1. Behind only London, Paris, Vienna, and Berlin. See Kruze and Kutsentov, “Naselenie Peterburga,” 105.

2. Neil Weissman, Reform in Tsarist Russia: The State Bureaucracy and Local Government, 1900–1914 (New Brunswick, N.J., 1981), 202–20; for the critical role of hooliganism in influencing police and court reform, see also Mezhduvedomstvennaia komissiia po preobrazovaniiu politsii v imperii pod predsedatel’stvom senatora A. A. Makarova (St. Petersburg, 1910–11); Z. M. Zil’berberg, Zakon 15 iiunia 1912 goda o preobrazovanii mestnogo suda (Moscow, 1914).

3. Although revolutionary violence is often mentioned only obliquely in Vekhi, responses to revolutionary violence and to the radical intelligentsia’s encouragement of violence underlie each essay; see S. Bulgakov, “Heroism and Asceticism,” 40–44; M. Gershenzon, “Creative Self-Cognition,” 77–81; A. Izgoev, “Educated Youth,” 110–11; Struve’s article opens with a characterization of 1905 as analogous to the Time of Troubles and the Razin and Pugachev peasant uprisings (“The Intelligentsia and Revolution,” 138–41, 146–47, 150–51); Semen Frank, “The Ethic of Nihilism,” 170–72; all in Landmarks: A Collection of Essays on the Russian Intelligentsia, 1909, trans. Marian Schwartz and ed. Boris Shragin and Albert Todd (New York, 1977).

4. PMS 1906, 205, 210; PMS 1907, 202.

5. When the gradonachal’nik stopped processing these cases in 1910, the mirovoi sud immediately showed an upsurge in trial, conviction, and imprisonment rates for hooligan crimes. Not only did absolute figures for trial and conviction rates rise when the mirovoi court regained its full jurisdiction over these crimes, but in 1910 hooligan-like crimes accounted for two-thirds of those sentenced to the mirovoi House of Detection, and this percentage rose steadily thereafter. See PMS 1906, 199; PMS 1907, 202.

6. PMS 1909, 170. In 1910 the prison chief stated that in addition to the return of hooliganism to his jurisdiction, the general increase in “police repression of petty crime” was responsible for rising rates, now that those arrested were again appearing before Justices of the Peace; PMS 1910, 132.

7. With the appearance of Gazeta-kopeika in St. Petersburg and its cousins in many other cities, the term “boulevard press” no longer referred only to the primarily middle-class newspapers such as Peterburgskii listok; in this chapter I use the term only when it refers to all the newspapers of the street; otherwise I name the newspapers specifically.

8. “DP: Peterburgskie apashi,” PL, March 30, 1912.

9. “DP: Zverstvo khuliganov,” PL, March 21, 1911.

10. K., “Khuligany v Strel’be i ikh rasprava,” PL, February 1, 1913.

11. “SPd: Zverskoe napadenie khuliganov,” PL, July 28, 1912.

12. For examples see “SPd,” PL, February 12, 1912, February 14, 1912, May 4, 1913, May 5, 1913, April 16, 1914.

13. “Zverskoe ubiistvo” was accompanied by a suggestive drawing in PL, February 12, 1912; see also examples in “SPd,” PL, July 28, 1912, March 2, 1913, May 10, 1913, May 12, 1913.

14. On violence in popular bandit and detective stories see Brooks, When Russia Learned to Read, 186–88; on violence in rural crime, see Frank, “Popular Justice”; and Frierson, “Crime and Punishment”; on early boulevard-press violence see McReynolds, The News, 106.

15. In 1906, advertisements typically filled half of the first page of PL and the final one or two pages out of approximately six to ten total pages. On September 1, 1913 advertisements covered all of page 1, a corner of page 2, and all of pages 12–18.

16. A Rech’ writer complained in July 1914 that the boulevard press ignored substantive issues in favor of sensationalistic scandals, such as the attempts to murder Rasputin, but in fact both Peterburgskii listok and Gazeta-kopeika devoted considerable attention to national and local political issues; Peterburgskii listok covered the Beilis trial in minute detail and with scathing criticism of the Ministry of Justice; see “Za nedeliu,” Rech’, July 7, 1914; on the Beilis case, see, for example, the full-page treatment in PL, October 1, 1913; on Lena see articles daily after April 5, 1912.

17. Svirskii, “Peterburgskie khuligany,” 252, also 266.

18. “Voina goroda s khuliganami,” PL, July 24, 1912.

19. Skitalets, “Pod nozhom,” GK, January 10, 1913.

20. Skitalets, “Ozverenie,” GK, January 16, 1913.

21. Skitalets, “Pod nozhom,” GK, January 10, 1913. It is also worth noting that when Moscow and St. Petersburg mirovoi sud officials defined hooliganism in 1912 in response to the Ministry of Justice inquiry, the Petersburg justices’ description included much more violent crimes among those considered hooliganism. See “Otzyv Moskovskogo,” 231–32; PMS 1913, 276.

22. Ministerstvo iustitsii, Svod statisticheskikh svedenii po delam ugolovnym [1872–1907] (St. Petersburg, 1873–1908); Svod statisticheskikh svedenii o podsudimykh, opravdannykh, i osuzhdennykh [1908–1914] (St. Petersburg, 1909–15); Mel’nikov, “Kolebaniia prestupnosti,” 72.

23. The French used “apache” for knife-wielding muggers who appeared in Paris around 1906; see Nye, Crime, Madness, and Politics, 180–226; Zaslavskii, “Bor’ba,” 127. Slightly later the German working-class gangs who beat up Hitler Youth groups also called themselves Red Apaches and Navajos; see Rosenhaft, “Organizing the ‘Lumpenproletariat,’ ” 185; and Peukert, Inside Nazi Germany, 154–67.

24. “Peterburgskie apashi,” PL, March 28, 1912; “SPd,” PL, April 17, 1912.

25. For examples see PL, March 15, 1911, June 17, 1911, March 10, 1912, April 30, 1913, May 26, 1913, August 17, 1913, January 28, 1914. In the past, victims may have died from knife wounds received in hooligan attacks, but reports rarely mentioned it.

26. Among others, a “well-dressed pedestrian”: “DP: Zverstvo khuliganov,” PL, March 21, 1911; a merchant: “DP: Ograblennyi khuliganami,” PL, May 21, 1911; another merchant: “DP: Kupets—zhertva khuliganov,” PL, May 22, 1912; a teacher, son of a colonel: “SPd: Khuliganskoe napadenie na realista,” PL, March 14, 1913.

27. Some examples are “DP: Nozhovshchina,” January 3, 1912; “DP: Peterburgskie apashi,” January 8, 1912; “SPd,” April 17, 1912; “Peterburgskie apashi,” March 28, 1912; and “Peterburgskie apashi,” May 10, 1912; “SPd: Lovelas-khuligan,” January 28, 1913; “SPd: Podvigi khuliganov Aleksandrovskogo parka,” April 15, 1914; “DP: Peterburgskie apashi,” February 14, 1912; all PL.

28. “SPd: Zverskii postupok khuligana,” PL, May 12, 1913; “DP: Zhertva khuliganov-podrostkov,” PL, September 25, 1913.

29. For examples see “SPd: Napadenie khuligana na artist,” PL, January 15, 1911; “DP: Ulichnyi razboi,” PL, May 19, 1912; “SPd: Khuliganskie napadeniia,” PL, February 27, 1913; “DP: Khuliganskie napadeniia,” PL, January 6, 1914.

30. “DP: Peterburgskie apashi,” PL, April 11, 1912; “SPd: Razboinoe napadenie za Narvskoi zastavoi,” PL, January 23, 1913; see also reports of brawls in GK, January 3 and 10, 1913; [untitled article], GK, January 15, 1912; “Proisshestviia: Srazhenie rabochikh,” GK, July 2, 1912. “Proisshestviia” was Gazeta-kopeika’s crime column.

31. A. V. Likhachev, “Ob usilenii nakazanii dlia khuliganov,” 93.

32. “SPd: Grandioznoe poboishche v Galernoi Gavani,” PL, August 13, 1912; “Krovavoe poboishche rabochikh,” PL, September 16, 1912.

33. “SPd: Podvigi khuliganskoi vol’nitsy,” PL, June 15, 1911.

34. “Gibel’ atamana khuliganov,” PL, August 6, 1912.

35. “Vasil’eostrovskie khuligany: Vchera 13;shII v okruzhnom sude,” PL, February 14, 1913. The Gazeta-kopeika report of the same crime and trial echoed the PL report; see “Sud: Parad khuliganov,” GK, February 14, 1913.

36. “Gibel’ atamana khuliganov,” PL, August 6, 1912. Police comments on gang activity corroborate information the boulevard press presented, with tantalizing but limited evidence on street gangs. For example, in 1911 the chief of the police department’s investigative unit boasted that police efforts in the year past brought gang activity in St. Petersburg under control: there had been five particularly large gangs (Koltovskaia, Roshchinskaia, Peskovskaia, Zheleznovodskaia, and Gaidovskaia, all mentioned at one time or another in crime reports), but according to the chief of police “[now] only memories of them remain”; a year later he would have cause to eat those words when vicious gang fighting again spilled blood on numerous city streets (cited in Vestnik, “Bor’ba s khuliganami: Beseda s I. O. Nachal’nika sysknoi politsii K. P. Marshalkom,” PG, August 14, 1911).

37. Occasionally GK’s hooligan victims included members of the upper classes. See, for example, “Proisshestviia: Napadenie khuliganov na kuptsa,” GK, December 29, 1912.

38. Skitalets, “Pod nozhom,” GK, January 10, 1913.

39. “Khuliganstvo v stolitse,” GK, November 20, 1912.

40. “Sudebnaia khronika: Nasilie gorodovogo nad devushkoi,” PG, July 6, 1906.

41. “SPd: Podvigi khuliganskoi vol’nitsy,” PL, June 15, 1911; “SPd: Peterburgskie apashi,” PL, January 1, 1912; “DP: Nozhevshchina,” PL, January 16, 1912; “SPd: Peterburgskie apashi,” PL, March 3, 1912; “SPd: Napadenie na chasovogo,” PL, August 29, 1912; “SPd: Dikoe khuliganskoe ubiistvo,” PL, June 5, 1913; “SPd: Khuliganskaia rasprava,” PL, July 29, 1913; K-v, “Khuliganstvo i shoffery,” PL, August 17, 1913; “SPd: Napadenie khuliganov na dvornikov,” PL, September 30, 1913; “DP. Khuliganskaia rasprava,” PL, January 16, 1914.

42. Robert Tombs, “Crime and the Security of the State: The ‘Dangerous Class’ and Insurrection in Nineteenth-Century Paris,” in Crime and the Law: The Social History of Crime in Western Europe since 1500, ed. V. A. C. Gatrell, Bruce Lenman, and Geoffrey Parker (London, 1980), 214; see also Chevalier, Laboring and Dangerous Classes.

43. Svirskii will be discussed below. Bakhtiarov wrote Briukho Peterburga (St. Petersburg, 1888), Proletariat i ulichnye tipy Peterburga (St. Petersburg, 1895), Otpetye liudi (St. Petersburg, 1903), and Bosiaki: Ocherki s naturi (St. Petersburg, 1903); Binshtok wrote Gde i kak iutitsia Peterburgskaia bednota (St. Petersburg, 1903). On Moscow writers see Joseph Bradley, “The Writer and the City in Late Imperial Russia,” The Slavonic and East European Review, vol. 64, no. 3 (July 1986); and McReynolds, The News, 145–67.

44. The sketch has received scant attention from scholars in comparison with its more famous cousin, the feuilleton. See A. G. Tseitlin, Stanovlenie realizma v russkoi literature: Russkii fiziologicheskii ocherk (Moscow, 1965); Maksim Gor’kii, letter to I. F. Zhiga, August 15, 1929, Sobranie sochinenii v tritsati tomakh, vol. 30 (Moscow, 1955); E. I. Zhurbina, Ustoichivye temy (Moscow, 1974); Gary Saul Morson, The Boundaries of Genre: Dostoevskii’s “Diary of a Writer” and the Traditions of Literary Utopia (Austin, Tex., 1981); Joseph Frank, Dostoevsky: The Stir of Liberation, 1860–1865 (Princeton, 1986), 216–25.

45. On popular and official attitudes toward poverty in Moscow that emphasize the work of “reformers” seeking to “civilize” the urban poor, see Bradley, Muzhik and Muscovite; in his survey of Moscow literature on the poor Bradley does not note the corrosion of the reformers’ faith, but he also does not treat the last decade of tsarist rule as a distinct period.

46. Lindenmeyr, “A Russian Experiment,” 434.

47. Such is the perspective in the most famous (and sympathetic) treatment of the Petersburg slums from the 1860s, the mammoth Peterburgskie trushchoby by Vsevolod Krestovskii. Published originally in installments in Otechestvennye zapiski (1864) and Peterburgskii listok (1864–65), it was republished as the first two volumes of V. V. Krestovskii, Polnoe sobranie sochinenii (St. Petersburg, 1898). Krestovskii relied heavily on Eugène Sue’s Les mystères de Paris for his plot, but his exhaustive descriptive details of the life and lingo of the poor and criminal underground were the result of his own research in the prisons, hospitals, courts, and tenements of St. Petersburg. See also a sample of such views in Chalidze, Criminal Russia, 3–11; S. V. Maksimov, Sibir’ i katorga (St. Petersburg, 1891), of which vol. 1 is entitled Neschastnye (The Unfortunates).

48. Similar shifts in popular literature’s images of the poor in England have been discussed by Jones in Outcast London, 280–314.

49. It should be added that the professional criminal underworld was also romanticized at this time: it was often regarded with a mixture of awe and admiration for the code of honor according to which criminals were said to have lived, or as a tantalizing but ultimately costly escape from the restrictions of respectable social life. On the code of honor and the decline of romantic attitudes toward it, see, for example, Aborigen, Krovavye letopisi Peterburga: Prestupnyi mir i bor’ba s nim (St. Petersburg, 1914); on criminals’ and bandits’ escape from society, see Brooks, When Russia Learned to Read, 174–213.

50. Dosuzhii (I. N. Gerson), “Narodnyi kurort,” PL, April 17, 1901.

51. “Deti-brodiazhki,” PL, March 7, 1901.

52. Avgur, “Komu pomogat’?” PL, April 12, 1902.

53. Bradley, Muzhik and Muscovite, 253–59.

54. “Nishchenstvo,” PL, March 4, 1903. In contrast, the police and city officials favored workhouses not only for “discipline” but for punishment of “recidivists”; TsGAOR, fond 102, delo 40, chast’ 2, listy 9–26.

55. K. L-dov, “Nishchenstvo v stolitse,” PL, August 30, 1913; Zriachii (I. N. Gerson), “ ‘Villa Brodiaga’,” PL, June 8, 1914; “Interesy dnia: Peterburgskie nishchie,” PG, August 3, 1906.

56. I. M-v, “Iz kipy zaiavlenii: Deti-nishchenki,” PL, December 31, 1905.

57. “Gorodskie dela,” PL, July 20, 1906.

58. “Sredi nishchikh,” PL, July 20, 1906.

59. K. L-dov, “Nishchenstvo v stolitse,” PL, August 30, 1913.

60. “Listok: Nishchie v tramvaiakh,” PL, March 8, 1914.

61. Zriachii, “ ‘Villa Brodiaga’,” PL, June 18, 1914.

62. M., “Iz kipy zaiavlenii: Khuliganskaia idilliia,” PL, July 30, 1906.

63. “Peterburgskie trushchoby,” PL, February 15, 1914.

64. M. B., “Peterburgskie trushchoby,” PL, October 31, 1913.

65. D., “Uzhasy ‘Vas’kinoi derevni’,” PL, April 27, 1914.

66. D., “Peterburgskie trushchoby: Novaia ekskursiia glasnykh,” PL, May 4, 1914.

67. Bradley, Muzhik and Muscovite, 271–72; see also Zelnik, Labor and Society, 279–80.

68. See, for example, B. Ivolgin, “Nochlezhnye doma,” PL, June 8, 1911.

69. On Svirskii’s own life, see “Avtobiografiia,” Polnoe sobranie sochinenii, vol. 1 (Moscow and Leningrad, 1930), 21–24; and in the same volume, I. N. Kubikov, “A. I. Svirskii,” 7–18. Svirskii also wrote a long version that is part picaresque adventure novel, part bildungsroman, Istoriia moei zhizni (Moscow, 1947). His most famous work today is Ryzhik (Moscow, 1940), yet another version of his childhood, written for adolescent readers. In St. Petersburg, Svirskii published a “boulevard newspaper,” Novaia gazeta, similar to Peterburgskii listok but aimed at a more literate audience, which ran for a few months in 1906 and 1907; he also edited and published Rubikon, a literary journal that included popular potboilers alongside works by the leading writers and poets of the Silver Age, which lasted for eight numbers in 1914.

70. A. I. Svirskii, Pogibshie liudi, vol. 1 (St. Petersburg, 1898), 7. See also, for example, Bakhtiarov, Proletariat i ulichnye tipy; id., Bosiaki; Binshtok, Gde i kak iutitsia Peterburgskaia bednota; and S. I. Elpat’evskii, “Na perepisi: V Viazemskoi lavre,” Russkoe bogatstvo 2 (1897).

71. Svirskii, Pogibshie liudi, vol. 1, p. 7.

72. Ibid., 2, 11–19, 57–71, and passim.

73. Ibid., 19, 26–27, 58.

74. Ibid., 15, 20, 27, 29, and 52–53.

75. Ibid., 54.

76. For the basic ideas of the “sociological” school and its debates with the “anthropological” school, see Ostroumov, Prestupnost’ i ee prichiny, 238–70.

77. Svirskii, Pogibshie liudi, vol. 1, pp. 68–69.

78. Ibid., 69–70.

79. Ibid., 219–20.

80. Ibid., 221.

81. Ibid., 9, 72–80.

82. Svirskii, “Peterburgskie khuligany.” See p. 104, n. 21.

83. Ibid., 258.

84. Ibid., 260.

85. Svirskii, Pogibshie liudi, vol. 1, p. 29.

86. Svirskii, “Peterburgskie khuligany,” 263.

87. Ibid., 253.

88. Ibid., 268.

89. Ibid., 269.

90. Of all the incantations he might have chosen, Svirskii opted to pray for mercy for us, not them (“Peterburgskie khuligany,” 276).

91. M. B., “Peterburgskie trushchoby,” PL, October 31, 1913.

92. Izbiratel’, “Peterburgskie deti ulitsy,” PL, February 25, 1914.

93. Svirskii, “Peterburgskie khuligany,” 259ff.

94. For example, Bater, St. Petersburg, 201; Zelnik, Labor and Society, 240–83; Bradley, Muzhik and Muscovite, 249–91.

95. They were also less likely to unionize; see Bonnell, Roots of Revolution, 367.

96. I. V. Gessen, Lev Tikhomirov, and S. S. Ol’denburg, quoted in Rogger, “Russia in 1914,” 102; S. Galai, “A Liberal’s Vision of Russia’s Future, 1905–1914: The Case of Ivan Petrunkevich,” in Russian and East European History: Selected Papers from the Second World Congress, ed. R. C. Elwood (Berkeley, 1984).

97. N, “Rost’ prestupnosti,” PL, September 26, 1913.

98. Kruze and Kutsentov, “Naselenie Peterburga,” 115–22.

99. Detlev J. K. Peukert, The Weimar Republic: The Crisis of Classical Modernity, trans. Richard Deveson (New York, 1989), 134–35.

100. Riabchenko, O bor’be, 5.

101. E. N. Tarnovskii, “Dvizhenie prestupnosti v Rossiiskoi imperii, 1899–1908,” Zhurnal ministerstva iustitsii 9 (1909).

102. I. V. Gessen, “Vnutrennaia zhizn’,” Ezhegodnik gazety Rech’ na 1914 god (St. Petersburg, 1915), 25. His example of “brazenness” was the slashing of Repin’s painting, a case that won attention for the futurists, whom Repin blamed for indirectly inciting the attack; see p. 145, n. 114.

103. I. V. Gessen, Rech’, January 1, 1914 [lead editorial]. Many leading liberals were less sanguine, as is well known; for Petrunkevich’s expectation of the “revenge of the poor” see Galai, “A Liberal’s Vision,” 112.

104. McReynolds, The News, 224–25, 251–52; Thurston, Liberal City, 189–90, 212; on Novoe vremia see David R. Costello, “Novoe vremia and the Conservative Dilemma, 1911–1914,” Russian Review, vol. 37, no. 1 (1978): 30–50.

105. Gershenzon, “Creative Self-Cognition,” 77–81.

106. Haimson, “Social Stability,” Part 1, 638–39.

107. For accounts of the crisis atmosphere in educated society see Haimson, “Social Stability,” Part 2; Rogger, “Russia in 1914”; and W. Bruce Lincoln, In War’s Dark Shadow: The Russians before the Great War (New York, 1983), 389–99.

108. Few historians have analyzed the strike in any detail; see Haimson, “Social Stability”; Haimson and Petrusha, “Two Strike Waves”; Haimson, “Structural Processes of Change and Changing Patterns of Labor Unrest: The Case of the Metal-Processing Industry in Imperial Russia, 1890–1914,” in Strikes, Wars, and Revolutions in an International Perspective, ed. Leopold Haimson and Charles Tilly (Cambridge, 1989); id., “Labor Unrest in Imperial Russia on the Eve of the First World War: The Roles of Conjunctural Phenomena, Events, and Individual and Collective Actors,” in Strikes, Wars, and Revolutions; G. A. Arutiunov, Rabochee dvizhenie v Rossii v periode novogo revoliutsionnogo pod"ema, 1910–1914 (Moscow, 1975); E. E. Kruze, Peterburgskie rabochie v 1912–1914 godakh (Moscow and Leningrad, 1961). See also Heather Hogan, “Industrial Rationalization and the Roots of Labor Militance in the St. Petersburg Metalworking Industry, 1901–1914,” Russian Review, vol. 42, no. 2 (1983); id., “Scientific Management and the Changing Nature of Work in the St. Petersburg Metalworking Industry, 1900–1914,” in Strikes, Wars, and Revolutions; Robert McKean devotes a chapter to July 1914 in St. Petersburg between Revolutions: Workers and Revolutionaries, June 1907–February 1917 (New Haven, 1990), 297–317; documents on the strike are in Rabochee dvizhenie v Petrograde v gody novogo revoliutsionnogo pod"ema, 1912–1917 gg., ed. I. I. Korablev (Leningrad, 1958); and Proletarskaia revoliutsiia [hereafter PR] 8–9 (1924), which also published numerous memoirs: PR 30 (1924), 44 (1925); on worker radicalization in 1914, see Bonnell, Roots of Rebellion, 390–438.

109. The following account is based on the document sources in n. 108 above and the following newspapers: Peterburgskii listok, Gazeta-kopeika, Rech’, Novoe vremia, and Trudovaia Pravda. There is very little disagreement among the sources over the course of events. Among newspapers, the strike was covered most thoroughly in Peterburgskii listok; PL included both official communiqués and its own correspondents’ reports from around the city. Each newspaper had its own interpretation of the strikers’ violence, which will be discussed below.

110. Since the beginning of the year Petersburg workers had been increasingly restive. On the anniversary of Bloody Sunday 100,000 workers had gone on strike, 250,000 workers struck on May Day, and during the course of the month of May, 476,762 workers engaged in political strikes in the capital. Kruze, Peterburgskie rabochie, 306, 318–20.

111. Quoted in Rogger, “Russia in 1914,” 95.

112. The Bolshevik leaflet explicitly declined to call a general strike (“We still will not now engage in a struggle using Baku’s methods. We will now only support the struggle of our Baku comrades”), calling instead for the one-hour strike (Rabochee dvizhenie, 209–10).

113. Kruze, Peterburgskie rabochie, 307–10; Rabochee dvizhenie, 209–14. On government denials, see Rabochee dvizhenie, 213; PL published the official report in an article by A. Ch., “Den’ krovavykh stolknovenii,” PL, July 5, 1914; and “Za nedeliu,” Rech’, July 7, 1914; “K stolknoveniiu na Putilovskom zavode,” GK, July 5, 1914.

114. Rabochee dvizhenie, 214–15.

115. Figures for the number of strikers vary. Arutiunov, Rabochee dvizhenie v Rossii, 373, compares Okhranka figures with those published in newspapers (social democratic, moderate liberal) and those culled from official reports. The Peterburgskii listok figures fell between the two.

116. Arutiunov, Rabochee dvizheniev Rossii, 365, 371; Rabochee dvizhenie, 231–32.

117. Rabochee dvizhenie, 216; A. Ch., “Den’ krovavykh stolknovenii,” PL, July 5, 1914.

118. Though it seems doubtful, it is hard to know whether the strikers intended their demonstration to coincide with Poincaré’s arrival, but some observers believed the workers purposely sought to disrupt the visit. See Rogger, “Russia in 1914,” 99–101; “Rabochee dvizhenie,” Rech’, July 12, 1914; the Peterburgskii listok analyst believed that it harmed the peace effort, though workers had not intended it; see V. P-v, “Nedelia zabastovok,” PL, July 13, 1914.

119. Strikers did reach Nevskii at its intersection with Ligovskaia, near the Nikolaevskii Station, but this was at the far end of Nevskii, barely considered fashionable and central; “Zabastovki i ulichnyi bezporiadki,” Novoe vremia, July 10, 1914.

120. Haimson, “Structural Processes,” 387–94.

121. Ibid., 397; Haimson and Petrusha, “Two Strike Waves,” 132–33, 144.

122. Haimson, “Labor Unrest,” 507–9.

123. McKean, St. Petersburg, 306; also see 304–5, 315–17.

124. Hogan even mentions that in two earlier strikes workers smashed time clocks and turnstiles (“Industrial Rationalization” 180). Haimson rightly notes that this kind of violence differed significantly from earlier forms of Luddism because the Russian workers were not trying to return to an earlier work process but rather to regain lost autonomy and control over the modern work process (though even here the distinction is a fine one) (“Structural Processes,” 392).

125. Petty violence and vandalism had long been a part of the labor movement in other regions, as Wynn has shown in Workers, Strikes, and Pogroms, his study of the Donbass-Dnepr Bend, but either its role in St. Petersburg was less widespread or it has been underestimated. Research at this point shows that workers used petty violence only on occasion and in isolated instances; see Surh, 1905, 196, 313; and Hogan, “Industrial Rationalization,” 180.

126. V. P-v, “Nedelia zabastovok,” PL, July 13, 1914.

127. E. E. Kruze, Usloviia truda i byta rabochego klassa Rossii v 1900–1914 godakh (Leningrad, 1981), 95–96. The City Duma discussed lowering the fare, which was higher than even the most expensive tram fares in Western Europe. Semen Kanatchikov recalled that he could afford to ride the horse-drawn trolley when he was employed in Moscow as a skilled pattern maker earning more than a ruble and a half per day, but when he lost his job he was forced to tramp the city on foot looking for work. When he first moved to St. Petersburg and found work in the Vyborg quarter but lived in the Nevskii Gates region he was forced to walk the distance of five or so miles each way until he could find a place to live near his job; see Zelnik, A Radical Worker, 76, 86; Bater, St. Petersburg, 271–72, 277, 281–84, 320, 332.

128. Both tsarist police reports and social democrats depicted labor unrest as a battle in the war between the state and its political enemies, the revolutionary parties; see, for example, Rabochee dvizhenie, 211–12.

129. V. P-v, “Nedelia zabastovok,” PL, July 13, 1914.

130. As Haimson noted, Lenin himself feared that the Bolsheviks’ maximalist appeal would unleash popular violence; see Haimson, “Social Stability,” Part 1, 639; and Bonnell, Roots of Revolution, 406.

131. Sosloviia, age, place of origin, length of residence in St. Petersburg, or place of employment are not definitive evidence of skill or radicalism. Even occupation, which rarely appears in documents connected with strikes or demonstrations, is ambiguous, since many occupational categories included skilled and unskilled jobs. Haimson has shown that workers in cities with a high concentration of industry, a high concentration of large plants, and higher average levels of pay had a higher propensity to strike. He also shows that metalworkers in the capital accounted for a vastly disproportionate number of strikers, and metal plants for a disproportionate number of strikes during the 1912–14 period, but none of this is conclusive evidence that the people who threw rocks and wrecked trams were highly skilled, highly paid, or highly politicized, nor does it prove that the workers who sang revolutionary songs were the same workers who flung rocks at policemen, or that the rock throwers were also tram wreckers; see Haimson and Petrusha, “Two Strike Waves,” 113–22.

132. Haimson and Petrusha, “Two Strike Waves,” 113–22.

133. Rabochee dvizhenie, 216–38; A. P-ii, “Zabastovki v stolitse,” PL, July 10, 1914; id., “Zabastovki v stolitse,” PL, July 11, 1914; V. P-v, “Nedelia zabastovok,” PL, July 13, 1914; “Zabastovki i ulichnye bezporiadki,” NV, July 10, 1914.

134. It is not entirely clear that liberal sympathy for the workers’ cause was all that advantageous to workers, but Marxists considered it necessary at this historical stage.

135. Rech’, July 12, 1914 [lead editorial].

136. “Rabochee dvizhenie,” Rech’, July 12, 1914.

137. Novoe vremia viewed hooliganism as the result of government incompetence and neglect even before the 1914 violence; see Costello, “Novoe vremia,” 46–47.

138. “V tine revoliutsionnogo khuliganstva,” NV, July 11, 1914.

139. Ibid.

140. Ibid.; my emphasis.

141. A. Ch., “Den’ krovavykh stolknovenii,” PL, July 5, 1914; id., “Zabastovka rabochikh,” PL, July 6, 1914.

142. A. P-ii, “Zabastovki v stolitse,” PL, July 10, 1914.

143. “Zabastovki v stolitse,” PL, July 8, 1914; A. P-ii, “Zabastovki v stolitse,” PL, July 10, 1914, July 11, 1914, and July 13, 1914.

144. “Deviatoe ianvaria v Peterburge,” PL, January 10, 1914.

145. For example, “Vcherashnye zabastovki rabochikh,” PL, March 14, 1914.

146. V. P-v, “Nedelia zabastovok,” PL, July 13, 1914.

147. “Kul’turnaia bor’ba s zabastovkami (voprosy vnutrennei zhizni),” Niva, May 3, 1914.

148. On Blok, the development of his social ideas, and some of the responses to these ideas, see Avril Pyman, The Life of Aleksandr Blok, 2 vols. (Oxford, 1979).

149. “Stikhiia i kul’tura,” Sobranie sochinenii v shesti tomakh, vol. 4 (Leningrad, 1982), 123. Blok’s source for the song was Nikolai Kliuev, the “peasant-poet,” with whom he carried on an extended and at times rancorous correspondence. The song clearly mixes two genres: the first eight lines are typical of hooligan chastushki, recorded in European Russia in the early twentieth century, while the last four lines more closely resemble much older songs associated with Siberian exile, prison, and hard labor, whose roots are in rural folk tale and song; see N. M. Iadrintsev, Russkaia obshchina v tiur’me i ssylke (St. Petersburg, 1872), 86–123; Maksimov, Sibir’ i katorga, 331–75; K. M. Azadovskii, “Olonetskaia derevnia posle pervoi russkoi revoliutsii (stat’ia N. A. Kliueva ‘S rodnogo berega’),” Russkii fol’klor 15 (1975): 199–209.