Up in Flames
This "struggle with nature," explained tsarist officials, was to blame for "the slow pace of capital accumulation and the slow development of economic and civil life." And it was rooted in two simple facts: first, Russia was built of wood. Second, it was located on a vast plain that was subject to searing, drying summers, and dreadfully cold winters that necessitated the use of fire for survival.
The employees of the Central Statistical Committee who compiled the 1865 report on fire acknowledged what they called "temporary" factors (a reasonable person might have wondered whether the growing frustration with serfdom had anything to do with the spike in fires across European Russia), but insisted that the phenomenon of fire be understood within a geographical and climatic context.
The burning question is this: between 1842 and 1864, the number of fires taking place annually in the European part of the Russian Empire doubled. This trend was out of line with population growth, and there was no demonstrable decline in living standards. What do you make of the statisticians' claim that the rising flames in rural and urban areas should be attributed to better record keeping and a few geographical quirks?
