The soldiers were certainly fed out of all proportion to their accustomed fare in the villages. Not only was their bread ration higher than the quantity habitually consumed by the most well-fed Russian workers, but in addition they had a daily meat ration. In peace time meat was certainly very little consumed in the villages, and even the town workers were accustomed to a very limited ration of meat. In peace time the soldiers themselves were fed, not on meat, but on "shchi" (cabbage soup) and "kasha" (porridge made of buckwheat). The meat crisis in Russia, which already in 1916 became a literal famine, is to be ascribed entirely to the methods of army feeding. But, even so, probably the greater part of the enormous quantity of food absorbed by the army is accounted for by waste and mismanagement.
The consumption of the town population also increased at the beginning of the war. The abolition of alcohol was partly responsible for this increase. Not only did the town workers save more money to be spent on food, but abstinence actually increased their appetites. The example of Russia confirms the established fact that drunkards spend less on food because they prefer to spend more on drink, and actually they feel hunger less. But while the consumption of the town population increased, that of the peasantry increased relatively much more.
I am afraid it is impossible to give an adequate idea to English readers of how Russian peasants were accustomed to be fed. Were I simply to say that in large districts the Russian peasants lived in a perpetual state of semi-starvation, it would nevertheless be impassible for the English reader to grasp the situation. Even "semi-starvation," as understood in Western Europe, would probably be considered waste and plenty in a Russian village. Without giving statistics to show how little the Russian peasants made use of milk, meat, eggs, butter, or even bread, I need only quote one short story of Turgeniev to indicate their extreme poverty:
