used in this post to provoke and invite critical thought; the historical research on the Mennonite experience is accurate and carefully considered. ~ANF Mennonite endorsement Trump the man No one denies the moral flaws of Donald Trump, least of all Trump himself. In these next months Mennonite pastors who supported Trump will have many opportunities to restate to their congregation and their children why someone like Trump won their support. It may be obvious, but the words can be difficult to find. To help, I offer examples from Mennonite history with statements from one our strongest leaders of the past century, Prof. Benjamin H. Unruh (see the nice Mennonite Encyclopedia article on him, GAMEO ). I have substituted only a few words, indicated by square brackets to help with the adaptation. The [MAGA] movement is like the early Anabaptist movement!  In the change of government in 1933, Unruh saw in the [MAGA] movement “things breaking forth which our forefathe...

Diary of Johann Jantzen, 1843-1903

Johann Jantzen was born in 1823 in Neuteichsdorfsfeld, West Prussia, resided in Neuendorf near Danzig, and migrated late to Russia (1869), then Central Asia, and finally in 1884 to Nebraska, USA. He died in 1903. Decades later his descendants translated his diary of notable annual highlights, entitled: Accounts of various Experiences in Life. A Diary begun in the Year 1839 ( note 1 ). The little West Prussian villages he names regularly are familiar place to many with Russian Mennonite family history: Schönau, Neu Münsterberg, Schönsee, Lakendorf, Neuteicherwalde, etc. While most Russian Mennonite families left Prussia much earlier than Jantzen, his diary offers a picture of the typical rhythm of life that Mennonites lived in West Prussia over generations. It also offers something I did not expect. The revolutions across Europe in 1848 had a local impact which he mentions, and he gives us a hint as to the other political highlights and episodes of civil unrest that were on the mind...