Chapter 7.2: The 19th Century; 7.2.1: The abolishment of serfdom. Countryside

The abolishment of serfdom in Estonia was not something that happened overnight, but rather a gradual process that lasted for several decades. Baltic-German landowners were in two camps when it came to peasant rights. The more liberal side believed that the abolishment of serfdom was inevitable and wanted to reform country life radically, wishing to improve the well-being of the peasants. According to them, the reason behind the poor state of the peasants was the fact that the peasants did care about property or their work as they could be kicked out at any time and did not own the fruits of their labour. The conservative side did not support fast changes and were afraid of losing control over the peasants. According to them, Estonians were born to be slaves and freedom for them would only cause chaos. It was believed that a money based rental system like in Britain could not work in Estonia, as the peasants here were too primitive to keep track of their income and expenses. In the end the conservatives also supported the abolishment of serfdom, whilst also trying to retain the socio-economic relations as much as possible, the consequences of which I will cover soon.

In 1802 in the governorate of Estonia declared that peasants had the right to own property, as long as they managed their farm sustainably, which was similar to the 1765 law in Livonia. The 1804 law, which was meant for both the gouvernates of Estonia and Livonia, determined clear duties that the farms had to perform for the manor. The latter did decrease the amount of tribute peasants generally had to provide, but in several manors increased the number of days they had to work on the manor field. The new laws caused lots of confusion amongst the peasantry, as many believed that the emperor had decreased the duties even further or even cancelled them completely, but the landowners were keeping it secret for their own gain. In 1804-1805 there was upheaval in several places, as some peasants declined to work for the manor, especially for the threshing of grain, which took place at night. In some areas soldiers had to be brought in to force the peasants back to work, but even that did not always have the intended effect. In 1805 there was a conflict between peasants and soldiers in Kose-Uuemõisa, where 9 peasants and 2 officers lost their lives.

Until 1810 the Baltic-Germans discussed how to improve the situation of the peasants within the system of serfdom. As the central government in St. Petersburg put some pressure on the nobles, the Baltic-Germans decided to shift their focus on abolishing serfdom, but on favourable conditions for themselves. In 1811, they presented a draft of main principles for the reform to the Emperor, but Napoleon´s venture to Russia in 1812 put it on hold. After the end of the Napeopleonic Wars, the work resumed and new laws came out in 1816 in the governorate of Estonia and in 1819 in Livonia.

The laws did not abolish serfdom immediately however, but instead opted for a 14 year long step by step process of abolishing it.

The new laws gave personal freedom to the peasants, they no longer belonged to the landlord and could no longer be bought, sold or pawned. However, they were released without any land, so they were forced to rent the land from the manor. The main form of paying rent was nothing new, they still had to work for the manor like before. There were no limits to what or how much the manor could demand for rent. It was illegal for peasants to move outside of the borders of their local community, which was controlled by the local manor, without the permission of the manor that is. This meant that peasants could not pick their landlords and had no other option other than to accept whatever work norms they had to put up with.

Peasants were given surnames (by the manor lords) for the first time. Before they just went by the name of the farm. For example, if the farm was called Tamme talu or Oak farm, then they would be known as Tamme Jaan or Jaan of Oak. This tradition still continued in everyday life for some time, but officially Tamme Jaan became Jaan Tamm. In most cases, the surname did come from the name of the farm. However, sometimes the name was given after some animal or bird, and in rare cases even after some bad concepts, like being called Dog, Lazy, Fat and so on. Many families got German surnames.

The laws concerning the peasantry from the beginning of the 19th century had another effect as well, they established some communal institutions for the peasants. As a result, the local communities were no longer merely ruled by the manor, but both the manor and the peasants. One of these institutions were communal courts (vallakohus), which were manned by prominent members of the village community. These were in charge of dealing with careless workers and salary questions of paid workers on the farm, as well as taking care of orphans. In addition, they had to make sure that the community had ample supplies of grain in case of crop failure.


A building for housing the communal grain or magasiait. Located in the Karilatsi Open Air museum.

With the abolishment of serfdom, the tasks of the communal courts were expanded. They had to deal with civilian court cases between peasants, regulate different economic questions within the community and provide welfare. This remained the case until 1866, when the local communities or vallad received their own councils and government. Courts only retained court functions, all other tasks were delegated to the new institutions.

The abolishment of serfdom did not improve the situation of the peasants, as they only became free de jure, not de facto. Instead, the situation worsened, as peasants started to now rack up debt to the manor as they struggled with fulfilling the obligations set in the rent contracts. If they fell too much in debt, or if the manor owner decided so, the peasants were kicked out of the farm. In some cases they were given a smaller farm, in other cases they had to settle with living in the sauna of their neighbours.

The dissatisfaction amongst peasants increased over time. The 1830s and 1840s were especially bad in agriculture, as there were several crop failures. In the spring of 1845, the Russian Orthodox bishop of Riga Filaret declared (lied) that all converts to Russian Orthodoxy would be given free land and become free of manor slavery. The peasants believed that if they exchanged the Lutheran faith of the nobles for the Orthodox faith of the Emperor, they would be ruled directly by the emperor, not the nobles. Although the state did say that this was false, they did not take any steps to stop people from converting, as it was something that was seen as desirable. In 1842 the teaching of Estonian to Orthodox priests began and in the meantime orthodox texts were translated into Estonian. As a result, there was a large wave of conversions between 1845 and 1848, where around 65 000 people in Southern Estonia became orthodox. This was about 15% of the peasant population. The conversion attempts in Northern Estonia were stopped by the religious authorities there to not allow conversions which were not based on sincere changes in faith but rather an experiment to gain materially.

The movement faltered as peasants realised that converting was pointless. Instead, the converts faced repercussions from the protestant Baltic-German nobles. As a result, the vast majority of new converts would soon reconvert to Lutheranism and newly built Orthodox churches would be abandoned. However, some pockets of Orthodoxy, like the island of Kihnu, survived.



Saint Nicholas church on Kihnu. Built as a Lutheran church in 1784, it was one of the few Lutheran churches that was converted to an Orthodox one in 1847.

The upheavals of the 1840s, including the wave of conversions, made it clear that further reforms had to be made. New sets of laws regulating the lives of peasants came out in 1849 in Livonia and 1856 in Estonia.

These would clearly separate manor land from farm land, leaving farm land for peasants for indefinite use. However they also allowed manors to annex about 20% of the land already used by the farms for the manors, the last such conversion of farm land to manor land.

More importantly, the new laws also gave much better opportunities for the peasants to opt for money based rent. As a result, the free labour that manors had used for centuries disappeared and they had to start paying salaries to the peasants. What helped this was the widespread opinion that people working for money are more efficient than when being forced to work. In addition, the new laws gave the peasants the opportunity to buy land.

The new laws were still a disappointment for many, as they hoped for the complete and immediate abolishment of work based rent. Many misunderstood the law, and believed that there were at least some reductions to the work they had to do, which was false. This caused further rebellions, the most famous of which was the so called Mahtra war, where about 800 local peasants attacked a military unit tasked with punishing some peasants that had refused to work on the manor fields. One officer and seven peasants were killed, and many were wounded.


Mahtra war, Evald Okas, 1958.

The main law enforcement in the countryside had been the so-called manor police. Both the manor and the court were allowed to punish peasants, there had been no real limits to the punishment. The new regulations made it clear that the peasants could only receive up to 18 lashes in the manor, 15 for women and minors. Courts could punish people by up to 50 lashes. In 1865, manor police was abolished, manors were no longer able to deal justice. Physical punishments were also banned for farm owners, punishing servants in such a way continued to be allowed.

The first few farms were bought by peasants already in the 1820s and 1830s, but during that time it was very rare. As the effects of the new laws kicked in in the 1850s, buying out their farms from the manor became more and more common. In Livonia, this was aided by the opportunity to take a loan for this purpose. By the mid 1880s, about two thirds of all farms in Livonia were owned by the peasants, in the county of Viljandi it was 80%. In the governorate of Estonia, the progress was much slower. The peasants there were generally poorer, they had started to use money rent later and they were also not able to take loans. As a result, only a few hundred farms had been sold in North Estonia by the early 1870s. Buying out farms in the North only became common in the 1880s. It was even slower on Saaremaa, when buying farms became common after the revolution of 1905.

Peasants started to finally own their own land and all the buildings and resources on it. This gave a sense of ownership and independence to the peasants. They became more industrious and productive, as they knew that all of their work was for their own good and for the good of their children. They became independent small farmers, masters of their own destiny. Farming became a profession. This increased the national self-awareness of Estonians, increased their demands of political rights and was fundamental to the national awakening.

Manors did retain some old privileges however. Farmers were not able to establish inns or produce vodka or beer for sale. Neither were they allowed to build mills on their land or hunt. When the farms were bought out, the deals almost never included forested areas.