C7. During the reign of Alexander 3, critical assessments of the judicial reform of 1864 were expressed; the post-reform courts were called dangerous talking shops and claimed that they contributed to the growth of the revolutionary movement.
What point of view on the question of the meaning of judicial reform do you know? Which point of view do you think is more convincing? Open it and give at least three facts and statements that can serve as arguments to support your point of view.
An alternative point of view given in the task:
The judicial reform was the most consistent of the Great Reforms of the 18s, an important step towards the establishment of an equal, independent, open judiciary for all.
A. When choosing the point of view set out in the task:
Post-reform courts in the 18s. sometimes people were acquitted. Guilt was not in doubt
Acquittals handed down by a jury to participants in the revolutionary movement are known (the trial of Vera Zasulich)
Court hearings aroused great public interest, often took place in an atmosphere of sensationalism, and were perceived as sources of scandalous information.
The post-reform period was classless, the old class division of legal proceedings was destroyed, the principle of independence and irremovability of judges and judicial investigators was introduced
A jury was set up to deliver a verdict on the guilt or innocence of the accused.
C6. Review the historical situation and answer the questions.
In the 15th century Russian boyars firmly held on to the right of parochialism. And the boyars said: "That is death to them, that without places to be." However, in the early 80s. 17th century Tsar Fedor Alekseevich abolished localism.
What was the reason for this measure? What was the significance of the abolition of parochialism?
The following reasons for the abolition of parochialism in the 1980s can be named. 17th century
The urgent need for reforms in Russia demanded a change in the principle of appointment to the highest government positions;
Local orders had a negative impact on the state and military service, the system of distribution of ranks and positions in the Russian state;
Localism hampered the king in the right to choose officials;
Localism introduced rivalry, envy, disputes among the boyars.
Provisions on the meaning of the abolition of parochialism:
Personal qualities, professional skills, zealous service to the sovereign became the main source of promotion;
The claims of the feudal nobility to power were dealt a blow;
Representatives of the nobility gradually became the mainstay of absolutism, won the struggle for predominance in the ruling elite of Russia.
C4. Name at least three changes in the position of the peasantry and townspeople after the adoption of the Council Code. Give at least three provisions that characterize the significance of this document.
Changes in the position of the peasantry and townspeople after the adoption of the Council Code:
Cancellation of school years and the introduction of an indefinite investigation of fugitive peasants
Establishing the heredity of serfdom
Granting landowners the right to dispose of the property of a serf
Granting landowners the right to a patrimonial court and police supervision of serfs
Imposing on the serfs the obligation to perform duties in favor of the state
Elimination of "white" settlements
The prohibition of peasants to keep constant trade in cities and the consolidation of the right to trade for townspeople
Provisions characterizing the significance of the Cathedral Code:
In fact, completed the process of legal registration of serfdom
Contributed to the strengthening of royal power, contained a number of provisions aimed at protecting the personality of the monarch and the Russian Orthodox Church
Contributed to the design of the class structure of society, the definition of the rights and obligations of the main classes
It acted as a code of laws of the Russian state until the first half of the 19th century.
C7. In domestic science, there is a judgment that the reason for the election of Mikhail Romanov to the Russian throne was that the boyars, who played the main role at the Zemsky Sobor in 1613, believed that "Mikhail is young, he has not yet reached his mind and will be convenient for us."
What other judgment about the reasons for the election of Mikhail Romanov to the Russian throne do you know? Which one do you think is more convincing? List at least three facts. Propositions of judgments. Which can serve as arguments for your chosen point of view.
On the reasons for choosing Mikhail Romanov to the Russian throne:
The Romanovs, who had family ties with the previous dynasty, were most suited to all classes, which made it possible to achieve reconciliation and national harmony.
Arguments:
- for the nobility- The Romanovs are descendants of an old boyar family;
- for the Cossacks Mikhail Romanov - the son of Patriarch Filaret, who was in the Tushino camp for a long time and was associated with the Cossacks;
- for the peasantry, townspeople Mikhail Romanov was a "natural king", a symbol of national independence and the Orthodox faith.
C7. Many Western historians consider the Soviet Union to be responsible for the outbreak of the Cold War in the second half of the 1940s.
What other assessments of the causes of the Cold War do you know? What assessment do you think is the most convincing? Give at least three facts, provisions that argue your chosen point of view.
Other estimates, alternative to the one given in the task:
A) the leaders of the United States and its allies, representatives of the aggressive forces of these states are responsible for the unleashing of the "cold war";
B) Both sides are "to blame" for the "cold war". Defending their own interests, ambitions, the main reason was the struggle of two superpowers - the USSR and the USA for leadership in the world.
When choosing the assessment set out in the task:
One of the foundations of the state ideology of the USSR was the statement about the inevitable victory of the world revolution, the Soviet leadership tried to implement this provision when favorable conditions arose;
The establishment of pro-Soviet regimes in the states of Eastern Europe was regarded by the ruling circles of Western countries as the forcible imposition of the Soviet model of development, the "expansion" of the USSR.
The refusal of the USSR and, under its pressure, the countries of Eastern Europe to accept the Marshall Plan further deepened the confrontation between the two groups of states.
If you select the score set out in part 1(a) of the response content:
During the reforms, serfdom increased, the lack of freedom of all classes, including the nobility
One of the consequences of the reforms of Peter 1 was the cultural split of Russian society into a Europeanized elite and a mass of the population alien to new European values.
The main method of carrying out the transformations was violence, used against all sectors of society, relying on the punitive power of the state.
B. When choosing an alternative point of view:
- the reforms of Peter 1 were based on the changes in all spheres of the country's life that occurred in the middle and in the second half of the 17th century, during the reign of his father Alexei Mikhailovich
As a result of the Petrine reforms, a significant step was taken in the development of the economy (manufactory, protectionist policies, the development of national production, etc.), public administration (the proclamation of an empire, collegium, the Senate, etc.)
Russian culture was enriched by the latest achievements of European science, art, and education for that time (the opening of schools, the publication of the first printed newspaper, the creation of the Academy of Sciences, etc.)
Peter's reforms in the field of military affairs created an army that managed to win access to the Baltic Sea and turn Russia into one of the strongest European powers.
C5. Compare the system of government in Russia during the reign of Alexei Mikhailovich and after the reforms carried out by Peter 1. What was common in them and what was different.
As general characteristics, the management systems in Russia during the reign of Alexei Mikhailovich and after the reforms carried out by Peter 1 can be named:
Under Alexei Mikhailovich, a tendency towards the formation of absolutism is being formed, under Peter 1;
Under Alexei Mikhailovich, the activities of Zemsky Sobors ceased;
The general trend is the tendency towards the formation of a bureaucratic apparatus.
Differences:
|
Under Alexei Mikhailovich |
Under Peter 1 (by 1725) |
|
The Boyar Duma is gathering The highest organs of executive power are orders The order of the great sovereign of secret affairs is being organized The principle of locality is preserved Strengthened the influence of the state on the church |
Senate established Collegiums were created as the highest bodies of executive power Adopted the Table of Ranks The patriarchate has been abolished. Holy Synod established to govern the church Russia proclaimed an empire |
C4. Expand the main results of the transformational activities of Peter 1.
The results of the foreign policy activities of Peter 1.:
Access to the Baltic Sea was won, Russia acquired the status of a great power (since 1721 - an empire )
Results of domestic policy in the economy:
As a result of state assistance to the development of industry. Policies of protectionism the emergence of large-scale manufactory production. New industries
Development of trade (policy of mercantelism)
In the political system:
- public administration reforms, creation of a new state apparatus (Senate, Boards), regional and city reforms (creation of local governments)
Church reform. The creation of the Synod, the subordination of the church to secular power
Military reforms, regular army and navy
In social relationships:
Strengthening the position of the nobility, expanding its estate privileges (Decree on uniform inheritance, Table of ranks)
The tightening of serfdom, the intensification of the exploitation of peasants and working people, the introduction of a poll tax
In the field of culture and life:
The introduction of the civil alphabet, the publication of the first newspaper, the transition to a new chronology
Formation of the system of secular education. development of sciences (foundation of the Academy of Sciences)
The introduction of European customs in everyday life
Conclusion: the transformation of Peter 1 led to the strengthening of the military-political position of Russia in Europe. Strengthening autocracy.
C4. Name at least three popular uprisings that took place in the 18th century, indicate their reasons (at least three).
The following 18th century folk performances:
Revolt of 17 in Astrakhan;
The uprising on the Don under the leadership of K. Bulavin (17 years)
Performance of working people at manufactories (20s of the 18th century)
Religious performances of the Old Believers in the first quarter of the 18th century;
Movements of peasants and working people in the –s. 18th century;
Peasant - Cossack uprising led by E. Pugachev 17
Reasons for popular demonstrations: toughening:
The tightening of feudal oppression;
The growth of duties of peasants and townspeople;
The plight of working people;
Decrees of Peter 1. on ascribed and possessive peasants;
The offensive of the state on the Cossack liberties;
Persecution of the Old Believers.
C5. Compare the ideas underlying the theory of official nationality. And the ideas that the Slavophiles adhered to in the middle of the 19th century. What was common and what was different.
General characteristics:
- an idea of the originality of the historical path of Russia, its difference from the historical path of the West;
Belief in the charity of the autocracy for the Russian society;
Representation in the special role of Orthodoxy as the spiritual foundation of Russian society.
Differences:
|
The theory of official nationality |
Views of the Slavophiles |
|
The main task is to preserve the established order based on the triad of "Orthodoxy, autocracy, nationality", the rejection of reforms Defense of autocracy as the only form of government supported by the Russian people Preservation of serfdom as a form of guardianship of the people by landlords Maintaining censorship Idealization of the past of Russia, the idea of the unity of the history of the country |
Recognition of the need for reforms, significant changes in the public life of Russia Preservation of autocracy with the obligatory addition of the power of autocratic power with the opinion of society (“the power of power - to the king, the power of opinion - to the people”), the reconstruction of the Zemsky Sobor Abolition of serfdom Implementation of the principle of freedom of the press A sharply critical attitude towards the activities of Peter 1. the idea of a “break” in Russian history as a result of the transformations he carried out. |
C6. At the beginning of the 19th century, he came up with a program of reforms. He proposed to implement the principle of separation of powers, create the State Duma and the State Council, and carry out other transformations.
What other ideas about the prospects for the development of the country were expressed during the reign of Alexander 1? Name two views. Was Speransky's program implemented? Why? Give at least three reasons.
Views can be named:
Russia does not need transformations, it needs "not a constitution, but fifty efficient governors" and unlimited autocracy ()
Radical changes are needed - the adoption of the Constitution and the approval of the constitutional order, the restriction or liquidation of autocracy, the abolition of serfdom (Decembrists).
The project was not fully implemented, and the reasons can be given:
The plans caused sharp discontent of the court society.
He did not find support among the metropolitan bureaucracy, who feared a new system of public service.
The personal qualities of Alexander 1, who retreated under the pressure of conservative sentiments, also influenced the failure of the reforms.
An important reason is the contradiction between the need for reforms and the real danger of a social explosion caused by reforms.
C4. Explain what was the historical need for reforms in Russia in the middle of the 19th century.
Internal preconditions for reforms in 18s.
Decomposition of the feudal economic system;
Estates of landowners: their profitability due to increased exploitation of the peasants, and not the introduction of new technology
Subsistence economy of peasants: their poverty, low purchasing power;
The growth of peasant uprisings;
The need to overcome the backwardness of Russian industry: one of the reasons is the lack of labor due to the serfdom of a significant part of the population
Foreign Policy Crisis:
- Russia's defeat in the Crimean War of 18 The main reason is the military-technical backwardness of the country
Awareness of the Russian society. Government circles of the immorality of serfdom, the need to abolish it in order to overcome the backlog of Russia from the leading countries of Europe.
C4. Expand the thesis: "The defeat of Russia in the Crimean War meant the collapse of the principles of the reign of Nicholas."
In the field of foreign policy, Nicholas 1's calculation on the solidarity of European monarchs did not materialize.
England and France went to war against Russia
Austria, which Russia helped to suppress the revolutionary uprisings of the 18s, took a position of hostile neutrality (waiting)
Russia found itself in a state of international isolation
The war showed that the great European powers are opposed to the growing influence of Russia in the Balkans
In the field of domestic policy - the war revealed the general economic, technical and military backwardness of Russia
The defeat was largely due to the peculiarities of the internal situation in Russia during the reign of Nicholas, including:
Preservation of the feudal system in the countryside
Insufficient industrial development
Poor transport conditions, weak rail network
Preservation of the class principle of manning the army, which prevented the promotion of gifted people "from the common people"
Obsolete weapons of the army and navy
The heroism of Russian soldiers was not supported by the necessary economic and military power of the country
Conclusion: defeat in the war was considered by many as a consequence of the crisis state of the Russian Empire.
C6. Consider the historical situation and answer the questions.
The land was redistributed among the peasants who supported this measure.
In the spring of 1919 The Bolsheviks proclaimed a policy of alliance with the middle peasants.
B. For the alternative estimates set out in part 1 of the response content:
- White postponed until the completion of Gr. War decision agrarian. national issues. The question of the future state structure of Russia;
In the camp of the whites there was no unity, no coordination of political and military actions;
The leaders of the white movement received aid from abroad, had to coordinate their actions with foreign powers;
In September 1918 The Red Terror was officially declared in the country
Throughout Gr. During the war, both sides used such measures as execution without trial, taking hostages, etc., but the Bolsheviks carried out these measures more widely;
The Bolsheviks were able to mobilize more forces into their army than the Whites.
C5. Compare the foreign policy of the Soviet state in the first half of the 1930s. and in the late 1930s. Point out what was common and what was different.
Common features:
Soviet foreign policy was determined by the position of the USSR as the only country of socialism in a hostile environment;
By the beginning of the 1930s. passed a period of diplomatic recognition of the Soviet state, the USSR was an active participant in international relations;
In the context of the aggressive actions of the fascist states in the 1930s. The USSR sought to suspend, push back the threat of war.
Differences:
|
First half of the 1930s |
Late 1930s |
|
Participation of the USSR in the activities of international organizations, entry into the League of Nations |
Carrying out their own course, curtailing contacts with the League of Nations after the start of the war against Finland |
|
The struggle for the creation of a system of collective security in Europe (including the conclusion of agreements with France, Czechoslovakia) |
The desire to ensure their own security on the basis of bilateral treaties, the search for allies - Anglo-French-Soviet negotiations; the conclusion of the Soviet-German treaties in 1939. |
|
Condemnation by the Soviet Union of acts of aggression by fascist states |
Conclusion of non-aggression and "friendship and border" pacts with Nazi Germany; the accession of new territories in 19gg. |
|
Coordination of the country's foreign policy and leadership tasks with the international communist movement; promotion of anti-fascist slogans |
Rejection of the slogans of struggle after the conclusion of the Soviet-German treaties of 1939. (until June 1941) |
C4 . What are the main directions (at least two) of the foreign policy of the USSR in 1919. Give at least three examples of any politicians.
1. Main policy directions:
Participation in the resolution of international problems within the framework of the UN;
Strengthening the influence of the USSR on the Eastern European states;
Support for the national liberation movement in colonial and dependent countries;
Expansion of the influence of the USSR on the communist and workers' parties of many countries of the world;
Active participation in the organization of the peace movement
2. Examples:
The refusal of the USSR to accept the Marshall Plan;
Forcing Stalin on the atomic project in order to eliminate the US monopoly on atomic weapons, testing the atomic bomb (1949);
Helping the Chinese Communists in the Civil War;
Aid to North Korea during the Korean War (10 years);
Promoting the formation of the GDR after the creation of the FRG
C7. During the transition to NEP, some leaders of the Soviet state argued that this would be a step towards the restoration of capitalism, recognition of the defeat of Soviet power. What other point of view on the essence of NEP do you know? Which point of view do you find more convincing? Give at least three facts, provisions that can serve as arguments confirming your chosen point of view.
1. Another point of view:
NEP is a special policy, designed for a significant period of time, aimed at building the foundations of socialism.
2. When choosing the assessment set out in the task:
- the NEP was a forced measure, taken under the pressure of negative circumstances for the Soviet government (the severe consequences of the Civil War, etc.);
In introducing the New Economic Policy, the leadership of the Communist Party and the Soviet state recognized that the policy of war communism, as a policy of a direct transition to socialism, had been defeated;
Similar thoughts were expressed by many communists who had a negative attitude towards the NEP.
When choosing an alternative point of view:
Having abandoned war communism, the leadership of the party and the state continued to set the goal of building socialism;
Commanding heights remained in the hands of the state (large enterprises, subsoil, foreign trade);
Numerous restrictions were imposed on the activities of private capital;
The state allowed separate market mechanisms, but prevented the creation of a market system;
The dictatorship of the proletariat was strengthened, there was a one-party system
C5. Compare the goals and methods of state policy in the countryside during the NEP period and after the start of the policy of complete collectivization. What was common in them (at least two common characteristics), and what was different (at least three differences).
1. As general characteristics of the goals and methods of state policy in the countryside during the NEP period and after the start of the policy of complete collectivization, the following can be named:
Transformation of agriculture on socialist principles as one of the goals of state policy
Recognition of the economic advantages of large. Technically equipped farms over small peasant farms
Recognition of the need for technical re-equipment of agriculture based on the development of heavy industry
Implementation of measures against the kulaks
Unequal exchange between city and countryside, prices for manufactured goods are higher than prices for agricultural products
|
After the beginning of continuous collectivization |
|
|
The main forms of procurement of agricultural products - tax in kind and public procurement |
A system of mandatory state deliveries is being formed |
|
Free trade in bread and other agricultural products |
Free trade in bread and other agricultural products abolished |
|
Use of market mechanisms and methods |
A rigid administrative-command system is being formed |
|
ry aimed at limiting the kulaks. Mainly of an economic nature (taxes, deprivation of benefits, reduction in purchase prices) |
The policy of dispossession, the liquidation of the kulaks as a class is being pursued. |
|
Small individual peasant farms are the basis of agricultural production |
Kolkhozes and state farms become monopoly in essence, producers of agricultural products |
Introduction
The first popular revolution of the era of imperialism, which shook the foundations of the autocratic system and created the prerequisites for the subsequent successful struggle to overthrow tsarism. It was a new type of bourgeois-democratic revolution, the hegemon of which for the first time in history was the proletariat, headed by the Marxist party.
The mass strike movement of the workers of Russia was of national importance. Having assumed the brunt of the struggle against the autocratic system, bringing the greatest sacrifices, the workers put forward not private, professional, but public tasks, to the fore. Revolutionary strikes were characterized by their offensive character. As a rule, major strikes were accompanied by political rallies and demonstrations, often leading to clashes between the strikers and the tsarist troops. An armed uprising in December 1905 necessarily grew out of the mass strike movement of the proletariat, in which the advanced detachments of workers fought with weapons in their hands to solve the fundamental question of the revolution - the question of power. In the fire of the strike and armed struggle, the Soviets of Workers' Deputies arose - the rudimentary organs of a new, revolutionary power, which later, as a result of the victory of the October Revolution, turned into a political form of the dictatorship of the proletariat.
Background of the revolution
The first Russian revolution took place at a time when world capitalism, including Russian capitalism, had entered its highest, imperialist stage. All the contradictions inherent in imperialism were present in the country, and above all the most acute social conflict between the proletariat and the bourgeoisie. However, the main thing remained the contradiction between the needs of the country's socio-economic development and the remnants of serfdom, which were guarded by an outdated semi-feudal political superstructure - the tsarist autocracy. An acute discrepancy has developed in the Russian economy between highly developed industrial and significantly developed agrarian capitalism and semi-serfdom. 10.5 million peasant households owned almost as much land as 30,000 landlords who used labor compensation and other semi-feudal methods of exploiting the peasants. Describing the basic contradiction of the economic and social situation in Russia, Lenin wrote: "... The most backward landownership, the wildest village - the most advanced industrial and financial capitalism!"
The agrarian question was the most acute in the Russian revolution, one of the main tasks of which was the elimination of landlordism. The revolution of 1905-1907 in Russia was a bourgeois peasant revolution: the entire mass of the peasantry advocated the transfer of the land into the hands of the people. The solution of this problem directly depended on the implementation of the main, primary task of the revolution - the overthrow of tsarism and the establishment of a democratic republic. It was also necessary to put an end to the great-power chauvinist policy towards the non-Russian nationalities oppressed by tsarism and to provide all peoples of the Russian Empire with equal rights and democratic freedoms.
The diversity and acuteness of socio-economic, political and national conflicts have made Russia the focal point of all the contradictions of world imperialism, its weakest link. This predetermined, according to Lenin, the enormous scope of the revolution, in which two social wars intertwined - the nationwide struggle for freedom and democracy and the class struggle of the proletariat for socialism. The revolution of 1905-1907 in Russia was not only anti-serfdom, but also anti-imperialist. The driving forces of the revolution were the broad masses of the people, headed by the proletariat. The workers entered the revolution as the most politically mature class in Russia, the first to create their own party in 1903, the Bolshevik Party. By 1905 the Russian proletariat had accumulated experience in the class struggle, opposing itself not only to the bourgeoisie, but also to the tsarist autocracy. The working class, whose core was a detachment of 3,000,000 industrial workers, represented a major social force that exerted an enormous influence on the fate of the country and led the liberation movement in Russia. The Kharkov May Day of 1900, the "Obukhov Defense" of 1901, the Rostov strike of 1902, the General Strike in the South of Russia of 1903, and the strike of the Baku oil workers of 1904 were harbingers of the imminent revolution. The main ally of the proletariat in the revolutionary struggle was the multi-million peasantry, a vivid indicator of the revolutionary potential of which were the peasant uprisings in Ukraine in 1902. The economic crisis of the early 20th century deepened social contradictions and contributed to the growth of the class struggle in the country. The military defeats of tsarism in the Russo-Japanese War of 1904-1905 revealed the rottenness of the autocracy, caused a crisis in government power and hastened the onset of the revolution. In Russia, the deepest conflict between the noble-bureaucratic authorities and the revolutionary people has matured.
Causes of the revolution
Economic:
the contradiction between the capitalist modernization that began in the country and the preservation of pre-capitalist forms of economy (landownership, community, lack of land, agrarian overpopulation, handicraft industry);
the global economic crisis at the beginning of the 20th century, which had a particularly hard effect on the Russian economy;
Social:
a complex of contradictions that have developed in society, both as a result of the development of capitalism and as a result of its immaturity;
Political:
the crisis of the "tops", the struggle between the reformist and reactionary lines in the government, failures in the Russo-Japanese war, the activation of leftist forces in the country;
the aggravation of the socio-political situation in the country as a result of the defeat in the Russo-Japanese war of 1904-1905;
National:
complete political lack of rights, lack of democratic freedoms and a high degree of exploitation of the working people of all nations;
The alignment of socio-political forces on the eve of the revolution was represented by three main areas:
Conservative, government direction.
The basis is a significant part of the nobility and higher officials. There were several trends - from reactionary to moderate - or liberal-conservative (from K.P. Pobedonostsev to P.D. Svyatopolk-Mirsky).
The program is the preservation of the autocratic monarchy in Russia, the creation of a representative body with legislative advisory functions, the protection of the economic and political interests of the nobility, the expansion of the social support of the autocracy at the expense of the big bourgeoisie and the peasantry. The authorities were ready to go for reforms, but waited, hesitated, could not choose a specific model;
liberal direction.
The basis is the nobility and the bourgeoisie, as well as part of the intelligentsia (professors, lawyers). There were liberal-conservative and moderate-liberal currents. The main organizations were the “Union of Zemstvo-Constitutionalists” by I. I. Petrunkevich and the “Union of Liberation” by P. B. Struve.
The program is to ensure democratic rights and freedoms, the abolition of the political monopoly of the nobility, dialogue with the authorities and the implementation of reforms "from above";
Radical Democrats.
The basis is the radical intelligentsia, which sought to express the interests of the working class and the peasantry. The main parties were the Socialist Revolutionary Party (AKP) and the RSDLP.
The program is the abolition of the autocracy and landlordism, the convocation of the Constituent Assembly, the proclamation of a Democratic Republic, the solution of the agrarian, workers' and national polls in a radical democratic way. They defended the revolutionary Model of transformations "from below".
Tasks of the revolution
The overthrow of the autocracy and the establishment of a democratic republic;
Elimination of class inequality;
Introduction of freedom of speech, assembly, parties and associations;
The abolition of landownership and the allocation of land to the peasants;
Reducing the length of the working day to 8 hours;
Recognition of the right of workers to strike and form trade unions;
Establishment of the equality of the peoples of Russia.
In the implementation of these tasks were interested in the broad sections of the population. The revolution was attended by: most of the middle and petty bourgeoisie, the intelligentsia, workers, peasants, soldiers, sailors. Therefore, it was nationwide in terms of goals and composition of participants and had a bourgeois-democratic character.
The revolution lasted 2.5 years (from January 9, 1905 to June 3, 1907). Two lines can be distinguished in the development of the revolution, ascending and descending.
The ascending line (January - December 1905) - the growth of the revolutionary wave, the radicalization of demands, the mass nature of revolutionary actions. The range of forces advocating the development of the revolution is extremely wide - from liberals to radicals.
The descending line of the revolution (1906 – June 3, 1907) – the authorities take the initiative into their own hands. In the spring, the "Basic State Laws" are adopted, fixing the change in the political system (Russia is being transformed into a "Duma" monarchy), elections are held for the I and II State Dumas. But the dialogue between the authorities and society turned out to be unproductive. The Duma actually did not receive legislative powers.
June 1907, with the dissolution of the Second Duma and the publication of a new electoral law, the revolution ends.
stages of the revolution. Start.
The revolution began in St. Petersburg on January 9, 1905, when tsarist troops shot at a peaceful demonstration of St. Petersburg workers marching to the tsar to present a petition about the needs of the people. The first barricades appeared on the streets of the capital, marking the beginning of the armed struggle of the working class against the autocracy. The proletariat of Russia supported the St. Petersburg workers with numerous strikes. In January-March 1905, 810,000 industrial workers were on strike, twice as many as in all 10 pre-revolutionary years. Metalworkers were the most active. Workers rose up in the national regions (Poland, the Baltic States, the Caucasus). In many places, strikes and demonstrations were accompanied by clashes with troops and police. The struggle unfolded under the slogans: "Down with the autocracy!", "Down with the war!", "Long live the revolution!". At the same time, the proletariat put forward economic demands, including the demand for an 8-hour working day. Under the influence of the struggle of the working class, a peasant movement flared up in Central Russia, where the survivals of serfdom were especially strong. There were strikes by agricultural workers in Latvia, Poland, and the Right-Bank Ukraine. The struggle of the peasants in the Caucasus unfolded. The peasants sacked the landlords' estates, felled the forest, seized grain, and in some places the land. In the spring of 1905, Lenin wrote, "...the awakening of the first major, not only economic, but also political, peasant movement in Russia" took place. However, in January-April 1905 the peasant movement covered only 1/7 counties of European Russia. The anti-government actions of the students poured into the general flow of the revolutionary movement. The democratic intelligentsia became more active. Professional-political unions of lawyers, engineers and technicians, doctors, teachers, etc., arose, uniting in May in the "Union of Unions". The liberal bourgeoisie also revived, claiming to be the leader of a nationwide movement against the autocracy. However, while opposing the autocracy and flirting with the masses of the people, the liberal bourgeoisie was more afraid of revolutionary uprisings than of reaction, constantly wavering between tsarism and the forces of democracy, and conducting behind-the-scenes negotiations with the government, betraying the interests of the people and the revolution at decisive moments. Unlike the Western European bourgeoisie of the era of rising capitalism, the counter-revolutionary Russian bourgeoisie proved incapable of becoming the leader of the bourgeois-democratic revolution of the imperialist era and was pushed aside by the proletariat from the leadership of the masses. Thus, three camps clearly appeared on the political arena of the country: the government (tsarism, the ruling bureaucracy and the feudal landlords), who sought to preserve the autocratic system at any cost; the liberal opposition (liberal landowners, the bourgeoisie, the top bourgeois intelligentsia), who sought a constitutional monarchy; revolutionary (the proletariat, the peasantry, the petty-bourgeois sections of the city, the democratic intelligentsia), who fought for the establishment of a democratic republic.
Having intensified the military and police terror against the revolutionary people, the tsarist government at the same time began to maneuver (the creation of the commissions of Shidlovsky and Kokovtsov, the rescript of February 18 on the development of a draft law of the deliberative Duma), trying to deceive the masses with the promise of reforms. However, the Bolsheviks exposed the meaning of these maneuvers and called on the masses to intensify the revolutionary struggle.
The Third Congress of the RSDLP, held in London in April 1905, determined the strategy and tactics of the proletariat in the revolution that had begun. The Bolsheviks proceeded from the fact that the proletariat, in alliance with the peasantry, having neutralized and isolated the liberal bourgeoisie, should achieve the maximum expansion and deepening of the revolution, strive for the victory of the armed uprising and for the establishment of a revolutionary-democratic dictatorship of the proletariat and peasantry. The organ of this dictatorship was to be the Provisional Revolutionary Government, called upon to convene a Constituent Assembly and implement the political and economic demands formulated in the minimum program of the RSDLP. The Bolsheviks considered it acceptable, under certain conditions, for representatives of the Social Democrats to participate in such a government. The 3rd Congress of the RSDLP emphasized that one of the most important current tasks of the party is the practical military-combat preparation of the proletariat for an armed uprising. Bolshevik tactics were based on the Leninist idea of the hegemony of the proletariat in the bourgeois-democratic revolution. The proletariat not only most selflessly and energetically fought against the autocracy, dragging along the peasantry and the "middle strata" of the city, but also acted as the ideological leader and organizer of the struggle of the non-proletarian masses. Particularly great is the role of the mass political strike as the decisive lever of proletarian hegemony in the popular movement, as the proletarian method of mobilizing the masses for the struggle against tsarism. The vanguard role of the working class and the special place of the strike and other proletarian methods of struggle in 1905-1907 gave the revolution a proletarian character. The tactical line of establishing the hegemony of the proletariat in the revolution was expressed in the resolution of the Third Congress of the RSDLP on the attitude towards the peasant movement. It spoke of the need for the immediate creation of revolutionary peasant committees, the independent organization of the rural proletariat, and the support by the working class of all the revolutionary demands of the peasantry, up to and including the confiscation of landlord, state, church, and appanage lands. The Bolsheviks explained to the workers the anti-revolutionary and anti-proletarian character of the liberal opposition and vigorously fought against its attempts to seize hegemony in the revolutionary movement.
The Mensheviks advocated a completely different tactical line. They saw in the Russian revolution only a repetition of the experience of the "classical" bourgeois revolutions of the past and assigned the proletariat the modest role of "extreme opposition", which is called upon to push the bourgeoisie to fight against the autocracy. The Mensheviks underestimated the revolutionary possibilities of the peasantry as an ally of the working class, denied the idea of the hegemony of the proletariat, as well as the possibility of organizational and military-technical preparation for an armed uprising, and were opposed in advance to the participation of the Social Democrats in the Provisional Revolutionary Government. Their tactics were designed to "not scare away" the liberal bourgeoisie, whom the Mensheviks considered the driving force and leader of the revolution. Objectively, the Menshevik tactics led to the political subordination of the proletariat to the bourgeoisie, to curtailing the revolution. No less dangerous was the adventurist leftist line of the Menshevik-Trotskyists, calculated to "jump over" the democratic stage of the movement directly to the struggle for socialism.
The particular harm of the Trotskyist theory of the permanent revolution was that it denied the alliance between the proletariat and the peasantry, isolated the workers from the broad democratic movement of the popular masses, and made the fate of the Russian revolution completely dependent on the success of the struggle of the proletariat in the West. Waging an ideological struggle on two fronts - against "right" and "left" opportunism, the Bolsheviks sought to eliminate the split in the labor movement and the unity of action of the working class in the interests of the revolution, to create a united front of revolutionary democratic forces under the leadership of the proletariat. They considered admissible individual practical agreements with the petty-bourgeois Socialist-Revolutionary Party, which enjoyed influence among the peasantry and the democratic intelligentsia. While sharply criticizing the erroneous provisions of the Socialist-Revolutionary doctrine (the program of the socialization of the land, the attitude towards individual terror, etc.), the Bolsheviks took into account at the same time their revolutionary democratism, their readiness to go to an armed uprising.
In July 1905, V. I. Lenin’s book Two Tactics of Social Democracy in the Democratic Revolution was published, in which all the fundamental provisions of the policy of the proletarian party in the bourgeois-democratic revolution were substantiated, and the opportunism of the Mensheviks in tactical questions was subjected to crushing criticism. Lenin also outlined the prospect of the bourgeois-democratic revolution growing into a socialist one without a long historical interval. The decisions of the Third Party Congress and Lenin's programmatic work armed the Bolsheviks, the working class, with a scientifically substantiated plan of struggle for the victory of the revolution.
Spring-Summer Rise of the Revolution
strike revolution autocracy worker
Throughout 1905 the revolution developed along an ascending line. The spring-summer upsurge began with mass May Day strikes, in which 220,000 workers took part. The May Day holiday was celebrated in 200 cities. In April - August 1905 participants in political strikes accounted for more than 50% of the total number of strikers. More and more sections of the working class were drawn into the struggle. The general strike of the Ivanovo-Voznesensk textile workers, which began on May 12, demonstrated the revolutionary maturity of the workers. The strike lasted 72 days. The strikers were led by the Assembly of Authorized Deputies - in fact, the first city-wide Soviet of Workers' Deputies in Russia. During the strike, leaders of the workers came forward - the Bolsheviks F. A. Afanasiev, M. V. Frunze, E. A. Dunaev, M. N. Lakin, S. I. Balashov and others. quickly developed into an armed uprising that stirred up all of Poland and found a response in different regions of Russia. As a sign of solidarity with the Lodz workers, a general strike began in Warsaw, which was led by the Warsaw Committee of the SDKPiL, headed by F. E. Dzerzhinsky. In the summer of 1905, about 900 demonstrations took place in the villages, covering a fifth of the districts of European Russia. In a number of provinces, special social-democratic agrarian groups were created to work among the peasants. In August, the All-Russian Peasant Union took shape, demanding the transfer of land into public ownership. A major event in the course of the revolution was the uprising of the crew of the battleship Potemkin (June 1905), the first attempt to form the nucleus of a revolutionary army. Almost simultaneously, an uprising of sailors broke out in the Baltic in Libau. Altogether, in the summer of 1905, more than 40 revolutionary actions by soldiers and sailors took place. Frightened by the magnitude of the popular movement, the government published on August 6 a manifesto on the convocation of a legislative State Duma, which was a concession by tsarism in order to crush the revolution. However, this project did not satisfy not only the revolutionary camp, but even many liberals, who noticeably "turned to the left" under the influence of the Potemkin uprising. In the context of the upsurge of the revolution, the Bolsheviks came out in favor of an active boycott of the Duma, linking it with extensive agitational activity, holding mass strikes and intensifying preparations for an armed uprising. Under the banner of the boycott of the Duma, the Bolsheviks managed to rally almost the entire Russian Social Democracy, including the most influential national Social Democratic parties. The Socialist-Revolutionaries also came out for a boycott. Only a section of the Mensheviks rejected the boycott tactics. In the course of the anti-Duma campaign, a bloc of social democrats and revolutionary bourgeois democrats (the "left bloc") actually took shape. The decision to boycott the Duma was even made by the left-liberal Union of Unions. The right wing of the liberals, condemning the Bulygin project in words, spoke in favor of participating in the Duma, hoping to stop the revolution with its help. But tsarism never had time to convene the Bulygin Duma.
Highest Rise of the Revolution
By autumn, the revolutionary movement had engulfed almost the entire country. The September strike of Moscow printers, bakers, tobacco workers, tram workers and workers of some other professions, supported by the proletariat of St. Petersburg, was a harbinger of a new upsurge in the revolution. The Bolsheviks tried to turn partial strikes in both capitals into citywide strikes, to spread them throughout the country. The Bolshevik policy of uniting all revolutionary forces brought great success. In the October days, all the railroad workers of Russia went on strike. The All-Russian Railway Union played an important role in this. The railway strike contributed to the beginning of a general strike in factories and plants, in institutions, higher and secondary educational institutions, at the post office and telegraph. It was a truly all-Russian strike that paralyzed the entire political and economic life of the country. The general strike of workers gave a powerful impetus to the national liberation movement of the oppressed peoples, especially in Poland, Finland, Latvia, and Estonia.
The October strike demonstrated the might of the proletariat as an organizer and leader of the nationwide struggle against the autocracy; it wrested from the tsar the Manifesto of October 17, 1905, which proclaimed civil liberties. Legislative rights were recognized for the Duma, and the circle of voters expanded. On October 21, a decree was issued on the amnesty of political prisoners, on October 22 - on the restoration of Finland's autonomy, on November 3, the government announced that it would stop collecting ransom payments from peasants. All this was the first major victory of the revolution. The proletariat won for itself and for the entire people, although for a short time, freedom of speech and the press. The Social Democracy emerged from the underground. For the first time in the history of the country, workers' newspapers began to be published legally, including the central organ of the Bolsheviks, the New Life newspaper, which published articles by V. I. Lenin, M. S. Olminsky, A. V. Lunacharsky, M. Gorky, V. V. Vorovsky and other party publicists.
A temporary, extremely unstable balance of the contending forces was established; Tsarism was no longer strong enough to crush the revolution, and the revolution was not yet strong enough to overthrow Tsarism.
The liberal bourgeoisie greeted the tsar's manifesto with delight. A bourgeois party, a constitutional-democratic one (the Cadets), took shape; P. N. Milyukov, V. A. Maklakov, P. B. Struve, and others became its leaders; the "Union of October 17" (Octobrists) was formed, headed by A. I. Guchkov and D. N. Shipov and others. The Russian liberals, who built tactics based on the Duma, turned to counter-revolution. The popular masses, on the contrary, intensified the revolutionary onslaught on tsarism, which, having recovered from its fright, intensified the consolidation of counter-revolutionary forces (Black-Hundred pogroms, inciting ethnic hatred, the murder of revolutionaries, the creation of monarchist organizations, etc.). Since the end of October, the peasant movement has grown sharply, which has acquired the greatest scope during the revolution and covered about 37% of the districts of European Russia. The largest performances of the peasants took place in the Saratov, Tambov, Chernigov, Orel, Kursk, Voronezh provinces. Peasant uprisings engulfed Georgia and the Baltic states. On the whole, however, the onslaught of the peasantry was still insufficient to defeat tsarism. In October, in many cities, the proletariat achieved the neutralization of the troops. An indicator of the further development of the revolution to an armed uprising was the spontaneous actions of soldiers and sailors in Kronstadt and Vladivostok (end of October), in Kyiv, in the Turkestan military district and, especially in the Black Sea Fleet, in Sevastopol (November). The latter was headed by Lieutenant P. P. Schmidt, a non-party revolutionary democrat. Preparing for an armed uprising, the proletariat created previously unprecedented mass political organizations - the Soviets of Workers' Deputies - the rudimentary organs of the revolutionary-democratic dictatorship of the proletariat and peasantry. On October 13, the Soviet of Workers' Deputies began its activity in St. Petersburg; November 21 - in Moscow. The Soviets operated in more than 50 cities and industrial towns. From organs for leading the strike struggle, they were transformed into organs of a general democratic revolutionary struggle against the tsarist government, into organs of an armed uprising. In the course of the struggle, the Soviets established freedom of the press, introduced an 8-hour working day, exercised control over the work of trade, municipal and other enterprises. These were the germs of a new revolutionary power. The trade unions of workers and employees that arose in the course of the revolution grew rapidly.
As a result of the October strike, the conditions for the activity of the RSDLP changed radically. The Bolsheviks took advantage of the days of "freedom" to create legal or semi-legal party organizations (along with the preservation of the illegal apparatus) and consistently implement the principle of democratic centralism in them. All this contributed to the strengthening of the party's ties with the masses and to the growth of its ranks. In 1905 the working core of the Bolshevik Party increased significantly (about 62 percent). The illegal party apparatus was intensively engaged in military-technical preparations for an armed uprising. The military organization of the RSDLP carried out work in the army and navy, which was headed by the combat technical group under the Central Committee of the RSDLP, headed by L. B. Krasin. The combat organizations of the Bolsheviks created detachments of vigilantes, taught them how to use weapons, the rules of street fighting.
In November 1905, V. I. Lenin returned to St. Petersburg from exile, and he headed all the work of the party. In preparing the uprising, the Bolsheviks sought, above all, to create a united workers' front. They resolutely supported the unification movement in the RSDLP, begun on the initiative of the party workers, which already in the autumn led to the creation of federal or united Social Democratic committees. The Bolsheviks also sought unity of action between the Social Democrats and the revolutionary bourgeois democrats, represented by the Socialist-Revolutionary Party, peasant and railway unions, and other organizations. But the systematic preparation of an armed assault, which encountered numerous difficulties along the way, lagged behind the spontaneously growing uprising. The tsarist government, striving to get ahead of the further development of the revolution, went over to the offensive. Punitive expeditions were sent to the provinces engulfed by peasant uprisings. In mid-November, the leaders of the All-Russian Peasant Union were arrested. November 21 - leaders of the Postal and Telegraph Congress and the Postal and Telegraph Union held in Moscow. On November 29, local authorities were granted the right to apply emergency measures to strikers at the railroads, post and telegraph; a circular was issued on the decisive struggle against revolutionary propaganda in the army. On December 2, temporary rules on the criminal liability of strikers were issued, a number of cities and provinces were declared under martial law and a state of emergency. On December 2-3, the government confiscated and closed several democratic newspapers for publishing the "Financial Manifesto" of the St. payment in gold. On December 3, the police arrested members of the Executive Committee and a significant part of the deputies of the St. Petersburg Council. Under these conditions, the logic of the development of the revolution inevitably led the masses to an armed clash with the autocracy.
The December armed uprisings of 1905 were the culmination of the revolution. Moscow was the center of the uprising. For 9 days, several thousand vigilante workers, with the support or sympathy of the entire working population of the city, fought heroically against the tsarist troops. The workers showed miracles of heroism during the uprising. The leaders of the masses advanced, the courageous heroes of the barricade battles - the Bolsheviks Z. Ya. Litvin-Sedoy, A. I. Gorchilin, M. S. Nikolaev, F. M. Mantulin, I. V. Karasev and others. V. Ukhtomsky, M. I. Sokolov and others Muscovites were supported by the workers of Rostov-on-Don, Novorossiysk Sochi, Nizhny Novgorod (Sormovo, Kanavino), Kharkov, Yekaterinoslav, Donbass, Motovilikha, Krasnoyarsk, Chita, Latvia, Estonia and Georgia were engulfed in revolts. However, they were local in nature, flaring up at different times. The rebels, as a rule, adhered to defensive tactics.
The objective situation in the December days in a number of industrial centers was rapidly changing for the worse. The uprising did not affect Petersburg, where the forces of the government were especially strong, and the forces of the proletariat, which had been in the vanguard of the movement from the first days of the revolution, were fundamentally weakened by the preceding struggle, lockouts, and arrests. The vacillation and indecision of the Petersburg Soviet, the leadership of which belonged to the Mensheviks, also had an effect. The predominant form of movement for the overwhelming majority of the working people in December 1905 remained the general political strike. Only a part of the proletarian forces were involved in the December events, since broad sections of the proletariat entered into an active struggle later, in 1906. Large military forces, thrown into the suppression of peasant uprisings, basically eliminated the danger threatening the government in the countryside by the beginning of December and deprived the rebels of workers enough powerful support from the peasantry.
The first attempt at an armed assault on the autocracy was unsuccessful. Punitive expeditions raged in a number of regions of the country. By April 1906, the total number of those executed exceeded 14 thousand people. 75 thousand political prisoners languished in prisons. The December uprisings enriched the proletariat with experience in the revolutionary struggle and demonstrated the possibility of street fighting with government troops. In the course of the uprising in Moscow, the tactics of partisan actions of vigilante workers in small mobile detachments was born. From the lessons of the December uprisings emerged the need to continue preparing for a simultaneous all-Russian armed action of the working class with the support of the peasantry and the army. Summarizing and propagating the experience of December 1905, the Bolsheviks, led by Lenin, learned and taught the masses to treat insurrection as an art, the main rule of which is a bold and decisive offensive, called for an energetic struggle for the transition of the wavering army to the side of the people. "By the December struggle," V. I. Lenin wrote, "the proletariat left the people one of those legacies that are capable ideologically and politically of being a beacon for the work of several generations."
Retreat of the revolution
With the defeat of the uprising, the slow retreat of the revolution began, stretching for a year and a half. The proletariat twice tried to launch a new offensive. But, neither the spring-summer (April - July) 1906, nor the spring 1907 upsurge of the revolution could grow to the level of autumn 1905. In total, about 14 thousand strikes and 2.86 million strikers (60% of the industrial proletariat) were registered in 1905, in 1906 there were over 6,100 strikes with 1.1 million participants (up to 38% of the workers), and in 1907 there were over 3,570 strikes and 0.74 million strikers (32.8% of the workers). The greatest decline in the movement in 1906 was among the metalworkers, the vanguard of the struggle of 1905, who needed a respite in order to accumulate new forces (in 1907 the metalworkers again intensified the struggle). The textile workers, who for the most part were drawn into the movement later than the metalworkers, produced the largest number of strikers in 1906. In the midst of layoffs and lockouts, with the help of which the bourgeoisie sought to get rid of the most active workers and intimidate the proletariat, in 1906 the movement of the unemployed under the slogan "Work and Bread!" assumed wide proportions. Supported by the entire proletariat, the unemployed created Soviets of the Unemployed in a number of cities. The political strikes of the proletariat significantly prevailed in this period over the economic ones, and in the non-industrial provinces (Arkhangelsk, Vologda, Kursk, Simbirsk, etc.) 1906 even increased the total number of strikers in comparison with 1905.
The revolutionary upsurge in the summer of 1906 was accompanied by the re-establishment of Soviets of Workers' Deputies (July), the formation of new fighting squads, the development of guerrilla warfare, and an increase in the number of trade unions (by 1907 they united about 245,000 workers). In 1906-1907, the partisan movement acquired a particularly large scale (attacks on police stations and prisons, the release of political prisoners, the seizure of weapons, the expropriation of funds for the needs of the revolution, etc.). This movement was strongest in Latvia, Georgia, and the Urals. The level of peasant movements in the summer of 1906 approached the level of the autumn of 1905. In total, about 1,850 peasant uprisings were recorded in April-August 1906. The main regions of the peasant movement of 1906 were the Volga region, the black earth center, the Ukraine, and Poland. The peasants began to fight against the tsarist administration, especially the police. Agricultural workers went on strike. In the summer of 1906, revolutionary ferment among the troops resulted in an armed uprising in the Baltic, led by the Bolsheviks A. P. Emelyanov, E. L. Kokhansky, D. Z. Manuilsky, and I. F. Dubrovinsky. Bolsheviks N. Lobadin and A. I. Koptyukh led the uprising on the cruiser "Memory of Azov", which was stationed in the Revel area.
In pursuing the line of preparing a new nationwide uprising, the Bolsheviks linked its success with the unity of action of all revolutionary forces, and above all of the proletariat itself.
The Fourth (unifying) Congress of the RSDLP, held in Stockholm in April 1906, showed the deep fundamental differences between the Bolsheviks and the Mensheviks. The association was formal, temporary. The ideological struggle between Bolshevism and Menshevism continued.
As in 1905, the government in the fight against the revolution acted not only with repression. In an effort to split and weaken the popular movement, to divert the petty-bourgeois strata of the population, primarily the peasantry, from the revolution, to formalize an alliance with the bourgeoisie and calm "public opinion" at home and abroad, tsarism convened in April 1906 the "legislative" State Duma, having previously done everything possible, to turn it into a powerless body. The electoral law, adopted at the height of the December uprising of 1905, expanded the circle of voters, admitting a section of the workers to the elections to the Duma. The position of the revolutionary camp in the elections to the 1st State Duma (February - March 1906) on the whole repeated the tactics in relation to the Bulygin Duma. At the Tammerfors Conference of the RSDLP (December 1905), the Bolsheviks decided to boycott the elections. The Mensheviks took a half-hearted position - for participation in the elections of commissioners and electors, but against the election of the members of the Duma themselves, admitting, however, the possibility of electing individual Social Democratic deputies to it. Anticipating the inevitability of a new upsurge in the revolution, the Bolsheviks believed that the participation of workers in the elections to the Duma could sow constitutional illusions among the masses and distract them from preparing for an armed assault on the autocracy. When it became clear that it was not possible to disrupt its convocation, Lenin began to seek the most effective use of the Duma rostrum in the interests of the revolution, and later recognized the boycott of the 1st Duma as a small and easily correctable mistake.
Thus, already in the spring of 1906, the Bolsheviks took a course towards a combination of parliamentary and extra-parliamentary methods of struggle, subordinating Duma activity to the tasks of developing a mass revolutionary movement. The majority in the 1st Duma was won by the Cadets. In contrast to the Mensheviks, who took the position of supporting the Duma as a whole, the Bolsheviks propagated the tactics of the "left bloc", seeking to split the peasant Trudovik deputies from the Cadets. The growing opposition of the Duma (discussion of the agrarian question) under the conditions of the spring-summer revolutionary upsurge of 1906 caused deep anxiety among the reaction. On July 9, Nicholas II dissolved the 1st State Duma.
A new wave of repression swept across the country. On August 19, courts-martial were introduced. For 6 months of their existence, about 950 people were sentenced to death. By the autumn of 1906 the struggle of the workers began to fade away. At the same time, the government tried somehow to calm the peasantry, to create for itself a new mass support in the person of the kulaks. Laws followed on the sale to peasants of part of the specific and state lands, on the promotion of peasant resettlement in the eastern regions of the country, on the abolition of certain legal restrictions on peasants. On November 9, 1906, a decree was issued on the free exit of peasants from the community, which marked the beginning of the Stolypin agrarian reform.
At the beginning of 1907, elections were held to the 2nd State Duma, in which the Bolsheviks also took part, who decided to use the Duma platform for the purpose of revolutionary agitation and exposure of the liberals. During the election campaign, the Bolsheviks came out against the bloc of Social Democrats with the Cadets, which the Mensheviks stubbornly insisted on. The Duma tactics of the Bolsheviks, developed by Lenin, were designed to create a revolutionary bloc of representatives of the working class and the peasantry. Lenin's tactics were fully approved by the Fifth (London) Congress of the RSDLP (April - May 1907).
Contrary to the calculations of the reaction, the composition of the 2nd Duma turned out to be more left-wing than the 1st. The Cadets lost their leading influence in it. On June 3, 1907, tsarism dispersed the 2nd State Duma; the Social Democratic faction was arrested, the government issued a new electoral law, according to which the rights of workers were further curtailed. The June 3 coup d'état of 1907 marked the end of the revolution.
The meaning of the revolution
The defeat of the revolution was due to a number of reasons. The most important of these is the insufficient strength of the alliance between the working class and the peasantry. The actions of the workers, peasants, and soldiers were scattered, they could not be merged into a single stream. Only "... a minority of the peasantry," wrote Lenin, "actually fought, organizing at least to some extent for this purpose, and a very small part rose up with weapons in their hands to exterminate their enemies ...". Although in 1905-1907 there were about 250 open actions of soldiers and sailors, for the most part the army still remained loyal to tsarism. The struggle of the proletariat itself was also insufficiently coordinated, large contingents of which were already drawn into the revolution when the forces of the vanguard were weakened. Nor was there the necessary unity in the ranks of the party of the working class; The opportunist line of the Mensheviks hindered the development of the revolution and weakened its strength. The liberal bourgeoisie played a treacherous role. Tsarism was greatly assisted by foreign capitalists, who feared the loss of their investments in Russia and the spread of the revolution to Western Europe. Foreign loan in 1906 in 843 million rubles. saved the tsarist government from financial bankruptcy and strengthened its position. Tsarism was also helped by the conclusion of peace with Japan.
Although the Revolution of 1905-1907 did not achieve its immediate goal, it dealt a powerful blow to tsarism. In the course of it there was a clear demarcation of classes and parties. It awakened millions of working people to the political struggle, served for them as the richest school of political education, turned Russia into a country of revolutionary people. The proletariat for the first time in history acted as the hegemon of the bourgeois-democratic revolution, for the first time an alliance of the working class and the peasantry arose, the foundation was laid for the revolutionary alliance of all the peoples of the Russian Empire. The Russian working class rallied the working people of all the oppressed peoples of the country and showed them the way to national and social liberation. The revolution gave rise to new forms of struggle and revolutionary organization of the masses, revealed the enormous role of mass political strikes, and the workers gained experience in armed struggle. For the first time in history, the working masses created Soviets, which developed in 1917 into the state form of the dictatorship of the proletariat. The revolution showed that the Bolsheviks were the only completely revolutionary party in the country; it was a comprehensive test of the theory and tactics of Bolshevism. In the resolution of the Central Committee of the CPSU of 1975 "On the 70th Anniversary of the Revolution of 1905-1907 in Russia" it is noted that the role of V. I. Lenin as the greatest theorist of Marxism was manifested in the revolution, which he enriched by developing questions about the hegemony of the proletariat, about the leading role of the party , about the development of the bourgeois-democratic revolution into a socialist one, about the soviets as organs of armed insurrection and revolutionary power, etc. During the revolution, the Bolsheviks gained organizational strength, grew in numbers, expanded and consolidated their influence among the masses. In 1905-1907, the organizational abilities of the Bolshevik-Leninists were clearly manifested: Ya. M. Sverdlov, S. G. Shaumyan, I. V. Babushkin, M. M. Litvinov, V. L. Shantser (Marat), S. I. Gusev , P. A. Dzhaparidze, S. A. Ter-Petrosyan (Kamo), K. E. Voroshilov, M. I. Kalinina, F. A. Sergeeva (Artem), P. I. Stuchki, A. S. Bubnova , V. P. Nogina, M. G. Tskhakaya, R. S. Zemlyachki and many others. Under the leadership of the Bolsheviks, the proletariat won, albeit for a short time, a number of democratic freedoms, achieved some improvement in its own economic situation. Tsarism was forced to agree to the creation of the State Duma, thereby taking another step along the path of turning Russia into a bourgeois monarchy. Having laid the groundwork for subsequent class battles, the revolution of 1905-1907 was the "dress rehearsal" for the revolutions of 1917 - not only the February bourgeois-democratic, but also the October socialist revolution.
The first Russian revolution marked the onset of a new period in world history - a period of political upheavals and revolutions. Its events evoked a lively response and sympathy from the Western European proletariat and awakened the oppressed peoples of the East. The struggle of the Russian working class has become an example for the workers of the whole world. The strike movement and the struggle for democratic freedoms intensified. The revolution in Russia was followed by revolutions in Iran (1905-1911), Turkey (1908), China (1911-1913). The national liberation and anti-feudal movement intensified in other countries of the East. There was a regrouping of forces in the international arena: Russia, which finally became in 1905-1907 the leading force, the center of the world revolutionary movement, ceased to be the main stronghold of international reaction.
The experience of the revolution of 1905-1907 in Russia played a big role in the fight against opportunism in the international labor movement - it shook many of the dogmas of the leaders of the 2nd International, strengthened the international positions of Bolshevism, and had a strong influence on the formation of the left, revolutionary wing in the Social Democratic parties.
Conclusion
The end of the revolution led to the establishment of temporary internal political stabilization in the country. This time the authorities managed to take the situation under control and suppress the revolutionary wave. At the same time, the agrarian question remained unresolved, many feudal vestiges and privileges remained. As a bourgeois revolution, the revolution of 1905 did not fulfill all its tasks, it remained unfinished.
The meaning of the revolution
The revolution changed the political situation in Russia: constitutional documents appeared (the Manifesto of October 17 and the Fundamental State Laws), the first parliament, the State Duma, was formed, the composition and functions of the State Council changed, legal political parties and trade unions were formed, and the democratic press was developed.
A certain limitation of autocracy (temporary) was achieved, although the possibility of making legislative decisions and all the fullness of executive power remained.
The socio-political situation of Russian citizens has changed: democratic freedoms have been introduced, censorship has been abolished, it is allowed to organize trade unions and political parties (temporarily).
The bourgeoisie received a wide opportunity to participate in the political life of the country.
The material and legal situation of the working people has improved: wages have increased in a number of branches of industry and the length of the working day has decreased.
The peasants achieved the abolition of redemption payments.
In the course of the revolution, the prerequisites were created for carrying out an agrarian reform, which contributed to the further development of bourgeois relations in the countryside.
The revolution changed the moral and psychological situation in the country: tsarist illusions in the countryside began to wane, unrest swept through part of the army and navy, the masses felt themselves to be subjects of history, the revolutionary forces accumulated significant experience in the struggle, including realizing the effective role of violence.
The revolution forced Nicholas II to sign on October 17 the Manifesto "On the improvement of the state order", proclaiming:
Granting freedom of speech, conscience, assembly and unions;
Involvement of the general population in the elections;
Mandatory procedure for approval by the State Duma of all issued laws.
Numerous political parties arise and legalize in the country, formulating in their programs the requirements and ways of political transformation of the existing system and participating in elections to the Duma, the Manifesto laid the foundation for the formation of parliamentarism in Russia. This was a new step towards the transformation of the feudal monarchy into a bourgeois one. According to the Manifesto, the State Duma was characterized by certain features of the parliament. This is evidenced by the possibility of an open discussion of state issues, the need to send various requests to the Council of Ministers, and to make attempts to declare no confidence in the government. The next step was to change the electoral law. Under the new law of December 1905, four electoral curia were approved: from the landowners, the urban population, peasants and workers. Women, soldiers, sailors, students, landless peasants, laborers and some "foreigners" were deprived of the right to choose. The government, which continued to hope that the peasantry would be the backbone of the autocracy, provided it with 45% of all seats in the Duma. Members of the State Duma were elected for a term of 5 years. According to the Manifesto of October 17, the State Duma was established as a legislative body, although tsarism tried to evade this principle. The jurisdiction of the Duma was to include issues that require a legislative solution: the state list of income and expenses; state control report on the use of the state list; cases on alienation of property; cases on the construction of railways by the state; cases on the establishment of companies on shares. The State Duma had the right to request the government about illegal actions committed by ministers or chief executives. The Duma could not start a session on its own initiative, but was convened by decrees of the tsar.
In October 1905, a decree was published on measures aimed at strengthening unity in the activities of ministries and main departments. In accordance with the decree, the Council of Ministers was reorganized, which was now entrusted with the leadership and unification of the actions of the chief heads of departments on management and legislation.
Bibliography
1. Lenin V. I. On the revolution of 1905-1907, M., 1955;
Revolution 1905-1907 in Russia. Documents and materials. [Series, vol. 1-16, book 1-18], M. - L., 1955-65;
Leaflets of the Bolshevik organizations in the first Russian revolution of 1905-1907, parts 1-3, M., 1956;
History of the CPSU. v. 2, Moscow, 1966;
History of the USSR. From ancient times to the present day, vol. 6, M., 1968;
First Russian Revolution 1905-1907 and the international revolutionary movement. part 1-2, M., 1955-56;
Pyaskovsky A. V. Revolution of 1905-1907. in Russia, M., 1966;
Yakovlev N. N. The people and the party in the first Russian revolution, M., 1965;
Dubrovsky S. M. The peasant movement in the revolution of 1905-1907, M., 1956; 10. Petrov V. A. Essays on the history of the revolutionary movement in the Russian army in 1905, M. - L., 1964;
Naida S. F. Revolutionary movement in the tsarist fleet. 1825-1917, M. - L., 1948;
Yerman L.K. Intelligentsia in the first Russian revolution, M., 1966;
Chermensky E. D. Bourgeoisie and Tsarism in the First Russian Revolution, 2nd ed., M., 1970;
Tomilov S. A. Battleship "Potemkin", Od., 1975;
The First Russian Revolution and Its Historical Significance, M., 1975;
Revolution 1905-1907 Documents and materials, M., 1975;
First Russian Revolution 1905-1907 Annotated index of literature, M., 1965;
Dunaevsky V. A. The international significance of the Russian revolution of 1905-1907.
Tutoring
Need help learning a topic?
Our experts will advise or provide tutoring services on topics of interest to you.
Submit an application indicating the topic right now to find out about the possibility of obtaining a consultation.
May 19, 1649 England was proclaimed a republic. The "inexpedient" power of the king has been abolished. And the House of Lords too. These institutions were later restored. But at the moment of revolutionary fever, it seemed to people, driven to despair by exactions and arbitrariness, that they had saved the country from tyranny. Cromwell, who became the commander of the army and the virtual ruler of England, had to find an opportunity to resist numerous political currents and at the same time establish the authority of the young republic in the international arena. He succeeded a lot. At the same time, Western European monarchies did not show much solidarity with the English king.
At home, Cromwell consolidated his power in the most decisive way - and in his most shameful deeds. These are the wars in Ireland and Scotland. In essence, he fulfilled the dream of many generations of English kings by establishing power over these territories. They were original both ethnically and religiously and wanted to preserve their independence. Cromwell drowned them in blood. The documents that he signed were preserved: to crush the heads of all officers in Scotland. These were his means.
In 1649 Cromwell won the famous Battle of Denbar in Scotland by some clever maneuver. But then he wrote that it happened by accident and he himself was surprised that his position turned out to be so successful. He destroyed a third of the population of Ireland - half a million people. For example, during the capture of the fortress of Drogheda, everyone was destroyed, even those who did not resist. Many of the surviving Irish went overseas to America. A large Irish community was formed there, whose influence in the United States is great to this day.
The uprising of the Levellers, his former supporters, was also brutally suppressed. [Basovskaya, Man in the Mirror of History]
The first session of the Protectorate Parliament (September 3, 1654 - January 22, 1655) was concerned with revising the Constitution rather than drafting and enacting new laws. As a result, Cromwell dissolved Parliament on 22 January, and a royalist uprising broke out in March. And although it was immediately suppressed, the Lord Protector introduced the police regime of major generals in the country. Censorship was introduced again. This regime turned out to be extremely unpopular and ruinous. Cromwell divided England and Wales into 11 military administrative districts, headed by major generals, endowed with full police power. Cromwell himself, in his own word, becomes a constable - a guardian of order. [Musk]
Cromwell changed. In this yesterday's landowner, the features of a tyrant appeared more and more clearly. He did not trust anyone, he suspected everyone of treason. In doing so, he essentially created his own courtyard. When in 1654 Cromwell's inauguration ceremony as Lord Protector took place, the pomp was extraordinary. He himself wore a robe trimmed with sables, a typical monarchical appearance. Receptions began, noisy feasts.
In 1657 what had to happen happened. Parliament, represented by several figures, offered the crown to Cromwell. This has happened many times in history. For example, Gaius Julius Caesar was offered the royal crown, he abstained. Cromwell said he would think about it, thanked Parliament and refused. He remained Lord Protector, subject to the adoption of a new constitution, under which he could appoint a successor for himself. And it was done.
Why didn't he want to be king? Probably, the common sense of a provincial landowner worked. England would never accept a monarch from this milieu. Many were already beginning to think that maybe the next Stewarts would be better. And they were already beginning to call Charles II and His Majesty the son of the executed king who lived in exile. Cromwell apparently felt it all. But, guided by the logic of the revolution, he behaved like a true tyrant. He began to seat his relatives in the most important positions. His youngest son Henry became governor of Ireland, from which it was still possible to enrich himself. The son-in-law actually commanded the army. There were relatives in the State Council. And the Lord Protector himself, who did not trust anyone, became more and more gloomy every day. [Basovskaya, Man in the Mirror of History]
Since the establishment of the republic in 1649. Cromwell's environment became an order of magnitude more complex. The role of the head of state, by definition and by conviction obliged to be responsible for all areas of government activity, ultimately led Oliver to the most severe disappointment in his own abilities. [Barg]
The idea of dictatorship dates back to antiquity, primarily to Ancient Sparta and Ancient Rome. It also had a romantic beginning. It was argued that in moments of a turning point in the life of the people, in moments of great danger, a temporary dictatorship must be introduced. This was also the view of the Jacobins, those who entered the revolution as members of the club of supporters of the constitution and, in the course of the development of revolutionary events, turned into a radical political party. The Jacobins eliminated the Feuillants - supporters of the constitutional monarchy, destroyed the moderate revolutionaries of the Girondins and established their own political regime. The Jacobin dictatorship is irreducible to terror. She did a lot of useful things for France and all of Europe: she abolished feudal remnants; introducing maximum prices and trying to distribute, and when it did not work out - to sell part of the land to the peasants, limited speculation on what people want to eat.
In parallel, Robespierre came up with an amazing way to rally the nation - to establish a cult of the Supreme Being. Even earlier, when some of his associates proposed an atheistic program, he had the good sense to object: he understood that this would alienate the people. Now he proposed the cult of a new Supreme Being, which the French supposedly discovered and under whose auspices they were to lead all the peoples of the world. June 8, 1793 great celebrations took place. Robespierre - the chairman of the Convention - led the procession, in a new blue tailcoat, with ears of corn in his hands. He had never worn tailcoats before. But at that moment, he was not afraid to look ridiculous, believing that he would unite the nation, that all enemies would finally be rejected and the people would follow him. [Bachko. Robespierre and terror]
The purpose of the cult of the Supreme Being was to give terror the ideology it so badly needed. This cult, in the name of morality, approved the actions of terrorists, alien to any morality in general. He gave revolutionary rule a legitimacy that did not involve any reference to real or imagined circumstances. And, finally, this cult contributed to the perpetuation, strengthening and, especially, the centralization of revolutionary government in the interests of Robespierre, entrusting him with the mission of interpreting the laws of providence. [Genife, The Politics of Revolutionary Terror]
At the same time, terror remained the most effective method of fighting enemies. For a month and a half in 1793. 1285 death sentences were handed down.
Robespierre, step by step, removed competitors, demonstrating the ability to maneuver, amazing political flexibility. Jacques Hebert and the Heberists - all under the knife. And supporters of Georges Danton. When the fiery Danton was being taken past Robespierre's house to be executed, he shouted: "We'll meet soon, Maximilian!" And he was absolutely right. Among those sentenced was Camille Desmoulins, a school friend of Robespierre, with whom they sat at the same desk at a college in Arras. Robespierre was best man at Desmoulins' wedding. And so Camille, in his newspaper The Old Cardelier, expressed some doubts about the need for terror. For Robespierre, terror apparently became something like a religion. And he sent a former close friend to the guillotine.
Exactly one month after the death of Robespierre, Tallien, a member of the Convention, who was well acquainted with terror, since he himself practiced it, while on a mission in Bordeaux, delivered an important speech about the terrible era from which France had then just emerged. In this introduction, Tallien gave a fairly accurate definition of terror: the division of society "into two classes," albeit unequal in number, "those who make people afraid and those who are afraid." The definition is accurate, but still insufficient, because it does not allow a clear distinction between different forms of violence, because each of them inevitably involves the presence of such protagonists as the executioner and the victim. It should be noted here that only one of these two protagonists - the victim - remains in this capacity, regardless of the nature of the action from which he suffered: whether it was a saber blow inflicted by a participant in the uprising, or a decision of the Revolutionary Tribunal. On the contrary, depending on the situation, different subjects (a crowd, a limited group of persons, an individual or a state) can act as a terrorizing party, just as the methods and intensity of the violence they use can vary. It is these differences that make it possible to establish the characteristic features of terror in comparison with the wider phenomenon of violence.
Terror is not limited to violence. Of course, any violence causes a feeling of horror (terreur), and terror always requires the use of some degree of violence. However, not all acts of violence during the revolutionary era were inherently terrorist. Terror can be distinguished from ordinary violence by two criteria: first, whether the act is premeditated or not; and, secondly, whether the victim, against whom the action is directed, is identified with the real goal pursued, or, on the contrary, a distinction is made between them. The mob uses violence against those whom it, by chance, or at least without prior intention, has made its target; while the peculiarity of terror is that violence is deliberately used against a predetermined victim in order to achieve a specific goal.
A hallmark of the indiscriminate collective violence, of which the Revolution gave numerous examples, beginning with the assassination of Foulon and Berthier de Sauvigny on July 22, 1789. and ending with the massacre in the prisons in September 1792, was that it arose spontaneously. Violence becomes a reaction to the anxiety that grips a society when it faces a danger that threatens its very existence or is perceived as such, and the situation is aggravated by the decline of legitimate authority and the collapse of traditional guidelines.
Terror, on the other hand, can be defined as a strategy that relies on violence, ranging in intensity from the mere threat of resorting to it to limitless use, and with the explicit intention of inducing the degree of fear deemed necessary to achieve political goals that the terrorists believe they do not can achieve without violence or by legal means available to them. In addition, terror differs from other forms of violence in its conscious, and therefore rational, nature. [G. Patrice, "The Politics of Revolutionary Terror 1789-1794"].
Debates about the usefulness of terror have made extensive use of the arguments that have been put forward for a century by supporters and opponents of the death penalty, arguing about its edification and ability to intimidate. If the initiators of the creation of the Revolutionary Tribunal said the same thing as Muillard de Vouglans, then those who fought against terror, especially after Thermidor, borrowed their arguments from all the opponents of the death penalty, from Baccaria to Duport and Robespierre. So, Robespierre May 30, 1791. advocated its abolition, arguing that the death of the convict not only does not serve edification, but also directly contradicts the goal: on the one hand, it evokes sympathy for the executed, and therefore the disgust from the execution drowns out the disgust from the crime, which, in fact, should be awakened justice; on the other hand, the spectacle of execution hardens and corrupts the souls of those who observe it, and its repeated repetition dulls the fear of punishment, devaluing human life. Of course, a year or two later, Robespierre will no longer make such speeches, but it is precisely with these arguments that at the turn of 1793-1794. Camille Desmoulins will use to condemn terror, declaring that it only corrupts morals, although it was introduced under the pretext of their revival. [G. Patrice, "The Politics of Revolutionary Terror 1789-1794"].
2*. What contributed to the intensification of revolutionary terror and the exacerbation of grassroots violence during the French Revolution? Do you think a revolution can do without violence?
3. Why did thousands of French enthusiastically volunteer for the army during the revolutionary wars? What helped them overcome their natural fear of being killed or maimed in war?
4. Why did the revolutionaries declare the attack of the sans-culottes on prisons in September 1792 and the extermination of prisoners as "revolutionary self-defense"? How do you think they could motivate it?
1. Back in December 1790, in his newspaper "Friend of the People" J.-P. Marat demanded the execution of the entire royal family, all the generals, ministers who supported the monarchy, etc.: “Kill without mercy the entire Parisian general staff, all deputies of the National Assembly ... Six months ago, 500-600 heads would have been enough ... Now, perhaps, it will be necessary to cut off 5-6 thousand heads. But even if you had to cut off 20,000, you can’t hesitate for a single minute.”
Rate these words. Why did the Friend of the People think that there should be more and more executions? In your opinion, was this position of Marat exceptional or did he have like-minded people? Justify your answer.
2. In 1792, the Russian Empress Catherine II drew up a document "On measures to restore royal rule in France." In particular, it said: “Currently, 10 thousand troops are enough to go through France from end to end ... All the French nobles who left their homeland will inevitably join the recruited army, and, perhaps, also regiments of German sovereigns. By means of this army it is possible to liberate France from the robbers, restore the monarchy and the monarch, disperse the impostors, punish the villains.
Explain what allowed Catherine II to count on a quick victory for the interventionists in 1792. What forces did the European monarchs expect to rely on in the fight against the revolution?
“From this moment until the enemies are expelled from the territory of the republic, all the French are declared in a state of constant requisition. Young people will go to the front to fight, the married must forge weapons and bring food; women will prepare tents, clothes and serve in hospitals; children to pluck lint [thread dressing] from old linen; old people will force themselves to be led out into the square in order to arouse courage in the soldiers, hatred of kings and the idea of the unity of the republic. National buildings will be turned into barracks; squares will become weapons workshops; the earth from the cellars will be subjected to leaching in order to extract saltpeter from it.
Think about how the citizens of revolutionary France must have felt when they read the text of this decree. What were their responsibilities? Could all these measures help in the fight against the enemy?
4. Based on the materials of the textbook, continue filling out the one you started after studying § 1.
§ 3. Jacobin dictatorship and Thermidor. French Republic in 1793–1795
Jacobin dictatorship
In the provinces, the news of the expulsion of the Girondins from the Convention was greeted with indignation. In the northern departments of the country, army units were already being formed to march on Paris. This movement (the Jacobins called it a federalist rebellion) also embraced the large cities of the south - Bordeaux, Marseille, Nimes. On July 13, 1793, the young republican Charlotte Corday killed the most odious Jacobin, Jean Paul Marat. She hoped that the death of this "monster" would stop the civil war that had begun. In Toulon, where supporters of the monarchy were popular, the local authorities preferred to surrender the city to the British. The situation also escalated in Lyon, where royalist officers (i.e., supporters of the monarchy) stood at the head of the detachments that opposed the power of the Jacobins.
The French Republican army was still pursued by defeats: the Austrians successfully advanced through the lands of France in the northeast, the British captured the French colonies in the West Indies. In France itself, a civil war was going on: in the Vendée, the troops of the Convention were defeated, in Brittany an uprising of Chouans (supporters of the power of the king and the Catholic Church) began.
Having received power as a result of the uprising and coup on May 31 - June 2, 1793, the Jacobins needed the broadest support of the population. The convention adopted a decree on the sale of land previously owned by emigrants, in small plots and in installments. On June 17, all senior duties were abolished.
ViewThe history of the stress pit in international waters: causes, sides, consequences of resistance (yes)
ViewHistory A1. The consequence of the Neolithic Revolution: 1 1) Appearance of the Generic Community 2) The appearance of religious beliefs 3) to the producing economy 4) separation of handicrafts from agriculture A2. The first ancient civilizations arose: 1) in Greece 2) in America 3) in the Middle East 4) on the Apennine Peninsula AZ. Great empires I I - I millennium BC e. contributed to the emergence of: 1) Homo sapiens 2) private property 3) civil society 4) eastern civilizational community A4. The emergence of:) Islam □ 3) Buddhism is connected with the history of India: 2) Zoroastrianism □ 4) Confucianism А5. The creation of the poems "Iliad" and "Odyssey" by Homer belongs to the period that historians 1) dominate □ 3) the era of Hellenism 2) the Middle Ages □4) the archaic era A6. Appearance in the III century. n. e. in the Roman state, the colony testified to: 1) the crisis of the republican system 2) the emergence of feudal relations 3) the transformation of Rome into a world power 4) the original character of Roman architecture A7. A characteristic feature of Western European medieval society was its division into: 1) varnas □3) classes 2) policies □4) estates А8. The era of the mature Middle Ages includes: 1) the beginning of the Crusades 2) the creation of barbarian states 3) the beginning of the industrial revolution 4) the fall of the Western Roman Empire A9. The culture of Byzantium is the successor of the culture: 1) Catholic □ 3) Slavic 2) pagan □ 4) ancient A10. Feudalism in the East, unlike feudalism in the West, is characterized by: 1) the exploitation of dependent peasants 2) the absence of feudal fragmentation 3) the rule “my vassal’s vassal is not my vassal” 4) the state’s supreme ownership of land
