1 Ivanov-Razumnik, , Istorija russkoj obshchestvennoj mysl', 2nd ed. (St. Petersburg,19o8), II, 335 Google Scholar. The present author agrees in a general way with this statement but would urge that, in calling the eighties an “ideological void,” Ivanov-Razumnik goes somewhat too far.

2 A popular and influential pamphlet of 1894 argued that the time had come for agitation among the workers, looking to the creation of a mass movement. Ob agitacii (Geneva, 1896). The pamphlet, originally circulated in hectographed copies, was written by a certain Kremer and edited by Martov.

3 For background on the formation of the “Emancipation of Labor” Group, see my article, “Plekhanov and the Origins of Russian Marxism,” Russian Review, XIII (January, 1954).

4 See Ivanov-Razumnik, , op. cit., pp. 291–333 Google Scholar for a brilliant account of the mood of “society” in the eighties.

5 Deutsch, L., “Kak Plekhanov stal marksistom,” Proletarskaja revoljucija, No. 7(1922), pp. 97-101 Google Scholar.

6 Deutsch, L., “Pervye shagi gruppy ‘Osvobozhdenie truda,'” Gruppa “Osvobozhdenie truda,” (Moscow, 1924-28)Google Scholar, I, 11. Even several years later, a writer said of the Group that it was “conscientiously translated from the German.” Dobrovol'skij in Samoupravlenie, cited by Plekhanov in “Bibliograficheskie zametki,” Sochinenija, 2nd ed. (Moscow-Leningrad, 1923-27), IV, 277.

7 Deutsch-Akselrod, July 3, 1883, Gruppa “Osvobozhdenie truda,” I, 169-70.

8 Plekhanov, “Ob izdanii ‘Biblioteki sovremennogo socializma,'” Sochinenija, II, 21.

9 For the fortunes of the members of the Group in this period see, M. Kamenskaja,“Zhizn G. V. Plekhanova v konce 80 gg.,” Gruppa “Osvobozhdenie truda,” III; Zasulich-Kravchinskij, October 8, 1888, ibid., I, 200-201

10 Plekhanov-Akselrod, , March 4, 1889, Perepiska G. V. Plekhanova i P. B. Akselroda (Moscow, 1925), I, 57 Google Scholar. This volume will be cited hereinafter as Perepiska, I.

11 A short account of Ignatov's life and his role in the affairs of the Group is to be found in L. Deutsch, “V. I. Ignatov,” Proletarskaja revoljucija, No. 9 (1923).

12 The details of Deutsch's arrest, extradition and Siberian experience are told in his memoir Sixteen Years in Siberia, trans. Helen Chisholm (London, 1903). See also Tarle, E., “Vydacha Deich,” Byloe, No. 13 (1917).Google Scholar

13 Akselrod, P. B., “Gruppa ‘Osvobozhdenie truda,'” Letopisi Marksizma,No. 6('1928), 97 Google Scholar.

14 Stepniak and Lavrov were invited to join the Group at different times but both refused. Deutsch, ”Pervye shagi gruppy ’Osvobozhdenie truda,’ “ op. cit., pp. 12, 37; Akselrod-Lavrov, , August 16, 1888, Iz arkhiva P. B. Akselroda (Berlin, 1924), pp. 34–35 Google Scholar. Deutsch claims that a woman named Voinarovskaja, later a prominent Polish social democrat, was admitted to the Group after his arrest. “Pervye shagi gruppy ‘Osvobozhdenie truda,'” op. cit., p. 38. The present author has found no independent evidence of this. A student named Ingerman was taken into the Group in 1888. Not long afterward, he emigrated to the United States, where he organized among the Russian colony a number of social-democratic circles which extended significant financial aid to the Group. Akselrod, “Gruppa ‘Osvobozhdenie truda,'” op. cit., p. 104. Also, Plekhanov- Akselrod, December 18, 1888, Perepiska, I, 51.

15 M Akselrod-Plekhanov, End of 1887, ibid., 27; Akselrod-Zasulich, , February, 1888, Literaturnoe nasledie G. V. Plekhanova (Moscow, 1934-40), I, 236-37.Google Scholar

16 Ingerman letter, 1929, ibid., 251.

17 The attitude of the Group members on this question bears a certain similarity to that later taken by Lenin with respect to the party. But there is ample evidence that Plekhanov and his friends did not intend to carry over the principle of an elite leadership either to the future Social-Democratic Party or to the socialist society.

18 Criticisms of Plekhanov's polemical methods were made by, among others, Deutsch, in his letter to Akselrod, December, 1890, Gruppa “Osvobozhdenie truda”, II, 259; Mokrievich in letter to Zasulich, May, 1885, ibid., IV, 235; Lavrov in letter to Akselrod, September 17, 1888, Iz arkhiva Akselroda, p. 40; Sleptsova, cited in Perepiska, I, 29

19 Ts.Gurevich-Martynovskaja, “Znakomstvo s G. V. Plekhanovym i Zasulich, V. I.,” Gruppa “Osvobozhdenie truda”, II, 163 Google Scholar.

20 Lavrov, P. L., “Socializm i politicheskaja bor'ba,” Vestnik Narodnoj voli,No. 2 (1884), 65–66.Google Scholar

21 Redakcija “Vestnika Narodnoj voli”—Peterburgskaja narodovol'cheskaja rabochaja gruppa, February 20, 1885, Gruppa “Osvobozhdenie truda” v Period 1883-1894 gg. ed. Nevskij, V. I., Istoriko-revoljucionnyj sbornik, II (Leningrad, 1924), 185 Google Scholar. This work is cited hereinafter as Istoriko-revoljucionnyj sbornik, II.

22 Cited in “Bibliografija,” Katorga i ssylka, No. 10 (1933), 134, 136-37. Comments of other publications and groups are also cited here.

23 This group had published, with favorable comment, a letter of Akselrod to revolutionists in Russia, stating the case for the views of the Group and requesting aid. The letter and remarks upon it appear in Gruppa “Osvobozhdenie truda”, II, 87-102.

24 Akselrod, , “Gruppa ‘Osvobozhdenie truda’ ”, op. cit., p.90 Google Scholar.

25 There is evidence that the tsarist secret police also viewed the matter in this light. A police agent suggested to his superiors that a social-democratic group taking shape in Kharkov be permitted to develop, in order to facilitate the campaign of the police against the Narodovol'ci. Rachkovskij in Istoriko-revoljucionnyj sbornik, II, 186.

26 Engels, F., Fridrikh Engel's o Rossii (Geneva, 1894)Google Scholar. This is a later edition of the work originally published in 1875.

27 Engels-Zasulich, , April, 1885, Gruppa “Osvobozhdenie truda”, III, 26–27 Google Scholar. See also the extremely interesting letter on Engels’ views by Lopatin, a Russian revolutionist and an intimate of his, written on September 20, 1883. Parts of the letter are reproduced in “Narodnaja volja” v dokumentakh i vospominanijakh (Moscow, 1930), pp. 245-46.

28 Plekhanov, , “Doklad rabochemu socialisticheskomu kongressu v Brjussele v 1891 g.,” Sochinenija, IX, 343 Google Scholar. See also Akselrod-Bemstein, October 20, 1892, Perepiska,I, 244.

29 The Group was represented at the founding congress of the Second International in 1889, where Plekhanov made a brief but important address. See “Rech’ na mezhdunarodnom rabochem kongresse v Parizhe,”Sochinenija, IV. The Group had no representative at the Brussels Congress in 1891 but sent a report on the Russian situation. At the Zurich Congress in 1893, Plekhanov played a prominent role in the debate on socialistintactics in the fight for peace. The report of 1891 and the speech of 1893 are respectively to be found in Sochinenija, IX, IV.

30 Liebknecht-Plekhanov, , December 16, 1893, Literaturnoe nasledie Plekhanova, I, 279 Google Scholar.

31 Fisher-Plekhanov, R., January 13, 1894, ibid., IV, 270 Google Scholar.

32 This is the work cited in footnote 27.

33 An example of the type of epistle sent is Deutsch's letter, evidently of late 1883, in Literaturnoe nasledie Plekhanova, I, 225-29.

34 Deutsch, , “Pervye shagi gruppy ‘Osvobozhdenie truda,’ ” op. cit., p. 19 Google Scholar.

35 A letter by Akselrod giving a brief statement of the views of the Group was hectographed and distributed by this Moscow unit. See, Akselrod, P. B., “O zadachakh nauchno-socialisticheskikh literatury,” Gruppa “Osvobozhdenie truda”, II, 88-102 Google Scholar.

36 “For material on this group and its relation to “Emancipation of Labor,” see Sergievskij, N. L., Partija russkikh social-demokratov. Gruppa Blagoeva(Moscow-Leningrad, 1929)Google Scholar; “Gruppa ‘Osvobozhdenie truda’ i Marksistkie kruzhki,” Istoriko-revoljucionnyj sbornik, II. These works should be used with caution. Also D. Blagoev, “Kratkie vospominanija iz moei zhizni,” Proletarskaja revoljucija, No. 8, 1928; N. L. Sergievskij, “Kogda i po kakomu povodu byl napisan Plekhanovym ‘Proekt programmy russkikh social-demokratov,’ ” Proletarskaja revoljucija, No. 1, 1928; B. N-skij, “K istoriju 'Partii russkikh social-demokratov’ v 1884-1886,” Katorga i ssylka, No. 5 (1929); “Programma pervogo v Rossii S. D. Kruzhka,” Byloe, No. 13 (1918).

37 Blagoevci-Gruppa “Osvobozhdenie truda,” (End of 1884), ibid. pp. 49, 51-52; See also Blagoevci-Gruppa, “Osvobozhdenie truda,” (n.d.), Gruppa “Osvobozhdenie truda”, VI, 130-33Google Scholar.

38 The paper was called Rabochij. The Group members contributed to its second number, which was also the last. Plekhanov's article, “Sovremennye zadachi russkikh rabochikh,” is found in Sochinenija, II.

39 The latter is the program which, in Sochinenija, II, is described as that of 1887. Sergievskij proves beyond much doubt that this program was worked out in conjunction with the Blagoevci in 1885. See his “Kak i po kakomu povodu byl napisan Plekhanovym 'Programmy russkikh social-demokratov,” op. cit. The two programs are printed in Sochinenija, II.

40 Fragments of a long letter from Akselrod to an Odessa group, designed to win support for “Emancipation of Labor” appear in Iz arkhiva Akselroda, pp. 231-35. A social-democratic organization called the Tochiiskij Circle, formed after the smashing of the Blagoevci and itself wiped out in 1888, was unknown to the Group until the latter received a letter in 1891, giving a list of the members who had fallen into the clutches of the police. See Literaturnoe nasledie Plekhanova, I, 255-56. Further information on this circle may be examined in V. Nevskij, I., Ocherki po istorii rossisskoj kommunisticheskoj partii (Petrograd, 1923), I, 237-42,Google Scholar.

41 Akselrod-S. D., Kruzhok v Varshave, May 19, 1893, Iz arkhiva P. B. Akselroda, p. 239 Google Scholar.

42 There is a good deal of material on this group in Ot gruppa Blagoeva k sojuzbor'by, ed. Ol'minskij (1921). See also the account of Brusnev, “Voznikovenie pervykh social-demokraticheskikh organizacii,” Proletarskaja revoljucija, No. 2 (1923).

43 Ibid., p. 31; notes in Perepiska, I, 72-73.

44 Ibid., p. 73.

45 Martov, Ju., Zapiski social-demokrata (Berlin, 1922), p.161 Google Scholar. They also received a mandate from Russians in the United States. Akselrod-Plekhanov, Early 1893, Perepiska, I, 84.

46 Deutsch, , “Pervye shagi gruppy ‘Osvobozhdenie truda,'’” op. cit., pp. 27–32 Google Scholar.

47 Ermanskij, O., Iz perezhitogo (Moscow-Leningrad, 1927), p. 33 Google Scholar. The Group was attacked for its failure to establish a suitable transport route for illegal literature to Kussia.

48 Sleptsova, , cited in Perepiska, I,29 Google Scholar.

49 Ermanskij, , op. cit., p.33 Google Scholar.

50 Otvet redakcii “Rabochego dela” na pis'mo P. Akselroda i Vademecum G. Plekhanova (Geneva, 1900), pp. 72-73.

51 For a description and discussion of Plekhanov's analysis of certain key Narodnik ideas, see my article, “Plekhanov on Russian Capitalism and the Peasant Commune, 1883-1885,” American Slavic and East European Review, XII (December, 1953).

52 This was signalled by the appearance of such journals as Samoupravlenie (1887) and Svobodnaja Rossija (1889) which urged that socialist agitation be set aside so that all opposition forces might join hands with “society” for an assault on autocracy that would win political freedom.

53 Plekhanov-Akselrod, , Beginning of 1888, Perepiska, I, 34 Google Scholar. Akselrod-Lavrov, August 16, 1888, Iz arkhiva Akselroda, p. 34; Plekhanov-Akselrod, March, 1889, Perepiska, I, 60. Lavrov too felt the gravity of the situation in 1889. Lavrov-S. Ginsburg, March 18, 1889, Katorga i ssylka, No. 2 (1928), 45; and thus the two groups were able to cooperate for a time in 1889.

54 See, for example, Kareev, N., “Novaja popytka ekonomicheskogo obosnovanija istorii,” Russkoe bogatstvo, No. 1 (1894)Google Scholar; N. K. Mikhailovskij, “Literature i zhizn,“ Russkaja mysl', No. 6 (1892) and “Literatura i zhizn,” Russkoe bogatsvo, No. 1 (1894).

55 The result was his famous work published legally in Russia in 1895, K voprosu o razvitii monisticheskogo vzgljada na istoriju. This is reproduced in Sochinenija, VII.

56 Taking into account some of the considerations mentioned below, a Soviet writer N. L. Sergievskij, has argued that the “Emancipation of Labor” Group had almost nothing to do with the development of the Marxian movement in Russia. He contended that the social-democratic movement grew up on Russian soil, independently of the emigre Marxists, and that it was physically and ideologically a continuation of narod See his Partija russkikh social-demokratov and “Gruppa ‘Osvobozhdenie truda’ i marksistkie kruzhki,” Istoriko-revoljucionnyj sbornik, II.

57 Ibid., pp. 116-17 and passim.

58 Ibid., p. 185.

59 Akselrod-Ortodoks, L., “Iz moikh vospominanii,” Katorga i ssylka, No. 2 (1930), 30–32 Google Scholar.

60 For an account of this group, see Aleksandrov-(Ol'minskij), M. C., “ ‘Gruppa Narodovol'cev' (1891-1894),” Byloe,No. 11 (1906).Google Scholar

61 Istoriho-revoljucionny j sbornik, II, 189-90.

62 Ibid., p. 189.

63 Report of police agent, March 1885, ibid., p. 186; S. Ginsburg, a portion of whose letter describing the situation to Lavrov is cited in P. L. Lavrov, “Vospominanija Ginsburg, S. M.,” Golos minuvshego, Nos. 7-8 (1917), 230-31Google Scholar.

64 Excerpts from the program appear in Poljakov, A. S., “Vtoroe 1 marta,” ibid., Nos. 10-12 (1918), 246-49Google Scholar.

65 Akselrod-Plekhanov, , Fall of 1887, Perepiska, I, 27; Plekhanov-Akselrod, June 29, 1888, ibid., p.44 Google Scholar. Still another approach led to collaboration in the journal Socialist.

66 Plekhanov-Akselrod, , March, 1889, Perepiska, I,59 Google Scholar.

67 This Rabochij sbornik is reproduced in Krasnaja letopis', No. 4 (1922).

68 Aleksandrov, , “'Gruppa Narodovol'cev’ (1891-1894),” op. cit., p.13 Google Scholar.

69 Blagoeva-Gruppa, Gruppa “Osvobozhdenie truda,” June 10, 1885, Gruppa “Osvoboihdenie truda”, VI, 131–32Google Scholar.

70 Fedorchenko, L., “Pervye shagi Social-demokratii v Kieve,” Katorga i ssylka, No. 7 (1926), 24.Google Scholar

71 Wolfe, B . D., Three Who Made a Revolution (New York, 1948), p. 119 Google Scholar. The Group was so informed soon after the publication of the work. Zasulich-Engels, January, 1895. Perepiska Marksa i Engel'sa s russkimi politicheskimi dejateljami (1947), p. 277. The pseudonym Bel'tov was given as the name of the author of the book.

72 Plekhanov, , “O social'noj demokratii v Rossii,” Sochinenija, IX, 24 Google Scholar.

73 Cited by Akselrod-Ortodoks, L., Etjudy i vospominanija (Leningrad, 1925), p.9 Google Scholar.

74 Cited in Kol'tsov, “Konec ‘Narodnoj voli’ i nachalo social-demokratii,” in Thun, A., Istorija revoljucionnykh dvizhenii v Rossii, 2nd ed. (Petrograd, 1920), p. 256 Google Scholar.

75 Cited in Nevskij, Istorija rossiskoj kommunisticheskoj partii, p. 272.

76 Akselrod-Bernstein, October, 1892, Perepiska, I, 243; Ol'minskij, Ot gruppa Blagoeva k sojuzu bor'by, pp. 74-75; Takhterev, Ocherk Peterburgskogo rabochego dvizhenija po-x godov (London, 1902), pp. 5-7; “Vyderzhki iz pokazanii Kuznetzova, A. A.,“Istoriko-revoljucionnyj sbornik, II, 245 Google Scholar; V. B., “Vospominanija Peterburzhca o vtoroj polovine 80-x godov,” Minuvshie gody, No. 10 (1908), 176.

77 Ol'minskij, , op. cit., pp. 74–75 Google Scholar; Takhterev, op. cit., pp. 5-6; Brusnev, “Voznikovenie pervykh social-demokraticheskikh organizacii,” op. cit., p. 19.