The Narodniks in the Russian Revolution. Russia's Socialist-Revolutionaries in 1917-A Documentary History
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Francis King, transl. and compiler. The Narodniks in the Russian Revolution. Russia's Socialist-Revolutionaries in 1917-A Documentary History. Socialist History Occasional Papers Series, No. 25. London: Socialist History Society, 2007. 111 pp. £5.00, paper.This is a collection of almost 50 documents, or excerpts from documents produced by various factions of the Socialist-Revolutionary Party between February 1917 and the brief meeting of the Constituent Assembly in January 1918. They include appeals from party committees, leaflets, speeches and reports to the Petrograd Soviet or the Second All-Russia Congress of Soviets after the Bolshevik coup, or to the Constituent Assembly or SR party conferences and congresses, party resolutions or motions, stenographs and reports of party and Soviet meetings, articles, telegrams, protocols or minutes of party meetings. Most were published contemporaneously, either individually or in various party papers. The author's intention is to mark the 80th anniversary of the Revolution by presenting the perspectives of the different SR groupings during 1917, to rescue the SRs from the dustbin of history, not as alternative leaders, but as part of the history of 1917 and a general socialist heritage. The documents have been selected from recent Russian publications of documents relating to the revolution.There is a brief introduction to the Narodniks and their debates with the Marxists in the late nineteenth century and a useful history of the SR party from its foundation at the very beginning of the twentieth century up to 1917. Francis King provides a chronological narrative covering political developments in 1917 into which the documents are inserted. Although the documents are addressed to various groups such as soldiers and workers, they are in reality mainly addressed to other members of the SR party. Like most commentators on the SRs, King sees their heterogeneity as the deeper cause of their downfall, beyond the personalities of Aleksandr Kerenskii or Viktor Chernov and the vicissitudes of 1917 itself, although he shows with some neat examples how these factors played out. The fracturing of the party creates the structure of the book and the selection of documents. So documents from all wings of the SR party are presented, from the Union of SR Maximalists (Soyuz Eserov-Maximalistov) to the People's Socialists (Narodnie sotsialisty) and no effort is made to evaluate which had more right to the title Narodnik. Some of the documents of the extremes could have been left out, such as the People's Socialists; as King's text and they themselves recognized, they had miniscule support in 1917 and no desire to reunite with the main SR party, with whom they had long split. Space instead could have been given to regional SRs, either in the areas where the party had been traditionally strong, such as the Volga, or where they were to remain influential for a few brief years after 1917, for example Siberia. …
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.002 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".