Where did the historical turning point that marked the collapse of the Russian Empire begin? What driving forces led the country to the revolutions of 1917, what ideology did the revolutionaries adhere to, what was their support in society? The current point of view about the Bolsheviks who undermined the stone of state power, corrupted the army and came to power as a result of an armed coup in October 1917 looks extremely simplistic. Indeed, earlier, without any participation of the Bolsheviks, the overthrow of the monarchy took place in February, and 12 years before that, the revolution of 1905 broke out, in which the influence of the Bolsheviks was minimal.

The preconditions for the revolutionary explosion go back to the 19th century. Domestic historiography speaks of two revolutionary situations that developed in the Russian Empire in 1859-1861 and 1879-1882. V.I. Lenin directly stated that 1861 gave birth to 1905 (and 1905, according to numerous researchers, gave birth to 1917). You can treat the personality of Vladimir Ilyich as you like, but it is impossible to deny that he was the greatest theoretician (and practitioner) of the revolution in the 20th century.

Lenin dated the first revolutionary situation from 1859 to 1861. Bare facts: the Crimean war, catastrophic for the empire, exposed massive unrest among the peasants. The cup of patience was overflowing, the "lower classes" could no longer put up with serfdom. An additional factor was the increased exploitation of the peasants caused by the war. Finally, famine caused by crop failures in 1854-1855 and 1859 struck 30 Russian provinces.

Not yet formed into a united force, not revolutionary in essence, but driven to despair, the peasantry was leaving work en masse. Having learned about the "Decree on the Formation of the Naval Militia" (1854) and the "Manifesto on the Convocation of the State Militia" (1855), thousands of people left the estates and headed to the cities. Ukraine was swept by a mass movement - "Kievskaya Kazatchina", the peasants in the villages demanded to enroll them in the army. Wishful thinking, they interpreted the royal decrees as a promise to grant freedom in exchange for military service. After the end of the war, in 1856, the roads of Ukraine were filled with carts: there was a rumor that the tsar was distributing land in the Crimea. Hundreds and thousands of people made their way to the cherished freedom. They were caught and returned to the landlords, but the stream did not dry up.

It became clear that the government was losing control over the peasant environment. “Tops” could not control the situation. If in two years, from 1856 to 1857, more than 270 peasant uprisings took place in the country, then in 1858 - already 528, in 1859 - 938. The intensity of passions in the most massive class of Russia grew like an avalanche.

In these conditions, Alexander II had no choice but to carry out reforms. “It is better to abolish serfdom from above than to wait for the time when it, by itself, will begin to abolish from below,” he said, receiving representatives of the nobility of the Moscow province on March 30, 1856.

It should be noted that Alexander the Liberator was almost too late with the reform. The ideas of the abolition of serfdom have agitated Russia since the time of Catherine II. Feudal relations objectively hampered the development of the state, and the lag of Russia from the European powers was felt more and more. This example is indicative: In 1800 Russia produced 10.3 million poods of pig iron, England - 12 million, and in the early 1950s Russia - from 13 to 16 million, England - 140.1 million poods.

In 1839, the head of the III department of the imperial chancellery, chief of the gendarmes A.H. Benkendorf reported to the sovereign about the mood in the peasant environment:

“... at every important event at the court or in the affairs of the state, from ancient times and as usual, the news of the impending change runs through the people ... the thought of the freedom of the peasants is aroused; as a result of this, riots, murmurs, and displeases have taken place and in the past year have taken place in different places, which threaten, though remote, but a terrible danger. The rumors are always the same: the tsar wants, but the boyars resist. It is a dangerous business, and it would be a crime to hide this danger. The common people today are not the same as they were 25 years before this. The clerks, thousands of petty officials, the merchants and the serving cantonists, who have one common interest with the people, instilled in him many new ideas and fanned a spark in his heart that may someday flare up.

The people incessantly interpret that all foreign pagans in Russia, Chukhny, Mordovian, Chuvash, Samoyed, Tatars, etc. are free, and some Russians, Orthodox Christians are slaves, contrary to Holy Scripture. That all evil is caused by the gentlemen, that is, the nobles! All the trouble is blamed on them! That the gentlemen are deceiving the tsar and slandering the Orthodox people before him, etc. Here they even summarize texts from the Holy Scriptures and predictions on the interpretations of the Bible and portend the liberation of the peasants, revenge against the boyars, who are compared with Haman and Pharaoh. In general, the entire spirit of the people is directed towards one goal towards liberation.In general, serfdom is a powder magazine under the state, and all the more dangerous because the army is made up of peasants, and now there is a huge mass of homeless noblemen from officials who, being inflamed with ambition and having nothing to lose , glad to any frustration. In this respect, the attention is drawn to the soldiers dismissed on indefinite leave. Of these, the good ones remain in capitals and cities, and people who are mostly lazy or badly behaved in the villages. Having lost the habit of peasant labor, having no property, strangers in their homeland, they incite hatred against the landowners with their stories about Poland, the Ostsee provinces and, in general, can have a harmful effect on the minds of the people.

The opinion of sane people is as follows: without declaring freedom to the peasants, which could cause riots from suddenness, one could begin to act in this spirit. Now serfs are not honored even by members of the state and do not even swear allegiance to the sovereign. They are outside the law, because the landowner can exile them to Siberia without trial. One could begin by establishing by law everything that already exists in practice (de facto) in well-organized estates. This would not be news. For example, it would be possible to establish volost administrations, recruiting by lot or by the general court of the elders of the volost, and not at the whim of the landowner. It would be possible to determine the measure of punishment for guilt and subject serfs to the patronage of general laws

It is necessary to start sometime and with something, and it is better to start gradually, carefully, than to wait until it starts from below, from the people. Only then will the measure be salvific when it is taken by the government itself, quietly, without noise, without loud words, and prudent gradualism is observed. But that this is necessary and that the peasant class is a powder mine, in this everyone agrees ... ".

There were enough sane voices calling to change the situation with serfdom. But a characteristic feature of the Russian ruling dynasty was to postpone the solution of pressing problems for the future - for one reason or another, under one pretext or another. Having embarked on the path of reforms, they preferred not to cut in the heat. As a result, well-conceived progressive endeavors were universally confined to half-measures, or leveled out by subsequent decisions.

The abolition of serfdom in 1861 was no exception. As noted above, the long-awaited freedom was granted to peasants without ownership of land, the allotments available for cultivation were reduced, the rural population was imposed with ransom payments, and corvée remained. This was not the kind of reform the peasantry dreamed of.

"The provisions of February 19, 1861 on the peasants who came out of serfdom" caused a new explosion of discontent. In 1861, the number of peasant uprisings increased to 1,176. In 337 cases, troops had to be used against the peasants. The people were agitated by the rumor that the "Regulations" were forged, that the real royal decree was hidden in the bar. The most indicative is the Kandeevskoe performance of 1861, which covered many villages of the Penza and neighboring Tambov provinces. The uprising was led by the peasant Leonty Yegortsev, who claimed that he saw the "real" letter with the complete emancipation of the peasants. She, according to the leader of the rebellion, was kidnapped by the landowners, and then the tsar conveyed his will through Yegortsev: "All the peasants will be forced out of the landowners by force, and if someone does not fight back before Holy Easter, he will be anathema and cursed."

Thousands of crowds of peasants with a red banner rode around the villages in carts, proclaiming: “The land is all ours! We do not want to rent a quitrent, we will not work for the landowner! "

The situation was stabilized only by using force. The Kandeyev uprising, like hundreds of others, was defeated by the troops. However, as we know, this did not resolve any contradictions. Until the next revolutionary situation - 1879-1882 - a tense silence reigned in the Russian Empire, threatening a new explosion at any moment.

• The subject and method of the history of the domestic state and law
  • The subject of the history of the domestic state and law
  • The method of the history of the domestic state and law
  • Periodization of the history of the domestic state and law
• Old Russian state and law (IX - early XII century.)
  • Formation of the Old Russian state
    • Historical factors of the formation of the Old Russian state
  • The social structure of the Old Russian state
    • Feudal-dependent population: sources of education and classification
  • State system of the Old Russian state
  • The system of law in the Old Russian state
    • Ownership in the Old Russian state
    • Law of Obligations in the Old Russian State
    • Marriage and family and inheritance law in the Old Russian state
    • Criminal law and trial in the Old Russian state
• The state and law of Russia during the period of feudal fragmentation (early XII-XIV centuries)
  • Feudal fragmentation in Russia
  • Features of the socio-political system of the Galicia-Volyn principality
  • Social and political system of the Vladimir-Suzdal land
  • Social and political system and law of Novgorod and Pskov
  • State and law of the Golden Horde
• Formation of the Russian centralized state
  • Prerequisites for the formation of the Russian centralized state
  • Social system in the Russian centralized state
  • State system in the Russian centralized state
  • Development of law in the Russian centralized state
• Estates-representative monarchy in Russia (mid-16th - mid-17th century)
  • Social system during the period of the estate-representative monarchy
  • State system during the period of the estate-representative monarchy
    • Police and prisons in ser. XVI - mid. XVII century.
  • Development of law in the period of the estate-representative monarchy
    • Civil law in the middle. XVI - mid. XVII century.
    • Criminal law in the Code of 1649
    • Legal proceedings in the Code of 1649
• Formation and development of an absolute monarchy in Russia (second half of the 17th-18th centuries)
  • Historical preconditions for the emergence of an absolute monarchy in Russia
  • The social system of the period of absolute monarchy in Russia
  • State system of the period of absolute monarchy in Russia
    • Police in absolutist Russia
    • Prisons, exile and hard labor in the 17th-18th centuries
    • Reforms of the era of palace coups
    • Reforms during the reign of Catherine II
  • Development of law under Peter I
    • Criminal law under Peter I
    • Civil law under Peter I
    • Family and inheritance law in the 17th-18th centuries
    • The emergence of environmental legislation
• The state and law of Russia during the period of the disintegration of the serf system and the growth of capitalist relations (first half of the 19th century)
  • The social system during the disintegration of the serf system
  • State system of Russia in the nineteenth century
    • State reform of authorities
    • His Imperial Majesty's own office
    • The system of police bodies in the first half of the 19th century.
    • The prison system of Russia in the nineteenth century
  • Development of the form of state unity
    • Finland's status within the Russian Empire
    • The incorporation of Poland into the Russian Empire
  • Systematization of the legislation of the Russian Empire
• The state and law of Russia during the period of the establishment of capitalism (second half of the 19th century)
  • Abolition of serfdom
  • Zemsky and city reforms
  • Local government in the second half of the 19th century.
  • Judicial reform in the second half of the 19th century
  • Military reform in the second half of the 19th century.
  • Reform of the police and prison system in the second half of the 19th century.
  • Financial reform in Russia in the second half of the 19th century.
  • Reforms of the education system and censorship
  • Church in the system of government of tsarist Russia
  • Counter-reforms of the 1880-1890s
  • The development of Russian law in the second half of the XIX century.
    • Civil law of Russia in the second half of the XIX century.
    • Family and inheritance law in Russia in the second half of the 19th century.
• State and law of Russia during the period of the first Russian revolution and before the start of the First world war (1900-1914)
  • Background and course of the first Russian revolution
  • Changes in the social structure of Russia
    • Agrarian reform P.A. Stolypin
    • Formation of political parties in Russia at the beginning of the XX century.
  • Changes in the state system of Russia
    • Reform of state bodies
    • Establishment of the State Duma
    • The punitive measures of P.A. Stolypin
    • The fight against crime at the beginning of the XX century.
  • Changes in law in Russia at the beginning of the XX century.
• State and law of Russia during the First World War
  • Changes in the state apparatus
  • Changes in the field of law during the First World War
• State and law of Russia during the February bourgeois-democratic republic (February - October 1917)
  • February Revolution of 1917
  • Dual power in Russia
    • Solving the issue of the state unity of the country
    • Reform of the prison system in February - October 1917
    • Changes in the state apparatus
  • Activities of the Soviets
  • Legal activity of the Provisional Government
• Creation of the Soviet state and law (October 1917 - 1918)
  • All-Russian Congress of Soviets and its decrees
  • Fundamental changes in the social order
  • The demolition of the bourgeois and the creation of a new Soviet state apparatus
    • Powers and activities of the Soviets
    • Military Revolutionary Committees
    • Soviet armed forces
    • Working militia
    • Changes in the judicial and penitentiary systems after the October Revolution
  • Nation-building
  • Constitution of the RSFSR 1918
  • Creation of the foundations of Soviet law
• Soviet state and law during the Civil War and intervention (1918-1920)
  • Civil war and intervention
  • Soviet state apparatus
  • Armed Forces and Law Enforcement
    • Reorganization of the police in 1918-1920
    • The activities of the Cheka during the Civil War
    • Judicial system during the civil war
  • Military Union of Soviet Republics
  • Development of law in the context of the Civil War
• Soviet state and law during the New Economic Policy (1921-1929)
  • Nation-building. Formation of the USSR
    • Declaration and Treaty on the formation of the USSR
  • Development of the state apparatus of the RSFSR
    • Reconstruction of the national economy after the civil war
    • Judicial bodies during the NEP period
    • Creation of the Soviet prosecutor's office
    • Police of the USSR during the NEP period
    • Correctional labor institutions of the USSR during the NEP period
    • Codification of law during the NEP period
• Soviet state and law in the period of radical breakdown of social relations (1930-1941)
  • State management of the economy
    • Collective farm construction
    • National Economy Planning and Reorganization of Management Bodies
  • State management of social and cultural processes
  • Law enforcement reforms in the 1930s
  • Reorganization of the armed forces in the 1930s
  • USSR Constitution 1936
  • Development of the USSR as a union state
  • Development of law in 1930-1941
• Soviet state and law during the Great Patriotic War
  • The Great Patriotic War and the restructuring of the work of the Soviet state apparatus
  • Changes in the organization of state unity
  • The development of Soviet law during the Great Patriotic War
• The Soviet state and law in the post-war years of the restoration of the national economy (1945-1953)
  • The internal political situation and foreign policy of the USSR in the first post-war years
  • Development of the state apparatus in the post-war years
    • The system of correctional labor institutions in the post-war years
  • Development of Soviet law in the post-war years
• The Soviet state and law during the period of liberalization of social relations (mid-1950s - mid-1960s)
  • Development of the external functions of the Soviet state
  • The development of the form of state unity in the mid-1950s.
  • Restructuring of the state apparatus of the USSR in the mid-1950s.
  • The development of Soviet law in the mid-1950s - mid-1960s.
• The Soviet state and law during the period of slowing down the pace of social development (mid-1960s - mid-1980s)
  • Development of external functions of the state
  • USSR Constitution 1977
  • The form of state unity according to the Constitution of the USSR of 1977
    • Development of the state apparatus
    • Law enforcement in the mid 1960s - mid 1980s
    • The bodies of justice of the USSR in the 1980s.
  • Development of law in the middle. 1960s - mid. 1900s
  • Correctional labor institutions in the middle. 1960s - mid. 1900s
• Formation of the state and law of the Russian Federation. The collapse of the USSR (mid 1980s - 1990s)
  • The policy of "perestroika" and its main content
  • The main directions of development of the political regime and state system
  • The collapse of the USSR
  • External consequences of the collapse of the USSR for Russia. Commonwealth of Independent States
  • Formation of the state apparatus of new Russia
  • Development of the form of state unity of the Russian Federation
  • Development of law during the collapse of the USSR and the formation of the Russian Federation

Background and course of the first Russian revolution

The years of the revolution 1905-1907 became for Russia a time of important state reforms, although they were not recognized as great, but they were deep and difficult to reverse. Then, on the whole, the political, legal and socio-economic transformations, begun in the 1860s, were completed, which were supposed to ensure the survival and further development of the monarchical form of government. In the course of these transformations, the scope of the monarch's rights changed, representative bodies of power arose, and feudal law significantly advanced towards its transformation into bourgeois law.

The prevailing trend in the development of the Russian state at the turn of the XIX-XX centuries. there was modernization, which is understood as the processes of renewal of the economy, social and political system, legal institutions, etc.

The initial stage of modernization was the traditional agrarian society with its characteristic rigid estate hierarchy, absolutist form of government and the privileged position of the noble landowners. The final stage of this process is an industrial society, the most important features of which are a market economy, the institution of separation of powers, a multi-party system, etc.

Russia took the road of modernization later than other countries. As a country with a backward economy and political system, it was implementing the so-called “catch-up type” of modernization. He was characterized by the active intervention of the state in the economic and political life of the country, the imposition of capitalist relations and the transformation of the form of government "from above".

The fact that in Russia in 1905-1907. there was such an important historical event as the first Russian revolution, there were socio-economic and political preconditions.

Socio-economic preconditions... The modernization of the Russian economy reached by the beginning of the XX century. significant results. An industrial revolution was carried out at a rapid pace in the country, new techniques and technologies were introduced, and the development of private entrepreneurship was initiated.

A rapid industrial upsurge took place in the 1890s, when S.Yu. Witte. The economic course he was pursuing included a tough tax policy, financial reform designed to ensure the convertibility of the ruble, the development of banking, attraction of foreign investment in the development of domestic industry, especially Group A enterprises, and active railway construction. The results of this stage of industrial modernization were an increase in the volume of industrial production by more than 2 times, an increase in labor productivity, and technical re-equipment of enterprises.

By the beginning of the XX century. Russian capitalism has moved to a qualitatively new stage of development, called imperialism... There was a concentration of production and capital, the first monopoly associations of capitalists in industry arose. Covering practically all branches of heavy and some branches of light industry, they became the basis of the country's economic life. The process of merging industrial and banking capital began, which led to the emergence of finance capital and a financial oligarchy.

Russian capitalism was characterized by a high degree of concentration of capital, production and labor. During the years of industrial growth, the rate of production growth in a number of leading industries was higher than in the highly developed countries of Europe and the United States. The network of railways increased significantly, amounting to 64 thousand versts by 1913. However, the object of export for Russia was not industrial goods, but agricultural goods, first of all, bread.

A feature of Russian capitalism was the preservation of significant survivals of serfdom. There were disproportions in the development of industry and agriculture, actively developing industry coexisted with backward agriculture, large noble land ownership - with an underdeveloped peasant economy. The remnants of feudalism in agriculture impeded the process of capitalization of the country. Peasant land shortages increased, arrears in taxes and redemption payments from peasants increased. Crop failures became more frequent, as well as peasants' hunger strikes and epidemics accompanying them. The local nobility, largely unable to adapt to the new economic conditions, was rapidly losing land, bombarded the monarch with petitions for help.

On the eve and during the years of the first Russian revolution, the agrarian crisis became an important component of the general political crisis that was brewing in the country. It was accentuated by the fact that Russia was a predominantly agrarian country: more than 75% of the country's population was engaged in agriculture, and the agrarian sector of the economy provided about half of the gross national product.

Political prerequisites... Like socio-economic ones, they matured gradually. The beginning was laid by the reforms of the 1860s and 1870s, which became an important stage in the modernization of the Russian state. The formula of V.I. Lenin that 1861 gave birth to 1905. The reforms gave a powerful impetus to the development of the country. They introduced some elements of bourgeois statehood into the state system of Russia: they created elected representative institutions of local government (zemstvo and city self-government bodies), elective court bodies (magistrates' courts), established the foundations of the bourgeois judicial system and legal proceedings, more flexible bourgeois forms of state financial control and censorship, and etc.

In the activities of the highest state bodies (the Committee of Ministers, the Council of Ministers. The State Council, the Senate), matters related to bourgeois entrepreneurship and property began to take an increasing place. Representatives of the bourgeoisie began to be included in the advisory branch offices of the ministries (committees, councils). The share of landowners among the higher bureaucracy has decreased, amounting to the beginning of the XX century. a little over 50%. The so-called plutocracy appeared in the bureaucracy - representatives of the wealthy commercial and industrial bourgeoisie, as well as the "third element" - the civilian staff of self-government bodies (doctors, statisticians, agronomists, teachers, etc.). However, the positions of the Russian bourgeoisie in government were weak, in contrast to the countries of Western Europe, where the “third estate” was politically active, had a pronounced civic position, and acted as a leader and conductor of modernization.

The weakness of the political influence of the bourgeoisie aroused its discontent and was compensated by the omnipotence of the noble bureaucracy. This gave rise to disproportions and asynchrony of the modernization process, which was carried out at a high rate in the economic sphere and practically did not affect the political sphere. Russian modernization was aimed primarily at the field of technology and technology, while the renewal of the form of the state. especially the form of government and the political system, has long been a taboo topic. In view of this, the technical revolution coexisted with absolutism and with the wildest forms of serfdom.

By the beginning of the XX century. preserved the main pre-reform higher, central and local institutions with a noble bureaucratic majority, as well as the foundations of pre-reform law. The Council of State retained the value of the highest legislative body. At the top of the bureaucracy, projects have more than once been put forward to expand the composition of the State Council at the expense of elected members from zemstvo assemblies and city councils, the authors of which were M. Loris-Melikov, P.A. Valuev and others. However, they were not implemented. Russia remained an absolute monarchy with an autocrat-emperor at its head. The lack of reform of the political system gave rise to protest in the society.

During the reign of Alexander III, the importance of the Council of State decreases somewhat due to the strengthening of the role of the Committee of Ministers. The emperor preferred to discuss bills in a narrower circle of trusted senior officials. Unlike the Committee of Ministers, which was in charge of current administrative matters. The Council of Ministers considered and discussed events of national importance. The ruling Senate retained in post-reform Russia the value of the supreme body of court and supervision. The functions and apparatus that existed before 1861 were retained by the Holy Synod.

The crisis was further aggravated by the lack of continuity in the political course of the autocracy, which alternated reforms with counter-reforms. During the reign of Alexander III in a number of areas (local government, court, education system), measures were taken that limited and distorted the reforms of the 1860-1870s.

A significant role in the ripening of conditions for the revolution was played by the personality and style of government of the last Russian emperor. Nicholas II(1868 1918). He had to rule in a crisis of state power, when traditional foundations and values ​​were rethought. Not being a reformer by nature, the emperor was actually a hostage of the principles of power inherited by him, perceived a departure from them as a betrayal of the interests of Russia and an outrage over the sacred foundations bequeathed by his ancestors. The emperor viewed autocracy as a family affair of the Romanovs, in which no one has the right to interfere. He expressed his political credo in response to a question about his occupation in the questionnaire of the First Imperial Population Census in 1897, where he wrote down clearly and succinctly: "Master of the Russian land." In his first public speech in January 1895, the tsar pointed out: "Let everyone know that, devoting all my strength to the good of the people, I will protect the foundations of autocracy as firmly and unswervingly as my unforgettable late parent guarded it."

However, trying to solve the problems facing Russia at the turn of the 19th and 20th centuries. large-scale problems "politics of the Middle Ages", without shaking the age-old foundations of Russian statehood, it was impossible. The last Russian tsar was faced with a task, the solution of which was relegated to the background of all his predecessors. The country was called upon to overcome the backwardness of the social system, carried out "the liberalization of the political regime. The first Russian revolution was the answer to the inability of the autocracy to respond to the challenge of the time and to carry out reforms that weaken the intensity of confrontation in society.

The political crisis in the country was aggravated by the adventurous foreign policy of the tsarist government. By the beginning of the XX century. in the ruling spheres, the influence of a group of politicians prevailed, headed by the Minister of Internal Affairs V.K. Plehve, who saw a way to resolve internal contradictions in a "small victorious war." In the government, supporters of the so-called "Great Asian Program" prevailed, which assumed the exit and strengthening of Russia on the Pacific coast.

An aggressive foreign policy and the struggle for the redivision of the world were characteristic features of the imperialist stage in the development of capitalism. The Nikolaev empire was drawn into a complex tangle of international contradictions, which led it to an inglorious war with Japan, and in the long term to a world war. This war was the catalyst for a revolutionary explosion. As V.O. Klyuchevsky, a monarchy suffering a military defeat is losing its legitimacy.

The Russo-Japanese War, which began on January 27, 1904, was doomed even before it began, as many politicians pointed out. There was a disdainful underestimation of the enemy, the ambiguity of the purpose of entering the war, the lack of a strategic concept of military operations, the mediocrity of the command, the poor training of officers, backward weapons, significantly inferior to Japanese. In August 1905, the Peace of Portsmouth was signed, which recorded a significant weakening of Russia's positions in the Far East, its loss of spheres of influence in China and Korea, on Sakhalin. Russia's failures in the foreign policy arena put the country on the brink of revolution.

The events of the revolution of 1905-1907... The beginning of the first Russian revolution was laid by the events of January 9, 1905, called "Bloody Sunday". Troops in Petersburg shot crowds of workers on their way to the Winter Palace to submit a petition to the tsar. According to official data, 96 people were killed and 333 people were wounded (according to private data, the number of victims was much higher - from 800 to 1000 killed). “Bloody Sunday” undermined the people's faith in the king.

The march was organized by the priest G. Gapon, an agent of the St. Petersburg secret police and the founder of the St. Petersburg Society of Factory Workers, an organization that aimed to attract workers to the side of the autocracy. The demonstrators demanded the introduction of elective popular representation and the provision of civil rights to the population. The petition also included slogans for improving the life of the workers (establishing an eight-hour working day, increasing wages), convening a Constituent Assembly to carry out democratic reforms, responsibility of ministers to the people, etc. The petition collected 150,000 signatures.

The shooting of workers in St. Petersburg shook society. A wave of workers' strikes against the ill-treatment of the population swept across the country. In January 1905 alone, the number of strikers exceeded the average annual level of the previous decade by 10 times. A symptom of the political activism of workers was the creation of Councils of authorized deputies, initially serving as centers for the leadership of strikes, and then gradually transformed into alternative bodies of power. The first such council arose in May 1905 during a textile workers' strike in Ivanovo-Voznesensk. On behalf of the workers, the Council elected by them negotiated with the factory owners and represented their interests before the city authorities, was engaged in the maintenance of public order (formed its own militia, banned the sale of spirits in shops during the strike), distributed among the strikers the funds collected for them by the workers, organized a political demonstration under the slogan "Down with the autocracy!" As the Ivanovo-Voznesensk strike showed, the workers did not confine themselves to criticizing the existing order and demands for political reforms, but developed their own alternative model of state administration and self-government.

The growth of the revolution was evidenced by the statistics of peasant uprisings: in January-February 1905, 126 cases of protest were registered, in March-April - 247, in May-June - already 791. Riots in the village were accompanied by the seizure, looting and arson of noble estates. According to rough estimates of the Ministry of Internal Affairs, in 1905-1907. more than 2 thousand landowners' estates were destroyed and burned, the peak of protest actions fell on the autumn of 1905.

Revolutionary uprisings engulfed the army, which was previously the unshakable support of the autocracy. In the summer and autumn of 1905, more than 40 performances by soldiers and sailors took place. In June 1905, the crew of the Black Sea Fleet battleship "Prince Potemkin Tavrichesky", one of the best ships in the fleet, mutinied. Unrest began on the national outskirts: the revolutionary movement swept Poland, Finland, the Baltic States, Ukraine. Caucasus, Central Asia.

In September-October 1905, Russia was engulfed in a general political strike, in which railway workers, factories and plants, and city institutions took part. The events began in Moscow with a strike of printers who put forward political demands. Soon, representatives of other professions joined it, the demands began to be economic in nature, the geography of performances expanded: they covered 66 provinces of European Russia. The culmination of the revolution was the armed uprising in Moscow in December 1905.

The abolition of serfdom marked the establishment in Russia of capitalism as the dominant socio-economic formation. However, capitalist relations took shape in the depths of the old, feudal system.

In the second quarter of a century, a crisis of the feudal system arose in Russia, which meant that the further economic development of the country on the basis of the existing serf system of economy became impossible. If the onset of the crisis did not lead to an economic decline either in agriculture or in industry, then this happened only because further development took place on the basis of new, capitalist relations, in spite of the prevailing serf system. It was this circumstance that determined the well-known successes in the development of agriculture, as well as individual branches of industry.

Some landowners were aware of the advantage of free labor over serfs, which resulted not only in the practical application of the former, but also in the understanding of the need to abolish serfdom. However, during the first half of the century, these landowners were literally an exception in the general mass of serf-owning nobles, who were striving at all costs to preserve the existing order of things.

The crisis of the feudal-serf system worsened the position of the peasantry, causing a certain growth of the peasant movement.

Involved by the entire course of historical development in the orbit of economic progress, the government did not

despite its feudal nature, he understood the need for the development of industry and trade. This was determined by the desire to strengthen the economic foundation of the state, and above all its military power.

At the same time, the government realized that the existence of serfdom posed a great danger to the state, bearing in mind the possibility of a peasant uprising. All this determined the desire of the government, represented by Alexander I and Nicholas I, to come out sometimes with proposals to abolish serfdom. However, these proposals were essentially abstract in nature. The autocracy could not take this step against the will of the nobility, having almost no sympathy for this issue within the given class. It is this, in our opinion, that determined the whole groundlessness of government aspirations.

The Crimean War shook the entire existing system, revealed not only the economic backwardness of Russia, but also revealed the entire viciousness of the state system as a whole - a system based on lies and hypocrisy.

Sj "Under the influence of the war, some, albeit numerically and small, part of the nobility begins to understand the need to abolish serfdom.

At the same time, the government, and especially Alexander II, was frightened by the mass peasant movement, which became widespread during the war.

If the abolition of serfdom was caused by the entire course of economic development, which was revealed with sufficient evidence during the Crimean War, then the immediate reason that pushed Alexander II down this path was the fear of a peasant uprising. However, Alexander II was able to abolish serfdom only because he was supported by a small group of both the liberal and conservative nobility, who understood the need to abolish serfdom, being guided by considerations of different nature. The fear of a peasant uprising was of decisive importance for this part of the conservative nobility.

The tense situation in the countryside during the preparation of the reform and characterized by

known growth of peasant unrest, forced the government to revise the original reform program in the direction of its radicalization. On the other hand, the deterioration of the draft_T3 editors' commissions in 1860 indicated that the situation in the countryside at that moment did not cause much concern to the government.

Realizing perfectly well that the peasantry will react negatively to the content of the reform, the government is taking a number of measures to prevent peasant uprisings, including in the event of an uprising in St. Petersburg.

Despite the wide scale of peasant uprisings, they still remained tsarist. The main motive of these speeches was the struggle for real will, which the tsar allegedly gave, but the bar and the officials concealed it.

Moreover, the absence of a class capable of leading the peasantry also determined the impossibility of a revolutionary explosion. The growing revolutionary situation could not develop into a revolution.

So, the abolition of serfdom created the conditions for the establishment of capitalism in Russia. These conditions consisted in the personal emancipation of over 20 million landlord peasants, partially deprived of the means of production. It was the personal emancipation of the peasants that was one of the decisive conditions that ensured the victory of the new, capitalist economic system. The transfer of peasants to ransom meant virtually the elimination of serf relations. Despite the preservation of feudal-serf survivals in the form of various forms of labor labor, capitalist relations of production gradually, albeit slowly, occupy a dominant position.

“... The reform is a product of the development of the commodity economy,” wrote V. I. Lenin in a letter to P. P. Maslov, “and ... its whole meaning and significance consisted in the fact that those fetters that were holding back and hampered the development of this system ”1.

However, the reform retained a large number of feudal-serf survivals, which is also characterized by

V. I. Lenin. Poly. collection cit., v. 46, p. 2.

her predatory character was brought down. Firstly, some part of their land was cut off from the peasants, and basically just that part, without which they could not do. It was this circumstance that made it possible for the landowners to enslave the peasants, which found its expression in the labor system.

The most predatory nature was the terms of the ransom - the “Regulation on the ransom”. Thanks to these conditions, the peasants lost the greatest amount of land, "voluntarily" giving it up due to its prohibitively high value.

The allotments received by the landlord peasants as a result of the reform were for the most part completely inadequate in the conditions of the then system of land use (community) and the existing culture of agriculture.

The lack of land, various forms of serf bondage that survived determined the extremely difficult situation in the post-reform village. However, the abolition of serfdom created the conditions for the development of capitalism both in the city and in the countryside. The main result of this development in agriculture was the process of disintegration of the peasantry. This process could have proceeded much faster, if, however, the remnants of the old had not in every way hindered the development of capitalism.

The struggle against feudal-serf survivals, the struggle for the land in the hands of the landowners, and determined the peasant movement in the post-reform period. “1861 gave birth to 1905,” 1 wrote V. I. Lenin, speaking of the prerequisites for the revolution of 1905-1907.

V. I. Lenin. Poly. collection cit., v. 20, p. 177.

The reform of 1861 was supposed to create conditions for the development of capitalism, but to preserve the autocracy and landlord ownership. Serfdom hindered the formation of a market for hired labor, and in agriculture deprived the peasants of interest in the development of productive forces. The crisis of the landlord economy, based on the ineffective labor of serfs, was growing. The peasant protest against serfdom intensified. For the 50s of the XIX century. more than 1,000 peasant unrest swept across the country.

The defeat of Russia in the Crimean War clearly showed that serfdom is the main reason for Russia's military-technical backwardness.

Preparations for the reform began in 1857, when the Secret Committee was created, which was to take into account the interests of all strata of the nobility. Rescripts (instructions) were sent to the governors for the development of local projects "to improve the life of landowners' peasants." In 1858 the Secret Committee was transformed into the Main Committee "on landlord peasants coming out of serfdom."

It turned out that in the non-chernozem zone the landowners demanded a large cash ransom for the land (the project of the Tver leader of the nobility Unkovsky). In the black earth zone, where land was the main source of income, landowners held on to the land and agreed to the minimum allotments for the peasants (the project of the Poltava landowner Posen).

According to the project of the landowner of the steppe zone (Samara province) Samarin, it was proposed to establish a transitional period of 10-12 years after the abolition of serfdom, during which corvée was preserved, since serfdom was abolished. there was a lack of working hands.

Rostovtsev became the chairman of the editorial commissions for the preparation of the reform, then the Minister of Justice Panin.

The reform of 1861, which abolished serfdom, and the subsequent bourgeois reforms of the 60s and 70s are called great reforms, since they contributed to the establishment of capitalism in Russia. A special role in the preparation of the reforms was played by N.A. and D.A. Milyutin, S.S. Lanskoy, lawyer Zarudny.

On February 19, 1861, Alexander II signed the Manifesto proclaiming the abolition of serfdom. The "Regulations on the peasants who came out of serfdom" were also signed.

The bourgeois features of the reform were manifested in the fact that the personal emancipation of the peasants created conditions for the formation of a market for hired labor.

The transfer of peasants to a cash ransom for land drew the peasantry more strongly into commodity-money relations.

The peasants received some legal rights: the right to freely dispose of their property, engage in trade, move to other unprivileged estates, and marry without the permission of the landowner.

Capitalist land leasing began to spread. The reform also preserved feudal vestiges, the main of which were: landlord ownership and autocracy, peasants' land shortage increased, since a part of the peasant land was cut off in favor of the landowner. A system of segments has arisen. The peasants lost especially a lot of land in the black earth strip.

The peasant could not immediately pay the entire amount of the ransom to the landowner. The state became an intermediary between the peasant and the landowner, which paid the landowner 80% of the ransom for the peasant. However, the peasant had to return this amount with an additional payment of 6% per annum. Cash redemptions for land were canceled by P. Stolypin only in 1906. The peasants remained "temporarily liable" for another 20 years (that is, they carried the previous duties - corvee or quitrent).

Peasants remained dependent on the rural community. The land was given to the community by the landowner through a charter.

The reform created conditions for the development of capitalism. This was a step towards the transformation of Russia into a bourgeois monarchy. However, this reform did not completely solve the agrarian question, the peasantry turned out to be land-poor. The advanced public criticized this reform. The peasant found himself entangled in the remnants of serfdom, the peasant suffered "not so much from the development of capitalism as from its insufficient development." Therefore, according to Lenin, 1861 gave birth to 1905, "the reform was carried out by serfs and was carried out in a serf-like manner."

Ticket 24Reforms of the 60-70sXIXin.

In 1863-1865, an agrarian reform was carried out in the appanage and state villages. Specific peasants in the form of redemption payments paid the same quitrent as before for 49 years.

The conditions for reform in the appanage and state villages were more favorable than in the landowners' village. The allotments of the specific peasants turned out to be one and a half times more than those of the landowners, and the state ones - two times, the redemption payments turned out to be slightly less.

After the abolition of serfdom, capitalism began to take hold in Russia. To adapt the autocracy and the nobility to the development of capitalism, the tsarist government carried out a number of reforms that were inconsistent and contradictory. Their implementation dragged on for a decade - from 1864 to 1874. These reforms caused a restructuring in the local government system, in the judicial system, in the army, etc., but the state system in Russia remained the same, unchanged.

In 1864 the Zemskaya reform was carried out. Zemstvo councils and assemblies were created in counties and provinces (zemstvos). They elected vowels, but the representation of the peasants was limited. Zemstvos dealt with local economic issues (construction of schools, hospitals, roads). Any decision of the zemstvos required a sanction from above, i.e. they worked under the supervision of the Ministry of the Interior.

Elections to county zemstvo assemblies were held from three categories of the population: 1) from county landowners (from landowners and rich peasants); 2) from urban voters (from the city trade and industrial bourgeoisie); 3) from rural communities (from peasants).

However, the elections from the peasants were three-stage: first, the village gathering elected representatives to the volost gathering, at which electors were nominated, and those - deputies to the district zemstvo. At the county meeting, elections were held to the county zemstvo council and deputies to the provincial zemstvo assembly.

A lot of progressive intelligentsia worked in the zemstvos, which helped the population in case of famine, epidemics, and fires. Writers L. Tolstoy and A. Chekhov were active zemstvo leaders. During the famine of 1891, L. Tolstoy, funded by the zemstvos, opened many free canteens for the hungry.

In 1870, the city reform was carried out. City Dumas were created, which were supposed to deal with economic issues in cities (construction and design, inspection of schools, hospitals; roads, bazaars, etc.). Their activities were also under the control of the Ministry of the Interior. Elections to city councils were wordless, but property qualifications were taken into account.

Judicial reform was carried out in 1864. A single court was established for all estates. The court was declared public, the power of the judge - independent. There were new positions in the court: a lawyer and a jury. Persons were elected to the positions of jurors, taking into account the property and educational qualification, i.e. representatives of the nobility, merchants. The jury determined the degree of guilt of the defendant. The progressiveness of this reform lay in the fact that in the course of the investigation the vices of the existing system began to be revealed. By decision of the jury, the workers who took part in the Morozov strike, Vera Zasulich, who had shot at the head of the Petersburg prison, were released.

The reformed judicial system included 4 stages: 1) magistrate court (local); 2) the district court (general jury court); 3) the judicial chamber (to consider more important cases); 4) the Senate (the highest court).

The military reform was completed in 1874. Military duty became an all-class one. Recruitment kits were canceled. The term of service in the army was reduced to 6 years, and in the navy - to 7 years. However, for those with higher education, the service life was 6 months, for those who graduated from the gymnasium - 1.5 years; for those who graduated from the city school - 3 years.

The military command system was reorganized in the country. Russia was divided into 15 military districts. Created new military schools (cadets).

Measures were also taken to develop education. By decree of 1864, individuals and organizations were given the right to open private schools. Gymnasiums for men were declared open to all classes, but tuition fees remained high. The new university charter in 1863 returned self-government to the universities.

The historical significance of the reforms of the 60s-70s is that they contributed to the establishment of capitalism in Russia.

Ticket 25Public thought in Russia in the second halfXIXin

1) The state apparatus almost completely freed itself from the landowners who prevailed in it.

2)Social movement in Russia in the 60-90s.

Social movement has become a factor development of Russia. Throughout the century, the intellectual elite of society has fought for the good of the people. The people themselves have never recognized serfdom. The peasants were supremely indifferent to politics.

I... Conservative direction.

Since the mid 60s. The fight against the opposition was led by MN Katkov, a retired professor at Moscow. University, publisher of the journal Russian Bulletin and the newspaper Mosk. Vedomosti. The theory of the official nationality was the government's reaction to the development of revolutionary ideas in Russia. But in the minds of people lived faith in God and the king, and church rituals were everyday life. It was on this that the state was kept. self-awareness. Thinkers were looking for how to preserve the most important national foundations - the Orthodox faith, an original political and socio-economic system, to prevent a revolution. They saw the danger of Russia being assimilated by Europe. They were Leontiev, Danilevsky, Pobedonostsev.

Danilevsky is one of the founders of the concept of Pan-Slavism. He saw Europe as an enemy and aggressor in relation to the Slavic states. He argued that material culture can be perceived by all civilizations, but the intangible elements of culture are spread only within the boundaries of the civilization that gave birth to them.

Pobedonostsev is a prominent statesman.

Thanks to Pobedonostsev, millions of peasant children received education and formed social services. basis for Stolypin's agrarian transformations. He was a staunch opponent of democracy and Russia, he believed that the Russian peasantry was not ready for self-government. He saw the way out of the crisis in the renewal of society through the church.

II... Liberal social movement.

The Milyutins, Golovnin, Reitern, Bunge took part in the development and implementation of reforms. The political program of the liberals was aimed at defending the reforms already implemented, at preparing a whole system of gradual reforms in the social and economic spheres. Russia had to be transformed gradually in order to prevent a revolutionary explosion in the country. The liberals thought of their activities as a legal public direction and did not seek to create their own party. The journal "Vestnik Evropy" was a tribune of liberal opposition to the government course and the conservative direction. A broad zemstvo-liberal movement arose. The zemstvo consisted of liberal-minded nobles, officials, teachers, and later began to attract peasants.

III... Radical currents.

Herzen's ideas laid the foundation for the radical movement. His followers called themselves populists (they were characterized by rejection of the bourgeois, the desire to defend the interests of the peasantry, the unwillingness to recognize capitalism in Russia). The revolutionaries of the 60s and 70s denied the need for political freedoms in Russia, they wanted to provoke an immediate revolt for the establishment of universal equality in the country on the basis of collectivism.

The populist movement had several ideologists (Bakunin, Lavrov, Tkachev, Mikhailovsky). They believed that the intelligentsia was to blame before the people. it is the people who created the whole culture and this imposes a heavy responsibility on those who use this culture. The Narodniks began terror against the tsar and the government. The government began to execute the culprits and expel them. The Narodniks found themselves isolated from Russian society.

From 80-90 years, Marxism conquers the revolutionary environment in Russia. Plekhanov and his associates prepared the conditions for the creation of a Marxist party in Russia. Lenin argued that socialism can be realized with insufficient development of capitalism and without a working class. He believed that underdeveloped capitalism is a great boon for revolutionaries.

Ticket 26: Alexander III: counter-reforms or "conservative" modernization.

After the assassination of Alexander 2 and accession to the throne of Alexander 3 in the second half of the 1880s. restrictions were introduced in the field of jury trials, and city courts were introduced in cities, in which judges were appointed by the government. Censorship in the press has been restored, abolished in the era of liberal reforms, censorship repression has reached a large scale. The rudiments of peasant and urban self-government, the introduction of which pursued the zemstvo and city reform of the 1860s, were eliminated. In 1889, in order to strengthen the supervision of the peasants, the positions of zemstvo chiefs with broad rights were introduced. They were appointed from the local noble landowners. Clerks and small traders, other poor strata of the city were deprived of the right to vote. The judicial reform has undergone changes. In the new regulation on zemstvos in 1890, the estate-nobility representation was strengthened. In 1882-1884. many publications were closed, the autonomy of universities was abolished; elementary schools were transferred to the church department - the Holy Synod.

All this happened because the emperor was very afraid of repeating the history of his predecessor and sought to remove from the masses any beginnings of free-thinking. He believed that concessions in legislation and liberal government policies contributed to the emergence of revolutionary sentiments.

At the same time, it is worth noting that some reforms were intended to smooth out the rough edges from the reign of Alexander II, such as the consequences of the 1861 reform. The lowering of redemption payments, the legalization of the obligation to redeem peasant allotments, the establishment of a peasant land bank to issue loans to peasants for the purchase of land (1881-1884) were aimed at smoothing out the unfavorable aspects of the reform of 1861 for the peasants. The abolition of the poll tax (May 18, 1886), the inheritance tax and interest-bearing securities, and the increase in trade taxation (1882-1884) revealed a desire to begin a radical reconstruction of the tax system, in the sense of facilitating the poorest classes; the restriction of factory work of minors (1882) and night work of adolescents and women (1885) was aimed at protecting labor; the establishment of commissions for drawing up criminal and civil codes (1881-1882) responded to an undoubted urgent need; The commission of State Secretary Kakhanov, established in 1881, began a detailed study of the needs of local government, with the aim of improving the regional administration in relation to the beginnings of the peasant and zemstvo reform.

Ticket 27 Formation of the political system of Russia at the endXIX- the beginningXXcenturies

The problem of modernization, i.e. a radical renewal of all spheres of life from the economy to the state system rose again before Russia at the turn of the century. The reforms of the 60s-70s were not completed and were stopped by the counter-reforms of the 80s and 90s. The modernization was to be carried out over a vast area, in a country with many feudal vestiges and stable conservative traditions.

Domestic policy was based on great power principles. Social tensions increased due to the rapid development of new economic forms. The conflict between the landlord and peasant sectors of the economy deepened. The post-reform community could no longer restrain the social differentiation of the peasantry. The growing Russian bourgeoisie claimed a political role in society, meeting the opposition of the nobility and the state bureaucracy. The main support of the autocracy - the nobility, was losing its monopoly on power.

The autocracy with difficulty made the police concessions, the transition from reforms to repression. The system of supreme bodies of power and administration was designed to strengthen the power of the emperor.

The revitalization and development of commodity-money relations, the formation of a market for goods, raw materials, finance and labor demanded a restructuring of the political and state system. In the political sphere, supporters and opponents of industrial modernization and political reforms emerged (the former was represented by S.Yu. Witte, the latter - by V.K. Pleve).

The state encouraged private entrepreneurship: in 1891 a protectionist customs tariff was established, in 1900-1903 significant subsidies were allocated to entrepreneurs.

The government sought to influence the nascent workers 'and peasants' movement. Under the auspices of the police, workers' societies were created in large industrial centers, and in 1902 a "Special Conference on the Needs of the Agricultural Industry" was formed. These parastatal organizations aimed to control social movement.

The defeat in the war with Japan contributed to the growth of the revolution. After the murder of the Social Revolutionaries V.K. Plehve, the "Era of Confidence" has begun, proclaimed by the new Minister of Internal Affairs, P.D. Svyatopolk-Mirsky. The events of January 9, 1905 interrupted this period.

In February 1905, two mutually exclusive government acts were published: a decree allowing the population to submit projects to improve the state structure and a manifesto affirming the inviolability of the autocracy.

In May 1905, a draft was submitted to the ministers for the creation of a legislative body ("Bulygin Duma"). The government tried to maneuver. The result of this policy was the Manifesto of October 17, 1905, which laid the foundation for bourgeois constitutionalism in Russia.

The extreme reaction to government concessions was the action of the right-wing forces, which manifested itself in pogroms. In the political sphere, the formation of parties of the government camp began, opposing the democratic and liberal camps.

In December 1905, an armed uprising in Moscow was suppressed. The government rejected a number of concessions made during the revolution. By the Manifesto on February 20, 1906, the State Council was transformed into a legislative body, the upper house of the Russian parliament, and the Basic Laws of the Russian Empire were quickly revised.

Ticket 28: The Development of Capitalism in Russia at the EndXIX- the beginningXXcenturies

As for Russia, here the rapid development of capitalism began after the bourgeois reforms of the 60s and 70s. XIX century, and it is associated with the name of Sergei Yulievich Witte.

For 10 years, Witte strove to catch up with the more industrially developed countries of Europe, for which he set specific goals:

1) carry out industrialization (development of heavy industry);

2) more actively to attract foreign capital into industry;

3) but at the same time not affect the political system, since he considered the monarchy the best form of government.

The most effective measure was the introduction in 1894 of the wine monopoly, i.e. the exclusive right of the state to sell alcoholic beverages. And although Witte justified these measures not with the goal of increasing income, but with the goal of reducing popular drunkenness, in practice, the population was getting drunk, because the working hours of the wine shops were increased - from 7 am to 10 pm, and on Sundays it was resumed immediately after the church service.

To strengthen the budget, the government went to increase indirect taxes.

In 1898, on the initiative of Witte, a new industrial tax was approved, which determined the amount of tax not by the owner's guild, but by the capacity of the enterprise. The economic crises of the end of the century led to the instability of the Russian ruble, which frightened off foreign investors.

In 1897, a monetary reform was carried out to strengthen the ruble:

devaluation of the ruble by 1/3 (i.e. artificial depreciation of the ruble);

the introduction of the "gold standard" (gold circulation and free exchange of the credit ruble for gold);

restriction of credit tickets issued by the State Bank and not backed by gold.

Such measures led to an inflow of foreign capital (mainly from France, England, Germany and Belgium), which, on the one hand, led to the development of domestic industry, but on the other, to economic dependence.

In foreign trade, Witte stood for protectionism.

Our trade with Germany was especially active, which accounted for at least 25% of Russian exports (mainly grain, timber, livestock products), and from where up to 35% of all industrial goods imported into Russia came from. German agrarians demanded an increase in import duties on Russian agricultural products, but Witte, by retaliatory measures against German industrial imports, forced them to maintain a balance in customs tax.

90s showed the correctness of the choice of the path: the annual construction of the railway reached 2,500 versts, the growth of industrial production in the leading industries was 15% or more, and the private sector was very active.

But all this began to crumble during the economic crisis. The main reason for the crisis and bankruptcy at the end of the 19th century was Witte's mistake in ignoring the role of the countryside in the economic development of Russia (which is 80% of the population). At the beginning of the reforms, the village for Witte was only a source of funds for the development of industry:

=> a community strengthening policy that guaranteed the regular flow of redemption payments.

Therefore, he unconditionally supported the law of December 14, 1893, which prohibited the withdrawal of peasants from the community without the consent of the "world" (2/3 of the community members-householders). The peasant community had a positive meaning - it protected the peasants from poverty and unemployment. But, at the same time, the community by no means contributed to the economic initiative of enterprising peasants.

To the end. In the 19th century, the rapidly developing industry faced the problem of the narrowness of the domestic sales market, and massive bankruptcies began. Witte changes his views and begins to view the village as a sales market:

=> a course towards the destruction of the community and the creation of a layer of individual peasants.

In the beginning. XX century, the Minister of Finance began to advocate for the liquidation of the community by allowing peasants who made redemption payments to leave the community with an allotment. Moreover, the Minister of Finance and his supporters considered it necessary to equalize the peasants in rights with other estates, but they encountered powerful resistance from the reactionary conservatives led by the Minister of the Interior V.K. Pleve.

In 1902, 2 bodies arose in the government, acting on different positions:

A special meeting on the needs of the agricultural industry, headed by S.Yu. Witte.

The editorial commission for the revision of the legislation on peasants of the Ministry of Internal Affairs, headed by Comrade (Deputy) Minister of Internal Affairs A.S. Stishinsky, advocated the preservation of the traditional peasant way of life as a guarantor of the stability of the autocracy.

The years of the revolution of 1905-1907 became a time of important statehood for Russia. reforms, although not recognized as great, but having a deep and intractable character Then, on the whole, political, legal and socio-economic transformations were completed, begun in the 1860s, which were supposed to ensure the survival and further development of the monarchical form of government.

In the course of these transformations, the scope of the monarch's rights changed, the representative bodies of the aldsti arose, and there was a significant proliferation of feudal law on the way of its transformation into bourgeois law.

The predominant trend in the development of the Russian state at the turn of the XX-XX centuries was modernization, which refers to the processes of renewal of the economy, social and political system, legal institutions, etc.

The initial stage of modernization was a traditional agrarian society with a characteristic rigid estate hierarchy, an absolutist form of rule of law, and a privileged position of noble landowners.The final stage of this process is an industrial general defense, the most important features of which are a market economy, the institution of separation of powers. multi-party system, etc.

Russia took the road of modernization later than other countries. As a country with a backward economy and political system, it was implementing the so-called “catch-up type” of modernization. He was characterized by active intervention of the state in the economic and political life of the country, the imposition of capitalist relations and the transformation of the form of government "from above".

There were socio-economic and political prerequisites for the fact that such an important historical event as the first Russian revolution took place in Russia in 1905-1907.

Social and economic prerequisites The modernization of the Russian economy achieved significant results by the beginning of the 20th century. The country was undergoing a rapid industrial revolution, new techniques and technologies were introduced, and the development of private entrepreneurship was initiated.

A rapid industrial upsurge took place in the 1890s, when S. Yu Witte was the Minister of Finance. The economic course he pursued included a strict tax policy, financial reform designed to ensure the convertibility of the ruble, the development of banking, and foreign investment in the development of domestic industry. especially the enterprises of the group "A-", active railway construction. The results of this stage of industrial modernization were an increase in the volume of industrial production by more than 2 times, an increase in labor productivity, technical re-equipment of enterprises

By the beginning of the XX century. Russian capitalism moved to a qualitatively new stage of development, called imperialism. The concentration of production and capital took place, the first monopoly associations of capitalists in industry arose. They covered practically all branches of heavy and some branches of light industry and became the basis of the country's economic life. The process of merging industrial and banking capitals began, which led to the emergence of finance capital and financial oligarchy

Russian capitalism was characterized by a high degree of concentration of capital, production and labor.

During the years of industrial upsurge, the rate of production growth in a number of leading industries was higher than in the highly developed countries of Europe and the United States. The railroad network significantly increased, reaching 64 thousand versts by 1913. However, the subject of export for Russia was not industrial goods, but agricultural goods, first of all - klsb

A feature of Russian capitalism was the preservation of significant survivals of serfdom. There were imbalances in the development of industry and agriculture, actively developing industry coexisted with backward agriculture, large noble land management - with an underdeveloped peasant economy. The remnants of feudalism in agriculture slowed down the process of capitalization of the country. Peasant land became stronger, and arrears in the payment of tax and redemption payments from peasants increased. Crop failures became more frequent, as well as peasants' hunger strikes and epidemics accompanying them. The landed nobility, to a large extent unable to adapt to the new conditions of management, was rapidly losing land, and peppered the monarch with petitions for help.

On the eve and during the years of the first Russian revolution, the agrarian crisis became an important component of the general political crisis that was brewing in the country. It was aggravated by the fact that Russia was a predominantly agrarian country "more than 75% of the country's population was engaged in agriculture, and the agricultural sector of the economy gave about half of the gross national product. ...

Political premises. As well as socio-economic, they matured gradually. The beginning was laid by the reforms of 1860-1870, which became an important stage in the modernization of the Russian state. The formula of B P Lenin is true, that 1861 gave birth to 1905. The reforms gave a powerful impetus to the development of the country They introduced some elements of bourgeois statehood into the state system of Russia "created elected representative institutions of local government (zemstvo and city self-government bodies), elected court bodies (magistrates' courts), established the foundations of the bourgeois judicial system and legal proceedings, more flexible bourgeois forms state financial control and censorship, etc.

In the activities of the highest state bodies (the Committee of Ministers, the Council of Ministers, the State Council, the Senate), cases involving bourgeois entrepreneurship and property began to occupy an increasing place. Representatives of the bourgeoisie began to be included in the advisory branch institutions of ministries (committees, councils) bureaucracy decreased, amounting to the beginning of the XX century. a little over 50%. Within the bureaucracy, the so-called plutocracy appeared - representatives of the state-owned commercial and industrial bourgeoisie, as well as the "third element" - the free-hired personnel of self-governing bodies (doctors, statisticians, agronomists, teachers, etc.) However, the positions of the Russian bourgeoisie in government were weak in Unlike the countries of Western Europe, where the "third estate" was politically active, had a pronounced civic position, acted as a leader and a conductor of modernization. The weakness of the political alias of the bourgeoisie injected its discontent, was compensated by the omnipotence of the noble bureaucracy.This gave rise to disproportions and asynchrony of the modernization process, which was carried out at high rates in the economic sphere and practically did not affect the political sphere. Russian modernization was aimed primarily at the sphere of technology and technology, the state, especially the forms of rule of law and the political system, was for a long time a taboo subject. In view of this, the technical revolution coexisted with absolutism and the most dna forms of serfdom

By the beginning of the XX century. preserved the main pre-reform higher, central and local institutions with a noble bureaucratic majority, as well as the foundations of pre-reform law. The State Council retained the significance of the supreme legislative body B the top of the bureaucracy more than once put forward projects to expand the composition of the State Council at the expense of elected members from zemstvo assemblies and city councils, the authors of which were MT Loris-Melikov, PA Valuev, etc. However, they were not implemented Russia remained absolute a monarchy headed by an autocrat-emperor. The lack of reform of the political system gave rise to protest in society.

During the reign of Alexander Ul, the importance of the Council of State decreases somewhat due to the strengthening of the role of the Committee of Ministers. The emperor preferred to discuss the bills in a narrower circle with the power of attorney of high officials. Unlike the Committee of Ministers, which was in charge of the current administrative grandfather. The Council of Ministers considered and discussed events of national importance. The ruling Senate retained in post-reform Russia the significance of the supreme body of court and supervision. The functions and apparatus that existed before 1861 were retained by the Holy Synod.

The crisis was further aggravated by the lack of continuity in the political course of the autocracy, which alternated reforms with counter-reforms. During the reign of Alexander III, in a number of areas (local government, court, education system), measures were taken that limited and distorted the reforms of the 1860s-1870s.

An essential role in the ripening of the conditions for the revolution was played by the features of the PERSONALITY and style of government of the last Russian emperor Nicholas II (1868-1918). them the principles of power, perceived a departure from them as a betrayal of the interests of Russia and an outrage over the sacred foundations bequeathed by his ancestors.The emperor viewed autocracy as a family affair of the Romanovs, in which no one has the right to interfere. the sheet of the First Imperial Population Census of 1897, where he wrote down clearly and concisely: “Master of the Russian land”. In his first public speech in January 1895, the man pointed out: "Let everyone know that I, having devoted all my strength to the good of the people, will guard the head of the autocracy as firmly and unswervingly as my unforgettable late parent guarded it."

However, it was impossible to try to solve the large-scale problems facing Russia at the turn of the 19th-20th centuries with the “politics of the Middle Ages” without shaking the age-old foundations of Russian statehood. The last Russian tsar faced a task, the solution of which all his predecessors put into the background. The country was called upon to overcome the backwardness of the social system, to liberalize the political regime. The nerve Russian revolution was the answer to the inability of the autocracy to respond to the challenge of the time and carry out reforms that weaken the intensity of confrontation in society.

The political crisis in the country was aggravated by the adventurous foreign policy of the tsarist government by the beginning of the 20th century. In the ruling spheres, the influence of a group of politicians headed by the Minister of the Interior BK Plehve prevailed, who introduced a way to resolve internal contradictions in the "small victorious war". In the government, supporters of the so-called "Great Asian Program" prevailed, which assumed Russia's exit and strengthening on the Pacific coast. An aggressive foreign policy and the struggle for the redivision of the world were characteristic features of the imperialist stage in the development of capitalism. The Nikolaev empire was drawn into a complex tangle of international contradictions, which led it to an inglorious war with Japan, and in the long term to a world war. This war became a catalyst for a revolutionary explosion. As BO Klyuchevsky correctly pointed out, a monarchy suffering a military defeat loses its legitimacy

The Russo-Japanese war, which began on January 27, 1904, was doomed even before it began, as indicated by many politicians.There was a disdainful underestimation of the enemy, the unclear purpose of entering the war, the lack of a strategic concept of military operations, the mediocrity of the command, the weak preparedness of officers , backward weapons, significantly inferior to the Japanese. In August 1905, the Peace of Portsmouth was signed, which recorded a significant weakening of Russia's positions in the Far East, its loss of spheres of aliyah in China and Korea, on Sakhalin. Russia's failures in foreign policy have put the country on the brink of revolution

The events of the revolution of 1905-1907 The beginning of the first Russian revolution was laid by the events of January 9, 1905, dubbed "Bloody Sunday". Troops in St. Petersburg shot crowds of workers going to the Winter Palace to submit a petition to the steam. According to official data, 96 people were killed and 333 were wounded (but private data, the number of victims was much higher - from 800 to 1000 killed). "Bloody Sunday" undermined people's faith in the king

The march was organized by priest G Gapon, an agent of the St. Petersburg secret police and the founder of the St. Petersburg Society of Factory Workers, an organization whose goal was to side the workers with the autocracy. The demonstrators demanded the introduction of elected popular representation and the granting of civil rights to the population. The petition also included slogans for improving the life of workers (establishing an eight-hour working day, increasing wages), convening a Constituent Assembly to hold democratic refunds, responsibility of ministers to the people, etc. The petition collected 150 thousand signatures

The shooting of workers in St. Petersburg stirred up the general public. A wave of workers' strikes of protest against ill-treatment of the population swept across the country In January 1905 alone, the number of strikers exceeded the average annual level of the previous decade by 10 times. A symptom of the political activism of the workers was the creation of Soviets of authorized deputies, initially serving as centers of leadership * for strikes, and then gradually transformed into alternative bodies of power. The first such council arose in May 1905 during a textile workers' strike in Ivanovo-Voznesensk. On behalf of the workers, the Council elected by them negotiated with the aladels of the factories and represented their interests before the city authorities, was engaged in the maintenance of public order (formed its own militia, prohibited the sale of strong syrt drinks in shops during the strike), distributed among the strikers the funds collected for them by the workers, organized a political demonstration under the slogan "Down with the autocracy!" As the Ivanovo-Voznesensk strike showed, the workers did not confine themselves to criticizing the existing order and demands for political reforms, but developed their own alternative model of state governance and self-government.

The growth of the revolution was evidenced by the statistics of Kreghyan protests - in January-February 1905, 126 cases of protest were registered, in March-April - 247, in May-June - already 791 Riots in the village were accompanied by the seizure, looting and arson of noble estates. According to rough estimates of the Ministry of Internal Affairs, in 1905-1907 more than 2 thousand private estates were destroyed and burned, the peak of protest actions fell on the autumn of 1905.

Revolutionary actions embraced the army, which was previously the unshakable support of the autocracy. In the summer and autumn of 1905, there were more than 40 performances by soldiers and sailors. In June 1905, the command of the battleship of the Black Sea Fleet "Prince Potemkin Tavrichesky", one of the best ships of the fleet, mutinied. Unrest began on the national outskirts of the revolutionary movement swept Poland, Finland, the Baltic States, Ukraine, the Caucasus, Central Asia.

In September-October 1905 Russia was seized by a general political strike, in which railway workers, factories and plants, and city institutions took part. Events began in Moscow with a strike of printers who put forward political demands. Soon it was joined by other professions, the demands began to be economic in nature, the geography of performances expanded: they covered 66 provinces of European Russia. The culmination of the revolution was the armed uprising in Moscow in December 1905 i.