Eng Cn Translate this page:
Please select your language to translate the article


You can just close the window to don't translate
Library
Your profile

Back to contents

Historical informatics
Reference:

Incomes of scientists in the USSR in the 1920s (Based on materials from the budget survey of 1925)

Mazur Liudmila Nikolaevna

ORCID: 0000-0003-0407-3816

Doctor of History

Professor, Document Studies, Archival Studies and State Administration History Department, Ural Federal University after the First Russian President B.N. Eltsin; Leading Research Fellow, Russian State University for the Humanities

620000, Russia, Sverdlovsk region, Yekaterinburg, Turgenev str., 4, office 482

lmaz@mail.ru
Other publications by this author
 

 

DOI:

10.7256/2585-7797.2023.3.43744

EDN:

XRBBJI

Received:

09-08-2023


Published:

12-10-2023


Abstract: The article examines the structure of income and the level of material well-being of scientists in 1925. The source base of the study is represented by the primary materials of the budget survey, which covered 16 cities of the USSR, including Moscow, Leningrad, Voronezh, Krasnodar, Novocherkassk, Perm, Rostov, etc. Total 282 forms of budgets of scientific workers university professors, academic and museum workers, librarians, etc. have been preserved in the archive. The information from the budget form makes it possible to characterize various aspects of the life of scientists under the NEP, including income and consumption. The information from the survey forms was systematized in a database and became the basis for studying the standard of living of various categories of scientists depending on their status and place of residence (capital/province). Budgetary data allow us to conclude that the position of scientists has noticeably worsened in comparison with the pre-revolutionary period. This manifested itself, firstly, in an increase in the workload due to the growth of labor standards at the main place of work and the spread of part-time jobs (more than half of the surveyed worked additionally in 1-2 places, had a private practice and other sources of income); secondly, in a noticeable decrease in the income level of the bulk of scientific workers who were not included in the "special" lists. The average monthly salary of a scientist at the main place of work is characterized by a high level of variability and was higher than the average salary of a worker in Moscow. High variability testifies to the processes of differentiation of scientists in terms of income, which depended on the status characteristics of a scientist, his activity, creating prerequisites for the selection of elite categories of scientists, in the 1930s. formed into a hierarchical system of teaching staff with an appropriate set of privileges.


Keywords:

budget surveys, researcher, family budget, income, expenses, consumption model, new economic policy, USSR, scientist's family, database

This article is automatically translated. You can find original text of the article here.

Introduction

The formation of Soviet science took place in difficult conditions. During the revolution and the Civil War, many scientists migrated abroad, and the rest were on the verge of survival. This is evidenced by the surviving diary entries. So, for example, in the diary of the historian A.V. Oreshnikov we read [https://corpus.prozhito.org/person/213 ]:

November 30 (November 17) 1918

"In the morning I went to the office of S.V. Prokhorov, where I was told that he was being evicted from his apartment in 3 days! After 3 hours from the Museum I went to his apartment, where I was shocked by the picture: the whole family, including his daughter and her husband, are packing their belongings! Poor us all! Any inviolability of the person, property does not exist. S.V. with great composure gave me coffee, even drank with him a glass of vodka with caviar and white bread (sic!)!! Tears choked me. When will all these horrors stop? Izvestia publishes other horrors: Generals Ruzsky, Radko-Dmitriev, former ministers Rukhlov and Dobrovolsky were shot... it's scary to write it down. No one can vouch for his life. Hunger makes you feel. There are no provisions. There was a food-related meeting at the Museum; will our initiatives succeed? There is no firewood either, I'm heating it with boards. I read in the calendar: "To win, what do you need? Courage, more courage and constant courage." No one has this courage, the Russian people have fallen so low. The only consolation: hope. In the evening I had fun: I corrected the note "The relationship of Mithridates Eupator to Olvia according to numismatics"."

In 1919, some steps were taken to improve the financial situation of scientists, in particular, academic rations were introduced. And since 1921, thanks to the Central Commission for the Improvement of the Life of Scientists (TSEKUBU), the issues of providing scientists with housing, food and basic necessities began to be resolved. How have these events affected the standard of living of researchers?

To reconstruct the living conditions, including the structure of income and consumption of scientists, the materials of the budget survey of 1925, conducted by the CSU together with the Section of scientists, allow.

Sources and methods

The study of budget statistics has a fairly rich tradition. First of all, peasant budgets came to the attention of researchers. They were studied by M. N. Chernomorsky, Yu. P. Bokarev, N. G. Minyailo, V. A. Pozhda, N. L. Rogalina, V. M. Selunskaya, V. P. Pushkov and others [1-2], laying the foundations of the historiography of budget statistics. A qualitatively new stage in the historiography of the study of budgets occurred in the 1990s, when, thanks to the microcomputer revolution and the penetration of computer technology into the laboratory of historians, works based on the analysis of the budgets of workers and peasants using database technology appeared.

As a result, there are two approaches to the analysis of budget survey materials in historical science: 1) study of the data of primary forms using database technologies and methods of mathematical and statistical processing of budget information [3-5]; 2) study of aggregated indicators contained in statistical forms and analytical notes [6-9]. In this case, the historian is dealing with "ready-made" indicators obtained by statistical agencies taking into account the program for the development of budget information, which inevitably limits the range of tasks to be solved that do not go beyond the program of statistical analysis, narrowing the information potential of the source.

The budget survey of scientific workers in 1925 is in some sense unique both in terms of the object of research and in terms of the completeness of the materials preserved in the archive. The initiator of the budget survey was TSEKUBU, pursuing the objective of an objective assessment of the living and working conditions of researchers. The complex of primary survey documents of 300 families was preserved in the GARF and served as the basis for compiling a database and reconstructing the lifestyle of Soviet scientists [GARF. F.R- 5462. Op. 7. D. 397-412].

Today it is difficult to judge the principles of sampling and territorial distribution of families. According to Table. 1 it can be seen that the sample included a family who lived in the capital cities scientific centers (Moscow and Leningrad) and made up 1/3 of the entire sample; as well as in the cities old university centers (Kharkov, Tomsk, Kazan, Novocherkassk) and new Soviet university cities (Voronezh, Krasnodar, Perm, Rostov, Simferopol).

As a result of the repair, we get an array of 282 budgets, in which 178 families of scientists living in different cities of the RSFSR are represented this is the most representative array; 75 budgets belong to the cities of the Ukrainian SSR (Kiev, Odessa, Kharkov); and 29 budgets belong to other union republics Azerbaijan (8), Belarus (11) Uzbekistan (10). It makes sense to study the last three sets of budgets of the capital cities of the Union republics together, since the processes of formation of national scientific centers took place in the context of political decisions of the Soviet government. Higher educational institutions were opened here in the first years of Soviet power, including the Central Asian State University (1918), the Azerbaijan State University (1921); the Belarusian State University (1921). To conduct the survey, the families of researchers employed at universities and scientific institutions, including large museums, libraries, and observatories, were selected by their main place of work.

Table 1.

Territorial structure of the information array of the budget survey of scientists of the USSR 1925*

City

Number of families surveyed

Specific gravity in %

RSFSR

Voronezh

9

3,0

Vladimir (rural settlements)

13

4,3

Kazan

19

6,3

Kyzyl-Orda

1

0,3

Krasnodar

11

3,7

Leningrad

54

18,0

Moscow

36

12,0

Novocherkassk

5

1,7

Perm

10

3,3

Murom

4

1,3

Rostov-on-Don

10

3,3

Simferopol

12

4,0

Tomsk

12

4,0

Total

196

65,3

Ukrainian SSR

Kyiv

31

10,3

Odessa

17

5,7

Kharkov

27

9,0

Total

75

25,0

Union Republics

Baku (Azerbaijan SSR)

8

2,7

Minsk (Byelorussian SSR)

11

3,7

Tashkent (Uzbek SSR)

10

3,3

Total

300

100,0

Compiled by: State Archive of the Russian Federation (GARF). F.R- 5462. Op. 7. D. 397-412.

During the survey , several forms were filled out for each household: 1) the main form "Budget Survey" is the most informative document, with a volume of 12 A4 pages; 2) form 1 "Composition of monetary and inkind receipts and expenditures of the budget month", accumulating information of the main form; 3) nutrition sheet; 4) agricultural form; 5) time budget; 6) income and expenditure records designed to record daily income and expenses both in kind and in monetary terms. All forms, with the exception of income and expense records, were filled in by registrars by interviewing family members. In general, the information of the main questionnaire form allows us to reconstruct the conditions and standard of living of the family of a researcher and analyze the factors affecting the size of income and consumption.

To study the everyday life of scientists, a mixed strategy was chosen a problem-oriented database was designed, in the structure of which several objects were reflected a scientist, a family, housing, the budget itself (income and expenses). The main source for filling out the database was the questionnaire form "Budget Survey". Filling in the fields was carried out as indicated in the document, i.e. in a source-oriented mode.

The database structure contains several information blocks:

- identification fields (number in order; budget number; city 3 fields);

- head of the family (gender, main and additional place of work, length of service, profession, education, educational institution, nationality, marital status, age 12 fields);

family (number of family members, demographic type of family, number of minor children; number of dependents; availability of servants 6 fields);

farm (field or garden) 2 fields;

monetary income of the family (total received from the main source of income; tariff category; other sources; natural income 9 fields);

premises and expenses for it (type of household, type of premises, characteristics of housing (individual/communal/dormitory), number of rooms, living area, area for 1 family member, heating, stove, water supply, sewerage, bathroom, lighting, cost of premises, onetime expenses for premises, fuel costs - 16 fields);

balance of cash income and expenses (receipts during the month; spent for the month 5 fields);

the composition of monetary and in-kind income and expenses (total income; salary at the main place of work; salary for secondary employment; other income of the head of the family; social benefits; income of other family members; other types of income; other income; undisclosed income; total expenses; room expenses; food expenses; clothing; for cultural and educational needs; socio-political expenses; other expenses; unexplained expenses; in-kind receipts; consumption of natural products 37 fields);

- archive address.

Most of the fields (24 fields) have an additional column "Note", in which the comments of the registrar or the operator who was engaged in entering information were placed. In total, the database includes 91 fields, 300 records.

Main results

Let's briefly describe the socio-demographic portrait of a researcher. The first thing that catches the eye when studying the materials of budget surveys is the gender composition. 4 women (5.0%) and 268 men (95.0%) took part in the survey. The proportion could vary depending on the territorial factor: in Moscow, the proportion of women scientists was 7.8%, in the Russian province - 3.4%; in the republics there are none.

The age structure of the scientific community is characterized by a predominance of middleaged and elderly scientists: 37.6% are scientists aged 41-50 years; 30.1% are "31-40 years old" (together these two groups made up more than half of 67.7%); 25.9% are "51 and older". The average age in the sample is 44.5 years.

The sample data correlate with the information in the Moscow directory, where the age group from 31 to 40 years was 35.6%; from 41 to 50 years -30.7% (together both groups have a share of 66.4%). Young people (21-30 years old) accounted for 11.6%, and on the contrary, older age groups (51 and over) 22.0%. The average age of Moscow scientists in 1925 was 42.1 years [10, Appendix, p.2].

In general, all types of scientific institutions were included in the sample: 83.7% are teachers and professors who worked in higher educational institutions, 5% are employees of research institutions of academic or branch subordination, and 5% are employed in scientific institutions of museum and library types.

Science in the 1920s was mainly a male occupation. The absolute majority of scientists were engaged in teaching, having a work experience of 15 years or more. The specificity of the current moment is that the 1920s is a turning point when there is a generational change in science. It will be completed by the mid-1930s. In 1925, the social portrait of science in the USSR is determined by the generation of scientists, which took shape at the end of the XIX century and reached creative maturity in the first decade of the XX century.

The majority of researchers who participated in the 1925 survey were married (88.3%). Only a small part (12.8%) did not have a marriage partner for various reasons: 4.3% were widowed; two people (0.7%) were divorced; 6.7% belonged to the category of single/unmarried.

Numerically, the sample was dominated by mediumsized families of 5-7 people of the extended type (33.7%), followed by the frequency of occurrence of nuclear small families (2-4 people) - 27.0%. Nuclear families made up a total of 44.7% in the sample, of which 82.7% had minor children, including 1 child 45.7% of families; 2 children 23.6%; 3 or more children 13.3%.

The indicator characterizing the entire studied set of families as a whole is the average family composition - it amounted to 4.8 people. The lowest group average is observed in single-parent families of scientists living on the territory of the Union republics. The largest is in extended families of provincial cities. In the capital cities, the extended family consisted of an average of 5.2 people, the nuclear family consisted of 4.3 people.

Let's consider the indicators of the standard of living of scientists in 1925, obtained during the budget survey. The average monthly income of a family of a researcher in 1925 was 230.82 rubles; expenses 221.98 rubles (Table 2). At the same time, the salary for the main place of work in the income structure averaged 120.14 rubles, only half determining the family income, which stimulated the search for additional jobs to ensure a decent standard of living for his family. The vast majority of the surveyed researchers (77.3%) had an additional place of work (and more than one).

The distribution of families by income is as follows: 52.5% had an income below the arithmetic mean; 37.2% above and 10.3% from 210 to 240 rubles, i.e. close to the arithmetic mean. The distribution of families of scientists by expenses correlates with income: 55.3% spent less than 210 rubles per month, 35.8% more than 240 rubles; and 8.9% within the limits of fluctuations of the arithmetic mean (210-240 rubles).

Taking into account the amount of remuneration of a scientist in accordance with the tariff schedule, the variability of indicators of total income and expenses, the following categories of researchers can be distinguished:

- lowincome less than 120 rubles per month - 14.2% of families;

- with average income from 120-240 rubles 48.6%;

- with a high level of income from 240 and above 37.2%.

Table 2.

Distribution of families of scientists of the USSR by the size of the total monthly income and expenditure*

Cash income/expenses, in rubles.

Income of the head of the family from the main source, rub.

Total income, RUB.

Consumption per month, rub.

Abs.

%

Abs.

%

Abs.

%

Up to 30,00

15

5,32

2

0,71

0

0,00

30,01-60,00

49

17,38

2

0,71

5

1,77

60,01-90,00

63

22,34

12

4,26

10

3,55

90,01-120,00

40

14,18

24

8,51

29

10,28

120,01-150,00

38

13,48

34

12,06

36

12,77

150,01-180,00

33

11,70

35

12,41

33

11,70

180,01-210,00

14

4,96

39

13,83

43

15,25

210,01-240,00

14

4,96

29

10,28

25

8,87

240,01-270,00

6

2,13

23

8,16

25

8,87

270,01-300,00

0

0,00

24

8,51

24

8,51

300,01-330,00

1

0,35

13

4,61

12

4,26

330,01-360,00

3

1,06

10

3,55

11

3,90

360.01 and more

6

2,13

35

12,41

29

10,28

Total

282

100,00

282

100,00

282

100,00

Average income, rub.

120,14

230,82

221,98

Fashion, rub.

71,34

188,57

190,72

Median, rub

100,49

204,60

192,54

* Compiled according to the database "Scientific workers of the USSR. 1925".

Here is an example of the budget of a metropolitan family with incomes close to the arithmetic mean. In particular, the family of a researcher at the State Astrophysical Institute, established in 1923 in Moscow on the basis of the Main Physical Observatory, had an income of 238 rubles. The age of the scientist was 43 years old, by marital status he was a widower with two minor children. The total number of family members was four people, including a housekeeper. The family income was formed from several sources: due to the salary of a scientist who worked in addition to the institute at the observatory (154.70 rubles), in addition, 80 rubles were borrowed. Family expenses amounted to 205.41 rubles per month, including 53.04 rubles (25.8%) housing costs; 87.06 rubles (42.4%) food; 24.33 rubles (11.8%) clothing, shoes, hygiene and treatment; 6.85 rubles. (3.3%) for books, magazines, theater and entertainment; 29.83 rubles. (14.5%) were other expenses (lent). Additionally, the family consumed food products in the amount of 87.54 rubles. [GARF. F. R-5462. Op. 7. D. 406. L. 205-211ob.]. The given example of a budget with average statistical parameters is close to a crisis consumption model with a predominance of spending on meeting basic needs.

This example is quite indicative both from the point of view of budget formation mechanisms (one employee, several places of work), and from the point of view of the cost structure, which includes, in addition to basic payments for housing, food and clothing, expenses for cultural and socio-political needs, which together reach 3-6%.

A similar budget structure is demonstrated by families in Moscow and Leningrad with high income indicators. For example, the income of the family of a professor of medicine at Moscow State University (50 years old) of 6 people amounted to 733.4 rubles per month., expenses 751.74 rubles., where the main costs went to pay for housing (23.9%); food (22.2%), clothing and shoes, hygiene (13.2%), cultural and socialpolitical needs (6.0%), borrowed (34.0%) [GARF. F. R-5462. Op. 7. D. 406. L. 50-56ob.], i.e., in the conditions of transition in high-income groups of families, the costs of food, clothing and shoes are growing, there are free funds that can be to borrow. However, in the hierarchy of needs, spending on books, magazines, theater and other entertainment has not yet achieved statistically significant results.

As can be seen from the above description of the budget, total income and expenses depend on a number of factors of an objective and subjective order. The first group includes information about the amount of wages in scientific institutions; the number of jobs available for combining; social support measures, the availability of field/garden farming. Subjective factors include information about the scientist's family (number of people, number of employees and dependents; number of consumers, children), as well as status and socio-demographic characteristics of the scientist (age, qualifications).

In 1922, the tariff schedule for researchers was approved, which included 17 categories, and employees were divided into 3 large groups: scientists-specialists of scientific institutions and university teachers were paid for 16-17 categories, the second group scientists (14-15 category), the third group scientific and technical staff (10-13 category). In 1924, the professor's salary averaged 28-33 rubles per month, in January 1925 it increased to 80 rubles, and by the end of the year, on average, to 120-150 rubles per month [11, p. 116]. Despite the systematic increase in the wages of scientists, it not only lagged far behind the pre-war earnings of scientists, but was significantly inferior to the wages of other categories of workers [12, p. 197].

In general, the salary at the main place of work was 52% of the total income, additional sources (lectures, consultations, royalties, paid services, translation, payments at an additional place of work) 34%; inkind receipts - 3%; other income (from the sale of things, loans in debt, renting housing in rent) 7%, social benefits 0.04%; incomes of other family members 3.5%.

The variety of income sources indicates different strategies of scientists in solving the problem of material support for their families. The main option for obtaining additional income was related to the search for new jobs where it was possible to realize their professional competencies universities, laboratories, hospitals, etc. On average, there were 1.3 jobs per 1 researcher.

Table 3

Distribution of families of scientists by income from other sources of cash receipts, abs./%*

Income, rub.

From secondary classes**

Other family income***

Social benefits

Income of other family members

Natural receipts

No

238/ 84,4

153/54,2

272/96,4

241/85,5

162/57,5

Up to 20.00

5/1,8

44/15,6

5/1,8

5/1,8

83/29,4

20,01-50,00

12/4,3

58/20,6

3/1,1

15/5,3

31/11,0

50,01-100,00

12/4,3

22/7,8

2/0,7

20/7,1

6/2,1

100.01 and more

15/5,2

5/1,8

0/0,0

1/0,3

0/0,0

Total

282/100,0

282/100,0

282/100,0

282/100,0

282/100,0

Average indicator, rub.

78,45

16,16

0,97

7,77

7,40

*Compiled according to the database "Scientific workers of the USSR. 1925".

** Lectures, consultations, royalties, paid services, translation, payments for an additional place of work

*** Sale of things, loans in debt, rental of housing

48.2% worked parttime at another university, 3.9% at the Academy of Sciences, medical institutions, 4.9% were engaged in literary work and translations, 1.4% in the library, museum; 8.9% at enterprises, organizations and management structures; 7.8% were engaged in private practice. 3.5% of families received social benefits from Tsekubu or in social insurance. The amounts of payments ranged from 4.66 to 63 rubles, while 0.7% of families received an amount over 50 rubles (see Table. 3), i.e. measures of social support for the absolute majority of families of scientists did not play a big role in the formation of the budget. Funds were given out for a variety of needs treatment, funerals, purchase of clothes and shoes, payment for children's education, scientific trips, etc. Their size ranged from 10 to 200 rubles [13, p. 204].

A widely practiced option for replenishing the budget is selling things (14.8%); getting money in debt (39.7%); from renting out housing (3.5%). But the most common way to overcome the budget deficit were loans from individuals or in the mutual assistance fund, while 13.1% of families of researchers had a debt of up to 20 rubles, and 18.1% from 20 to 50 rubles.

In 14.5% of families of scientists, in addition to the head of the family, there was also an employee(s) who contributed to the total income of the family. At the same time, half of families with two or more employees had an additional income from 20 to 50 rubles, and 2.4% of families over 100 rubles. In the absolute majority of families of scientists, only the head of the family formed the budget, experiencing a fairly high burden on the maintenance of family members.

And, finally, another source of replenishment of the budget is inkind receipts in the form of commodity loans or housing benefits established by the university. The variation range of this indicator ranges from 7.36 rubles to 227.98 rubles, significantly affecting the overall family budget.

In general, the distribution of families by income level is as follows (see Table 4):

- With a low level of per capita income (up to 30 rubles per family member) 19.1%

- With an average level of per capita income (30-60 rubles) 51.8%;

- With a high level of per capita income (over 60 rubles) 29.1%.

Low-income groups (up to 30 rubles per 1 family member) have the largest share in the Russian province (27.3%) and in Ukraine (20.0%), the smallest in Baku, Minsk, Tashkent - 3.5%. Highincome categories of families (over 60 rubles per family member) are more common in the capitals of the Union republics 44.8% of families; in Ukraine their share is 37.4%; in Moscow and Leningrad 24.5%; in the Russian province they are the least - 21.6% (see Table 4).

Of particular interest is the analysis of families with ultra-high incomes per family member of more than 90 rubles, where the head of the family is mainly a professor (53.3%) or a teacher (23.3%), who additionally earns in 1-2 places. 40.0% of families in this category are characterized by additional income (from 22 to 593.5 rubles) received from private practice or at the expense of royalties. Every fourth family (20.0%) had housing benefits. In 13.3% of families who received income for 1 member over 90 rubles, there was also an employee who contributed to the total family income (from 42 to 96 rubles). In the studied sample, a third of families (36.7%) with high per capita income borrowed from individuals or sold things, rented out living space.

Table 4.

Distribution of families of scientists from different regions of the USSR by income per 1 family member*

Income per 1 family member, in rubles.

Total

Capital cities

Provincial cities of the RSFSR

Ukraine

Union Republics

Abs.

%

Abs.

%

Abs.

%

Abs.

%

Abs.

%

Up to 10.00

2

0,7

1

1,1

1

1,2

0

0,0

0

0,0

10,01-20,00

15

5,3

2

2,2

8

9,1

5

6,7

0

0,0

20,01-30,00

37

13,1

11

12,2

15

17,0

10

13,3

1

3,5

30,01-40,00

68

24,1

24

26,7

21

23,9

16

21,3

7

24,1

40,01-50,00

46

16,3

18

20,0

15

17,0

6

8,0

7

24,1

50,01-60,00

32

11,4

12

13,3

9

10,2

10

13,3

1

3,5

60,01-70,00

21

7,5

5

5,6

5

5,7

8

10,7

3

10,3

70,01-80,00

14

5,0

2

2,2

3

3.4

7

9,3

2

6,9

80,01-90,00

17

6,0

5

5,6

5

5,7

5

6,7

2

6,9

90.01 and more

30

10,6

10

11,1

6

6,8

8

10,7

6

20,7

Total

282

100,0

90

100,0

88

100,0

75

100,0

29

100,0

Average per capita income, RUB

51,44

52,69

45,60

53,48

60,00

*Compiled according to the database "Scientific workers of the USSR. 1925".

Getting into high-income groups could be a random event: the one-time nature of the analyzed budget survey, aimed at studying monthly budgets, does not allow us to unambiguously judge the distribution and differentiation of families by income level. Belonging to low-income categories of families, on the contrary, is less susceptible to random fluctuations in monthly income and reflects some patterns of budget formation. Thus, 19.14% of families received less than 30 rubles per capita income, of which in 42.6% of cases the head of the family had only one place of work and in another 29.6% worked additionally in another place. More than half (55.5%) of scientists held the positions of teachers, assistants, librarians, laboratory assistants with a tariff category of 8-13 (13.0%) and 14-15 (44.4%).

So, if the superprofitable budgets of families are formed mainly due to external factors, high status characteristics of a scientist, his activity in terms of part-time earnings, then the formation of low-income groups is more associated with subjective factors - not only with lower status characteristics of a scientist, but also with family workload.

The amount of income determines the size and structure of expenses. In general, these indicators are in linear dependence, which does not exclude possible variations associated with the formation of a deficit, balanced or surplus budget (Table 5).

Table 5

Distribution of families of scientists of the USSR by income level and budget type*

Family income level, rub.

Budget deficit

Balanced budget

Surplus budget

Total, abs./%

Abs.

%

Abs.

%

Abs.

%

Low (up to 120)

9

14,3

27

21,3

4

4,3

40/14,2

Average (120-240)

31

49,2

72

56,7

34

37,0

137/48,6

High (240 or more)

23

36,5

28

22,0

54

58,7

105/37,2

Total

63

100,0

127

100,0

92

100,0

282/100,0

*Compiled according to the database "Scientific workers of the USSR. 1925".

In the studied sample, 45.0% of families had balanced budgets, where the difference between income and expenditure did not exceed 10-15 rubles; a deficit budget (expenses exceed income) occurs in 22.3% of cases; a surplus (income above expenses) in 32.6%, i.e. in every third family (see Table 5).

A surplus budget is more common in high-income families (51.4%), a balanced budget in low-income (67.5%) and middle-income families (52.6%), a deficit budget is found in all categories of families, but more often in high- and middle-income families. The type of budget largely indicates consumption practices (behavior), as well as the level of consumer demands formed by lifestyle. In a number of forms of the budget survey, the registrar describes family household practices of farming in conditions of austerity:

"The economy is very economical, based on the daily expenditure of no more than 1-70 kopecks. In order not to get out of the budget, daily food products are purchased for every day in order to avoid spending too much on larger purchases .... The object complains about the utter impossibility of acquiring scientific books necessary for him due to the lack of money for this" [GARF. F. R-5462. Op. 7. D. 403. L. 52-57ob.].

"The month is in many respects not very typical, in particular, household expenses due to the departure of the head of the family from the 10th were significantly reduced, due to the lack of servants and the absence of a husband, the wife was limited to the most necessary, ate stale bread for a long time, old soup, etc." [GARF. F. R-5462. Op. 7. D. 411. l. 100-109ob.].

Conclusions

Thus, the analysis of the size and structure of the income of the families of researchers allows us to draw the following conclusions:

by the mid-1920s, the income of scientists as a whole grew and had a positive trend, but did not reach the pre-war level, providing mainly satisfaction of vital needs;

the average income of researchers was higher than the average income of workers and employees (the average wage of a worker in Moscow in 1925 was 75.61 rubles, in Moscow province 61.48 rubles) [14, p. 111];

the main ways to increase income were associated with the intensification of the scientist's work - working in several places, as well as using the opportunities to receive royalties, income from private practice, lectures and consultations;

the crisis model of consumption is also evidenced by the extraordinary practices of increasing incomes associated with obtaining income from the sale of things, renting out housing;

differentiation of researchers by income level depended on the status characteristics of the scientist, his activity, creating prerequisites for the allocation of elite categories of researchers, in the 1930s. formed into a hierarchical system of teaching staff with an appropriate set of privileges.

The peculiarity of the studied period was the state of transition from a situation of social catastrophe, the characteristic features of which were hunger, increased mortality due to diseases and a decrease in living standards, to the stage of economic recovery and stabilization of the socio-political situation. In parallel with the normalization of lifestyle, there was a process of restoration of the pre-war consumption structure. The transition was complicated by social experiments aimed at constructing a new socialist reality, educating a "new" person the bearer of a system of values and communist ideology. This factor contributed to the diversification of consumption patterns, contributing to the formation of its three main variants the crisis (vital); transitional; and the new (Soviet) consumption model.

The crisis (vital) model of consumption is limited to satisfying basic needs for food, clothing, and safety, when all consumer practices are aimed at survival. The needs of a higher level fade into the background and are not updated due to limited resources and capabilities.

The transitional consumption model was focused on restoring the structure and level of consumption that was achieved in the pre-war years. It had a differentiated character, corresponding to the class structure of society, the level of family income and the quality of the urban environment. An important role was played by the policy of the NEP, which gave rise to hopes for a return to the old way of life. The agents of pre-revolutionary consumer practices were also the Soviet, party and economic nomenclature, whose material support was focused on bourgeois standards of consumption.

The new (Soviet) model of consumption was ideally based on the principles of asceticism and minimalism. Modesty in everyday life was attributed to the leaders of the revolution, in particular V. Lenin, and corresponded to the general low level of income of the population and the economic development of society. In practice, consumption was diversified by the system of privileges and benefits formed initially, which led to the formation of nomenclature (elite) and mass (worker/peasant) consumption models already in the 1920s.

References
1. Minyailo, N. G. (1975). Experience in the use of correlation analysis in the processing of peasant budgets. Mathematical methods in research on socio-economic history: Digest of articles, 128–151. Ed. I. D. Kovalchenko. Moscow: Nauka.
2. Bokarev, Yu. P. (1981). Budget surveys of peasant farms in the 1920s. as a historical source. Moscow: Nauka.
3. Komissarov, Yu. P., & Slavko, T. I. (1991). Budget surveys of workers in the 1920s as a historical source. Sverdlovsk: Ural University.
4. Mazur, L. N. (1992). Budgets of collective farmers as a source for the socio-economic structure of the peasantry of the Middle Urals in the first half of the 1960s: PhD dissertation abstract. Sverdlovsk.
5. Kadochnikova, L. M. (1998). Budget surveys as a source for studying the standard of living of workers in the Tyumen region: PhD dissertation abstract. Yekaterinburg.
6. Motrevich, V. P. (1990). Material well-being of collective farmers in the Urals in the 50s - the first half of the 60s.: guidelines and materials for a special seminar on the history of Soviet society. Sverdlovsk: Ural State University.
7. Mamyachenkov, V. N. (2017). Statistical surveys of family budgets of the population of the USSR: the problem of reliability (based on the materials of the State Archive of the Sverdlovsk Region). Scientific Dialogue, 1, 157–181.
8. Beznin, M. A. (1991). Peasant household in the Russian Non-Black Earth region 1950–1965. Moscow; Vologda: VGPU.
9. Gulin, K. A., Dimoni, T. M., & Karpov, S. G. (2003). Budget and property of the peasants of the European North of Russia in the second half of the twentieth century. Vologda. VSPU: "Rus".
10 Science and scientists of the USSR (1925): a Handbook. Part IV. Moscow scientists. Moscow: “Rabotnik prosveshcheniya” Publishing house.
11. Berlyavsky, L. G. (2011). Evolution of the legal status of scientists and teachers of higher educational institutions in the 20s of the XX century. Pravo I obrazovaniye, 1, 113–129.
12. Taitslin, I. (1925). Work of the Section on the ground. Nauchnyi rabotnik, 1, 195–202.
13. Fakhrutdinov, N. F. (2014). Material and legal status of Kazan scientists in the 1920s. Vestnik of Dmitry Pozharsky University, 1(1), 194–210.
14. A.P. (1928). Wages of workers and employees of the Moscow province in 1927/28 (On the campaign for the renegotiation of collective agreements). Voprosy truda, 12, 111-116.

First Peer Review

Peer reviewers' evaluations remain confidential and are not disclosed to the public. Only external reviews, authorized for publication by the article's author(s), are made public. Typically, these final reviews are conducted after the manuscript's revision. Adhering to our double-blind review policy, the reviewer's identity is kept confidential.
The list of publisher reviewers can be found here.

The subject of the research presented in this article is the income of researchers in the USSR in the 1920s. - In difficult socio-economic conditions of general disorder, scarcity, famine in the post-revolutionary period during the Civil War. This was the period of the formation of Soviet science, when many scientists migrated abroad, and the rest were on the verge of survival, as evidenced by many documentary sources - preserved diary entries, given here as a visual confirmation of the problem of providing scientists with means of subsistence. The study is based on a significant body of reliable information - the materials of the budget survey of 1925, conducted by the CSB together with the Section of Researchers. The work carefully analyzes a large set of primary survey documents preserved in the GARF and served as the basis for compiling a database and reconstructing the lifestyle of Soviet scientists of that period. The territorial structure of the information array of the budget survey of scientists of the USSR in 1925 included some cities of the RSFSR and a number of Union republics, which made it possible to identify a certain regional differentiation in the peculiarities of formation and the amount of income of scientists of the USSR. The main research method is information and statistical analysis in a historical context, which made it possible to identify results of scientific interest and to substantiate them. The relevance of the work is of continuing importance, since the formation of monetary incomes of researchers is still a debated problem that can be solved, including based on previous experience. This, of course, does not provide for its direct borrowing, but it can protect against mistakes of the past. The scientific novelty of the work consists, firstly, in the introduction into scientific circulation of documentary sources on the problem that had not previously been analyzed with such care; secondly, in obtaining new interesting results in the field of income generation for researchers during the period under review; in substantiating three variants of consumption models - crisis (vital); transitional; and new the (Soviet) consumption model. The style of work meets the requirements of a scientific approach to the presentation of research results. It is characterized by logic, strict consistency of presentation, semantic accuracy, informative saturation, and objectivity. The structure of the presentation does not cause complaints and is characterized by the interconnectedness of the parts, the logical transitions from one section to another. The text is accompanied by a large number of tables that allow you to trace the progress of the work and visually present the aspects under study. In terms of content, this article is a logically completed study of an urgent problem, carried out through the use of a set of scientific methods. The article contains a detailed analysis of the socio-demographic characteristics of a researcher in the 1920s: age, gender, qualification, marital status and family composition. Great attention is paid to the standard of living of researchers, differentiation of researchers by income level is carried out. Differences in the structure of the family budget are revealed. It has been established that total income and expenses depend on a number of objective and subjective factors. The first group includes information on the amount of wages in scientific institutions; the number of jobs available for combining; social support measures, the availability of field /garden farming. Subjective factors include information about the scientist's family (number of people, number of employees and dependents; number of consumers, children), as well as status and socio-demographic characteristics of the scientist (age, qualifications). The study revealed various strategies of scientists in solving the problem of financial support for their families. The main option for obtaining additional income was related to finding new jobs where you could realize your professional competencies universities, laboratories, hospitals, etc. On average, there were 1.3 jobs per 1 researcher. The options for replenishing the budget of researchers are given. It is rightly emphasized in the work that the amount of income determines the size and structure of expenses. In general, these indicators are in linear dependence, which does not exclude possible variations associated with the formation of a deficit, balanced or surplus budget. The result of this research is scientifically interesting conclusions that make an unconditional contribution to the study of the history of everyday life. In particular, the fact that the incomes of scientists mainly provided satisfaction of only vital needs; the average income of scientists was higher than the average income of workers and employees; the main ways to increase income were associated with the intensification of the scientist's work - working in several places, as well as using the opportunities to receive royalties, income from private practical training, lectures and consultations, as well as income from the sale of things, renting out housing; differentiation of researchers by income level depended on the status characteristics of the scientist, his activity, creating prerequisites for the allocation of elite categories of researchers, in the 1930s. formed into a hierarchical system of teaching staff with an appropriate set of privileges Bibliography It includes 14 sources devoted to the study of various aspects of this topic and providing information materials for this study. As a small remark, it should be noted that the list of references (bibliography) is not quite correct: - the sources are not listed in alphabetical order; - source 14 does not have the author's surname, only initials are given. The article undoubtedly has practical value, and will also arouse the interest of a wide range of readers.

Second Peer Review

Peer reviewers' evaluations remain confidential and are not disclosed to the public. Only external reviews, authorized for publication by the article's author(s), are made public. Typically, these final reviews are conducted after the manuscript's revision. Adhering to our double-blind review policy, the reviewer's identity is kept confidential.
The list of publisher reviewers can be found here.

The development of science is not just synonymous with progress, science acts as a transformative force and locomotive of the economy, as a result of which public investments in it pay off handsomely. In the history of Russia in the XX century. there are two periods at once when government spending on science, for a number of reasons, sharply decreased, which could not but lead to the emigration of scientists (what in recent decades has been referred to as nothing but a "brain drain"), and to the weakening of the scientific potential of the country. The period of the 1990s is memorable to most Russians, but what happened in the early 1920s is much less known. These circumstances determine the relevance of the article submitted for review, the subject of which is the income of Soviet scientists in the 1920s. The author sets out to show the source base of the work, analyze the socio-demographic portrait of a researcher of the USSR in the 1920s, and consider the size and income structure of families of researchers. The work is based on the principles of analysis and synthesis, reliability, objectivity, the methodological basis of the research is a systematic approach, which is based on the consideration of the object as an integral complex of interrelated elements. The author also uses a comparative method. The scientific novelty of the article lies in the very formulation of the topic: the author seeks to characterize the living conditions, including the structure of income and consumption of scientists in the Soviet Union in the 1920s. The scientific novelty of the article is also determined by the involvement of archival materials, as well as the compiled database "Scientific Workers of the USSR 1925" Considering the bibliographic list of the article as a positive point, its scale and versatility should be noted: in total, the list of references includes 14 different sources and studies. From the sources attracted by the author, we will first of all point to documents from the funds of the State Archive of the Russian Federation. Among the studies used, we note the works of V.N. Mamechenkov, N.F. Fakhrutdinov and others, which focus on various aspects of studying family budgets of the USSR. Note that the bibliography is important both from a scientific and educational point of view: after reading the text, readers can turn to other materials on its topic. In general, in our opinion, the integrated use of various sources and research contributed to solving the tasks facing the bus. The style of writing the article can be attributed to a scientific one, at the same time accessible to understanding not only to specialists, but also to a wide readership, to anyone who is interested in both the income structure in the USSR in general and the budgets of scientists in particular. The appeal to the opponents is presented at the level of the collected information received by the author during the work on the topic of the article. The structure of the work is characterized by a certain logic and consistency, it can be distinguished by an introduction, the main part, and conclusion. At the beginning, the author defines the relevance of the topic, shows that the formation of Soviet science in the 1920s took place in difficult conditions, many scientists were on the verge of survival. Characterizing the socio-demographic portrait of the Soviet scientist, the author draws attention to his primarily male appearance, as well as significant (15 years and above) work experience. The author shows that "the main ways to increase income were associated with the intensification of the scientist's work - working in several places, as well as using the opportunities to receive royalties, income from private practice, lectures and consultations." It is noteworthy that despite all the difficulties, "the average income of researchers was higher than the average income of workers and employees." The data presented by the author are of interest in the framework of studying and everyday life in the USSR during the NEP period. The main conclusion of the article is that "by the mid-1920s, the incomes of scientists as a whole had grown and had a positive trend, but did not reach the pre-war level, providing mainly satisfaction of vital needs." The article submitted for review is devoted to an urgent topic, is provided with 5 tables, will arouse readers' interest, and its materials can be used both in lecture courses on the history of Russia and in various special courses. In general, in our opinion, the article can be recommended for publication in the journal "Historical Informatics".