30Januaryянваря · 30-е января
Земля не может быть предметом собственности.
Land cannot be an object of ownership.
1. Когда Сократа спросили, откуда он родом, он сказал, что он гражданин всего мира; он считал себя жителем и гражданином всей вселенной.
1. When Socrates was asked where he was from, he said that he was a citizen of the whole world; he considered himself an inhabitant and a citizen of the whole universe.
From Tusculan Disputations · close to the original .
What Tolstoy read · Craufurd Tait Ramage, Beautiful Thoughts from Latin AuthorsWhen Socrates was asked to what country he belonged, he said "that he was a citizen of the world." For he thought himself an inhabitant and citizen of the whole universe.
Source text: archive.orgOriginal · LatinSocrates quidem cum rogaretur, cuiatem se esse diceret, 'mundanum' inquit; totius enim mundi se incolam et civem arbitrabatur.
Source text: thelatinlibrary.comIn English · C. D. Yonge, 1877Socrates, indeed, when he was asked where he belonged to, replied, "The world;" for he looked upon himself as a citizen and inhabitant of the whole world.
Source text: gutenberg.orgDetails
The words shown were found, word for word, in the saved source text. Tusculan Disputations, V.108 (V.37 in Ramage's numbering).
Faithful to Ramage's English, Tolstoy's source for Cicero in December too: «гражданин всего мира» is Ramage's "a citizen of the world" (Cicero's one word is mundanum), and «жителем и гражданином всей вселенной» keeps Ramage's order and his "whole universe" (Yonge reverses the pair and says "the whole world"). «Откуда он родом» (where he was from) renders "to what country he belonged".
2. Если предположить, что вся обитаемая земля может быть собственностью землевладельцев и что они имеют право на ее поверхность, то все неземлевладельцы не имеют на нее права. Так что неземлевладельцы могут существовать на земле только под условием согласия на то землевладельцев. Они получают право на место, занимаемое их ногами, только под условием согласия на то землевладельцев. Так что если бы эти не пожелали дать им места, они должны бы были быть свержены с земного шара.
2. If we suppose that the whole habitable earth may be the property of landowners, and that they have a right to its surface, then all the landless have no right to it. So the landless can exist on the earth only on condition that the landowners consent. They receive the right to the place their feet occupy only on condition that the landowners consent. So that if the landowners were unwilling to give them room, they would have to be cast off the globe.
From Social Statics · shortened by Tolstoy .
Herbert Spencer’s own wordsEquity, therefore, does not permit property in land.
… habitable globe to be so enclosed, it follows that if the landowners have a valid right to its surface, all who are not landowners, have no right at all to its surface. Hence, such can exist on the earth by sufferance only. They are all …
… trespassers. Save by the permission of the lords of the soil, they can have no room for the soles of their feet. Nay, should the others think fit to deny them a resting-place, these landless men might equitably be expelled from the earth altogether.
Source text: archive.orgDetails
The words shown were found, word for word, in the saved source text. Social Statics (London, John Chapman, 1851), ch. IX 'The Right to the Use of the Earth', §2, pp. 114-115.
Close but shortened: Tolstoy leaves out 'They are all trespassers' and 'equitably', and renders 'by sufferance only' as 'only on condition that the landowners consent', which he repeats for 'room for the soles of their feet'. 'Supposing the entire habitable globe to be so enclosed' becomes 'if we suppose that all the habitable earth can be the property of landowners'. The passage is in the first edition: Spencer left it out of the abridged and revised Social Statics of 1892 (checked in archive.org socialstaticsab04spengoog). The Jubilee list of Tolstoy's sources names Crosby's Earth for All Calendar, a calendar of readings on the land question, where Tolstoy may have found this and the other land thoughts of January 30; no copy of it was found online.
3. Собственность на землю, подобно собственности на рабов, по самому существу своему отличается от собственности на предметы, созданные трудом.
Отнимите у человека или у народа деньги, товары, скот, и ваш грабеж окончится вместе с вашим уходом. Течение времени, конечно, не сделает вашего преступления делом хорошим, но оно уничтожит его последствия. Оно быстро уходит в даль прошлого вместе с людьми, которые участвовали в нем.
Но отнимите у народа землю, и ваш грабеж будет продолжаться вечно. Он будет новым грабежом для каждого нового ряда сменяющихся поколений, для каждого нового года, для каждого нового дня.
3. Property in land, like property in slaves, differs in its very essence from property in things produced by labor.
Take from a man or from a people their money, goods, and cattle, and your robbery will end with your departure. The passage of time will not, of course, make your crime a good deed, but it will destroy its consequences. The crime quickly recedes into the distant past, along with the people who took part in it.
But take from a people their land, and your robbery will go on forever. It will be a new robbery for each new generation in the succession, for each new year, for each new day.
From The Land Question: What It Involves, and How Alone It Can Be Settled · shortened by Tolstoy .
Henry George’s own wordsProperty in land, like property in slaves, is essentially different from property in things that are the result of labor. Rob a man or a people of money, or goods, or cattle, and, the robbery is finished there and then. The lapse of time does not, indeed, change wrong into right, but it …
… the effects of the deed. That is done ; it is over ; and, unless it be very soon righted, it glides away into the past, with the men who were parties to it, so swiftly that nothing save omniscience can trace its effects …
But rob a people of the land on which they must live, and the robbery is con …
… tinuous. It is a fresh robbery of every succeeding …
… eration — a new robbery every year and every day ; it is like the robbery which condemns to slavery the children of the slave.
Source text: archive.orgDetails
The words shown were found, word for word, in the saved source text. The Land Question: What It Involves, and How Alone It Can Be Settled (1881), ch. VII 'The Great-Great-Grandson of Captain Kidd'; New York, Webster, 1893, ch. VII, pp. 41-42 (1893 printing).
Close in what it keeps. 'The robbery is finished there and then' becomes 'your robbery ends when you leave'; 'That is done; it is over; and, unless it be very soon righted, it glides away into the past, with the men who were parties to it, so swiftly that nothing save omniscience can trace its effects' is shortened to 'it quickly goes into the distant past with the people who took part in it'; Tolstoy leaves out 'and in attempting to right it we would be in danger of doing fresh wrong. The past is for ever beyond us. We can neither punish nor recompense the dead.' 'The robbery is continuous' becomes 'your robbery will go on forever', and he stops before 'it is like the robbery which condemns to slavery the children of the slave'. The Jubilee list of sources names S. D. Nikolaev's Russian translation, «Земельный вопрос» (Posrednik, 1908).
4. Мы занимаем остров, на котором живем трудами рук своих. Разбитый в кораблекрушении моряк выброшен на наш берег. В чем его право? Может ли он сказать: я тоже человек, я тоже имею естественное право обрабатывать землю; я могу, на том же основании, как и вы, занимать частицу земли для того, чтобы кормиться своим трудом.
4. We occupy an island on which we live by the labor of our hands. A shipwrecked sailor is cast up on our shore. What is his right? Can he say: I too am a man, I too have a natural right to till the land; I may, on the same grounds as you, occupy a small piece of land in order to feed myself by my labor?
From De la propriété et de ses formes primitives · shortened by Tolstoy .
Original · FrenchNous occupons une île où nous vivons des fruits de notre travail ; un naufragé y est jeté : quel est son droit ? Peut-il dire, invoquant l'opinion unanime des jurisconsultes : Vous avez occupé la terre en vertu de votre titre d'êtres humains, …
… mais moi aussi je suis homme; j'ai aussi un droit naturel à faire valoir. Je puis donc occuper, au môme titre que vous, un coin de cette terre pour y vivre de mon travail.
Source text: archive.orgIn English · G. R. L. Marriott, 1878We occupy an island, on which we live by the fruits of our labour; a shipwrecked sailor is cast on to it: what is his right? May he invoke the universal opinion of jurists, and say: You have occupied the soil in virtue of your title as human beings, …
… but I too am a man, I too have a natural right to cultivate the soil. I may therefore, on the same title as you, occupy a corner of this land to support myself by my labour.
Source text: archive.orgDetails
The words shown were found, word for word, in the saved source text. De la propriété et de ses formes primitives (Paris, 1874); English, Primitive Property, tr. G. R. L. Marriott (1878), Chapter XXVI, «La théorie de la propriété» (1874, p. 393); Marriott's English, chapter XXVII, 'The Theory of Property', p. 351.
Close, with the jurists left out: Tolstoy drops the appeal to 'the unanimous opinion of jurists' and their reasons for property (the condition of liberty and of cultivation, a necessity of existence, a natural right), and stops at the question, before Laveleye's answer (deny the claim and the castaway must be thrown back into the sea, or left to die, as Malthus says). Two words follow Marriott's English rather than the French: 'a shipwrecked sailor' («моряк»; Laveleye wrote «un naufragé», a castaway) and 'a natural right to cultivate the soil' («право обрабатывать землю»; Laveleye: «un droit naturel à faire valoir», a natural right to assert). So Tolstoy's text was probably made from the English.
5. Причина величайших бедствий — это грубое и чудовищное утверждение о том, что земля может быть чьей-нибудь частной собственностью. Это так же несправедливо и жестоко, как и рабство.
5. The cause of the greatest calamities is the gross and monstrous assertion that land can be anyone’s private property. This is as unjust and as cruel as slavery.
From Lectures on Political Economy · reworded by Tolstoy .
What changed“The land, which God has given to our nation” becomes simply “land.”
Newman’s own wordsHistory and Nature of Landed Property and of Rent.
Here is the fundamental error, the crude and monstrous assumption, that the land, which God has given to our nation, is or can be the private property of any one. It is a usurpation exactly similar to that of Slavery.
Source text: archive.orgDetails
The words shown were found, word for word, in the saved source text. Lectures on Political Economy (London, John Chapman, 1851), Lecture VI 'History and Nature of Landed Property and of Rent', pp. 132-133, after the Sutherland clearances.
Changed. Newman's 'Here is the fundamental error, the crude and monstrous assumption' becomes 'the cause of the greatest calamities is the crude and monstrous assertion'; 'the land, which God has given to our nation' becomes 'the land'; and 'It is a usurpation exactly similar to that of Slavery' becomes 'it is as unjust and cruel as slavery'. The author is Francis William Newman, professor of Latin and land reformer; the Jubilee name index takes «Ньюмэн» for his brother, Cardinal John Henry Newman. Tolstoy's name is right.
6. Если есть человек, не имеющий права на землю, то незаконно право на землю — мое, ваше, всякого человека.
6. If there is a man who has no right to the land, then the right to the land is unlawful — mine, yours, every man’s.
From Man the Reformer, a lecture read before the Mechanics' Apprentices' Library Association,… · close to the original .
What Tolstoy read · Stanton Coit, The Message of Man: A Book of Ethical Scriptures27. Whilst another man has no land, my title to mine, your title to yours, is at once vitiated.
Source text: archive.orgEmerson’s own wordsOf course, whilst another man has no land, my title to mine, your title to yours, is at once vitiated.
Source text: gutenberg.orgDetails
The words shown were found, word for word, in the saved source text. Man the Reformer, a lecture read before the Mechanics' Apprentices' Library Association, Boston, 25 January 1841, in Nature, Addresses, and Lectures, After 'he has no farm, and he cannot get one'.
Close, with two changes. 'whilst another man has no land' becomes 'if there is a man who has no right to land', and Tolstoy adds a third owner ('mine, yours, every man's'); 'is at once vitiated' becomes 'is unlawful'. Coit, whom Tolstoy read, prints the sentence alone, without Emerson's 'Of course', as Tolstoy has it. Emerson's sentence is printed here without 'Of course', as Coit prints it; the reviewer may prefer Tolstoy's version because of the change from 'has no land' to 'has no right to land'.
Translation note. The Jubilee text breaks the italics at each comma and at the dash; the English sets the line as one.
7. Земля — общая наша мать, она кормит нас, дает нам приют, радует и любовно обогревает нас; с минуты рождения и пока мы не успокоимся вечным сном на ее материнской груди, она постоянно своими нежными объятиями лелеет нас.
И вот, несмотря на это, люди толкуют об ее продаже, и действительно, в наш продажный век земля представляется на рынок для оценки и для так называемой продажи. Но продажа земли, созданной небесным творцом, является дикой нелепостью. Земля может принадлежать только всемогущему богу и всем сынам человеческим, работающим на ней, или тем, что будут на ней работать. Она представляет собственность не одного какого-либо поколения, но всех прошлых, настоящих и будущих поколений, работающих на ней.
7. The land is our common mother: she feeds us, gives us shelter, gladdens us, and lovingly warms us; from the moment of our birth until we rest in eternal sleep on her motherly breast, she constantly cherishes us in her tender embrace.
And yet, in spite of this, people talk of selling it, and indeed, in our venal age the land is put on the market for appraisal and for so-called sale. But the sale of the land, created by the heavenly Creator, is a wild absurdity. The land can belong only to almighty God and to all the sons of men who work on it, or to those who will work on it. It is the property not of any one generation, but of all generations, past, present, and future, that work on it.
From Past and Present · shortened by Tolstoy .
Carlyle’s own wordsThe Land is _Mother_ of us all; nourishes, shelters, gladdens, lovingly enriches us all; in how many ways, from our first wakening to our last sleep on her blessed mother-bosom, does she, as with blessed mother-arms, enfold us all!
Men talk of 'selling' Land. Land, it is true, like Epic Poems and even higher things, in such a trading world, has to be presented in the market for what it will bring, and as we say be 'sold:' but the notion of 'selling,' for certain bits of metal, the _Iliad_ of Homer, how much more the _Land_ of the World …
Creator, is a ridiculous impossibility!
Properly speaking, the Land belongs to these two: To the Almighty God; and to all His Children of Men that have ever worked well on it, or that shall ever work well on it. No generation of men can or could, with never such solemnity and effort, sell Land on any other principle: it is not the property of any generation, we say, but that of all the past generations that have worked on it, and of all the future ones that shall work on it.
Source text: gutenberg.orgDetails
The words shown were found, word for word, in the saved source text. Past and Present (1843), Book III 'The Modern Worker', ch. VIII 'Unworking Aristocracy', The opening paragraphs of the chapter.
Shortened and changed in places. The 'mother' sentence is kept closely ('nourishes, shelters, gladdens, lovingly enriches us all' becomes 'feeds us, shelters us, gladdens us, and lovingly warms us'). Tolstoy leaves out the next paragraph (the hill where Carlyle first saw the sun rise, and 'there can be no true Aristocracy but must possess the Land') and adds 'And yet, in spite of this'. 'In such a trading world' becomes 'in our venal age'; the Iliad is left out, so the sale of 'the Land of the World-Creator' alone is 'a wild absurdity'; 'We buy what is saleable of it... Who can, or could, sell it to us?' is left out; 'worked well on it' becomes 'working on it'; and 'all the past generations ... and all the future ones' gains 'present'.
Translation note. «Продажный век», “venal age”: the adjective is built on «продажа», “sale”, the word the sentence goes on to use.
Никто не может иметь права собственности на землю.
No one can have the right to own land.
Tolstoy TodayТолстой сегодня · tolstoytoday.org/january/30