The Tragic History Of The Gulgula Commune
How the utopian vision of Tolstoyans revolutionized peasant life in Eastern Georgia.
“Tolstoy is great as the spokesman of the ideas and sentiments that emerged among the millions of Russian peasants at the time the bourgeois revolution was approaching in Russia. Tolstoy is original, because the sum total of his views, taken as a whole, happens to express the specific features of our revolution as a peasant bourgeois revolution. From this point of view, the contradictions in Tolstoy’s views are indeed a mirror of those contradictory conditions in which the peasantry had to play their historical part in our revolution.”
Vladimir Lenin, Leo Tolstoy as the Mirror of the Russian Revolution (1908)
Introduction
The Russian Revolution of 1905 saw tumultuous political clashes and social upheaval. It also witnessed an empire-wide creation of experimental communes and cooperatives of vastly different ideological foundations. Every major revolutionary of the world at the time, including but not limited to Lenin, Luxemburg and Trotsky, offered extensive interpretations, analyses and reports on the ongoing events, while directly participating in them — Trotsky was carrying out serious agitation in Russia, Luxemburg was physically involved (and later jailed) in the Polish strikes and uprisings, and Lenin set up Bolshevik centers and planned sabotage and robberies throughout the whole period.
The aforementioned communal projects demonstrated the effectiveness of small-scale collective planning and activity and an overall improvement of village life. We have gathered on the banks of Acheron to discuss one such obscure, neglected but fascinating peasant commune in the village of Gulgula, Georgia.
The Tolstoyan Movement
At the turn of the 19th and the beginning of 20th century, the ideas of the Russian writer Leo Tolstoy spread rapidly throughout the world. Having heterodox views of Christianity and harshly criticizing the Russian Orthodox Church (ROC), the latter excommunicated him in 1901. [1] Unbothered, Tolstoy continued to lead a chaste, vegetarian, ascetic life, focusing more on Jesus’ teachings than any sort of miraculous divinity. The core of Tolstoyan understanding of Jesus revolved around the Sermon On The Mount, which underlined 5 main tenets for this movement: turning the other cheek, chastity, calmness, loving thy enemy and abstaining from oaths. Considering the government as evil, Tolstoyans categorically refused to either support or participate in any such political institution, viewing it as corrupt.
This trend led many to believe that Tolstoyan philosophy was a type of Anarchism, heavily dependent on pacifism and Christianity. However, Lenin rejected this characterization of Tolstoy and his followers, writing:
“The striving to sweep away completely the official church, the landlords and the landlord government, to destroy all the old forms and ways of land ownership, to clear the land, to replace the police-class state by a community of free and equal small peasants — this striving is the keynote of every historical step the peasantry has taken in our revolution; and, undoubtedly, the message of Tolstoy’s writings conforms to this peasant striving far more than it does to abstract “Christian Anarchism”, as his “system” of views is sometimes appraised.”
Tolstoyan ideas began to influence different Christian and utopian socialists, egalitarians, vegetarians and simple people who strived for social equality and acceptance. This led to hundreds of colonies and communes being set up throughout Europe, Africa and even America based on Tolstoy’s ideals, and its influence reached even the southernmost parts of the Russian Empire.
Village Gulgula And Ivane Kolelishvili
One such commune surprisingly appeared in Eastern Georgia, then a part of Russian Empire. [2] The creator and leader of the short-lived Tolstoyan commune in the village of Gulgula was an ex-governorate secretary, Ivane Kolelishvili (1862–1930), who had been educated in France and had a background in theology. According to contemporary accounts, Ivane was an odd man: an ardent follower of Tolstoy’s philosophy, he was a strict vegetarian, lived very simply, preferred to walk instead of using any mode of transportation, was extremely skeptical of alcohol and wine [3] and had a tendency to write out every important thought he had on the walls of his house, which made the interior of his residence a curious sight.
Maintaining apoliticism, he was still sympathetic to the Georgian Socialist-Federalist Revolutionary Party, which sought autonomy within Russia. Their somewhat moderate ideas (as opposed to the Revolutionary Georgian Section of The Russian Social Democratic Labor Party, which was carrying out serious illegal work with prominent figures such as Tskhakaya and Stalin at the helm) mainly attracted the peasantry and the petty gentry. Interestingly, their extreme and vocal support for national-cultural autonomy that was echoed by its members during every Socialist congress and meeting led Rosa Luxemburg to heavily criticizing them. According to her:
“The main thing on which the Socialist Federalists put emphasis is the reservation that the agricultural question in Georgia should be decided not in a constituent assembly nor in a central parliament, but only in autonomous national institutions, because ‘however life will decide this question, in principle, only this is unquestionable, that the land in a Georgian territory should belong first of all to the Georgian people.’ The question, how it happens that the ‘socialist’ party is joined, en masse, by the petty gentry and bourgeoisie, the delegates of the Georgian Federalists explained by saying that this happens only because ‘there is no other party which would formulate the demands of these strata.’”
Luxemburg concluded that federation as an idea, historically and politically, was a sign of the pseudo-revolutionary petit bourgeois nationalism, reactionary to its core. However, for Ivane, this party was a good alternative due to its peasant-centric attitude and the presence of Tolstoyans among its leading ranks.
In the 1890s, Ivane was the leading mind of the village, organizing facilities through which the villagers realized surplus-value from crops left after harvesting season and equally distributed them among the community. The main aim for such an undertaking was to mobilize the scattered potential of local industry. If the village was able to have centralized control over the trade of wine, it would avoid the need for middlemen and increase the overall revenue and therefore the standards of living. However, this initiative was never realized, as the village lacked enough funds to mobilize and build a voluminous communal cellar and the ministry left Ivane’s appeals for aid unanswered. Parallel to this, he also translated and spread information about agrarian jurisdiction, acquainting his community with the laws and conduct of the Empire.
The authorities started to notice Ivane’s strong influence in the area and planned to relocate him, but he left his job and started self-sufficient farming, limiting the authorities’ access to him and his activities.
The Revolution
Ivane and his associates were looking for the right time to realize their ideas, when conveniently the 1905 Russian Revolution broke out with full force. Tbilisi and Kutaisi governorates turned into a hotbed of strikes and clashes with the Tsarist forces. This drew the attention of Western Marxists and Rosa Luxemburg even reported some of the happenings in her articles:
“According to reports from Baku, the strike is continuing in the Caucasus. Railroad infrastructure between Tbilisi and Poti has been destroyed by the rebels and transport has been suspended.” [“Freedom Is Born in the Tsar’s Empire,” published in Luxemburg’ Vorwärts column “The Revolution in Russia,” issue №259, November 4, 1905]
“Tbilisi, November 5 (report by the Petersburg Telegraph Agency). When a number of reactionaries with pictures of the emperor moved through the city today, revolver shots and grenades were targeted at them. Troops who were accompanying the procession responded to the shooting by killing ten persons and wounding around thirty” [The Murderous Cads of the “Constitutional State,” published in Luxemburg’s Vorwärts column “The Revolution in Russia,” issue №261, November 7, 1905]
“Tbilisi, November 5 (report by the Petersburg Telegraph Agency). Yesterday, during alternating reactionary and revolutionary rallies in Vladikavkaz, both parties collided. Both sides fired off shots, killing four persons and injuring seventeen” [Ibid]
Clearly, Georgia didn’t lack any attention from Western or Russian Marxists, and the establishment of one of the first Peasant Republics in the world in Guria drew even more eyes onto the region.
The Commune
Ivane and his “co-conspirators” were acting secretly between 1905 and 1906 to avoid any attention. He was frequently visited by like-minded people from different regions of Georgia. The culminating point was January 8th (Old Style) of 1906, when Ivane called a village assembly and publicly declared the creation of the commune, asking everyone to join in. He speechified strongly, reiterating the many points he had been secretly explaining to the villagers for more than a year:
“Brothers and sisters! The poverty and the conditions you live in are unbearable. For you, neither warm residence, nor good food and clothing, nor rest and humane conditions exist. You work day and night, through sweat and blood, yet receive virtually nothing. Your life expectancy radically decreases from such brutal labor, by falling ill and having no one to look after you. Just look at your children, they have become yellow, ill and phantom-like from the hunger and cold. Where did their youthful smiles go? Or their lively eyes and childish naughtiness? The poor children, as soon as they learn to walk, they have to start working: they chase geese and oxen around. Where is their education? If we live so forcefully, wouldn’t it be better to not live at all?! This kind of life is not a life. It is suffering and misery. It’s clear that no one cares for us, so we have to care for one another ourselves. I tried a lot to look for a cure against poverty, but found nothing, other than unity, brotherhood, comradeship. If we splinter, we won’t be able to overcome our debilitation, as it’s very big and strong, and we have no strength to be separate. But together, it will be easier to tend to our wounds. As they add a second oxen to a yoke so that the two can work better, so must we work together. One ox won’t be able to carry the yoke, but six — very easily so. Strength is in unity. We must support each other, be united both in happiness and in misery and alleviate our terrible state. Brothers, whoever has property among us, let’s unite them, work our lands with the landless as comrades and divide our hard-earned gains as comrades. Myself, I forfeit my whole property — lands, vineyards and cattle for the whole village and whoever wants to help out by uniting their property with mine, let’s begin.”
Ivane used the hand analogy to explain unity to the villagers: every finger had its own function, but separately, they were of no use and could only be productive if they acted as one. From 190 families (i.e. Komli — household), 70 immediately opted for the commune. A committee was elected, naturally with Ivane as the leader. He made it clear to the villagers, that the directive organ would be strictly democratic and he would only serve as the chief during the first term, when the commune needed guidance in its nascent, critical stage. The commune drew up regulations and defined the rights and duties of every member. Leaving the commune was free and easy, and whoever decided to stop participating could take their property with them.
In Action
The Commune was named “Unity and Fraternity” and set developing silk and honey production, as well as handicraft as its primary objective. However, the affairs were looking dismal at the beginning, as peasants hostile to the communal project started rumors that the authorities would arrest anyone, who took part in the commune. Therefore, only 21 men went out for work the first time. Their joyful, harmonious and united labor and ethic gave an example to the frightened villagers, and in a few weeks time, the commune was in full swing. The starting capital was enough to sustain all members until the harvest and collective work ensured fast and effective cultivation of vineyards.
As the second step, the commune ensured that the personal residence of every member was well-kept and tidy. The next day’s work was always planned in advance by the communards, who congregated every evening. They created cultural and demographic departments to keep records and educate the members. The commune was also aided by sympathizers from nearby cities (most notably Telavi), who sent extra money, food and clothes when possible.
The relative success of the Gulgulan communards sparked massive interest across the region, and many political figures, journalists and just curious citizens visited its premises. Many of the skeptical villagers were won over and joined in with the rest, while people from nearby villages helf frequent correspondence with the commune, wanting to copy their example and establish their own collectives. The cultural department was working especially effectively, ensuring the full participation of women in the daily affairs, itself being led by a woman — Magda Kenkiashvili.
The harmonious flow of the project had many benefits for the village: criminal activities like petty theft and assault rapidly decreased (this was a huge problem in Gulgula at the turn of the century), alcoholism was losing its footing, and with Ivane’s help and extensive negotiations, villagers hostile to each other were reconciled and worked side by side in the commune. The number of families involved soon reached 120.
One Fateful Evening…
The harmony was soon interrupted, although through no fault of the communards themselves: the major success of the commune drew too much attention, both of the authorities and of the envious peasants, who had their own successes through hired labor and saw the commune as a major competition. Many of the poor peasants employed by these landowners preferred the commune and hence the number of people available for hiring rapidly decreased, increasing the hostility of the petty-bourgeois landholders and rich peasants.
1906 saw a rapid reaction from the Tsarist forces and their subordinates. The local authorities (who later exploited this inter-village dissident between the rich peasants and the commune members) were notified that Ivane encouraged the communards to resist the government, abstain from paying taxes, dodge drafts and concentrate on the commune. On the evening September 7th (O.S.) of the same year, Ivane’s window was shot by someone from behind his fence. The culprit was apprehended, which drew the attention of the governor Antonov, who paid a visit to the village with a few dozen Cossacks the very next day. The prominent members of the commune were arrested and the governor declared that as per the instructions from the government, the commune had to disband and members had to return to their old lifestyles.
Ivane was first jailed in the Metekhi fortress, and after a very political court decision (declaring him a dangerous person), he was sentenced to be deported to Yakutsk. After many pleads from prominent Telavi citizens, the general governor of Tbilisi changed the verdict and gave Ivane the chance to flee wherever he wished in 3 days, as long as it was outside of the Caucasus region. He left Georgia for Switzerland, where he lived for 2 years, and then moved to Italy, India, Egypt and Palestine respectively, staying there between 1910–1917. [4] After the Russian Revolution, the Mensheviks took power in Georgia and the Georgian Democratic Republic was founded. Ivane returned to his native village and continued agrarian work, trying to revive the commune, which ultimately failed, first due to the unstable and chaotic socio-economic and political situation, and then due the annexation of Georgia by the Soviets in February of 1921, after which he had to flee to France.
But this odyssey didn’t last long: Ivane couldn’t bear the idea of being so far from his village and returned to Gulgula, where he was briefly arrested by the Soviet authorities but released after reviewing the history of his resistance and activism. Up until his death in 1930, Ivane (with the help of the local authorities concentrated on collective labor and communist ideals) reintroduced silk production and much of the manufacturing the commune had undertaken two decades earlier. Soon, the clash between Soviet collectivization and the Tolstoyan ideas became more and more aggressive, and dissatisfied Ivane is quoted with saying:
“I don’t understand your alphabet, all of you have been changed, everything is different than what I anticipated; it is unclear to me who does what.”
His philosophical work was censored, taken out from circulation and destroyed. Old and broken, Ivane locked himself up in his house and died on the 12th of August.
First As A Tragedy
The Gulgula commune and its unfortunate fate has a lot to teach us: the advantages of collective work, the necessity and benefits of harmony between citizens, the utilization of historic events… It was never able to stand upright and resume its activities after the events of 1906. Ivane Kolelishvili and his commune belong to a vast number of Tolstoyan and other projects undertaken by the peasantry with the simple aim of improving their lives. After the Soviet policy of collectivization increased its speed, the communes were disbanded and integrated into Kolkhozes and Sovkhozes.
The main thing one can learn from these historical movements is simple: all humans want is to be sustained, to live joyously and free from ills. The utopian vision of the Tolstoyans aimed at realizing this goal, but failed for idealistic reasons. The petty ideology of Tolstoy was just a reflection (to borrow Lenin’s phrase) of the contemporary conditions, but the current one can only reflect one thing — the urgent need for a society that negates labor and turns it into life’s prime want.
Footnotes
[1] The Russian Church was extremely hostile to Tolstoy and his ideas. The famous Saint John of Kronstadt considered him to be the devil wrote to him:
“You ought to have stone hung around your neck and be lowered with it into the depths of the sea.”
[2] The weakened Georgian kingdom, split into many little provinces, was annexed by Russia between 1801–1870.
[3] This was a problem, as Georgia and Eastern Georgia specifically is a cradle of winemaking and has extensive and historical ties with wine, ingraining it into the local culture. Fortunately, Ivane was very well aware of this and tried his best to improve the vineyard systems and help the villagers trade wine efficiently.
[4] According to some accounts, the Kibbutz, collective communities in Israel that were traditionally based on agriculture, were influenced and aided by Kolelishvili, who lived in Palestine around the same time they started appearing.
All information about the commune and Ivane Kolelishvili comes from the book “ინიციატივა ცვლილებისთვის — თემის თვითორგანიზებისა და თანამშრომლობის გამოცდილება საქართველოში საბჭოთა ოკუპაციამდე” [The Initiative For Change]
