Are you here: Life style

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 hired 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 landlords 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 resettlements 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 those who own land on the basis of household plot land use was assigned 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 landlords and peasants was necessary, but the nobility should retain 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 landowners, 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 to 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 the reform and made it difficult (and even ruled out) 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 had opened, and publicity for the preparation of the reform was expanding. In the committees, a struggle broke out 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 the 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 "serfdom" 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 those 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 noble 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 , the allotment was uniform. 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 1820%, 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 (landlord 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 by 45 percent compared to the quitrent tax, 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 from each other 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, but not sold, and it is impossible to 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 landlords until they bought out a plot of land for themselves, while the amount of work or dues 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 for free. The peasants, who retained the desire to engage in agriculture, organized anti-government protests in the spring of 1861.

The unrest continued until 1864, then abruptly subsided. The historical significance of the peasant reform. The implementation of 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 landowners.

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

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 establishment of elective peasant 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 the 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 not able to quickly advance along the capitalist path: decomposition into kulaks and poor peasants.

The sharp upsurge in the wave of speeches against the predatory reform by the beating landlord peasants on February 19, 1961, forced the government to postpone the reform of 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 itself 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 rent 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., p. 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 Results 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 set 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 ahead of the Gromadyan War and the molding of the massacre 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 specification of property rights to the results of intellectual work intellectual property. We will determine precisely 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 specifying rights. Specification...

In Russian history, one of the saddest pages is the section on "serfdom", which equated most of the population of the empire with the lowest grade. The peasant reform of 1861 freed dependent people from bondage, which became impetus for reorganization the whole state into a democratic free state.

In contact with

Basic concepts

Before talking about the process of abolition, we should briefly understand the definition of this term and understand what role it played in the history of the Russian state. In this article you will get answers to the questions: who abolished serfdom and when serfdom was abolished.

Serfdom - these are legal norms that prohibit the dependent population, that is, the peasants, from leaving certain land plots to which they were assigned.

Talking about this topic briefly will not work, because many historians equate this form of dependence with slavery, although there are many differences between them.

Not a single peasant with his family could leave a certain plot of land without the permission of an aristocrat who owned land. If the slave was attached directly to his master, then the serf was attached to the land, and since the owner had the right to manage the allotment, then the peasants, respectively, too.

People who fled were put on the wanted list, and the relevant authorities had to bring them back. In most cases, some of the fugitives were defiantly killed as an example for others.

Important! Similar forms of dependence were also common during the New Age in England, the Commonwealth, Spain, Hungary and other states.

Reasons for the abolition of serfdom

The predominant part of the male and able-bodied population concentrated in the villages, where they worked for the landowners. The entire crop harvested by the serfs was sold abroad and brought huge incomes to the landowners. The economy in the country did not develop, which is why the Russian Empire was at a much lagging stage of development than the countries of Western Europe.

Historians agree that the following causes and conditions were dominant, as they most sharply demonstrated the problems of the Russian Empire:

This form of dependence hindered the development of the capitalist system - because of this, the level of the economy in the empire was at a very low level.
The industry was going through far from its best times - due to the lack of workers in the cities, it was impossible for the full functioning of factories, mines and plants.
When agriculture in the countries of Western Europe developed according to the principle of introducing new types of equipment, fertilizers, methods of cultivating the land, then in the Russian Empire it developed according to an extensive principle - due to increase in the area of crops.
The peasants did not participate in the economic and political life of the empire, and yet they constituted the predominant part of the entire population of the country.
Since in Western Europe this type of dependence was considered a kind of slavery, the authority of the empire suffered greatly among the monarchs of the Western world.
The peasantry was dissatisfied with this state of affairs, and therefore uprisings and riots constantly took place in the country. Dependency on the landlord also encouraged people to go to the Cossacks.
The progressive layer of the intelligentsia constantly put pressure on the king and insisted on profound changes in.

Preparations for the abolition of serfdom

The so-called peasant reform was prepared long before its implementation. As early as the beginning of the 19th century, the first prerequisites for the abolition of serfdom were laid.

Cancellation preparation serfdom began during the reign, but it did not go beyond projects. Under Emperor Alexander II in 1857 Editorial Commissions were created to develop a project for liberation from dependence.

The body faced a difficult task: a peasant reform should be carried out according to such a principle that the changes would not cause a wave of discontent among the landowners.

The commission created several reform projects, reviewing various options. Numerous peasant revolts pushed its members towards more radical changes.

Reform of 1861 and its contents

The manifesto on the abolition of serfdom was signed by Tsar Alexander II March 3, 1861. This document contained 17 points that considered the main points of the transition of peasants from a dependent to a relatively free class society.

It is important to highlight main provisions of the manifesto about the liberation of people from serfdom:

the peasants were no longer the dependent class of society;
now people could own real estate and other types of property;
to become free, the peasants had to initially buy the land from the landowners, taking a large loan;
for the use of the land allotment they also had to pay dues;
the creation of rural communities with an elected head was allowed;
the size of allotments that can be redeemed were clearly regulated by the state.

The reform of 1861 to abolish serfdom followed the abolition of serfdom in the lands subject to the Austrian Empire. The territory of Western Ukraine was in the possession of the Austrian monarch. The elimination of serfdom in the west happened in 1849. This process has only accelerated this process in the East. They had practically the same reasons for the abolition of serfdom as in the Russian Empire.

The abolition of serfdom in Russia in 1861: briefly

The manifesto was released throughout the country from March 7 to mid-April of the same year. Due to the fact that the peasants were not just freed, but forced to buy their freedom, they protested.

The government, in turn, took all security measures, redeploying troops to the most hot spots.

Information about such a path of liberation only outraged the peasantry. The abolition of serfdom in Russia in 1861 led to an increase in the number of uprisings compared to the previous year.

The uprisings and riots almost tripled in scope and number. The government was forced to subdue them by force, which caused thousands to die.

Within two years from the moment the manifesto was published, 6/10 of all the peasants in the country signed the advising letters "on liberation". Buying the land for most people stretched over more than a decade. Approximately a third of them had not yet paid their debts in the late 1880s.

The abolition of serfdom in Russia in 1861 was considered by many representatives of the estate of landlords. the end of Russian statehood. They assumed that now the peasants would rule the country and said that it was necessary to choose a new king among the mob, thereby criticizing the actions of Alexander II.

Results of the reform

The peasant reform of 1861 led to the following transformations in the Russian Empire:

the peasants now became a free cell of society, but they had to redeem the allotment for a very large sum;
the landlords were guaranteed to give the peasant a small allotment, or sell the land, at the same time they were deprived of labor and income;
"rural communities" were created, which further controlled the life of the peasant, all questions about obtaining a passport or moving to another place were again decided on the council of the community;
conditions for obtaining freedom caused discontent, which increased the number and scope of the uprisings.

And although the liberation of the peasants from serfdom was more profitable for the landowners than for the dependent class, it was progressive step in development Russian Empire. It was from the moment when serfdom was abolished that the transition from an agrarian to an industrial society began.

Attention! The transition to freedom in Russia was quite peaceful, while due to the abolition of slavery in the country, the Civil War began, which became the bloodiest conflict in the history of the country.

The reform of 1861 did not completely solve the actual problems of society. The poor still remained far from government and were only an instrument of tsarism.

It was the unresolved problems of the peasant reform that came to the fore at the beginning of the next century.

In 1905, another revolution began in the country, which was brutally suppressed. Twelve years later, it exploded with renewed vigor, which led to and drastic changes in society.

For many years, serfdom kept the Russian Empire at the agrarian level of development of society, while in the West it had long since become industrial. Economic backwardness and peasant unrest led to the abolition of serfdom and the liberation of the dependent stratum of the population. These were the reasons for the abolition of serfdom.

1861 was a turning point in the development of the Russian Empire, since it was then that a huge step was taken, which later allowed the country to get rid of the vestiges that hindered its development.

Prerequisites for the Peasant Reform of 1861

The abolition of serfdom, a historical overview

Conclusion

In the spring of 1861, the great All-Powerful Alexander II signs a manifesto on the liberation of the peasants. The conditions for obtaining freedom were taken very negatively by the lower class. And yet, twenty years later, most of the once dependent population became free and had its own land allotment, house and other property.

Introduction

2.3 Peasant allotment

2.4 Local regulations

Conclusion

Introduction

The reform of 1861 on the abolition of serfdom in Russia was of great historical and political significance. That is why this topic is very relevant for the history of our Motherland.

The abolition of serfdom in Russia became the main event of the middle and second half of the 19th century. The problem of the economic and political reorganization of Russia has always been in the center of attention of historians, both domestic and foreign. The solution of the peasant question, that is, the liberation of peasants from serfdom, was one of the most acute problems of Russian society in the late 50s and early 60s of the XIX century. There are many historians' assessments of the significance and background of the 1861 reform.

Thus, Soviet historians argued that the abolition of serfdom was carried out under the threat of the "revolutionary situation" that had developed in the country, which allegedly occurred as a result of the complete decomposition of the feudal serf system and the defeat of Russia in the Crimean War.

Purpose and objectives of the study.

The tasks are:

to consider the concept and main provisions of the peasant reform,

to highlight and consider the reform of 1861 from different points of view, to trace the entire socio-political process that preceded the adoption of this law, i.e. reveal and characterize the content of the causes and prerequisites for the abolition of serfdom;

to determine how this peaceful revolution, carried out from above, was perceived by the landowners and the liberal-minded part of the intelligentsia and nobility. Did the tsar's will really turn out to be a liberation for the peasants or even greater economic and political enslavement of rural workers.

what consequences did the reform of the abolition of serfdom have for the economic development of the Russian state, and what changes did it lead to in the administrative and political structure of the state apparatus of Russia.

The tasks set are being implemented in order to identify the theoretical foundations of the process of abolition of serfdom in Russia, its positive and negative consequences.

The object of research in the course work is directly the abolition of serfdom.

The subject of the study is a complex of consequences of the abolition of serfdom in Russia.

The course work consists of an introduction, two chapters and a conclusion. The introduction substantiates the relevance of the chosen topic, formulates the purpose and objectives of the study, indicates the object and subject of the study. The first chapter is devoted to the study of the prerequisites for the reform of February 19, 1864. The second chapter reflects the features of the peasant reform. The third chapter analyzes the consequences of the abolition of serfdom in Russia. In conclusion, the results of the entire study are summarized and appropriate conclusions are drawn.

1. Alexander II as a reformer

A very heavy legacy went to the new Russian autocrat from his father. “I hand over my command to you, but unfortunately, not in the order I wanted. I leave you a lot of work and worries,” Nicholas I admonished his successor before his death.

During this period, Russia was in a severe economic and political crisis, which was the result of the untenable Nikolaev policy. The Crimean War, which has been going on for two years, the fall of Sevastopol (August 28, 1855), the conclusion of the Paris Peace Treaty, which is unfavorable for Russia (March 18, 1856), all this created a tense situation in the country that required an early resolution. The accession of Alexander II to the throne aroused hope in society for changes for the better. So, Herzen, who was in exile in London, sent a letter to the new emperor in March 1855, in which he tried to convince the tsar to abolish serfdom in Russia: “Give the land to the peasants, it belongs to them anyway. Wash away the shameful stain of serfdom from Russia, heal the blue scars on the backs of our brethren. Hurry! Save the peasant from future atrocities, save him from the blood that he will have to shed!"

Alexander II was not inclined to reformism, but rather, on the contrary, he was a staunch conservative and supporter of the serf system. He received an excellent education, his teachers were General K.K. Merder, poet V.A. Zhukovsky, K.I. Arseniev, E.V. Kankrin, F.I. Brunnov, M.M. Speransky.

Alexander II finished his education with a trip in 1837 together with V.A. Zhukovsky in 29 provinces of European Russia, Transcaucasia and Western Siberia. Since the late 1930s, Nicholas I has been introducing his son Alexander to state affairs as a member of the State Council, the Senate and the Synod, chairman of two secret committees on peasant affairs. Absent from the capital, the emperor handed over to his son Alexander all state affairs. In 1850, Alexander took part in military operations in the Caucasus.

Then he conducted business within the framework of his father's policy, advocating tougher censorship, and invariably defended the interests of the landowners.

But, having ascended the throne, Alexander II realized that his father's policy had brought the country to the brink of disaster, and to prevent it, changes and urgent problems were needed, the main of which was the abolition of serfdom in Russia. In the very first year of his reign, he made a number of indulgences: in the field of education, the press. The restrictions that universities were subjected to, as well as bans on traveling abroad, were lifted, the "Buturlin" censorship committee was abolished, and a number of new periodicals were allowed. In the coronation manifesto of August 26, 1856, an amnesty was declared for the Decembrists, Petrashevites, participants in the Polish uprising of 1830-1831. and other political exiles.

1.2 Background and reasons for the abolition of serfdom

Agrarian-peasant question by the middle of the 19th century. became the most acute socio-political problem in Russia. Among the European states, serfdom remained only in it, hindering economic and socio-political development. The preservation of serfdom was due to the peculiarities (nature) of the Russian autocracy, which, since the formation of the Russian state and the strengthening of absolutism, relied exclusively on the nobility, and therefore had to take into account its interests.

Many statesmen and public figures understood that serfdom dishonored Russia and reduced it to the category of backward states. At the end of the 18th - the middle of the 19th century. The Russian public constantly discussed the problem of the liberation of the peasants. Some deputies of the Legislative Commission of 1767-1768 spoke about this. (I. Chuprov, F. Polezhaev, A.D. Maslov, Korob'in), educators (N.I. Novikov, S.E. Desnitsky), A.N. Radishchev, the first Russian revolutionaries (Decembrists), liberals (Slavophiles and Westernizers), all radical public figures. Various projects were created, caused mainly by moral and ethical considerations.

Even the government and conservative circles did not stand aside from understanding the need to resolve the peasant issue (recall the projects of M.M. Speransky, N.N. Novosiltsev, the activities of the Secret Committees on Peasant Affairs, the decree on obligated peasants in 1842, and especially the reform of state peasants in 1837 -1841). However, the government's attempts to soften serfdom, give the landowners a positive example of managing the peasants, and regulate their relations proved ineffective due to the resistance of the serfs.

By the middle of the XIX century. the prerequisites that led to the collapse of the feudal system were finally ripe. First of all, it has outlived itself economically. The landlord economy, based on the labor of serfs, was increasingly falling into decay. This worried the government, which was forced to spend huge amounts of money to support the landlords. Objectively, serfdom also interfered with the industrial modernization of the country, as it prevented the formation of a free labor market, the accumulation of capital invested in production, the increase in the purchasing power of the population and the development of trade.

The need to abolish serfdom was also due to the fact that the peasants openly protested against it. In general, anti-serfdom popular uprisings in the first half of the 19th century. were pretty weak. Under the conditions of the police-bureaucratic system created under Nicholas I, they could not result in broad peasant movements that shook Russia in the 17th-18th centuries.

In the middle of the XIX century. the dissatisfaction of the peasants with their position was expressed in various forms: refusal to work in the corvee and payment of dues, mass escapes (especially during the Crimean War), arson of landowners' estates, etc. Unrest in areas with a non-Russian population became more frequent. In 1857, 10,000 peasants revolted in Georgia.

The popular movement could not but influence the position of the government. Emperor Nicholas I, in a speech at a meeting of the State Council in the spring of 1842, was bitterly forced to admit: “There is no doubt that serfdom in its current position is an evil for us, tangible and obvious to everyone, but touching it now would be a matter even more destructive." This statement contains the whole essence of Nikolaev's domestic policy. On the one hand, there is an understanding of the imperfection of the existing system, and on the other, a fair fear that undermining one of the foundations can lead to its complete collapse. The defeat in the Crimean War played the role of a particularly important political prerequisite for the abolition of serfdom, as it demonstrated the backwardness and rottenness of the country's socio-political system. The new foreign policy situation that developed after the Peace of Paris testified to Russia's loss of its international prestige and threatened to lose influence in Europe. After 1856, the understanding of the economic and political necessity of the abolition of serfdom was finally formed in public opinion. This idea was openly expressed not only by radicals and liberals, but also by conservative figures. A striking example is the change in the political views of M.P. Pogodin, who in the 1940s was the mouthpiece of conservatism, and after the Crimean War, strongly criticized the autocratic-feudal system and demanded its reform. Numerous notes were developed in liberal circles about the abnormality, immorality and economic unprofitability of the serfdom of the peasants. The most famous was the "Note on the Liberation of the Peasants", compiled by the lawyer and historian K.D. Kavelin. He wrote: "Serfdom is a stumbling block for any success and development of Russia." His plan provided for the preservation of landlord ownership of the land, the transfer of small allotments to the peasants, the "fair" remuneration of the landowners for the loss of workers and the land provided to the people. A.I. was called for the unconditional release of the peasants. Herzen in "The Bell", N.G. Chernyshevsky and N.A. Dobrolyubov in the Sovremennik magazine.

Publicistic speeches by representatives of various socio-political trends in the second half of the 1950s gradually prepared the country's public opinion to realize the urgent need to resolve the peasant question.

Thus, the abolition of serfdom was due to political, economic, social and moral prerequisites.

In January 1857, a Secret Committee was created "to discuss measures to organize the life of the landlord peasants."

The committee began its activities under the chairmanship of the king. The notes of the reformers came here, many contained proposals that a gradual, long-term "softening" of the position of the peasants was necessary, and only then the abolition of serfdom was possible. Korf and Lanskoy offered a quick way: they advised organizing petitions of the nobility itself for the release of the peasants.

Rostovtsev and Lanskoy convinced Alexander II of the "threat from the left"; in their memorandums to the tsar, they even deliberately exaggerated, frightening with a new "Pugachevism". On the basis of information from Lansky, as well as the "Notes" of the German scientist Baron Haxthausen, Alexander II comes to the idea of the need to accelerate the peasant reform. He demands more productive action from the committee. The liberal-minded brother of the tsar, Prince Konstantin Nikolayevich, is introduced to the Secret Committee. In the winter of 1857, Alexander II announced the beginning of the liberation of the peasants with land and ordered the creation of a noble provincial committee in each province to discuss "local characteristics and noble wishes."

In the same year, 1857, new successes of glasnost were consolidated: an order appeared on the preparation of a new censorship charter. Printed publications placed materials with direct or indirect judgments about the necessary changes in the central and local administration, courts, the army, and education.

Tver landowner and publicist A.M. Unkovsky formulated what, in his opinion, is "essentially necessary for the renewal of Russia" simultaneously with the peasant liberation: "It's all about openness; in the establishment of an independent court; in the responsibility of officials before the court; in the strict division of power and in the self-government of society in economic relation".

Of course, other reformers understood this as well. Work was carried out simultaneously in all directions. Zemstvo, judicial, military, censorship, education, and other reforms were being prepared at the same time. And this was understandable: the question of the liberation of the peasants could not move without political indulgence, since "liberation from above" suggests that it is the ruling "top" itself, which previously held and "did not let go", is now beginning to change.

In 1858, provincial committees began to operate: some were more willing, others were less likely to analyze incoming projects for the liberation of the peasants. Projects were proposed very different: from frankly feudal to the most liberal.

1.3 Preparation of the peasant reform

From the beginning, the preparation of the bill on the peasant reform was entrusted to the Ministry of the Interior. A special group of competent officials under the leadership of A.I. Levshin Deputy Minister of Internal Affairs S.S. Lansky, in the summer of 1856 developed a concept for the upcoming reform. Its essence was that the landowner retained the right of ownership of all land, including the peasant allotment, which was provided to the peasants upon their release for use, for which they were obliged to bear in favor of the landowner the duties regulated by law in the form of corvée or dues.

January 1857, a Secret Committee was formed under the chairmanship of Prince A.F. Orlov "to discuss measures to organize the life of landlord peasants." The committee, consisting of convinced feudal lords, only dragged out the matter. While the situation in the country was becoming more and more tense, Alexander II sought to get the landlords to take the initiative in preparing the reform. The first to agree to this were the landowners of the three western provinces - Vilna, Kovno and Grodno. Nazimov about the establishment of three provincial committees from among the local landowners and one "general commission in the city of Vilna" to prepare local drafts of peasant reform. This document was based on the ideas set forth in the "note" by A.I. Levshin and approved by Alexander II.

December 1857 was followed by a similar rescript to the St. Petersburg Governor-General Count P.N. Ignatiev, and during 1858 - to the rest of the governors. In the same year, committees were opened in 45 provinces to prepare local projects for the liberation of the peasants. The government, due to some misgivings, officially called them "provincial committees for improving the life of the landlord peasants."

With the publication of the rescripts and the beginning of the activities of the provincial committees, the preparation of the peasant reform became public. In this connection, the Secret Committee was renamed into the "Main Committee on Peasant Affairs for Considering Resolutions and Proposals on Serfdom". Even earlier, an energetic and staunch supporter of the liberation of the peasants, Grand Duke Konstantin Nikolayevich, was introduced into the committee, who was then appointed its chairman.

However, the majority of landowners met the published program of rescripts negatively. Of the 46,000 landowners in the thirteen central provinces, only 12,600 agreed to "improve the life" of their peasants. In the provincial committees, a struggle broke out between the liberal minority and the majority of the feudal lords.

In the summer and autumn of 1858, Alexander II undertook a two-month trip to Russia. He visited Moscow, Vladimir, Tver, Vologda, Kostroma, Nizhny Novgorod, Smolensk and Vilna, where he declared his determination to free the peasants and called on the nobles to support other impending reforms.

The preparation of the peasant reform caused a heated discussion of this problem in society and in the periodical press, in such publications as: "Polyarnaya Zvezda", "Voices from Russia", "Bell" illegally published abroad, and in the legal publications "Russian Bulletin", " Ateney", "Russian conversation", "Rural improvement", "Contemporary" in which, since 1854, N.G. Chernyshevsky. In three published articles under the general title "he, in a censored form and outwardly well-intentioned tone, promoted the idea of the immediate release of the peasants with land without any ransom.

Rumors of an imminent liberation caused a new surge of protests against serfdom among the peasantry.

The tsarist government was greatly impressed by the uprising of the peasants in 1858 in Estonia. As early as 1816, Estonian peasants received personal freedom, but without land, which they had to rent from their former landlords for their former feudal duties.

In 1856, a new “Regulation” was issued, which was a step backwards, since it increased the dependence of the peasant tenants on the landlords and deprived them of the prospect of acquiring land as property. This uprising showed the danger of the landless liberation of the peasants. After these events, on December 4, 1858, the Main Committee adopted a new reform program that provided for the provision of peasants with their allotments in property through redemption, government assistance in redemption by arranging a loan, and the introduction of peasant self-government within the rural community. This program became the basis for the draft "Regulations on peasants emerging from serfdom."

In March 1859, Editorial Commissions were established under the Main Committee, which were responsible for: reviewing materials submitted by the provincial committees and drafting laws on the emancipation of the peasants. The editorial commissions were divided into financial, legal and economic departments. They included 38 people: 17 representatives of the ministry and departments and 21 experts from local landowners and scientists. Ya.I. Rostovtsev - close to Alexander II and "impossible" (having neither land nor peasants), absolutely impartial, consistently pursuing the government line. Thanks to his activities in 1859-1860. 25 volumes of "Materials of Editorial Commissions" and 4 volumes of "Appendices" to them were published.

After the death of Rostovtsev in February 1860, Minister of Justice V.N. Panin was a convinced serf-owner, but he could no longer significantly influence the activities of the commissions and the content of the projects prepared by that time.

In connection with the huge number of documents received by the Main Committee, in March 1858, under the Central Statistical Committee of the Ministry of the Interior, the Zemsky Department was formed, designed to analyze, systematize and discuss all information on the preparation of the reform. A.I. was originally appointed chairman of the Zemsky department. Levshin, later N.A. Milyutin - one of the most educated and talented statesmen of that era, according to contemporaries in the commissions, he was the "right hand" of Rostovtsev and "the main engine of reform."

Most of the provincial committees advocated the preservation of the temporarily obligated condition of the peasants for an indefinite period. The editorial commissions did not meet these claims of the nobility.

In August 1859, the draft "Regulations on Peasants" was basically prepared. It was supposed to first discuss it with the deputies from the provincial committees, whom it was decided to call to St. Petersburg in separate groups. At the end of August 1859, 36 deputies from 21 committees were called, and in February 1860, 45 deputies from the remaining committees.

Almost all the deputies took the project negatively, as the first group of deputies considered the established norms for peasant allotments to be too high, and the duties for them to be too low. The deputies of the "second invitation" insisted on keeping all the land and the patrimonial power of the landowners in the hands of the nobility. The editorial commissions decided to make some concessions. In a number of chernozem provinces, the norms of peasant allotments were lowered, and in non-chernozem provinces, mainly with developed peasant crafts, the amount of dues was increased and the so-called "re-rent" was provided - a revision of the amount of dues 20 years after the publication of the "Regulations on Peasants".

During the preparation of the reform, many landowners decided to "anticipate" the reform. Some moved the peasant estates to new places, others sold the peasants to the steppe landowners for a pittance, and still others forcibly liberated them without land or handed them over to recruits. All this was done in order to get rid of the excess number of people and to endow the land as little as possible. These actions of landowners A.I. Herzen aptly called "the deathly atrocities of landlord law."

On October 1860, the draft "Regulations" was completed by the Editorial Commissions and sent for discussion to the Main Committee on Peasant Affairs, and was considered there until January 14, 1861. The project underwent new changes in favor of the landlords: the norms of peasant allotments in certain areas were again lowered, the dues were increased in areas "having special industrial benefits." On January 28, 1861, the project was submitted for consideration by the last instance - the State Council. At its opening, Alexander II declared - "Any further delay can be detrimental to the state." Members of the State Council considered it necessary to make an addition to the project in favor of the landowners. It was submitted for consideration by Prince P.P. Gagarin, it assumed the right of the landowners to grant the peasants (by agreement with them) immediately free of charge (“as a gift”) a quarter of the allotment. Thanks to this, the landowner will be able to keep in his hands a maximum of land and provide himself with cheap labor.

February 1861, the State Council completed the discussion of the draft "Regulations on peasants emerging from serfdom." The signing of the "Regulations" was timed to February 19 - the sixth anniversary of the accession of Alexander II to the throne. Then he signed the Manifesto, announcing the liberation of the peasants from serfdom. It spoke of the "voluntariness" and "sacrifice" of the nobility, from which the initiative to liberate the peasants allegedly came. On the same day, the Main Committee "on the arrangement of the rural state" was formed, chaired by Grand Duke Konstantin Nikolayevich. This committee was supposed to observe and control the introduction of the new law, make decisions on contentious and administrative cases.

The government understood that the prepared law would not satisfy the peasants, and took a number of measures to suppress the peasant uprisings. Detailed instructions and instructions were drawn up in advance on the deployment and actions of troops in the event of peasant "riots". During December 1860 - January 1861, secret meetings were held at which measures for the protection of government buildings and royal palaces were discussed during the announcement of the Manifesto of "freedom".

With the required number of copies of the Manifesto and the "Regulations", an outhouse was sent - adjutants of the royal retinue. They were entrusted with the duty of announcing the "will" and endowed with broad powers to suppress the peasant "riots".

peasant reform redemption operation

Chapter 2. Implementation of the reform and its features

The “Regulations” of February 19, 1861 include 17 legislative acts: “General Regulations”, four “Local Regulations on the Land Arrangement of Peasants”, “Regulations” - “On Redemption”, etc. Their effect extended to 45 provinces, in which 100428 landowners there were 22,563,000 serfs of both sexes, including 1,467,000 serfs and 543,000 assigned to private plants and factories.

The elimination of feudal relations in the countryside is a long process that stretched over more than two decades. The peasants did not receive full liberation immediately. The Manifesto declared that the peasants for another 2 years (from February 19, 1861 to February 19, 1863) were obliged to serve the same duties as under serfdom. Landowners it was forbidden to transfer peasants to serfs, and to transfer quitrents to corvee. But even after 1863, the peasants were obliged to bear the feudal obligations established by the "Regulations" - to pay dues or to perform corvée. The final act was the transfer of peasants for redemption. But the transfer of peasants was allowed upon the promulgation of the "Regulations" either by mutual agreement with the landowner, or at his unilateral demand (the peasants themselves did not have the right to demand their transfer for redemption).

2.2 The legal status of peasants and "peasant self-government"

According to the manifesto, the peasants immediately received personal freedom. The granting of "freedom" has been a major requirement in the centuries-old history of the peasant movement. In 1861, the former serf now not only got the opportunity to freely dispose of his personality, but also a number of general property and civil rights, and all this liberated the peasants morally.

The issue of personal release in 1861 had not yet received a final resolution, but with the transfer of the peasants for ransom, the guardianship of the landowner ceased.

Subsequent reforms in the field of court, local government, education, military service expanded the rights of the peasantry: the peasant could be elected to the jury of new courts, to the zemstvo self-government body, he was given access to secondary and higher educational institutions. But this did not completely remove the class inequality of the peasantry. They were obliged to bear soul and other monetary and natural duties, were subjected to corporal punishment, from which other, privileged classes were exempted.

"Peasant public administration" was introduced during the summer of 1861. Peasant self-government in the state village, created in 1837-1841. reform P.D. Kiselev was taken as a model.

The initial cell was a rural society, which could consist of one or more villages or part of a village. Rural management consisted of a village meeting. The decisions of the meeting were valid if they were supported by the majority of those present at the meeting.

Several adjacent rural societies made up the volost. In total, 8750 volosts were formed in the former landowner villages in 1861. The volost gathering elected for 3 years the volost foreman, his assistants and the volost court consisting of 4 to 12 judges. The volost foreman performed a number of administrative and economic functions: he followed the "order of deanery" in the volost, "suppression of false rumors." The volost court considered peasant property litigations, if the amount of claims did not exceed 100 rubles, cases of minor offenses, guided by the norms of customary law. All business was done by word of mouth.

The Institute of Peace Mediators was also established. Created in the summer of 1861, it was of great importance.

Peace mediators were appointed by the Senate from local hereditary landowning nobles on the proposal of the governors together with the provincial marshals of the nobility. The peace mediators were accountable to the county congress of peace mediators, and the congress - to the provincial presence for peasant affairs.

Peace mediators were not "impartial conciliators" of disagreements between peasants and landlords, they also defended landowner interests, sometimes even violating them. The composition of the peace mediators elected for the first triennium was the most liberal. Among them were the Decembrists A.E. Rosen and M.A. Nazimov, Petrashevites N.S. Kashkin and N.A. Speshnev, writer L.N. Tolstoy and surgeon N.I. Pirogov.

2.3 Peasant allotment

The central place in the reform was occupied by the question of land. The published law was based on the principle of recognizing the landlords' ownership of all the land in their estates, as well as the peasant's allotment. And the peasants were declared only as users of this land. To become the owner of their allotment land, the peasants had to buy it from the landowner.

The complete landlessness of the peasants was an economically unprofitable and socially dangerous measure: depriving the landlords and the state of the opportunity to receive the former income from the peasants, it would create a mass of millions of landless peasants and thereby could cause general peasant discontent. The demand for the provision of land was central to the peasant movement of the pre-reform years.

The entire territory of European Russia was divided into 3 bands - non-chernozem, chernozem and steppe, and the "bands" were divided into "localities".

In the non-chernozem and chernozem "bands" "higher" and "lower" norms for allotments were established. In the steppe one - "narrow" norm.

The peasants used the pastures of the landlord free of charge, received permission to graze cattle in the landowner's forest, on the mowed meadow and the harvested landowner's field. The peasant, having received an allotment, did not yet become a full-fledged owner.

The communal form of land ownership excluded the possibility for the peasant to sell his allotment.

Under serfdom, a certain part of the wealthy peasants had own purchased land.

To protect the interests of the small landed nobility, special "rules" established a number of benefits for them, which created more difficult conditions for the peasants in these estates. The most deprived were the "peasants-donators", who received donations - "beggarly" or "orphan" allotments. According to the law, the landowner could not force the peasant to take a gift allotment. Its receipt exempted from redemption payments, the donor completely broke with the landowner. But the peasant could go "to the gift" only with the consent of his landowner.

Most of the deeds lost and ended up in distress. In 1881, Minister of the Interior N.P. Ignatiev wrote that the donors had reached the extreme degree of poverty.

The allocation of land to the peasants was compulsory: the landowner had to provide the allotment to the peasant, and the peasant to take it. By law, until 1870, the peasant could not refuse the allotment.

The “Redemption Regulations” allowed the peasant to leave the community, but it was very difficult. Figures of the reform of 1861 P.P. Semyonov noted: during the first 25 years, the purchase of individual plots of land and leaving the community was rare, but since the beginning of the 80s it has become a "common occurrence."

2.4 Local regulations

A number of "Local Regulations" basically repeated the "Great Russian", but taking into account the specifics of their regions. The features of the Peasant Reform for certain categories of peasants and specific regions were determined on the basis of the "Additional Rules" - "On the organization of peasants settled on the estates of small landowners, and on the allowance for these owners", "On people assigned to private mining plants of the department of the Ministry of Finance", "About peasants and workers serving work at Perm private mining plants and salt mines", "About peasants serving work at landlord factories", "About peasants and yard people in the Land of the Don Cossacks", "About peasants and yard people in the Stavropol province ", "About peasants and courtyards in Siberia", "About people who came out of serfdom in the Bessarabian region".

In 1864, serfdom was abolished in 6 provinces of Transcaucasia.

October 1864 was published "Regulations" on the abolition of serfdom in the Tiflis province. On October 13, 1865, this "Regulation" was extended to Western Georgia, and on December 1, 1866 - to Mingrelia.

In 1870 serfdom was abolished in Abkhazia, and in 1871 in Svaneti. Serfdom in Armenia and Azerbaijan was abolished by the "Regulations" of 1870. In 1912-1913. laws were issued on the mandatory transfer of the former landlord peasants of Transcaucasia for redemption. But the transfer for ransom here was not completed until 1917. In Transcaucasia, feudal relations lasted the longest.

The conditions for the peasant reform in Bessarabia turned out to be more favorable.

Appanage peasants in Russia got their name in 1797, when the Department of Appanages was formed to manage the lands and peasants belonging to the imperial house. Previously, they were called palace. Based on the decrees of June 20, 1858 and August 26, 1859. They received personal freedom and the right to "transfer to urban and other free rural state. "For 2 years (1863 - 1865) appanage peasants were transferred for redemption. The most significant were the performances of appanage peasants in the Volga region and the Urals, where the conditions for the reform turned out to be especially unfavorable.

Preparations for the reform in the state village began in 1861. On November 24, 1866, the law "On the land arrangement of state peasants" was issued. Rural societies kept the lands that were in their use. The land use of each rural society was recorded in the so-called "ownership records". The implementation of the land reform in 1866 in the state village led to numerous conflicts between the peasants and the treasury, caused by cuts from allotments that exceeded the norms established by law in 1866. In 12 central and middle-Volga provinces, cutting to allotments was carried out. The redemption of allotments was made only after 20 years according to the law of June 12, 1886.

2.5 Duties of temporarily obligated peasants and redemption operation

The law provided for before the transition of the peasants to the ransom, serving them for the provided land of service in the form of corvée and dues.

According to the law, it was impossible to increase the size of the dues above the pre-reform ones, if the land allotment did not increase. But the law did not provide for a reduction in dues in connection with the reduction of the allotment. As a result of the cut off from the peasant allotment, there was an actual increase in dues per 1 tithe.

The statutory rates of dues exceeded the income from the land. It was believed that this was a payment for the land provided to the peasants, but it was a payment for personal freedom.

In the first years after the reform, the corvée turned out to be so inefficient that the landowners began to quickly transfer the peasants to dues. Thanks to this, in a very short time (1861-1863), the proportion of corvée peasants decreased from 71 to 33%.

The final stage of the peasant reform was the transfer of peasants for redemption. On December 28, 1881, the “Regulations” were published, providing for the transfer of peasants who were still in a temporarily obligated position for compulsory redemption starting from January 18, 1883. By 1881, only 15% of the temporarily obligated peasants remained. Their transfer for ransom was completed by 1895. A total of 124,000 redemption transactions were concluded.

The ransom was based not on the real, market price of the land, but on feudal duties. The amount of the ransom for the allotment was determined by the "capitalization of quitrent".

The state took over the ransom by carrying out a ransom operation. To this end, in 1861, the Main Redemption Institution was established under the Ministry of Finance. The centralized redemption of peasant allotments by the state solved a number of important social and economic problems. The ransom turned out to be a profitable operation for the state.

The transfer of the peasants for ransom meant the final separation of the peasant economy from the landlord. The reform of 1861 created favorable conditions for a gradual transition from the feudal landlord economy to the capitalist one.

The main result of the 1861 reform was the liberation of more than 30 million serfs. But this, in turn, led to the formation of new bourgeois and capitalist relations in the country's economy and its modernization.

The promulgation of the "Regulations" on February 19, 1861, the content of which deceived the hopes of the peasants for "full freedom", caused an explosion of peasant protest in the spring of 1861. In the first five months of 1861, there were 1340 mass peasant unrest, in a year - 1859 unrest. More than half of them (937) were pacified by military force. In fact, there was not a single province in which, to a greater or lesser extent, the protest of the peasants against the unfavorable conditions of the granted "freedom" would not be manifested. Continuing to rely on the "good" tsar, the peasants could not believe in any way that such laws came from him, which for two years left them in fact in their former subordination to the landowner, forced them to fulfill the hated corvée and pay dues, deprive them of a significant part of their former allotments, and the lands granted to them are declared the property of the nobility. Some considered the promulgated "Regulations" to be a fake document, which was drawn up by the landowners and officials who agreed with them at the same time, hiding the real, "royal will", while others tried to find this "will" in some incomprehensible, therefore differently interpreted, articles of the tsarist law. False manifestos about "freedom" also appeared.

The peasant movement reached its greatest extent in the Central Chernozem provinces, in the Volga region and in Ukraine, where the bulk of the landowning peasants were on corvee and the agrarian question was the most acute. A great public outcry in the country was caused by the uprisings at the beginning of April 1861 in the villages of Bezdna (Kazan province) and Kandeevka (Penza province), in which tens of thousands of peasants took part. The demands of the peasants boiled down to the abolition of feudal duties and landownership ("we will not go to corvée, and we will not pay dues", "all our land"). The uprisings in Abyss and Kandeevka ended with the execution of peasants: hundreds of them were killed and wounded. The leader of the uprising in Abyss Anton Petrov was court-martialed and shot.

Spring 1861 - the highest point of the peasant movement at the beginning of the reform. No wonder the Minister of the Interior P.A. Valuev, in his report to the tsar, called these spring months "the most critical moment of the case." By the summer of 1861, the government, with the help of large military forces (64 infantry and 16 cavalry regiments and 7 separate battalions participated in the suppression of peasant unrest), by executions and mass sections with rods, managed to beat off a wave of peasant uprisings.

Although in the summer of 1861 there was a certain decline in the peasant movement, the number of unrest was still quite large: 519 during the second half of 1861 - significantly more than in any of the pre-reform years. In addition, in the autumn of 1861, the peasant struggle took on other forms: the felling of the landowners' forests by the peasants became widespread, refusals to pay dues became more frequent, but peasant sabotage of corvée works took on an especially wide scale: reports came from the provinces about "widespread failure to perform corvée work", so that in a number of provinces up to a third and even half of the landlords' land remained uncultivated that year.

In 1862, a new wave of peasant protest arose, connected with the introduction of statutory charters. More than half of the charters that were not signed by the peasants were forced on them. Refusal to accept statutory charters often resulted in major unrest, the number of which in 1862 amounted to 844. Of these, 450 speeches were pacified with the help of military commands. The stubborn refusal to accept statutory charters was caused not only by the conditions of liberation unfavorable for the peasants, but also by rumors that the tsar would soon grant a new, "real" will. Most of the peasants timed the onset of this will ("urgent" or "obedient hour") to February 19, 1863 - by the time the "Provisions" were put into effect on February 19, 1861. The peasants themselves considered these "Provisions" as temporary (as " the first will"), which, after two years, will be replaced by others, providing the peasants with "uncut" allotments free of charge and completely relieving them of the guardianship of the landowners and local authorities. A belief spread among the peasants about the "illegality" of the statutory charters, which they considered "an invention of the bar," "new bondage," "new serfdom." As a result, Alexander II twice spoke to representatives of the peasantry in order to dispel these illusions. During his trip to the Crimea in the autumn of 1862, he told the peasants that "there will be no other will than the one given." said: "After February 19 next year, do not expect any new will and no new benefits. Do not listen to the rumors that go between you, and do not believe those who will assure you of something else, but believe my words alone." Characteristically, the peasant masses continued to retain hope for a "new will with a redistribution of the land." After 20 years, this hope was revived again in the form of rumors about the "black redistribution" of land.

The peasant movement of 1861-1862, despite its scope and mass character, resulted in spontaneous and scattered riots, easily suppressed by the government. In 1863, there were 509 unrest, most of them in the western provinces. Since 1863, the peasant movement has declined sharply. In 1864 there were 156 disturbances, in 1865 - 135, in 1866 - 91, in 1867 - 68, in 1868 - 60, in 1869 - 65 and in 1870 - 56. Their character has also changed. If immediately after the promulgation of the "Regulations" on February 19, 1861, the peasants with considerable unanimity protested against the release "in the manner of the nobility", now they are more focused on the private interests of their community, on using the possibilities of legal and peaceful forms of struggle in order to achieve the best conditions for the organization of the economy.

The peasants of each landowner's estate united in rural societies. They discussed and resolved their general economic issues at rural gatherings. The decisions of the gatherings were to be carried out by the village headman, who was elected for three years. Several adjacent rural societies made up the volost. Village elders and elected representatives from rural societies participated in the volost gathering. At this meeting, the volost headman was elected. He performed police and administrative duties.

The activities of the rural and volost administrations, as well as the relationship between peasants and landlords, were controlled by peace mediators. They were called the Senate from among the local noble landlords. The mediators had broad powers. But the administration could not use the mediators for its own purposes. They were not subordinate to either the governor or the minister and did not have to follow their instructions. They were only to follow the directions of the law.

The size of the peasant allotment and duties for each estate should be determined once and for all by agreement between the peasants and the landowner and recorded in the charter. The introduction of these letters was the main occupation of the peace mediators.

The permissible framework for agreements between peasants and landlords was outlined in the law. Kavelin offered to leave all the lands to the peasants, he proposed to leave to the peasants all the lands that they used under serfdom. The landlords of the non-Black Sea provinces did not object to this. In the Black Sea provinces, they protested furiously. Therefore, the law drew a line between non-chernozem and chernozem provinces. In the non-chernozem, the use of the peasants was almost as much land as before. In the chernozem, under the pressure of the feudal lords, a greatly reduced shower allotment was introduced. When recalculated for such an allotment (in some provinces, for example, Kursk, it fell to 2.5 dess.), “extra” lands were cut off from peasant societies. Where the mediator acted in bad faith, including cut-off lands, the peasants needed land for cattle runs, meadows, and watering places. For additional duties, the peasants were forced to rent these lands from the landowners.

Sooner or later, the government believed, the "temporarily obligated" relationship would end and the peasants and the landowners would conclude a redemption deal for each estate. According to the law, the peasants had to pay the landowner a lump sum for their allotment about a fifth of the stipulated amount. The rest was paid by the government. But the peasants had to return this amount (with interest) to him in annual payments for 49 years.

Fearing that the peasants would not want to pay big money for bad plots and would run away, the government introduced a number of severe restrictions. While redemption payments were being made, the peasant could not give up his allotment and leave his village forever without the consent of the village assembly.

The implementation of the reform also entailed reforms in the socio-political sphere. Here is what one of the famous Russian historians B.G. wrote about this. Litvak: "such a huge social act as the abolition of serfdom could not pass without a trace for the entire state organism, accustomed to serfdom over the centuries. Already during the preparation of the reform, as we saw, in the Editorial Commissions and in the commissions of the Ministry of the Interior, which were led by N.A. Milyutin, legislative proposals were developed on the transformation of local government, the police, the courts, questions arose with recruitment. In a word, having touched the cornerstone of the feudal empire, it was necessary to change other supporting structures of the socio-political system.

The peasant reform removed the fetters of slavery from a million Russian peasants. It released the hidden energy, thanks to which Russia made a giant leap in its economic development. The liberation of the peasants gave impetus to the intensive growth of the labor market. The emergence of not only property, but also civil rights among the peasants contributed to the development of their agricultural and industrial entrepreneurship.

In the post-reform years, there was a slow but constant increase in the collection of bread, so compared to 1860, according to the studies of A.S. Nifontava, in 1880 the gross grain harvest increased by 5 million tons. If by 1861 in Russia there were less than 2 thousand km of railway lines, then by the beginning of the 80s their total length was over 22 thousand km. The new railways connected the country's largest commercial centers with agricultural areas and ensured the accelerated development of domestic trade, and improved transport conditions for export trade.

The capitalization of agriculture caused class stratification in the peasant environment, a rather large stratum of wealthy rich peasants appeared, and at the same time, such poor peasant households appeared, which did not exist in the countryside until 1861.

Significant changes have taken place in the industrial sector of the national economy. There was a steady trend towards the enlargement of enterprises, the transition from small-scale production to industrial production. The production of cotton fabrics has increased significantly, the consumption of which has doubled in the 20 post-reform years.

The beet sugar industry made progress. If in 1861 the average per capita consumption was 1 kg. sugar, then after 20 years - already 2 kg., and from the second half of the 70s, Russia began to export sugar.

But heavy industry, on the contrary, was in crisis, since its basic industry - the ferrous metallurgy of the Urals was based on the slave labor of serfs and the abolition of serfdom led to a shortage of workers.

But at the same time, a new metallurgical region began to form - the Donets Basin. The first plant was founded by the English industrialist Yuz (om), and the second one was built by the Russian entrepreneur Pastukhov. This new metallurgical base was based on the wage labor of workers and was free from serf traditions.

In connection with the development of industry, the number of workers increased one and a half times in 15 years.

The size of the Russian bourgeoisie also increased significantly, in which there were many people from wealthy peasants.

The abolition of serfdom affected not only the economy, but also required a restructuring of the system of state institutions in Russia. Its consequence was the reformation of the judicial, zemstvo and military systems.

Conclusion

During the study, we came to the following conclusions.

If the abolition of serfdom took place immediately, then the elimination of feudal, economic relations, which had been established for decades, dragged on for many years. According to the law, for another two years, the peasants were obliged to serve the same duties as under serfdom. The corvee was only slightly reduced and petty requisitions in kind were abolished. Prior to the transfer of peasants for ransom, they were in a temporarily obligated position, i.e. were obliged for the allotments granted to them to perform corvée or pay dues in accordance with the norms established by law. Since there was no definite period after which the temporarily liable peasants were to be transferred to compulsory redemption, their release was extended for 20 years (although by 1881 there were no more than 15% of them).

Despite the predatory nature of the 1861 reform for the peasants, its significance for the further development of the country was very great. This reform was a turning point in the transition from feudalism to capitalism. The liberation of the peasants contributed to the intensive growth of the labor force, and the granting of some civil rights to them contributed to the development of entrepreneurship. For the landlords, the reform ensured a gradual transition from feudal forms of economy to capitalist ones.

The reform did not turn out the way Kavelin, Herzen and Chernyshevsky dreamed of seeing it. Built on difficult compromises, it took into account the interests of the landlords much more than the peasants, and had a very short "time resource" of no more than 20 years. Then the need for new reforms in the same direction should have arisen.

And yet the peasant reform of 1861 was of great historical significance.

The moral significance of this reform, which put an end to serfdom, was also great. Its abolition paved the way for other important transformations, which were supposed to introduce modern forms of self-government and the court in the country, to push the development of education. Now that all Russians have become free, the question of a constitution has arisen in a new way. Its introduction has become the immediate goal on the way to a rule of law state, a state that is governed by citizens in accordance with the law and every citizen has reliable protection in it.

List of sources used

1.Complete Collection of the Foundations of the Russian Empire Collection 2. T.41. Part 2. No. 43888;

2.S.V. Bespalov. Problems of industrial development of Russia at the turn of the nineteenth century. in modern Western historiography. // Bulletin of the Tomsk State University. Story. M., 2012. No. 4 (20);

E.N. Vorontsov Reader on history - St. Petersburg: Peter, 2005. - 180 p.;

History of Russia XIX - early XX century. / Edited by V.A. Fedorova - M.: VITREM, 2002. - 249 p.;

V.A. Fedorov. History of Russia.1861-1917: Proc. for universities. M.: Higher. school, 1998. - 384 p.;

S.F. Platonov. Textbook of Russian history. - St. Petersburg: Nauka, 1994. - 428 p.;

A.M. Unkovsky. List of cases and documents. - Tver, 2003. - 80 p.;

N.G. Voropaev. The abolition of serfdom in Russia. M., 1989. - 163 p.;

M.N. Zuev. History of Russia: Textbook. - M.: Higher education, 2007. - 239 p.;

ON THE. Rozhkov. Russian history in comparative historical coverage: (Fundamentals of social dynamics). - 2nd ed. - L.; M.: Book, 1928. - V.12: Financial capitalism in Europe and the revolution in Russia. - 367 p.;

History of Russia: textbook. - 3rd czd., reworked. and additional / edited by A.S. Orlov, V.A. Georgiev, N.G. Georgieva, T.A. Sivokhin. - M.: TK Velby, 2006. - 413 p.;

Collection of statistical and economic information on agriculture in Russia and foreign countries. SPb., 1910 - 1917. - 460 p.;

Website "Gumer Library. History". http://www.humer.com info/bibliotek_Buks/History/Bohan_2/96. php (accessed 20.10.2014).

Tutoring

Need help learning a topic?

Our experts will advise or provide tutoring services on topics of interest to you.
Send an application indicating the topic right now to find out about the possibility of obtaining a consultation.

The year 1861 is considered a landmark in the history of Russia - it was then that Emperor Alexander II abolished serfdom. This did not happen suddenly - the prerequisites for the elimination of serfdom appeared long ago. Throughout the nineteenth century, unrest grew among the peasants themselves, and the emperor's predecessors tried to somehow resolve the issue, gradually improving and easing the position of the class. Thus, it fell to Alexander II to complete the process begun a long time ago.

How was the reform prepared?

The bill on the solution of the sore point was not created personally by the emperor. On his instructions, a special committee was established, which included prominent nobles of that era - Muravyov, Panin, Orlov, Milyutin and others. Some of the members of the committee were skeptical about their own work, others sincerely believed in the need to alleviate the peasant lot.

One way or another, from 1857 to 1861, the main provisions for the coming reform, its essence, were developed.

It was planned to grant the peasants personal freedom, while not forcing them to pay for its receipt with money.
It was planned to provide the peasants with their own land, albeit a small one, so that the newfound will would not deprive them of their livelihood.
Also, the actual "emancipation" had to take place gradually, over several years - so that the country's economy would not suffer, suddenly losing a lot of key workers.

The progress of the reform and its consequences

In 1861, the corresponding Manifesto was announced by the emperor, and a legislative act was issued containing clarifications to this manifesto. Starting from February 19, all peasants were considered personally free citizens of the empire and received full rights. Their houses and other buildings passed into the category of their personal property, the landowners were obliged to provide a small allotment of land to the liberated peasants. At the same time, for several years, the former serfs were still obliged to work for the benefit of the landowner and only then received the right to leave the allotment and leave their usual place.

The reform had many pluses and minuses. The latter include the fact that in practice, while maintaining corvée and dues, the life of the peasants for a long time remained almost unchanged. However, now no one could encroach on their personal freedom - and this undoubtedly became an important and long-awaited achievement for the Russian Empire.

Send your good work in the knowledge base is simple. Use the form below

Students, graduate students, young scientists who use the knowledge base in their studies and work will be very grateful to you.

Posted on http://allbest.ru

INTRODUCTION

peasant reform economic

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 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

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.

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.

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.

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 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 . 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 resettlements 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 those who own land on the basis of household plot land use was assigned 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 landlords and peasants was necessary, but the nobility should retain 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, specific and partially landowners showed the need for the existing system Zaionchkovsky P.A. The abolition of serfdom in Russia. - M., 2008., p. 34.

1.2 Implementation of the peasant reform

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

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

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 to 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 the reform and made it difficult (and even ruled out) 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 highly appreciated these first steps of Alexander II on the way to reform 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.

CHAPTER 2. CONTENT OF THE PEASANT REFORM

2.1 The essence of the peasant reform of 1861

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 stormy industrial revolution, an intensification of the stratification of the peasantry, an intensification of internal: trade) required the removal of those obstacles that stood in his way Yurganov A. L., Katsva L. A. History of Russia: Textbook for secondary educational institutions. M.: - MIROS, VENTANA-GRAF, 2010. - 466 p., p. 90.

On February 19, 1861, the "Regulations" and "Manifesto" were signed by the tsar. On March 1, 1861, the "Manifesto" on the reform was announced by Zayonchkovsky P.A. The abolition of serfdom in Russia. - M., 2008., p. 78.

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.

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 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.

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 had no direct relationship to the real price of the land Zaitseva L.A. History of the Russian peasantry / / Special courses in history: Textbook. - Ulan-Ude, 2004., p. 121.

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 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.

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