Presenter: Tracy K. Dennison, Edie and Lew Wasserman Professor of Social Science History and the Ronald and Maxine Linde Leadership Chair in the Division of the Humanities and Social Sciences, California Institute of Technology
Abstract: Serfdom is often viewed as a system of unfree labor where nobles and the state colluded to exploit the peasantry. On this view, the coercive powers of the state, especially state enforcement of mobility restrictions, are what made the system so oppressive. In this talk, the example of Russia is used to show that, in contrast to the conventional portrayal, serfdom existed where central states were weak. Serfdom was a concession to nobles by rulers, and serfdom waned as rulers grew stronger and centralized states emerged. Comparing the Russian case to western and central Europe (especially Prussia), we observe the importance of property rights and centrally controlled mechanisms for enforcement (such as royal courts) to state formation and, consequently, to emancipation and long-term economic and political development. The absence of these institutions in Russia – and the lack of “state capacity” – meant that emancipation was a less transformative event in that country than in other parts of Europe.
