On February 19, 1861, Alexander II signed the Manifesto and the “Regulations on the peasants who emerged from serfdom”. The peasant reform of 1861 was then put into practice.

Peasant question. Reasons for reform.

Even the great-grandmother of Alexander, Catherine II knew that it was better to abolish serfdom. But she did not cancel, because "the best is the enemy of the good." Alexander II understood the benefits of the abolition of serfdom in terms of economics, but was worried, realizing that the damage would be inflicted in terms of political.

The main reasons for the peasant reform of 1861:

One of the reasons for the abolition of serfdom can be called the Crimean War. This war opened the eyes of many people to the rotten system of autocracy. Because of serfdom, the military-technical backwardness of Russia from the leading powers of Western Europe became obvious.
Serfdom did not show signs of its collapse, it is not known how long it could exist further. The agricultural economy continued to stand still.
The work of a serf, as well as the work of an assigned worker, differed several times from the work of a free wage worker working for piecework. The serfs worked very badly, as their labor was forced.
The government of Alexander II feared peasant unrest. After the end of the Crimean War, spontaneous uprisings of peasants swept through the southern provinces.
Serfdom was a relic of the Middle Ages and resembled slavery, which in itself was immoral.

Alexander II, knowing the causes of serfdom and how to eliminate them, did not know how to proceed with them.

Of particular importance was the “Note on the Liberation of the Peasants” by K. D. Kavelin. It was this “Note” that served as the initial plan for reforms when it fell into the hands of the tsar. Kavelin, in his project, insisted that the peasant should be released only together with the land, which should be given to him for a small ransom. "Note" aroused the ardent hatred of the nobles. They set Alexander II against Kavelin. As a result, Kavelin was dismissed from St. Petersburg University and lost his place as Tsarevich.

Rice. 1. Photograph by K. D. Kavelin.

Manifesto preparation. The beginning of transformation

The preparation of reforms was carried out at first very secretly. In 1858, noble committees were nominated from all Russian provinces to draw up a general draft of reforms. The struggle between the nobles unfolded mainly because of the issue of granting plots of land to the peasants after their liberation from serfdom.

The main legal provisions of the Peasant Reform of 1861

From the day the Manifesto was signed, the peasants ceased to be considered the property of the landlords. The peasants of each landowner's estate were united in rural societies.

The bill drew a line between non-chernozem and chernozem provinces. In the non-chernozem provinces, the peasant was left with almost as much land as he had in use when he was a serf.
In the chernozem provinces, the landlords went to all sorts of tricks - the peasants were given cut-down allotments, and the best land remained with the landowner, and the peasants got marshy and stony soils.
Fearing that the peasants would simply scatter so as not to pay a ransom for the cut plots, the government obliged each peasant to pay a ransom. The peasant could leave the permanent area of \u200b\u200bhis residence only with the permission of the rural society. The general gathering usually resisted the desire of the peasants to leave, since usually all labor duties had to be divided equally for each peasant. Thus, the peasants were bound by mutual responsibility.
The landowner could “give” the peasants a quarter of their allotment, which was given by the state. However, at the same time, the landowner took all the best land for himself. Peasants who fell for such “gifts” quickly went bankrupt, since the “granted” lands were usually unsuitable for growing crops.

Rice. 3. Peasant on one leg. Caricature of the reform of 1861.

Needless to say, the peasants were waiting for a completely different reform ...

The consequences of the peasant reform of 1861 and its significance

From the table below, you can see the main pros and cons, as well as the results of the 1861 reform:

*Positive consequences of the reform of 1861*	*Negative Consequences of the 1861 Reform*
Peasants became a free class.	The reform was of a predatory nature - the peasant had to pay almost all his life for the allotment of land allocated to him.
The abolition of serfdom led to an increase in production.	The landowners retained the best land for themselves, which forced the peasants, especially those with little land, to rent land from the landowners.
Entrepreneurship has intensified.	The community still remained in the village.
Two new social strata of the population appeared - the industrial bourgeoisie and the proletariat.	The privileges of the nobility remained intact, since the reforms did not affect this social stratum.
The reform was the first step towards civil equality, since medieval serfdom was finally abolished.	The main part of the peasants went bankrupt after the reforms. This forced them to look for work in the city, joining the ranks of hired workers or urban beggars.
The peasants for the first time had the right to land.	The peasant was still not considered. The peasantry had no influence on the political life of the country.
Peasant unrest was prevented, although minor uprisings took place.	The peasants overpaid almost three times for the allotments allocated to them.

The significance of the Peasant Reform of 1861, first of all, was the entry of the Russian Empire into the international market of capitalist relations. The country gradually began to turn into a powerful power with a developed industry. At the same time, the consequences of the reform had a negative impact primarily on the peasantry.

After the "liberation" the peasants began to go bankrupt much more. The total value of the land that the peasants had to buy out was 551 million rubles. The peasants had to pay the state 891 million rubles.

What have we learned?

The reform of 1861, studied in the 8th grade, was of great importance for the country and progressive society. This article tells about all the negative and positive results of this reform, as well as about its main bills and provisions.

Topic quiz

Report Evaluation

Average rating: 4.4. Total ratings received: 414.

Prerequisites for the peasant reform:

1) the development of capitalist relations in Russia in the second half of the 19th century;

2) the delay by serfdom of the further development of the economy and industry;

3) the strengthening of the peasant movement by social contradictions;

4) the defeat of Russia in the Crimean War, which showed the inability of Russia under the feudal-serf system.

In 1857, preparations began for the peasant reform. To carry out the reform, Emperor Alexander II formed the Secret Committee for Peasant Affairs, which in 1858 was transformed into the Main Committee for Peasant Affairs.

The implementation of the peasant reform began on February 19, 1861, when Alexander II issued the Manifesto "On the liberation of the peasants from serfdom."

This manifesto stated:

1) a general provision on peasants who came out of serfdom;

2) provisions on the arrangement of courtyard people;

3) provisions on the redemption of land;

4) regulations on local institutions in charge of decisions on peasant affairs;

5) land arrangement of peasants in the provinces of Russia;

6) different rules for certain localities and categories of peasants.

The main ideas in the peasant reform, according to this Manifesto were obtaining by peasants of personal freedom and transfer to the conclusion of a redemption deal with the landowner of the land for their use.

As a result of the peasant reform of 1861, the peasants received personal freedom and were endowed with land for personal use. The size of the land allotment could be established either by agreement between the peasant and the landowner, or without it. In the case of determining the size of the land allotment without a voluntary agreement, the allotment of land was carried out on the basis of local provisions that took into account the type of land (chernozem, non-chernozem, steppe), and ranged from 0.9 to 12 acres. Landowners could provide peasants with a smaller plot of land free of charge. In the case of peasants using the landowner's land on the terms of permanent possession, they paid the landowner quitrent and carried the corvée. Peasants could buy their land if they wished. The procedure for the redemption of land allotment by peasants:

1) the peasants themselves had to pay the redemption sum in the amount of 20-25%;

2) the rest of the funds (75-80%) came to the owner of the land from the state from the royal treasury. This amount became the state debt of the peasants, which they had to repay along with interest (6%) for 49 years. Having redeemed the land, the peasants ceased to be temporarily liable. After buying out the land, the peasants created rural communities, which were located in the neighborhood and united in volosts. A kind of self-government of peasants was formed in the volost, headed by the volost headman and the volost gathering.

In the course of the peasant reform of 1861, the peasants received the rights to:

1) personal freedom;

2) speaking in court;

3) filing a complaint;

4) participation in elections of self-government bodies;

5) acquisition of immovable and movable property on the right of ownership and conclusion of contracts;

6) engaging in trade;

7) limited freedom of movement;

8) general education;

9) joining a guild.

The disadvantages of the peasant reform of 1861 were:

1) the preservation of large landed estates;

2) the small size of peasant allotments;

3) the establishment of communities within which mutual responsibility was established;

4) continuation of a number of state in-kind duties;

5) payment of poll tax;

6) imposition of corporal punishment.

46. Reform 1860–1870 Changes in the state system of the Russian Empire

In 1860–1870 reforms of local government (zemstvo and city) were carried out.

The zemstvo reform was carried out in 1864 on the basis of the Regulations on provincial and district zemstvo institutions, adopted on January 1, 1864. The zemstvo reform consisted in attracting the public masses to participate in the economic and administrative management in counties and cities, in regulating the property and money of the zemstvo, in the maintenance of zemstvo buildings, means of communication, health care institutions, education, etc.

In the course of the zemstvo reform of 1864, provincial and district local governments, known as zemstvo assemblies and administrations.

Their functions included:

1) conducting local economic affairs;

3) construction and maintenance of schools and hospitals;

4) charity events;

5) development of local trade and industry;

6) sanitary measures, etc.

Among local self-government bodies, executive and administrative bodies were distinguished. The administrative body was the county zemstvo assembly, headed by the local marshal of the nobility. The executive body was the zemstvo and provincial councils, which consisted of a chairman and two members. Provincial and district zemstvo assemblies, as well as zemstvo councils were elected bodies and were elected for a period of 3 years.

Elections to local self-government bodies were held in such 3 electoral curia as:

1) curia of county landowners, for participation in which a high property qualification was required (100 minimum peasant allotments);

2) the city curia, which was attended by persons who meet a fairly high property qualification (15,000 rubles a year);

3) the rural curia (representatives of the rural community), for participation in which the property qualification was not established, and representatives chosen by the peasants at the volost meeting were sent to the elections. The city reform was carried out in 1870 on the basis of the City Regulations adopted on July 16, 1870. During the city reform of 1870, the city government was introduced, which is necessary for economic and administrative management in the city.

The essence of the city reform in 1870 was the formation of a system of city public administration, consisting of the city electoral assembly, the city duma and the city council. The head of the city duma was the mayor, whose candidacy was approved by the minister of internal affairs, and in Moscow and St. Petersburg - by the emperor from persons proposed by the duma or the governor.

The city council and council were elected for a term of 4 years. At the same time, half of the composition of the city government was to be updated every 2 years. Arising between a thought and uprava disputes were resolved by the governor. Elections to the city duma were held on the basis of the property qualification and the residency qualification, according to which all city voters were divided into 3 groups. Each of the 3 groups elected a third of the composition of the city duma. Voting in the city duma was secret.

The right to vote was held by persons who, at the time of the elections, had reached the age of 25, owned real estate or commercial and industrial enterprises and small property, were engaged in crafts and trade. Workers, low-ranking employees, those under investigation, those deprived of their clergy, convicted persons, and many others were not allowed to vote. Functions of city institutions:

1) appointment of elected officials;

2) establishment of city fees;

3) management of city property;

4) acquisition of urban real estate;

5) conducting economic and administrative affairs of the city, etc.

47. "The establishment of judicial institutions" 1864

The "Establishment of Judicial Regulations" was adopted in November 1864 and spoke of Russia's transition to a new judicial system.

According to the "Institutions of Judicial Establishments" of 1864, the judicial system included:

1) justice of the peace;

2) congresses of justices of the peace;

3) district courts;

4) judicial chambers;

5) the Supreme Cassation Court (Senate).

Judicial power extended to persons of all classes and to all cases, regardless of whether they were civil or criminal.

The justice of the peace had sole power, and the congresses of justices of the peace, district courts, judicial chambers and the Senate were collegiate judicial bodies. Justices of the peace, congresses, district courts and judicial chambers considered cases on the merits. The Senate did not decide cases on the merits in the general order of legal proceedings, but oversaw the protection of the law and its uniform execution by all judicial institutions of the empire.

To carry out the production of investigations in cases of crimes and misdemeanors, judicial investigators were appointed. Sworn investigators, together with judicial investigators, determined the guilt or innocence of the defendants in criminal cases in accordance with the statute of criminal proceedings.

Justices of the peace were elected by all estates and approved by the government. Jurors were appointed in a special order. All other officials of the judiciary were appointed by the government.

Justices of the peace carried out their activities in counties and cities. The county with the cities located in it constituted a world district, which was divided into world sections. In each district of the peace there was a district justice of the peace and honorary justices of the peace, which together constituted the congress of justices of the peace. The congresses of justices of the peace met at the appointed time either for the final decision of cases subject to a world trial, or for the consideration in cassation of requests and protests to cancel these decisions.

Justices of the peace were elected for 3 years at county zemstvo assemblies.

The following persons could be elected as justices of the peace:

1) who have reached the age of 25;

2) who have received education in higher or secondary educational institutions, or who have passed the relevant test, or who have served for at least 3 years in positions in which practical information on the production of court cases could be acquired;

3) owning immovable property in the established amount.

The district court was established for several counties and consisted of a chairman and members. The jurors were elected from the population of local estates according to general and regular lists. A juror could not be called more than once a year. The Judicial Chamber was established according to a special schedule in each district, consisting of several provinces or regions.

In the Senate, cassation departments (one for criminal and one for civil cases) were formed to manage the judicial part as the supreme court of cassation.

In these departments, in the judicial chambers and in the district courts, to perform the actions assigned to them by the statutes of criminal and civil proceedings, there were bailiffs.

At each district court and at each judicial chamber there was a special prosecutor and a certain number of assistant prosecutors.

At the courts there were sworn attorneys who were appointed to take up cases on the election and instructions of the litigants, the accused and other persons participating in the case, as well as on the appointment in certain cases of councils of sworn attorneys and chairmen of the courts. Attorneys at law could be persons with certificates from universities or other higher educational institutions confirming the completion of a course in legal sciences.

48. "Charter of criminal proceedings" 1864

The "Charter of Criminal Proceedings" was adopted in the course of the judicial reform of 1864.

Stages of the criminal process according to the "Charter of Criminal Proceedings" of 1864:

1) inquiry;

2) judicial preliminary investigation, which could not be initiated:

a) in the event of the death of the accused;

b) after the expiration of the limitation period;

c) in the cases specified by law, reconciliation of the accused with the offended;

d) when issuing a supreme decree or a general gracious manifesto by which forgiveness was granted;

e) in case of committing a criminal act, for which a more severe punishment was imposed than before, by a minor from 10 to 17 years old, placed in an educational and correctional institution by court order or sentence, before being placed in this institution, as well as in the institution itself or in time to escape or leave it.

3) preparatory actions for the trial, which consisted in the collection by the investigators of the materials of the criminal case, the subsequent presentation to the accused and transfer to the prosecutor. The prosecutor drew up an indictment and sent it to the judicial chamber, which then issued a ruling on bringing the case to court;

4) the judicial investigation, which was carried out at the time of the consideration of the case by the court and the examination of evidence in the court session. The litigation process included:

a) pronouncement of the indictment;

b) interrogation of the accused and witnesses;

c) verification of other evidence;

d) final debate (speech by the prosecutor or private prosecutor and defense counsel, or explanations of the defendant);

5) sentencing, which was based on a verdict previously rendered by a majority of the jury on the guilt or innocence of the defendant;

6) execution of the sentence;

7) review of the sentence, carried out only by the Senate.

The reasons for initiating a criminal case were:

1) announcement and complaints of individuals who have suffered loss or harm;

2) reports by officials of the police or other administrative authorities about misdemeanors of the police and other administrative authorities discovered and pursued without complaints from private individuals;

3) discretion by the justice of the peace of criminal acts to be prosecuted regardless of the complaints of private individuals;

4) reports of judicial places, persons of prosecutorial supervision and judicial investigators;

5) surrender.

Additional reasons for starting an investigation were:

1) the discretion of the authorities in relation to subordinates in connection with malfeasance;

2) the discretion of the offices and officials of state administrations in connection with violations of the charter of state administration by private individuals;

3) protocols drawn up by officials of the customs departments in case of violation of the Customs Charter;

4) protocols of the forester in case of violations of the Charter of the Forestry, etc.

According to the "Charter of Criminal Proceedings" of 1864, "nameless libels and anonymous letters" (anonyms) were not a legitimate reason to start an investigation. But the charter also stated that if the anonymous messages contained a message about an important malicious intent or a criminal act threatening society, then they could serve as a pretext for a police search or inquiry, which could subsequently lead to an investigation.

Also, the investigation will not begin if the accuser, who was not an eyewitness to the criminal act, does not provide evidence of the credibility of the accusation. In this case, the exception is cases where the accusation was based on the defendant's own, extrajudicial confession.

49. Change in the state system of autocracy after the revolution of 1905–1907

As a result of the revolution of 1905-1907. there were changes in the state system of autocratic Russia. As a result of the first Russian revolution of 1905-1907. the first step was taken in the transformation of the Russian Empire in the form of government into a constitutional monarchy. These changes in the form of government were enshrined in the "Basic Laws of the Russian Empire" dated April 23, 1906.

After the revolution of 1905–1907 executive power belonged to the emperor, who had the right to issue decrees necessary for the execution of laws, orders, appoint all senior officials, approve bills, and exercise judicial power. The emperor exercised his power through the Council of Ministers, which was reorganized into an executive and administrative body, ministries, main departments and local governors.

The emperor shared legislative power with the State Council transformed into a legislative body and a new state body - the State Duma, which were the chambers of parliament. These bodies were convened and dissolved by the emperor.

The competence of the Parliament included:

1) issuance, amendment and repeal of laws;

2) state list of income and expenses;

3) approval of reports on the execution of the state budget;

4) the permission of state loans, etc. The State Council differed from the State Duma in the order of recruitment, composition and terms of office. Half of the State Council was appointed by the emperor, and the other half was elected. Persons over the age of 40, with no criminal record, with a secondary education could be elected to the State Council. The members of the State Council, appointed by the emperor, were approved for 1 year, and the elected members were elected for 9 years with re-elections every 3 years for a third of the members.

Unlike the State Council, the State Duma was an all-Russian representative body and was formed solely on the basis of elections, which were unequal, indirect and non-universal. For elections to the State Duma, provincial and city electoral districts were established, in which provincial and city electoral assemblies elected members of the State Duma. Provincial and city electoral assemblies consisted of electors.

The electors of the provincial electoral assemblies were elected according to such curiae as:

1) curia of county landowners - persons who have a certain property qualification (from 125 to 800 acres of land);

2) curia of urban voters - persons who owned real estate in cities, owned commercial and industrial enterprises;

3) curia of volost representatives - peasants who belonged to rural communities;

The election of the electors of the city electoral assemblies took place in the curiae of the workers and the curiae of the townsfolk.

At the same time, women, men under the age of 25, pupils and students, active servicemen did not have voting rights.

In the period from 1905–1907. 3 State Dumas were convened, different in composition. The First State Duma (April 27 - July 8, 1906) lasted 72 days and was dissolved on July 9, 1906 in connection with the Trudovik faction's proposal for a radical solution to the agrarian issue. The Second State Duma (February 20 - June 3, 1907) was dissolved as a result of accusing them of preparing a coup d'état. The Third State Duma, whose activities are associated with the name of P.A. Stolypin, was convened as a result of a change by the emperor of the electoral law.

50. Manifesto "On the improvement of the state order" October 17, 1905 "Basic state laws" 1906

On October 17, 1905, the manifesto “On the Improvement of the State Order” proclaimed the democratization of the political regime of the Russian Empire and the granting of democratic rights and freedoms to the population of Russia, the confirmation of the convocation of the State Duma, the promise of expanding voting rights, and the proclamation of the State Duma as a legislative body.

The manifesto of October 17, 1905 not only proclaimed the inviolability of the person, freedom of speech, conscience, assembly and association, but also became the official basis for the emergence of the following political parties:

1) the party of the government camp, which advocated the preservation of absolutism in the state;

2) the liberal opposition, advocating a constitutional form of government and democratic reforms;

3) the Union of the Russian people, who considered the autocratic monarchy the most acceptable form of government and used terror as methods of struggle;

4) the Constitutional Democratic Party (the Cadets), which sought to establish a constitutional monarchy by peaceful means, the forced purchase of part of the landed estates, and the introduction of an 8-hour working day;

5) the "Union of October 17", which supported the provisions of the Manifesto of October 17, 1905 and advocated a constitutional monarchy with popular representation based on universal suffrage;

6) the Russian Social Democratic Labor Party (RSDR), which advocated the overthrow of the autocracy, the separation of church and state, the abolition of ransom payments for peasants, and the introduction of an 8-hour working day;

7) The Party of Socialist Revolutionaries (SRs), which advocates the overthrow of the autocracy and the convening of a Constituent Assembly, and also advocates the transition to socialism through peasant communities through the socialization of the land. The Manifesto "On the Improvement of the State Order" on October 17, 1905, fulfilled its purpose as a political document, activating the bourgeois forces and creating the basis for the emergence of many political organizations. The "Basic State Laws" of 1906 were the result of changes in the state system as a result of the revolution and testified to the first step in the transformation of the Russian Empire into a constitutional monarchy. The content of the "Basic State Laws" of 1906 was developed by the State Chancellery and the Council of Ministers, and on April 23, 1906, it was approved by Emperor Nicholas II. The “Basic State Laws” of April 23, 1906 are considered the first Russian Constitution.

The creation of the State Duma, the reorganization of the State Council and the formation of a special government body - the Council of Ministers - were associated with the adoption of the "Basic State Laws" of 1906.

According to the "Basic State Laws" of 1906, the emperor's power was already limited. He could exercise legislative power jointly with the State Duma and the State Council. At the same time, he fully owned the executive power (he carried out the appointment and dismissal of ministers, the supreme commander in chief, resolved the issues of declaring war and concluding peace, and represented the state in foreign relations).

According to the "Basic State Laws" of 1906, legislative power and legislative initiative belonged to the State Duma and the State Council. In case of emergency during a break in the work of the State Duma, the Government, with the approval of the emperor, could issue emergency decrees, which were equated with laws.

1) the right to freely leave the community with plots of land 2) complete exemption from corvée and dues

3) free land 4) freedom from serfdom

2. Which of the above was one of the reasons for the dependence of the peasants on the landowners after the reforms of the 1860s - 1870s? ?

3) the destruction of the peasant community 4) the preservation of the right of the landowner to transfer peasants for a month

3. As a result of the military reform in 1874 in Russia

1) recruitment was introduced into the army 2) a regular army was created instead of the noble militia

3) the number of mercenary troops has been increased4) all-class military service has been introduced

4. The peasants who, after the reform of 1861 and before the conclusion of the redemption deal, were forced to bear duties in favor of the landowner, were called

1) assigned 2) temporarily liable 3) sessional 4) freed

5. Implementation of reforms 1860-1870 in Russia

1) contributed to the transition from a traditional society to an industrial one

2) removed all obstacles to the transition to an industrial society

3) slowed down the transition from a traditional society to an industrial one

4) did not change the foundations of traditional society

6. In the 1870-1880s. territories were included in the Russian Empire

1) North Caucasus and Transcaucasia 2) Central Asia 3) Western Ukraine and Crimea 4) Finland

7. Indicate the date related to the Russian-Turkish wars

1) 1821-1825 2) 1857-1861 3) 1877-1878 4) 1894-1895

8. Which of the above was carried out during the reign of Alexander III?

1) localism was canceled 2) the estate was equalized with the estate

3) a decree was issued on the return of runaway peasants to landlords 4) redemption payments were reduced

9. One of the leaders of the organization "Land and Freedom" 1876-1879. was

1) G.V. Plekhanov 2) K.S. Aksakov 3) B.N. Chicherin 4) P.Ya. Chaadaev

10. An organization that deployed in the late 70s - early 80s. 19th century terror against government officials and the king, was called

1) Northern society 2) Southern society 3) "Narodnaya Volya" 4) "Black redistribution"

11 . Establish a correspondence between reforms, transformations in Russia in the 19th century. and start dates.

12. Which of the following phenomena survived in Russia in the 1890s?

1) autocracy 2) recruitment

3) serfdom of peasants 4) landownership

5) peasant community 6) temporarily liable state of peasants

13. Arrange the following XIX events in chronological order.

A) zemstvo reform B) cancellation of redemption payments C) Decembrist uprising D) peasant reform

14. The Berlin Congress, which ended the Russian-Turkish war, at which Russia managed to defend the independence of Montenegro and achieve autonomy for Northern Bulgaria, took place in

1) 1815 2) 1856 3) 1878 4) 1881

15. Manifesto on February 19, 1861 on the abolition of serfdom and the "Regulations on peasants emerging from serfdom" signed

1) Alexander I 2) Nicholas I 3) Alexander II 4) Nicholas II

16. Military leaders M.D. Skobelev, I.V. Gurko became famous during

1) Patriotic War of 1812 2) Foreign campaign of the Russian army in 1813-1814

3) Russian-Turkish war of 1877-1878. 4) World War I 1914-1918

1) speech on the Senate Square 2) the assassination of Alexander II

3) barricade battles in Moscow 4) arrest of A.I. Zhelyabov

5) convocation of the State Duma 6) trial of the Narodnaya Volya

Answers to test number 1.

Part 1.

Question

Answer

a, c

a,b

Part 2. 1) aggravation of social relations in connection with the introduction of a system of serfdom; divisions within the ruling class; termination of the legitimate Rurik dynasty; 2) 1606 - 1610; 3) 1598 - 1605; 4) 1497, Ivan III's Sudebnik restricts the right of a peasant to move to another feudal lord a week before and a week after St. George's Day (November 26), subject to the payment of "payment for the elderly" - for living on the land of the former feudal lord; 1550, "Sudebnik" of Ivan IV confirms the existing situation, increasing the size of the "elderly"; 1581, “reserved years” are introduced - years in which peasant transitions were completely prohibited; 1592, compilation of scribe books, where peasants and their owners are indicated, at the same time a decree was issued on the prohibition of peasant transitions; 1597, a decree on the search for runaway peasants for 5 years and their return to their former owner; 1607, the "Code" of Tsar Vasily Shuisky increases the period of investigation to 15 years; 5) Polish prince Vladislav, son of the Swedish king Karl-Philip, son of False Dmitry II and Marina Mnishek Ivan, representatives of the largest boyar families.

Answers to test number 2.

OPTION 1

OPTION 2

OPTION 3

Answers to test number 3.

№ QUESTIONS

ANSWER

Answers to test number 4.

OPTION 1

OPTION 2

History Test No. 5 on the topic"Renaissance Art" Pupil(s) 7-___ grade _________________________ _______________________

1. Match the name of the scientist and the discovery: 1. I. Newton a) the discovery of Jupiter's satellites 2. W. Harvey b) the law of universal gravitation 3. R. Descartes c) the concept of "variable" 4. G. Galileo d) the secret of blood circulation.

2. Which of the great scientists of the Renaissance was burned at the stake for their scientific beliefs: 1) N. Copernicus; 2) D. Bruno; 3) G. Galileo.

4. The most famous Italian Renaissance artist, the author of "La Gioconda": 1) Rafael; 2) El Greco; 3) Leonardo da Vinci; 4) Diego Velazquez.

5. Indicate who we are talking about: sculptor, artist, poet, architect, musician, philosopher, mechanic: 1) Michelangelo; 2) Leonardo da Vinci; 3) Rafael; 4) Rembrandt.

The abolition of serfdom is the central event in the Russian history of the 19th century, since it affected the interests of the general population, changed their usual way of life, and ushered in the “epoch of great reforms”.

Objectively, regardless of the intentions of the reformers, the economic essence of the changes was to create conditions for the replacement of serf labor, based on non-economic coercion of the worker, with capitalist exploitation of a worker free personally, and also to some extent from the means of production, the worker.

“Manifesto of February 19, 1861”, “General Regulations on Peasants Who Have Emerged from Serfdom, Their Settlement and on the Government’s Assistance in Acquiring Field Land by Peasants”, other legislative acts of the reform ensured the undermining of feudal ownership of land, the mobilization of land property, its transition to other classes, including the peasantry, which was endowed with a number of personal and property rights. The reform created the legal foundations for the development of the all-Russian capitalist market: money, land, labor. It contributed to the spread of entrepreneurship, the productive use of capital. It was precisely these features of it, clearly visible in the economic upswing of the 1870s and 1880s, that allowed historians to compare the adoption of the reform of 1861 with coming of age, followed by maturity.

However, Russia crossed this age threshold with a clear delay, as evidenced by its defeat in the European war of 1853-1856. Moreover, steps in the noted direction were made by her, as it were, with reluctance, expressed in the limited nature of the transformations: the preservation for a long time of feudal-serfdom remnants in the form of landownership, the temporarily obligated state of the peasants with their political lack of rights, civil inequality compared to other estates.

This contradictory nature of the reform of the abolition of serfdom was clearly reflected in its implementation in the Yaroslavl province. The Provincial Committee for Improving the Life of the Peasants, which consisted of 20 landowners, was created on October 1, 1858, when there were 3,031 landowners, 523,345 serfs, and 28,072 serfs in the province. Most of the peasants were owned by the feudal aristocracy, royal dignitaries and ministers. These include: the princes Gagarins and Golitsyns (Yaroslavl district), prince Vorontsov (Danilov district), prince Lieven (Lyubimsky district), counts Musin-Pushkins (Mologa district), who had over 76 thousand dessiatins. land, Count Sheremetev, who owned 18.5 thousand dess. land in the Rostov district and 70.96 thousand dess. in Uglich county. In the Yaroslavl province, the quitrent system of serf duties prevailed, according to which the landowner received the main income not from the land, but from his serf, who was released for quitrent. On the eve of the reform, 9% were in corvée, 61% of the peasants were on dues, the rest (30%) performed mixed service.

The peasants expected from the reform exemption from compulsory work for the landowner, the right to own the land they used, and also the allocation of not only agricultural, but also forest land. On March 8, 1861, the Manifesto on the abolition of serfdom was promulgated in Yaroslavl. As a result of its implementation, the peasants lost a significant part of the land in the form of segments: if under serfdom the average allotment of a Yaroslavl peasant was 5.2 dessiatines, then after liberation it was reduced to 3.8 dessiatines.

The forced nature of the reform was reflected in the fact that statutory charters, designed to regulate new relations between the former owner of the serfs and the peasants, were often drawn up without the participation of the latter. Such charters were clearly enslaving in nature, which led to their return by peace mediators to the landowners for alteration. According to the statutory charters, the Yaroslavl peasant, when he redeemed his land allotment, had to pay 41 rubles for 1 tithe of land. 50 k., while the average market price of a tithe in the Yaroslavl province was 14 rubles. 70 k. This injustice, as well as the obligatory serving of duties by mutual responsibility, the reduction of land allotments (cuts) caused discontent among the peasants, who often refused to sign charter letters, to fulfill their obligations to the landowner. Frightened by the performances of the peasants, the landowners were forced to even call in military teams to restore calm. In just less than a year after the proclamation of the "Manifesto of February 19, 1861" 46 peasant uprisings took place in the province.

The liberation of the peasants in the Yaroslavl province caused enormous socio-cultural consequences and, having solved a number of problems, created new problem nodes in the life of every person and the whole society.

Agrarian-peasant question in the middle of the XIX century. became the most acute socio-political problem in Russia. The preservation of serfdom hindered the process of industrial modernization of the country, prevented the formation of a free labor market, an increase in the purchasing power of the population, and the development of trade.

Share work on social networks

If this work does not suit you, there is a list of similar works at the bottom of the page. You can also use the search button

PAGE \* MERGEFORMAT 1

INTRODUCTION

By the middle of the 19th century, the old relations of production in Russia came into clear conflict with the development of the economy, both in agriculture and in industry. This discrepancy began to manifest itself long ago, and it could have dragged on for a very long time if the sprouts, and then strong elements of new capitalist relations that undermined the foundations of serfdom, did not develop in the depths of the feudal formation. Two processes took place simultaneously: the crisis of feudalism and the growth of capitalism. The development of these processes during the first half of the 19th century caused an irreconcilable conflict between them both in the field of the basis - production relations, and in the field of the political superstructure.

The purpose of this work is to conduct a study of the essence and content of the peasant reform of 1861.

To achieve this goal, it is necessary to solve the following tasks:

Describe the agrarian situation before 1861;

Describe the process of implementing the peasant reform;

To reveal the essence of the peasant reform of 1861;

To reveal the content of the peasant reform;

Describe the peasant movements of 1861-1869;

Describe the impact of the peasant reform on the economic development of the country.

The object of this study is the essence and content of the peasant reform of 1861.

The subject of this study is the social relations that arise during the implementation of the peasant reform of 1861.

The methodology of this study was made up of the following methods of cognition: the method of induction and deduction, the method of analysis and synthesis, the historical method, the logical method, and the comparative method.

The theoretical basis for writing the control work was the scientific works of the following authors: Yurganov A. L., Katsva L. A., Zaitseva L. A., Zayonchkovsky P. A., Arslanov R. A., Kerov V. V., Moseykina M. N., Smirnova T.V., etc.

The control work consists of an introduction, 3 chapters, a conclusion and a list of references.

CHAPTER 1. PREREQUISITES FOR THE IMPLEMENTATION OF THE PEASANT REFORM

1.1. Agrarian situation before 1861

Under Paul I, a revision of the former attitude towards land as an object of taxation began. The Decree of December 18, 1797 established a differentiated approach to taxes for different localities (amount, quality of land, amount of income), i.e. the universal character of taxation passed into the cadastral one. 4 digits were entered. The provinces of the Chernozem belt and the Central industrial region, except for Moscow and Tver, were assigned to the upper class; to the lowest - northern, Finnish-Novgorod, Siberian provinces. Under Paul, state-owned villages were to be provided at the rate of 8-15 dess. to the auditor's soul.

The right of free peasant communities and individual peasants to their lands remained in an indefinite state. There was no centralized body in charge of agriculture and related land management, and there was no institution in charge of the affairs of the free peasant population.

The feudal system of organizing agriculture at the turn of the 18th-19th centuries. experienced a period of decay and crisis. By this time, the productive forces in agriculture had reached a relatively high development, an indicator of which was the use of machines, certain achievements in the field of agronomic science, and the spread of crops of new labor-intensive industrial crops.

At the beginning of the 19th century, the center of all economic life in the countryside was the landowner's estate. The land owned by the landowner was divided into two parts: the lordly plow, which was cultivated by the labor of serfs, and the peasant, which was in their use. The ratio of these parts was determined by the economic considerations of the landowner himself.

The basis of serfdom was feudal ownership of land. This type of property is characterized by the following features: the monopoly right to own land belonged only to the nobility; the direct producer, the serf, was personally dependent on the landowner, was attached to the land in order to guarantee the working hands of the feudal lord. Therefore, the serfs were assigned a conditional allotment, which was by no means their property and could be taken away from them by the landowner. The serf economy was in its own way natural, representing a closed whole.

In the first half of the XIX century. there is a significant growth in commodity-money relations, which, under the conditions of the introduction of new, capitalist technology and the partial use of free-labor, characterized a crisis of the feudal-serf system.

The expansion of serf plowing at the expense of serf allotments and the increase in the number of corvée days not only worsened the financial situation of the peasant, but also had an impact on the condition of his working cattle and equipment necessary for cultivating both his allotment and the landowner's land.

With the deterioration of the position of the peasantry, the quality of cultivation of the landlords' land also deteriorated. The increase in dues sometimes exceeded the increase in peasant incomes. Most of the landowners ran their households in the old fashioned way, increasing their incomes not by improving the management of their economy, but by intensifying the exploitation of the serfs. The desire of a part of the landowners to switch to other, more rational methods of managing the economy in the circumstances of serf labor could not have significant success. Carrying out certain agricultural activities was in complete contradiction with unproductive forced labor. It is precisely because of this that already at the beginning of the 19th century. a number of landowners raise in the press the question of the transition to free-lance labor.

Strengthening the exploitation of the serfs during the first half of the XIX century. caused an intensification of the class struggle, which manifested itself in the growth of the peasant movement.

One of the most frequent forms of protest against serfdom was the desire of the peasants to resettle. So, in 1832. The landlord peasants of a number of provinces rush to the Caucasus. The reason for this was the decree of 1832, according to which, in order to colonize the Black Sea region, various categories of the free population were allowed to settle there. This decree did not mean serfs, but caused a large wave of unauthorized migrations. The government had to use vigorous measures to detain the fugitives and cancel the issued order. peasant movement. Aimed at the fight against serfdom, it grew every year, posed a threat to the existence of the autocratic serf state.

The crisis of the feudal-serf system under the influence of the development of capitalism led to the emergence of a revolutionary ideology, bourgeois in its objective content.

The Crimean War revealed all the imperfections of the serf system, both economically and politically, and had a huge impact on the abolition of serfdom. Despite the heroism of the troops, the army suffered setback after setback.

At this time, the government begins to understand the need for radical changes, the impossibility of existing in the old way.

During the Crimean War, a significant rise in the peasant movement was noticed, which assumed a mass character.

In 1855 The movement became even more massive. The unrest of the peasants was also connected with their hope to gain freedom by joining the state militia. Having ascended the throne in February 185 after the death of Nicholas I, Alexander II distinguished himself by even greater conservatism than his father. Even those insignificant measures that were carried out in relation to the serfs under Nicholas II always met with resistance from the heir to the throne. However, the situation that has developed in the country The first act, which marked the official statement on the need to abolish serfdom, was the extremely obscure speech of Alexander II, delivered by him on March 30, 1856.

No less alarming was the “Sober Movement” common to the peasantry, which was tensely expecting freedom, which began in 1858 and there was no immediate threat of an uprising, the memory of the Pugachevshchina, the participation of the peasantry in European revolutions, greatly increased the fear of the “tops”.

Glasnost arose spontaneously from below. In Russia itself, “like mushrooms after the rain” (as Tolstoy put it), publications began to appear that personified the thaw. The emancipation of the spiritual forces of society preceded the reforms and was their prerequisite.

Only from the end of 1811, the management of state property and state peasants was concentrated in the Department of State Property of the Ministry of Finance. Under Nicholas I (1825-1855), the guardianship of the state peasants was carried out by the Ministry of State Property. Adjutant General Count P.D. was appointed head of the new department. Kisilev 1 . The land organization of the peasants was started by work on land surveying. 325,000 people were recognized as completely landless and without any settled way of life, peasants in need of full-fledged land plots. The land arrangement of the peasants took place by allocating free state lands to small-land communities in their locations or by organizing resettlement in sparsely populated areas. A stable order of ownership was established on the cut lands: one part was determined for pasture for public use; other land intended for hay mowing, arable land and estates was divided among the state peasants by decision of the peasant assembly. In the rules on the arrangement of family plots (1846), the conditions for household ownership of land were established, and the size of the plot ownership was indicated. The family plot was in the use of one householder, who was obliged to pay the state tax. The property in its entirety passed to the eldest of the legal heirs of the deceased householder. The conditions for household ownership of land were formed, the regulation of relations between farms and landowners on the basis of household plot land use was entrusted to the peasant society.

In 1842, the Law on Obligated Peasants was adopted. The initiator of the law was Count P.D. Kisilev. He believed that the regulation of relations between landowners and peasants was necessary, but the nobility should keep in their hands all the land that belonged to them. The landowners retained the right of ownership of the land, they were given the right to conclude agreements with the peasants on the use of the land, everything depended on the will and desire of the landowners. The law actually had no practical knowledge. Reforms in terms of state peasants, appanage and partly landowners showed the need for the existing system 2 .

Thus, the new economic organization of the peasants was, as it were, transitional to private peasant landownership with a solid mechanism of single inheritance. In practice, there were few family plots, mainly in the Samara province. The tax system established under Paul I remained practically unchanged.

The vast mass of the population, living by age-old traditions, remote in most cases from the urban environment and isolated from the commodity-money mechanism of the social economy, could be connected with it exclusively through various kinds of intermediaries, dealers, usurers, speculators. Without proper state tutelage, the Russian countryside was doomed to become a victim of the emerging bourgeois class.

1.2. Implementation of the peasant reform

The defeat in the Crimean War put the autocracy in front of an inevitable choice: either the empire, as a European power, come to naught, or hastily catch up with rivals. Alexander II (1855 - 1881) recognized that it is much better to abolish serfdom "from above than from below".

Opponents of serfdom gradually united around two main platforms: revolutionary-democratic and liberal. The revolutionary democrats - N.G. Chernyshevsky, N.A. Dobrolyubov, A.I. Herzen, N.P. Ogarev. They demanded the transfer of land to the peasants without redemption, the reduction of taxes from state peasants, the introduction of communal ownership of land, self-government and popular representation.

The peasant version of the reform in the course of preparations for the abolition of serfdom was not put forward.

The liberals (N.A. Milyutin, Yu.F. Samarin, V.A. Cherkassky, scientist P.P. Semenov) proceeded from the idea of emancipating the peasants, but preserving the landlords as owners of the land. Therefore, at the center of their position was the question of the size of the allotment left to the peasants, the ransom that the peasants must pay for their release.

The reform was opposed by a significant part of the landlord class, which defended serfdom.

The other part of the landlords, among whom were representatives of the highest officials, defended the most beneficial version of the reform for themselves - the liberation of the peasants without land and for a ransom.

The preparation of the peasant reform took 4 years. It began with traditional approaches, but ended with a completely innovative law. On January 3, 1857, the next (10th for the pre-reform period) Secret Committee on Peasant Affairs was established from the highest dignitaries of the country. But with the adoption on November 20, 1857 of a rescript addressed to the Vilna Governor-General V.I. Nazimov's traditional fate of fruitless secret committees was overcome. The highest (signed by Alexander II) rescript gave the first government reform program for three provinces - Vilna, Grodno and Kovno. The landowners retained the right of ownership of all the land, but the peasants were left with their estate settlement, which they could acquire ownership through a ransom (the period was not determined); field, allotment land was provided to the peasants for use in exchange for services (without specifying the exact size). The patrimonial power of the landowners was preserved, the term "liberation of the peasants" was replaced by a more cautious one - "improvement of life". To prepare the reform, it was planned to open noble committees in these three provinces. In itself, the rescript to Nazimov was of a local nature and did not directly signify the start of an all-Russian reform. However, the importance and cardinal novelty of this act lay in its publicity. It was immediately sent to all governors and provincial marshals of the nobility for review, and a month later appeared in the Journal of the Ministry of the Interior. From now on, glasnost became a powerful engine for the preparation of reform and made it difficult (and even excluded) the rejection of it. On December 5, 1857, a similar rescript was adopted for the St. Petersburg province, which essentially meant the inevitability of its further expansion after the capital. Herzen and Chernyshevsky praised these first steps of Alexander II on the path to reform 3 .

In early 1858, the Secret Committee, having lost its secrecy, became the Main Committee for Peasant Affairs. During the year, in response to the addresses of the nobility initiated by the government, rescripts were given to the European provinces of Russia, so that by the beginning of 1859 46 provincial committees were opened, and publicity for the preparation of the reform expanded. A struggle broke out in the committees between the conservative majority, who defended the right of the landowners to all the land and patrimonial power, and the liberal minority, who agreed to the peasants buying out allotment land as property. Only in one committee - Tver, headed by A.M. Unkovsky, the liberal nobility had the majority. The publicity of the discussion of the peasant question contributed to the strengthening of the tense expectation of the will among the peasantry, and the mass peasant movement that broke out in Estonia in the spring of 1858 showed the government how dangerous landless liberation - the so-called "Ostsee version" of reform. By the end of 1858, the liberal bureaucracy had gained the upper hand over the conservative forces in preparing the peasant reform. On December 4, the Main Committee adopted a new government program for the abolition of serfdom, which, unlike the rescripts, provided for the redemption of allotment land by peasants into property and the deprivation of landowners of patrimonial power.

The Main Committee could no longer cope with such a grandiose task as considering all provincial projects and creating new legislation that had no analogues in the previous history of Russia. For this purpose, a new, non-traditional institution was created - Editorial Commissions (1859-60) from representatives of the bureaucracy and public figures, most of whom supported the liberal reform program. The generally recognized leader in this area was N.A. Milyutin, his closest associates and assistants Yu.F. Samarin, V.A. Cherkassky, N.Kh. Bunge, and the Chairman of the Editorial Commission - Ya.I. Rostovtsev, enjoying the boundless confidence of Alexander II. Here a draft law was created and codified, which was then discussed in the Main Committee on Peasant Affairs and in the State Council, where the conservative majority did not support it. However, Alexander II approved the opinion of the minority of the council and signed the law - "Regulations on February 19, 1861". The great act of liberation from serfdom was adopted on the day of the accession of Alexander II to the throne, and he himself went down in history as the tsar-liberator 4 .

CHAPTER 2 CONTENT OF THE PEASANT REFORM

2.1. The essence of the peasant reform of 1861

The Peasant Reform in Russia (also known as the abolition of serfdom) is a reform begun in 1861 that abolished serfdom in the Russian Empire. It was the first in time and the most significant of the reforms of Emperor Alexander II; was proclaimed by the Manifesto on the abolition of serfdom of February 19 (March 3), 1861.

At the same time, a number of contemporaries and historians called this reform "feudal" and argued that it did not lead to the liberation of the peasants, but only determined the mechanism for such liberation, and moreover, flawed and unfair.

The economic prerequisites for the abolition of serfdom had developed long before the reform of 1861. The inefficiency of the economic system, which was based on the labor of serfs, was obvious; even for many rulers of Russia. The need for this step was pointed out by Catherine II, Alexander I, Nicholas I. Under Alexander I, serfdom was abolished in the western provinces of the country.

By the mid 50s. The feudal-serf economy was experiencing particularly difficult times: the decline of many landowners' farms and serf manufactories, the increased exploitation of serf labor made it necessary to reform the economy. At the same time, the significant and rapid growth of new, bourgeois economic relations (an increase in the number of capitalist manufactories, the emergence of factories, a violent industrial revolution, an intensification of the stratification of the peasantry, an intensification of internal trade) required the abolition of the obstacles that stood in its way. 5 .

However, the decisive argument in favor of revising the very foundations of the feudal economy was the defeat of Russia in the Crimean War. In 1856-1857. a series of peasant protests swept across the country, on whose shoulders the main hardships of the war fell. This forced the authorities to accelerate the development of the reform. In addition, Russia, claiming the role of a great European power, had to appear in the eyes of European public opinion as a modern, not archaic, state.

In January 1857, under the chairmanship of Emperor Alexander II, the Secret Committee began to work to discuss measures to arrange the life of landlord peasants, later renamed the Main Committee on Peasant Affairs. However, there was no unity among the members of the Committee regarding the timing and content of the reform. Initially, it was supposed to free the peasants without land (as was already done in the Baltic states at the beginning of the century) and to maintain non-economic coercion. However, during the discussion of this option, it soon became clear that such a half-measure would lead to a social explosion, since the peasants expected not only freedom, but also land. Within the framework of the Main Committee, Editorial Commissions were created, which were headed by supporters of the liberal version of the reorganization of the agrarian sector, Count Ya.I. Rostovtsev and Comrade (Deputy) Minister of Internal Affairs N.A. Milyutin. In 1858, the work of the Committee became known to the general public (previously such committees worked in complete secrecy) and numerous reform projects began to come to it from local nobility committees.

A number of specific options for solving the agrarian issue were borrowed from them. The key role in counteracting the conservatives was played by the emperor himself, who took a position close to the program of the liberals. On February 19, 1861, he signed the Manifesto and the "Regulations on peasants emerging from serfdom." They came into effect after the publication, which took place two weeks later. The document considered five main positions: the personal liberation of peasants, peasant allotments, peasant duties, the management of liberated peasants, the status of temporarily liable peasants.

2.2. The content of the peasant reform

On February 19, 1861, the "Regulations" and "Manifesto" were signed by the tsar. On March 1, 1861, the "Manifesto" for reform was announced 6 .

The materials of the "Regulations" form three sections: general provisions (for all serfs), local regulations (for certain regions of the country) and additional rules (for certain categories of serfs - at factories, etc.)

All relations between the landowner and the peasant are regulated by the peasant community. In other words, it is not the peasant who personally takes, redeems, pays, but on behalf of all the peasants this is done by the community. And she herself pays the landowner only a part of the ransom. And the landlords receive the bulk of the ransom from the state. For a loan for this amount, the community pays the state with interest for 50 years.

Consider how the issue of allotment was resolved. The existing allotment was taken as a basis. In Great Russia, three bands were identified: black earth, non-chernozem, steppe. In each lane, the highest and lowest limits were introduced (1/3 less than the highest). The highest limit of the allotment of the non-chernozem strip was from 3 to 7 dess.; for chernozem - from 2/4 to 6 dess. (1 dec = 1.1 ha). In the steppe - put on was one. If the existing allotment is larger than the upper one, then the landowner can cut it, if it is lower than the lower one, he must cut it, or reduce the payment.

At least 1/3 of the land must always remain with the landowner.

As a result, in 8 western provinces peasant allotments were increased by 18-20%, in 27 provinces the land use of peasants decreased, in 9 it remained the same. 10 million male souls of the former landlord peasants received about 34 million dess. land, or 3.4 dess. per capita.

For the use of the estate and allotment, the peasant had to perform specific duties to the master for 9 years, hence the term "temporarily obligated peasants." Two forms of service were envisaged: quitrent and corvée. The rate of dues is 10 rubles. the national average for the highest allotment. But if the allotment was not of the highest size, then the quitrent was reduced disproportionately to the size of the allotment. For the first tithe, 50% of the quitrent had to be paid, for the second - 25%, etc., i.e. for the first tithe of land, the landowner received half the quitrent.

The corvée was built like this: 40 days for men and 30 for women, but 3/5 of these days had to be worked out in the summer. And the summer day was 12 hours long.

The ransom was obligatory if the landowner so wished. Otherwise, the landowner was obliged to allocate allotment to the peasant for a period of 10 years, and what would happen next remained unclear.

The amount of the ransom has been determined. For the allotment, it was necessary to pay the landowner such an amount that, if it was deposited in a bank that pays 6% of the profit on deposits per year, would annually bring the amount of quitrent. With a dues of 10 rubles. the amount of the ransom (with a full allotment) was determined as follows: 10 rubles. - 6% X rub. = 100%. 10x100 6

The landowner, having received 166 rubles for each peasant. 66 kopecks, with this money he could buy agricultural machines, hire workers, buy shares, i.e. use at your discretion.

The peasants could not immediately pay the landlord the full amount.

Therefore, the state provided a loan to the peasants in the amount of 80% of the redemption amount if the peasants received a full allotment and 75% - if they received incomplete allotments. This amount was paid to the landowners immediately at the conclusion of the redemption transaction. The remaining 20-25% the peasants had to pay to the landowner by agreement. The state gave the peasants money at interest, the peasants paid 6% of the loan, and the payment was stretched for 49 years.

For comparison, let's take an example of the central regions: 1 dec. usually cost 25 rubles. with free sale, and its redemption cost the peasant 60 rubles. On average, the ransom for the country exceeded the price of land by one third, i.e. the price of the allotment was not directly related to the real price of the land 7 .

CHAPTER 3 RESULTS OF THE PEASANT REFORM OF 1861

3.1. Peasant movements 1861-1869

The peasants did not expect such a liberation. Revolts broke out in many villages. In 1861, 1889 peasant uprisings were registered.

In the peasant movement after the reform, 2 stages can be distinguished:

1) spring - summer 1861 - reflected the attitude of the peasants to the reform, the peasants did not think that they would be deprived of their land and forced to pay for it;

2) spring 1862 - associated with the implementation of the reform.

A total of 3,817 performances took place between 1860 and 1869, or an average of 381 performances per year.

The former state peasants were allotted land on more favorable terms than the former (landowner peasants. By law, they retained their land plots, for which they were given ownership records. In a number of cases, the area used by the peasants was reduced. Until the law of November 24, 1866 d. often the lands of state peasants were not delimited from state lands, part of which were used by rural communities.With the receipt of possession records, the peasants were completely deprived of the opportunity to use the treasury lands, which caused their discontent, which often (resulted in open speeches.

The tsarist government developed its own special version of the reform: the peasants basically had the land that they cultivated before the reform.

This was an option that met the interests of the landowners, the interests of preserving the tsar and the autocracy.

Payments for land allotments were a heavy burden on the peasant economy; among the former state peasants they were lower than among the former landowners. If the former state peasants paid from 58 kopecks for one tithe of allotment land. up to 1 rub. 04 kop., 8, then the former landowners - 2 rubles. 25 kop. (Novokhopersky district)9. With the transition of the former state peasants to compulsory redemption (according to the law of June 12, 1886), the redemption payments were increased, in comparison with the quitrent tax, by 45 percent, however, they were lower than the redemption payments paid by the former landlord peasants.

In addition to payments for land, peasants were required to pay numerous other taxes. The total amount of taxes did not correspond to the profitability of the peasant economy, as evidenced by high arrears. Thus, in the Ostrogozhsk district in 1899, arrears amounted to 97.2 percent of the annual salary for former landlord peasants, and 38.7 percent for former state peasants.

V. I. Lenin wrote that the former state and former landlord peasants "... differ among themselves not only in the amount of land, but also in the amount of payments, the terms of redemption, the nature of land ownership, etc.", which is among the former state peasants ". ..the bondage reigned less and the peasant bourgeoisie developed faster.” V. I. Lenin believed that without taking into account the peculiarities of the situation of peasants of various categories, "... the history of Russia in the 19th century and especially its immediate result - the events of the beginning of the 20th century in Russia - cannot be understood at all ...".

3.2. The impact of the peasant reform on the economic development of the country

Two new groups began to form in the countryside: the rural bourgeoisie and the rural proletariat. The economic basis of this process was the development of commercial agriculture.

Traditional conflicts with landlords were supplemented in the 60-90s of the nineteenth century. new contradictions between the rural bourgeoisie and the poor, which led to the growth of peasant uprisings. The demands of the peasants were limited to the return of lands cut off by the landowners during the reform, the weakening of unevenness.

All peasants had allotment lands (unlike private lands, until they were fully redeemed, they were considered incomplete property of the peasants, they can be inherited, leased out, but not sold, and you cannot refuse the allotment). The size of the allotment ranged from 2-3 dess. up to 40-50 dec. for one yard.

Thus, as a result of the peasant reform, the peasants received:

personal freedom;

Limited freedom of movement (remained dependent on peasant communities);

The right to general education, with the exception of especially privileged educational institutions;

The right to engage in public service;

The right to engage in trade, other entrepreneurial activities;

From now on, peasants could join guilds;

The right to go to court on equal grounds with representatives of other classes;

The peasants were in the position of temporarily obligated to the landowners until they bought out a plot of land for themselves, while the amount of work or quitrent was stipulated by law, depending on the size of the plot; the land was not transferred free of charge to the peasants, who did not have sufficient funds to buy out plots of land for themselves, which is why the process of complete emancipation of the peasantry dragged on until the revolution of 1917, however, the state approached the issue of land quite democratically and provided that if the peasant did not could redeem the whole allotment, then he paid a part, and the rest - the state 8 .

The main positive result of the peasant reform is the equalization of the members of society in their natural rights and, above all, in the right to personal freedom.

Cons of the peasant reform:

Feudal traditions were preserved (it was not the land that was redeemed, but the personality of the peasant);

The land allotment decreased, its quality worsened;

The amount of payments was more than the amount of dues.

Advantages of the peasant reform:

Free working hands appeared;

The domestic market began to develop;

Agriculture enters into commercial capitalist circulation.

Former serfs, despite the fact that they received freedom, were drawn into a new dependence, from which many were unable to free themselves. Some peasants, who had little money, left the village and began to look for a better life in industrial cities.

Many peasants managed to earn the required amount of money and emigrate to Canada, where land was provided to the settlers free of charge. The peasants, who retained the desire to engage in agriculture, already in the spring of 1861 organized anti-government protests.

The unrest continued until 1864, then abruptly subsided. The historical significance of the peasant reform. The reform played a significant role in the social and economic development of the state, and also contributed to the strengthening of positions in the international arena 9 .

The progressive countries of Europe ceased to consider the Russian Empire a feudal state. The liberation of the peasantry gave a new impetus to the development of the industrial complex and domestic trade.

CONCLUSION

Serfdom existed in Russia much longer than in other European states, and over time acquired forms that could actually identify it with slavery.

The development of bills on the abolition or liberalization of serfdom was carried out as early as the beginning of the 19th century.

However, a number of historical events, in particular the Patriotic War and the Decembrist uprising, somewhat suspended this process. Only Alexander II returned to the issues of reforming the peasant sphere in the second half of the 19th century.

On February 19, 1861, Alexander II solemnly signed the Manifesto, which granted personal freedom to all peasants dependent on the landlords.

The manifesto included 17 laws that regulated the property, economic, social and political rights of the former serf population.

The freedom granted to the peasants in the first few years was to be purely nominal, people were obliged to work for a certain period of time (not clearly regulated by law) for the landowner in order to obtain the right to use the land plot.

The peasant reform of 1861 provided for the abolition of patrimonial power, as well as the organization of peasant elective self-government, which was seen as the basis for the participation of peasants in the new local all-estate self-government.

In accordance with the general provisions of the reform, the peasant was granted personal freedom free of charge, and he also received the right to his personal property free of charge. The landowner retained the right to all the lands, but he was obliged to provide the peasant with the estate for permanent use, and the peasant was obliged to buy it out. Further, the landowner is obliged to give, and the peasant does not have the right to refuse an allotment if the landowner gives it. During this period, for the use of the allotment, the peasants pay dues or serve corvee. At any time, the landowner has the right to offer the peasants to redeem the plots, the peasants in that case are obliged to accept this offer.

Thus, the estate, like the community, seemed to be a temporary institution, inevitable and justified only for the transitional period.

For peasants with money (which were isolated cases), they were given the opportunity to buy the required amount of land from the landowner.

The reform of 1861 accelerated the development of Russia along the capitalist path in industry and trade. But in agriculture - it fettered the peasants to the community, lack of land and lack of money.

Therefore, the peasantry in its development was unable to advance quickly along the capitalist path: disintegration into kulaks and poor peasants.

The sharp rise in the wave of protests against the predatory reform by the landowning peasants on February 19, 1961, forced the government to postpone the implementation of the reform among the state peasants. It feared that the state peasants, dissatisfied with the proposed reform, would support the speeches of the former landlord peasants. Therefore, only on November 24, 1866, the law “On the land arrangement of state peasants in 36 provinces” was issued, which included the Voronezh province.

The reform created the possibility of a transition to new forms of economy in agriculture, but did not make this transition an inevitability, a necessity.

Like the landlords, absolutism was able to slowly rebuild over many years, preserving itself by transforming itself from a feudal monarchy into a bourgeois monarchy.

The abolition of serfdom, the construction of railways, and the appearance of credit increased the possibility of selling grain and other agricultural products, increased the marketability of agriculture and animal husbandry. Russia came out on top in the world in the export of bread.

Agricultural production grew as a result of its specialization in regions, the plowing of new lands. Agricultural implements and horse-drawn machines began to be used in landlord and kulak farms. After 1861, the landowners sold more land than they bought, more often rented it out than used it themselves in their households. The peasants paid for the lease of the landowner's land in money or in processing. The labor system of the economy became transitional from corvée to capitalist.

LIST OF USED LITERATURE

Arslanov R. A., Kerov V. V., Moseykina M. N., Smirnova T. V. History of Russia from ancient times to the twentieth century, - M .: Norma, 2007. - 388 p.
Questions of the history of the national economy and economic thought. Issue. I. - M.: Economics, 2009
Zayonchkovsky P.A. The abolition of serfdom in Russia. - M., 2008.
Zaitseva L.A. History of the Russian peasantry / / Special courses in history: Textbook. - Ulan-Ude, 2004.
Zaitseva L.A. Reforms P.D. Kisileva//Agrarian history: reforms and revolutions. – Ulan-Ude, 2005
Russian history. Textbook for high schools. Ed. Yu.I.Kazantseva, V.G.Deeva. - M.: INFRA-M. 2008. - 472p.
National history. Elementary course: textbook. manual for universities, ed. I. M. Uznarodova, Ya. A. Perekhova - M.: Gardariki, 2009.- 463 p.
Yurganov A. L., Katsva L. A. History of Russia: Textbook for secondary educational institutions. M.: - MIROS, VENTANA-GRAF, 2010. - 466 p.

1 Questions of the history of the national economy and economic thought. Issue. I. - M.: Economics, 2009, p. 78; Zaitseva L.A. Reforms P.D. Kisileva//Agrarian history: reforms and revolutions. - Ulan-Ude, 2005., Art. 121

2 Zayonchkovsky P.A. The abolition of serfdom in Russia. - M., 2008., p. 34

3 Arslanov R. A., Kerov V. V., Moseykina M. N., Smirnova T. V. History of Russia from ancient times to the twentieth century, - M .: Norma, 2007. - 388 p., p.87

4 National history. Elementary course: textbook. manual for universities, ed. I. M. Uznarodova, Ya. A. Perekhova - M.: Gardariki, 2009.- 463 p., p.72

5 Yurganov A. L., Katsva L. A. History of Russia: Textbook for secondary educational institutions. M.: - MIROS, VENTANA-GRAF, 2010. - 466 p., p. 90

6 Zayonchkovsky P.A. The abolition of serfdom in Russia. - M., 2008., p. 78

7 Zaitseva L.A. History of the Russian peasantry / / Special courses in history: Textbook. - Ulan-Ude, 2004., p. 121

8 National history. Elementary course: textbook. manual for universities, ed. I. M. Uznarodova, Ya. A. Perekhova - M.: Gardariki, 2009.- 463 p., p.84

9 Russian history. Textbook for high schools. Ed. Yu.I.Kazantseva, V.G.Deeva. - M.: INFRA-M. 2008. - 472p., p.129

Other related works that may interest you.vshm>
3032.		Socio-economic development of Russia after 1861	9.01KB
	Features of capitalism in Russia There were no spiritual and cultural prerequisites for capitalism: high literacy of the population, long traditions of private property, strong sense of justice. Council of Congresses of Industrialists of the South of Russia. the formation of the proletariat class The class of the proletariat in Russia in the 19th century.
3009.		The abolition of serfdom in Russia. Reform of 1861	10.27KB
	The peasant question is the knot of all problems in Russia. The country was heading towards revolution, but the peasantry was not a revolutionary force, and therefore the revolution did not happen. Preparation of the peasant reform.
13239.		The development of the legal status of the individual in Russia in the period from 1861 to 1993	74.87KB
	degree of development. Problems in the field of human rights and freedoms, the legal status of the individual have attracted the attention of researchers throughout the existence of human society, so today a huge amount of material has been accumulated that allows a general study of the legal status of the individual.
15506.		Ideas, causes, algorithm and results of modern land reform	24.91KB
	Ideas, Causes, Algorithm and Outcomes of Modern Land Reform Land reform is a set of economic organizational socio-political legal measures that were aimed at transforming land relations. The main stages of the land reform were: land inventory; transfer of land into ownership lease; formation of an appropriate legal framework. The legal basis of the land reform was formed by a block of laws and by-laws designed to give a legal character to the ongoing reforms.
19037.		USA in the period of Gromadyanskoy war 1861-1865rr	121.93KB
	Ushinsky Department of All-World History and Methodology of Science Explanatory note to the master's work of the ROC master on the topic: USA in the period of the Gromadyansk war 1861-1865pp. Causes of the Civil War in the USA 1. The development of the USA in advance of the Gromadyan War and the formation of a protirich between Pivnich and Pivnichchyu.
9365.		Results of economic activity of enterprises	74.8KB
	Profit is an indicator that most fully reflects the efficiency of production, the volume and quality of manufactured products, the state of labor productivity, the level of cost. Profit as the final financial result of the activities of enterprises is the difference between the total amount of income and the cost of production and sale of products, taking into account losses from various business operations. formed not as a result of effective economic activity, but by changing, for example, the structure of products ...
6732.		Economic results of the transition period	15.7KB
	Suppression of inflation as a condition for economic growth. Suppression of inflation as a condition for economic growth The goal of economic transformation in the transition period can be generally defined as the construction of a market economy: depoliticization of the economy, the inclusion of market forces, the establishment of private ownership of the means of production. In practice, the most obvious indicator was low inflation. Not a single post-socialist state has achieved growth without limiting inflation to 40 per year or less, while all countries that ...
21174.		Financial results of the enterprise and their regulation	118.97KB
	The ongoing economic reforms in Belarus have had a significant impact on the financial position of enterprises. This is determined by inflation and disparity in prices for products consumed and sold by producers. In recent years, both the legal norms governing relations for the sale of products and the organizational and legal forms of these relations have changed significantly. To date, the problem of making a profit from the sale of products has become sharply aggravated.
12602.		The results of the state examination of working conditions	508.67KB
	To study the procedure for conducting state examination of working conditions; Conduct an analysis of the results of the state examination of working conditions; Conduct an analysis of the state of labor protection in the Republic of Sakha (Yakutia) Develop recommendations for improving the quality of the examination of working conditions.
16955.		MECHANISMS FOR SPECIFICATION OF RIGHTS TO THE RESULTS OF INTELLECTUAL ACTIVITY	13.38KB
	One of the problems that arise during the transition to this type of economy is the problem of specifying property rights to the results of intellectual work - intellectual property. We will determine exactly the mechanism for securing the results of intellectual work and the economic effect of this if we turn to the economic theory of property rights. With regard to intellectual property objects in Russia, this statement encounters a number of problems on its way, and among them is the problem of the specification of rights. Specification...

The result of the reform of 1861

Peasant question. Reasons for reform.

Manifesto preparation. The beginning of transformation

The main legal provisions of the Peasant Reform of 1861

The consequences of the peasant reform of 1861 and its significance

What have we learned?

Topic quiz

Report Evaluation

INTRODUCTION

CHAPTER 1. PREREQUISITES FOR THE IMPLEMENTATION OF THE PEASANT REFORM

1.1. Agrarian situation before 1861

1.2. Implementation of the peasant reform

CHAPTER 2 CONTENT OF THE PEASANT REFORM

2.1. The essence of the peasant reform of 1861

2.2. The content of the peasant reform

CHAPTER 3 RESULTS OF THE PEASANT REFORM OF 1861

3.1. Peasant movements 1861-1869

3.2. The impact of the peasant reform on the economic development of the country

CONCLUSION

LIST OF USED LITERATURE

The concept of statistical observation, the stages of its implementation

Interaction between man and the technosphere

Thesaurus definition. Thesauri. linguistic principles of thesaurus construction. Example: WORDNET - intelligent computer thesaurus

Calculation of the consequences of an explosion inside technological equipment

The result of the reform of 1861

The result of the reform of 1861

Peasant question. Reasons for reform.

Manifesto preparation. The beginning of transformation

The main legal provisions of the Peasant Reform of 1861

The consequences of the peasant reform of 1861 and its significance

What have we learned?

Topic quiz

Report Evaluation

INTRODUCTION

CHAPTER 1. PREREQUISITES FOR THE IMPLEMENTATION OF THE PEASANT REFORM

1.1. Agrarian situation before 1861

1.2. Implementation of the peasant reform

CHAPTER 2 CONTENT OF THE PEASANT REFORM

2.1. The essence of the peasant reform of 1861

2.2. The content of the peasant reform

CHAPTER 3 RESULTS OF THE PEASANT REFORM OF 1861

3.1. Peasant movements 1861-1869

3.2. The impact of the peasant reform on the economic development of the country

CONCLUSION

LIST OF USED LITERATURE

Similar articles