Portrait of Alexander II the Liberator.

February 19 (March 3), 1861 in St. Petersburg, Alexander II signed the Manifesto on the abolition of serfdom and the Regulations on peasants emerging from serfdom, which consisted of 17 legislative acts. The Manifesto “On the most merciful granting to serfs of the rights of the status of free rural inhabitants” dated February 19, 1861 was accompanied by a number of legislative acts (17 documents in total) relating to the issues of the liberation of peasants, the conditions for their redemption of landowners' land and the size of redeemed allotments in certain regions of Russia. Among them: “Rules on the procedure for bringing into force the Regulations on peasants who have emerged from serfdom”, “Regulations on the redemption by peasants who have emerged from serfdom, from the estate settlement and on government assistance in acquiring these peasants into the ownership of field lands”, local provisions.

Manifesto of Alexander II on the liberation of the peasants, 1861.

The main provisions of the reform

The main act - "The General Regulations on Peasants Who Have Emerged from Serfdom" - contained the main conditions for the peasant reform:

Peasants ceased to be considered serfs and began to be considered "temporarily liable"; peasants received the rights of "free rural inhabitants", that is, full civil legal capacity in everything that did not relate to their special class rights and obligations - membership in a rural society and ownership of allotment land.
Peasant houses, buildings, all movable property of the peasants were recognized as their personal property.
The peasants received elective self-government, the lowest (economic) unit of self-government was the rural society, the highest (administrative) unit was the volost.

Medal "For labors for the liberation of the peasants", 1861.

Medals in honor of the abolition of serfdom. 1861.

The landowners retained ownership of all the lands that belonged to them, but they were obliged to provide the peasants with “estate residence” (household plot) and a field allotment for use; the lands of the field allotment were not provided personally to the peasants, but for the collective use of rural communities, which could distribute them among the peasant farms at their discretion. The minimum size of a peasant allotment for each locality was established by law.
For the use of allotment land, the peasants had to serve a corvée or pay dues and did not have the right to refuse it for 49 years.

The size of the field allotment and duties had to be fixed in charter letters, which were drawn up by the landowners for each estate and checked by peace mediators.

The abolition of serfdom. 1861-1911. From the collection of Igor Slovyagin (Bratsk)

Rural societies were given the right to buy out the estate and, by agreement with the landowner, the field plot, after which all obligations of the peasants to the landowner ceased; the peasants who redeemed the allotment were called "peasant-owners". Peasants could also refuse the right to redeem and receive from the landlord free of charge an allotment in the amount of a quarter of the allotment that they had the right to redeem; when endowing a free allotment, the temporarily obligated state also ceased.

The state, on preferential terms, provided the landlords with financial guarantees for the receipt of redemption payments (redemption operation), accepting their payment; peasants, respectively, had to pay redemption payments to the state.

Tokens and medals in honor of the 50th anniversary of the liberation of the peasants, 1911.

THE MATERIALS WERE PRESENTED BY THE BROTHER COLLECTOR IGOR VIKTOROVICH SLOVYAGIN, WHO OWNS A LARGE SELECTION OF HISTORICAL MATERIALS ON THE EVENTS OF FEBRUARY 19, 1861. THE ORIGINAL MANIFESTO OF ALEXANDER II ON THE EMPLOYMENT OF THE PEASANTS IS PRESENTED BY THE COLLECTOR TO THE MUSEUM.

On February 19 (old style), 1861, on the day of the five-year anniversary of the beginning of the reign of Emperor Alexander II, the Sovereign signed the Manifesto on the abolition of serfdom in Russia. The event that has been awaited for many years has come to pass. “By virtue of the aforementioned new provisions, serfs will in due time receive the full rights of free rural inhabitants”, - it was said in the text of the Manifesto, for the publication of which the Emperor was awarded the honorary title of "Tsar-Liberator" from the Russian people.

“The nobility voluntarily renounced the right to the identity of serfs ... - reported in the Tsar's Manifesto . - The nobles were supposed to limit their rights to the peasants and raise the difficulties of transformation, not without reducing their benefits ... The examples of generous care of the owners for the welfare of the peasants and the gratitude of the peasants to the beneficent care of the owners confirm our hope that most of the difficulties will be resolved by mutual voluntary agreements, inevitable in some cases the application of general rules to various circumstances of individual estates, and that in this way the transition from the old order to the new will be facilitated and mutual trust, good agreement and unanimous striving for the common good will be strengthened in the future ".

However, the people learned about the royal Manifesto not on the day of its signing, but only two weeks later - on Forgiveness Sunday after the end of the liturgy. This was due to the fact that, fearing a violent popular reaction, the authorities decided to wait out the Maslenitsa festivities and time the announcement of the document to coincide with the first week of Great Lent, when Orthodox Christians are especially striving to curb their own passions and repentance. And these calculations were fully justified. As noted by the capital newspaper, " the temples of God were filled with Orthodox people. The honest people humbly listened to the divine liturgy, preparing to find out the resolution of the thought cherished for him, brought up in his heart for years. “From 9 o’clock in the morning, for 10 o’clock, the telegraph did not stop transmitting to all parts of Russia, where only an electric wire was laid, the news of the highest manifesto on February 19, 1861,” reported Severnaya Pchela. - The mercy bestowed by the Sovereign on the people was accepted by Moscow with reverent tenderness. (...) On the same day, March 5, a manifesto was announced throughout the Moscow district, with perfect calm in all the landowners' estates ".

Within the framework of this brief essay, we will not dwell on the content of the reform and the course of the emancipation of the peasants, which are well known at least from the school history course, but will only touch on the perception of this hysterical event by contemporaries.

On the eve of the publication of the Manifesto, Emperor Alexander II prayed for a long time at the tomb of his father, Tsar Nikolai Pavlovich, who died on February 18, 1855, and did a lot to make the abolition of serfdom possible during the reign of his son. According to the historian M.P. Pogodin, the Sovereign experienced great joy on February 19. "Today is the best day of my life!", - said the Emperor, who "and cried, and laughed, and kissed children, and hugged relatives ...".

The official press was full of joyful and solemn messages: “The great event that took place on February 19, 1861, begins a new, better time for the social development of Russia”- noted "Russian speech". And the Sankt-Peterburgskiye Vedomosti assured its readers that "The great call for the unity of the estates and agreement on mutual interests in universal human relations has forever closed the abyss that was opened by the hands of Peter as a result of historical necessity."

"Kant, Schiller, Rousseau ..., - enthusiastically wrote M.P. Pogodin , - take off your hats, bow to the ground ... France, Germany, England, envy us ... We got equality and this "suddenly on one truly beautiful morning." And all this without a revolution. What kind of "monster Russia ...".

F.M. Dostoevsky also welcomed the Tsar’s Manifesto, noting that “All this abominable sin of ours was abolished at once according to the great word of the Liberator”. The prominent conservative publicist M.N. Katkov also called February 19 the Great Holiday of the Russian Land. Evaluating the reform 9 years after its implementation, Katkov noted: “Never has the “common sense of the people” been expressed so brilliantly as in the peasant reform that took place in Russia. At first, after liberation, immediately after the sharp turning point that took place in the Russian countryside, when serfdom had already fallen, but neither the mediators of the peace, nor the rural authorities had yet been put into action, when the peasants had not yet had time to get acquainted with their new rights - and then there was no serious confusion among the people, in spite of all the efforts of the malicious parties. The special measures taken just in case turned out to be completely unnecessary. The Russian people, with their common sense, surprised not only their enemies, but also their friends, who still did not expect the masses to be able to show such complete self-control at the first stages of freedom. It is known that malicious people tried to arouse exaggerated expectations in the peasantry. Rumors spread about a free allotment, about a new will, about liberation from all duties. But among the people a sound instinct for truth was constantly preserved..

But the reaction of society to the peasant reform was far from ambiguous. As the historian of the reign of Emperor Alexander II E.P. Tolmachev rightly notes, "the attitude of contemporaries to the promulgated peasant reform once again proved the old truth: there is no law that would be to everyone's liking". If some admired the great sovereign act, others interpreted the reform as "predatory".

In the last interpretation, the revolutionary camp was especially successful, which categorically did not accept the peasant reform. N.G. Chernyshevsky, having read the manifesto on February 19, 1861, angrily threw: “It has long been clear that this will be it”. And Herzen’s Kolokol, through the mouth of N.P. Ogarev, who noted that the peasants from serfdom fell into debt dependence, wrote: “The old serfdom has been replaced by a new one. In general, serfdom has not been abolished. The people are deceived by the king.

But many former feudal lords also felt deceived, whom the reform deprived of free labor and forced to share land with the peasants. Those of them who mortgaged their estates and owed considerable sums to the treasury, instead of the expected generous reward, received only the cancellation of pre-reform debts.

Everyone remembers Nekrasov's lines about the abolition of serfdom:

The great chain is broken

Torn - jumped

One end on the master,

Others for a man! ..

However, criticism of the reform was heard not only from the lips of left-wing radicals and offended landowners. 12 years after the publication of the Manifesto, F.M. Dostoevsky remarked: “With the liberation of the peasants, labor was left without sufficient organization and support. Everything perished: the countryside and land ownership, and the nobility, and Russia ... Personal landed property is in complete chaos, is sold and bought, changes its owner every minute ... this is the main question of the Russian future".

Without denying the need for reform, the Slavophil I.S. Aksakov also critically assessed its implementation in practice. “This reform is more than a coup, in the ordinary sense of the word; this is a whole revolution, of course peaceful, but still a revolution (...) - one of the greatest social revolutions that history has known, he considered. - ... The liberation of the peasants from serfdom was not some sort of transfer of objects from one department to another, or one of the useful reforms in a number of others - even, perhaps, the most important of them, which increased the number of full-fledged, from the Russian point of view, by 20 million vision, citizens. When embarking on this great action, we not only did not clearly realize its significance, the scope of its consequences, but even now we do not stand on the level of our consciousness with it. (...) How long ago did we begin to guess that, by destroying the landlord life and serfdom of the peasants, we dug into the very depths of our native history? We swept away the centuries-old deposits and exposed the ancient layer, the historical virgin soil, and we don’t know what to do with it: we don’t have seeds for it, or appropriate tools; seeds and plows, which were suitable for alluvial layers, are not suitable for her. We solved the historical question - without arming ourselves with historical consciousness, which our society is shamefully meager, having forgotten historical traditions!

And the famous publicist of the "New Time" M.O. Menshikov drew the attention of his readers to the fact that the great reform led to the collapse of the traditional system of values ​​among the peasantry, and the burden of freedom turned out to be unbearably heavy for many of them: “To the great act of liberation from serfdom, the people, the free people! - answered: 1) the rapid development of drunkenness, 2) the rapid development of crime ... 3) the rapid development of debauchery, 4) the rapid development of atheism and cooling off towards the church, 5) the flight from the village to the cities that tempted ... brothels and taverns, 6 ) the rapid loss of all disciplines - state, family, moral and religious and turning into a nihilist".

And there was truth in that criticism, too. After all, along with gaining freedom, the peasants were deprived of help and guardianship from the landlords, which they used to rely on. If for the prosperous part of the peasantry, accustomed to running an independent economy, this was not scary, then the poor peasants found themselves “thrown out” into an unaccustomed free life for them and, adapting to new living conditions, often turned their newfound freedom not at all for good.

But let's not forget that the task facing the Sovereign was not an easy one. The Russian autocrats had been thinking about the need to abolish serfdom since the time of Catherine the Great, when they began to realize that after the nobles were freed from compulsory public service, the enslavement of peasants was losing its moral justification. Beginning with Emperor Paul I, each of the Sovereigns took real steps to mitigate serfdom. And by the middle of the XIX century. it was already quite obvious that the form of management based on forced labor was losing its former effectiveness, and the growing awareness of the injustice of this state of affairs urgently required a fundamental solution to the peasant question. The words spoken to the Moscow nobility by Emperor Alexander II in 1856 are widely known: “It is better to start destroying serfdom from above than to wait until the time when it begins to destroy itself from below”. But as soon as we began to seriously address this issue, it became obvious that it was impossible to free the peasants without land, as was done in the West in their time, in Russia, and it would not work to redistribute property painlessly. The authorities faced an almost insoluble dilemma: to make sure that both the sheep were safe and the wolves were fed. But the Sovereign still managed to pass between Scylla and Charybdis. Although the reform simultaneously “robbed” both landlords and peasants (the former lost part of their property and income, while the latter did not receive what they expected), it did not lead to a powerful social explosion. Neither the noble "palace coup" nor the peasant Pugachevshchina happened. Having scolded the authorities, both dissatisfied parties began to adapt to live in the new conditions.

Prepared Andrey Ivanov, Doctor of Historical Sciences

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

In contact with

Basic concepts

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

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

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

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

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

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

Reasons for the abolition of serfdom

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

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

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

Preparations for the abolition of serfdom

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

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

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

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

Reform of 1861 and its contents

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

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

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

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

The abolition of serfdom in Russia in 1861: briefly

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

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

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

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

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

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

Results of the reform

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Prerequisites for the Peasant Reform of 1861

The abolition of serfdom, a historical overview

Conclusion

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

Serfdom turned into a brake on technological progress, which in Europe, after the industrial revolution, was actively developing. The Crimean War clearly demonstrated this. There was a danger of Russia turning into a third-rate power. It was by the second half of the 19th century that it became clear that the preservation of Russia's power and political influence is impossible without strengthening finances, developing industry and railway construction, and transforming the entire political system. Under the dominance of serfdom, which itself could still exist for an indefinite time, despite the fact that the landed nobility itself was unable and not ready to modernize their own estates, it turned out to be practically impossible to do this. That is why the reign of Alexander II became a period of radical transformations of Russian society. The emperor, distinguished by his common sense and a certain political flexibility, managed to surround himself with professionally literate people who understood the need for Russia's forward movement. Among them stood out the king's brother, Grand Duke Konstantin Nikolayevich, brothers N.A. and D.A. Milyutin, Ya.I. Rostovtsev, P.A. Valuev and others.

By the second quarter of the 19th century, it had already become obvious that the economic possibilities of the landlord economy in meeting the increased demand for grain exports had been completely exhausted. It was increasingly drawn into commodity-money relations, gradually losing its natural character. Closely connected with this was a change in the forms of rent. If in the central provinces, where industrial production was developed, more than half of the peasants had already been transferred to quitrent, then in the agricultural central black earth and lower Volga provinces, where marketable bread was produced, corvée continued to expand. This was due to the natural growth in the production of bread for sale in the landowners' economy.

On the other hand, the productivity of corvée labor has fallen noticeably. The peasant sabotaged the corvee with all his might, was weary of it, which is explained by the growth of the peasant economy, its transformation into a small-scale producer. Corvee slowed down this process, and the peasant fought with all his might for favorable conditions for his management.

The landowners sought ways to increase the profitability of their estates within the framework of serfdom, for example, transferring peasants for a month: landless peasants, who were obliged to spend all their working time on corvée, were paid in kind in the form of a monthly food ration, as well as clothes, shoes, necessary household utensils , while the landowner's field was processed by the master's inventory. However, all these measures could not compensate for the ever-increasing losses from inefficient corvée labor.

Quit farms also experienced a serious crisis. Previously, peasant crafts, from which the dues were mainly paid, were profitable, giving the landowner a stable income. However, the development of crafts gave rise to competition, which led to a drop in peasant earnings. Since the 20s of the 19th century, arrears in the payment of dues began to grow rapidly. An indicator of the crisis of the landowners' economy was the growth of the debts of the estates. By 1861, about 65% of the landowners' estates were pledged in various credit institutions.

In an effort to increase the profitability of their estates, some landowners began to apply new farming methods: they ordered expensive equipment from abroad, invited foreign specialists, introduced multi-field crop rotation, and so on. But only rich landowners could afford such expenses, and under serfdom, these innovations did not pay off, often ruining such landowners.

It should be specially emphasized that we are talking about the crisis of the landlord economy, based on serf labor, and not the economy in general, which continued to develop on a completely different, capitalist basis. It is clear that serfdom held back its development, hindered the formation of a wage labor market, without which the capitalist development of the country is impossible.

Preparations for the abolition of serfdom began in January 1857 with the creation of the next Secret Committee. In November 1857, Alexander II sent a rescript throughout the country addressed to the Vilna governor-general Nazimov, which spoke of the beginning of the gradual emancipation of the peasants and ordered the creation of noble committees in three Lithuanian provinces (Vilna, Kovno and Grodno) to make proposals for the reform project. On February 21, 1858, the Secret Committee was renamed the Main Committee for Peasant Affairs. A broad discussion of the forthcoming reform began. The provincial noble committees drew up their drafts for the liberation of the peasants and sent them to the main committee, which, on their basis, began to develop a general reform project.

In order to process the submitted projects, editorial commissions were established in 1859, the work of which was led by Deputy Minister of the Interior Ya.I. Rostovtsev.

During the preparation of the reform among the landowners there were lively disputes about the mechanism of release. The landowners of the non-chernozem provinces, where the peasants were mainly on dues, offered to give the peasants land with complete exemption from the landowner's power, but with the payment of a large ransom for the land. Their opinion was most fully expressed in his project by the marshal of the Tver nobility A.M. Unkovsky.

The landlords of the black earth regions, whose opinion was expressed in the project of the Poltava landowner M.P. Posen, offered to give the peasants only small plots for ransom, aiming to make the peasants economically dependent on the landowner - to force them to rent land on unfavorable terms or work as farm laborers.

By the beginning of October 1860, the editorial commissions completed their activities and the project was submitted for discussion to the Main Committee on Peasant Affairs, where it underwent additions and changes. On January 28, 1861, a meeting of the Council of State opened, ending on February 16, 1861. The signing of the manifesto on the liberation of the peasants was scheduled for February 19, 1861 - the 6th anniversary of the accession to the throne of Alexander II, when the emperor signed the manifesto "On the most merciful granting to serfs of the rights of the state of free rural inhabitants and on the organization of their life", as well as the "Regulations on peasants who emerged from serfdom”, which included 17 legislative acts. On the same day, the Main Committee "on the arrangement of the rural state" was established, chaired by Grand Duke Konstantin Nikolayevich, replacing the Main Committee "on peasant affairs" and called upon to exercise supreme supervision over the implementation of the "Regulations" on February 19.

According to the manifesto, the peasants received personal freedom. From now on, the former serf was given the opportunity to freely dispose of his personality, he was granted some civil rights: the ability to transfer to other classes, conclude property and civil transactions on his own behalf, open trade and industrial enterprises.

If serfdom was abolished immediately, then the settlement of economic relations between the peasant and the landowner dragged on for several decades. The specific economic conditions for the liberation of the peasants were fixed in the Charters, which were concluded between the landowner and the peasant with the participation of world mediators. However, according to the law, the peasants for another two years were obliged to serve in fact the same duties as under serfdom. This state of the peasant was called temporarily liable. In fact, this situation dragged on for twenty years, and only by the law of 1881 the last temporarily liable peasants were transferred to ransom.

An important place was given to the allocation of land to the peasant. The law proceeded from the recognition of the right of the landowner of all the land in his estate, including peasant allotments. The peasants received the allotment not as property, but only for use. To become the owner of the land, the peasant had to buy it from the landowner. This task was undertaken by the state. The ransom was based not on the market value of the land, but on the amount of duties. The treasury immediately paid the landowners 80% of the redemption amount, and the remaining 20% ​​were to be paid to the landowner by the peasants by mutual agreement (immediately or in installments, in cash or by working off). The redemption amount paid by the state was regarded as a loan granted to the peasants, which was then collected from them annually, for 49 years, in the form of "redemption payments" in the amount of 6% of this loan. It is easy to determine that in this way the peasant had to pay for the land several times more than not only its real market value, but also the amount of duties that he bore in favor of the landowner. That is why the "temporarily liable state" lasted more than 20 years.

When determining the norms of peasant allotments, the peculiarities of local natural and economic conditions were taken into account. The entire territory of the Russian Empire was divided into three parts: non-chernozem, black earth and steppe. In the chernozem and non-chernozem parts, two norms of allotments were established: the highest and the lowest, and in the steppe one - the “instruction” norm. The law provided for the reduction of the peasant allotment in favor of the landowner if its pre-reform size exceeded the “higher” or “indicative” norm, and the cutting if the allotment did not reach the “higher” norm. In practice, this led to the fact that cutting off the land became the rule, and cutting the exception. The severity of the "cuts" for the peasants consisted not only in their size. The best lands often fell into this category, without which normal farming became impossible. Thus, the "cuts" turned into an effective means of economic enslavement of the peasants by the landowner.

The land was provided not to a separate peasant household, but to the community. This form of land use ruled out the possibility of the peasant selling his allotment, and renting it out was limited to the boundaries of the community. But, despite all its shortcomings, the abolition of serfdom was an important historical event. It not only created conditions for the further economic development of Russia, but also led to a change in the social structure of Russian society, necessitated further reform of the political system of the state, which was forced to adapt to new economic conditions. After 1861, a number of important political reforms were carried out: zemstvo, judicial, city, military reforms, which radically changed Russian reality. It is no coincidence that Russian historians consider this event a turning point, a line between feudal Russia and modern Russia.

ACCORDING TO THE "SHOWER REVISION" OF 1858

Landlord serfs - 20,173,000

Specific peasants - 2,019,000

State peasants -18,308,000

Workers of factories and mines equated to state peasants - 616,000

State peasants assigned to private factories - 518,000

Peasants released after military service - 1,093,000

HISTORIAN S.M. SOLOVIEV

“Liberal speeches have begun; but it would be strange if the first, main content of these speeches did not become the emancipation of the peasants. What other liberation could one think of without remembering that in Russia a huge number of people are the property of other people, and slaves of the same origin as the masters, and sometimes of higher origin: peasants of Slavic origin, and the masters of Tatar, Cheremis, Mordovian, not to mention Germans? What kind of liberal speech could be made without remembering this stain, the shame that lay on Russia, excluding it from the society of European civilized peoples.

A.I. HERZEN

“Many more years will pass before Europe understands the course of development of Russian serfdom. Its origin and development is a phenomenon so exceptional and unlike anything else that it is difficult to believe in it. How, indeed, is it to be believed that half of the population of one and the same nationality, endowed with rare physical and mental abilities, is enslaved not by war, not by conquest, not by a coup, but only by a series of decrees, immoral concessions, vile pretensions?

K.S. AKSAKOV

“The yoke of the state was formed over the earth, and the Russian land became, as it were, conquered ... The Russian monarch received the value of a despot, and the people - the value of a slave-slave in their land” ...

"MUCH BETTER THAT HAPPENED FROM ABOVE"

When Emperor Alexander II arrived in Moscow for the coronation, the Moscow Governor-General Count Zakrevsky asked him to calm the local nobility, agitated by rumors about the upcoming liberation of the peasants. The tsar, receiving the Moscow provincial leader of the nobility, Prince Shcherbatov, with district representatives, told them: “Rumors are circulating that I want to announce the liberation of serfdom. This is unfair, and from this there were several cases of disobedience of the peasants to the landlords. I won't tell you that I'm totally against it; we live in such an age that in time this must happen. I think that you, too, are of the same opinion as me: therefore, it is much better for this to happen from above than from below.”

The case of the liberation of the peasants, which was submitted for consideration by the State Council, due to its importance, I consider it a vital issue for Russia, on which the development of its strength and power will depend. I am sure that all of you, gentlemen, are just as convinced as I am of the usefulness and necessity of this measure. I also have another conviction, namely, that this matter cannot be postponed, why I demand from the Council of State that it be completed by it in the first half of February and that it could be announced by the beginning of field work; I place this on the direct duty of the chairman of the Council of State. I repeat, and it is my indispensable will that this matter be ended immediately. (…)

You know the origin of serfdom. It did not exist with us before: this right was established by the autocratic power, and only the autocratic power can destroy it, and this is my direct will.

My predecessors felt all the evil of serfdom and constantly strove, if not for its direct destruction, then for the gradual restriction of the arbitrariness of the landowners' power. (…)

Following the rescript given to the Governor-General Nazimov, requests began to arrive from the nobility of other provinces, which were answered by rescripts addressed to the governors-general and governors of a similar content with the first. These rescripts contained the same main principles and foundations, and it was allowed to proceed to business on the same principles I have indicated. As a result, provincial committees were established, which were given a special program to facilitate their work. When, after the period given for that time, the work of the committees began to arrive here, I allowed the formation of special Editorial Commissions, which were to consider the drafts of the provincial committees and do the general work in a systematic manner. The chairman of these commissions was at first Adjutant General Rostovtsev, and after his death, Count Panin. The editorial commissions worked for a year and seven months, and despite the criticisms, perhaps partly just, to which the commissions were subjected, they completed their work in good faith and submitted it to the Main Committee. The main committee, under the chairmanship of my brother, labored with tireless activity and diligence. I consider it my duty to thank all the members of the committee, and my brother in particular, for their conscientious labors in this matter.

Views on the presented work may be different. Therefore, I listen to all different opinions willingly; but I have the right to demand from you one thing, that you, putting aside all personal interests, act as state dignitaries, invested with my confidence. Starting this important work, I did not hide from myself all the difficulties that awaited us, and I do not hide them even now, but, firmly trusting in the mercy of God, I hope that God will not leave us and bless us to complete it for the future prosperity. our dear Fatherland. Now, with God's help, let's get down to business.

MANIFESTO FEBRUARY 19, 1861

GOD'S MERCY

WE, ALEXANDER II,

EMPEROR AND AUTOGRAPHER

ALL-RUSSIAN

Tsar of Poland, Grand Duke of Finland

and other, and other, and other

We announce to all our loyal subjects.

By God's providence and the sacred law of succession to the throne, having been called to the ancestral All-Russian throne, in accordance with this calling, we have made a vow in our hearts to embrace with our royal love and care all our loyal subjects of every rank and status, from those who nobly wield a sword to defend the Fatherland to modestly work as an artisan tool, from passing the highest state service to making a furrow in the field with a plow or a plow.

Delving into the position of ranks and states in the composition of the state, we saw that state legislation, actively improving the upper and middle classes, defining their duties, rights and advantages, did not achieve uniform activity in relation to serfs, so named because they are partly old. laws, partly custom, hereditarily strengthened under the rule of the landowners, who at the same time have the duty to arrange their well-being. The rights of the landowners were until now extensive and not precisely defined by law, the place of which was replaced by tradition, custom and the goodwill of the landowner. In the best cases, this resulted in good patriarchal relations of sincere, truthful guardianship and charity of the landowner and good-natured obedience of the peasants. But with a decrease in the simplicity of morals, with an increase in the diversity of relations, with a decrease in the direct paternal relations of landowners to peasants, with landlord rights sometimes falling into the hands of people seeking only their own benefit, good relations weakened and the path opened up to arbitrariness, burdensome for the peasants and unfavorable for them. well-being, which in the peasants was answered by immobility for improvements in their own way of life.

Our ever-memorable predecessors also saw this and took measures to change the condition of the peasants to a better one; but these were measures, partly indecisive, proposed to the voluntary, freedom-loving action of the landowners, partly decisive only for certain localities, at the request of special circumstances or in the form of experience. So, Emperor Alexander I issued a decree on free cultivators, and in Bose, our deceased father Nicholas I - a decree on obligated peasants. In the western provinces, inventory rules define the allocation of land to peasants and their obligations. But the decrees on free cultivators and obligated peasants have been put into effect on a very small scale.

Thus, we were convinced that the matter of changing the position of serfs for the better is for us the testament of our predecessors and the lot, through the course of events, given to us by the hand of providence.

We began this work by an act of our trust in the Russian nobility, in the great experience of devotion to its throne and its readiness to donate to the benefit of the Fatherland. We left it to the nobility itself, at their own call, to make assumptions about a new arrangement for the life of the peasants, and the nobles were supposed to limit their rights to the peasants and raise the difficulties of transformation, not without reducing their benefits. And our trust was justified. In the provincial committees, in the person of their members, endowed with the confidence of the entire noble society of each province, the nobility voluntarily renounced the right to the identity of serfs. In these committees, after collecting the necessary information, assumptions were made about a new arrangement for the life of people in a serf state and about their relationship to the landowners.

These assumptions, which, as could be expected by the nature of the case, turned out to be diverse, were compared, agreed, brought together in the correct composition, corrected and supplemented in the Main Committee on this case; and the new provisions drawn up in this way on the landlord peasants and courtyard people were considered in the State Council.

Calling on God for help, we decided to give this matter an executive movement.

By virtue of the aforementioned new provisions, serfs will in due course receive the full rights of free rural inhabitants.

The landowners, while retaining the right of ownership to all the lands belonging to them, provide the peasants, for the established duties, with permanent use of their estate settlement and, moreover, to ensure their life and fulfill their duties to the government, the amount of field land and other lands determined in the regulations.

Using this land allotment, the peasants are obliged to perform in favor of the landowners the duties specified in the regulations. In this state, which is a transitional state, the peasants are called temporarily liable.

At the same time, they are given the right to redeem their estate settlement, and with the consent of the landowners, they can acquire ownership of field lands and other lands allocated to them for permanent use. With such an acquisition of ownership of a certain amount of land, the peasants will be freed from obligations to the landowners for the purchased land and will enter into a decisive state of free peasant owners.

A special provision on householders defines a transitional state for them, adapted to their occupations and needs; after the expiration of two years from the date of issuance of this regulation, they will receive full exemption and urgent benefits.

On these main principles, the drafted provisions determine the future structure of the peasants and householders, establish the order of social peasant administration and indicate in detail the rights granted to peasants and householders and the duties assigned to them in relation to the government and landowners.

Although these provisions, general, local and special additional rules for certain special localities, for the estates of small landowners and for peasants working in landowner factories and factories, are adapted as far as possible to local economic needs and customs, however, in order to preserve the usual order there, where it represents mutual benefits, we leave the landowners to make voluntary agreements with the peasants and to conclude conditions on the size of the land allotment of the peasants and on the duties following it, in compliance with the rules established to protect the inviolability of such contracts.

As a new device, due to the inevitable complexity of the changes required by it, cannot be made suddenly, but it will take time for this, approximately at least two years, then during this time, in disgust of confusion and for the observance of public and private benefit, existing to this day in the landowners on the estates, order must be maintained until then, when, after proper preparations have been made, a new order will be opened.

In order to achieve this correctly, we recognized it as good to command:

1. To open in each province a provincial office for peasant affairs, which is entrusted with the highest management of the affairs of peasant societies established on landowners' lands.

2. In order to resolve local misunderstandings and disputes that may arise in the implementation of the new provisions, appoint conciliators in the counties and form them into county conciliation congresses.

3. Then, to form secular administrations on landowner estates, for which, leaving rural societies in their current composition, open volost administrations in large villages, and unite small rural societies under one volost administration.

4. Draw up, verify and approve for each rural society or estate a charter charter, which will calculate, on the basis of the local situation, the amount of land provided to the peasants for permanent use, and the amount of duties due from them in favor of the landowner both for land and and for other benefits.

5. These statutory letters to be enforced as they are approved for each estate, and finally for all estates to be put into effect within two years from the date of publication of this manifesto.

6. Until the expiration of this period, the peasants and yard people remain in their former obedience to the landlords and unquestioningly fulfill their former duties.

Paying attention to the inevitable difficulties of an acceptable transformation, we first of all place our hope in the all-good providence of God, patronizing Russia.

Therefore, we rely on the valiant zeal of the noble nobility for the common good, to which we cannot but express deserved gratitude from us and from the entire Fatherland for their disinterested action towards the implementation of our plans. Russia will not forget that it voluntarily, motivated only by respect for human dignity and Christian love for neighbors, renounced serfdom, which is now abolished, and laid the foundation for a new economic future for the peasants. We undoubtedly expect that it will also nobly use further diligence to enforce the new provisions in good order, in the spirit of peace and goodwill, and that each owner will complete within the limits of his estate a great civil feat of the entire estate, arranging the life of the peasants settled on his land and his yards. people on favorable terms for both sides, and thus give the rural population a good example and encouragement to the exact and conscientious performance of state duties.

The examples we have in mind of the generous care of the owners for the welfare of the peasants and the gratitude of the peasants for the beneficent care of the owners confirm our hope that mutual voluntary agreements will resolve most of the difficulties that are inevitable in some cases of applying general rules to the various circumstances of individual estates, and that in this way the transition from the old order to the new, and for the future, mutual trust, good agreement and unanimous striving for the common good will be strengthened.

For the most convenient activation of those agreements between owners and peasants, according to which these will acquire ownership of farmlands and field lands, the government will provide benefits, on the basis of special rules, by issuing loans and transferring debts lying on the estates.

We rely on the common sense of our people. When the government's idea of ​​abolishing serfdom spread among the peasants who were not prepared for it, there were private misunderstandings. Some thought about freedom and forgot about duties. But the general common sense did not waver in the conviction that, according to natural reasoning, freely enjoying the benefits of society should mutually serve the good of society by fulfilling certain duties, and according to Christian law, every soul should obey the powers that be (Rom. XIII, 1), do justice to everyone, and especially to whom it is due, a lesson, a tribute, fear, honor; that the rights legally acquired by the landowners cannot be taken from them without a decent remuneration or a voluntary concession; that it would be contrary to any justice to use the land from the landlords and not bear the corresponding duty for this.

And now we expect with hope that the serfs, in the new future that opens up for them, will understand and gratefully accept the important donation made by the noble nobility to improve their life.

They will understand that, having received for themselves a firmer foundation of property and greater freedom to dispose of their economy, they become obliged to society and to themselves to supplement the beneficence of the new law by faithful, well-intentioned and diligent use of the rights granted to them. The most beneficent law cannot make people prosperous unless they take the trouble to arrange their own well-being under the protection of the law. Contentment is acquired and increased only by unremitting labor, prudent use of forces and means, strict frugality and, in general, an honest life in the fear of God.

The performers of the preparations for the new organization of peasant life and the very introduction to this organization will use vigilant care so that this is done with a correct, calm movement, observing the convenience of the time, so that the attention of the farmers is not diverted from their necessary agricultural activities. Let them carefully cultivate the land and gather its fruits, so that from a well-filled granary they will take seeds for sowing on the land of constant use or on land acquired in property.

Fall on yourself with the sign of the cross, Orthodox people, and call with us God's blessing on your free work, the guarantee of your domestic well-being and the public good. Given in St. Petersburg, on the nineteenth day of February, in the summer of the birth of Christ, one thousand eight hundred and sixty-one, our reign in the seventh.

Reading the article will take: 3 min.

On March 3, 1861, according to the new calendar style, or February 18 of the same year, according to the old style, Emperor Alexander II issued the highest Manifesto on the liberation of the peasants from serfdom, i.e. freed them from slavery. Previously, the peasants were the full property of the landlords - they could sell them like cattle. Today, March 3, 2012, it is exactly 151 years since serfdom was abolished in Russia... But was it actually terminated and what prompted the ruler of the Russian state to such reforms, because he was guaranteed to incur the wrath of the landowners?

The real reasons that prompted Emperor Alexander II to free the serfs from slavery were not at all some kind of liberal impulse. Take, for example, the United States of America and the well-known war between the northerners and the southerners for free workers for the factories and factories of the northerners - the reasons for this war were practically similar to those for which the Russian Empire partially freed the serfs. By the way, the war between the Yankees and the Confederates in the United States began immediately after the manifesto of Alexander II, so to speak, the timing-situations with the liberation of slaves in Russia and the United States coincided. And now about the "Russian" reasons for the liberation of slave serfs: recruits were required for compulsory military service (the defeat of Russia in the Crimean War affected); it was necessary to develop the classes of the proletariat and the bourgeoisie for capitalist society, but there was nowhere to take them from; the mass dissatisfaction of the slaves with their position grew.

Alexander II received the nickname “Liberator” from the people, but did his manifesto really free all serfs? The emperor cheated “a little” - freedom was relative and concerned only the private property of the landowners, which pretty much angered the latter. "State" slaves - numbering a little more than 15 million souls - remained the property of the state. As for the “liberated” peasants, they had the right to only one tithe of land from the landowner (1.09 hectares), and 12 legally possible tithes had to be redeemed from the master - 20% immediately, 80% was paid by the treasury, but the peasant was obliged to return amount with interest for 49 years. Moreover, the established amount of payment for land exceeded the actual market value by 3-6 times, i.е. the peasant had to not only redeem the land allotment, but also his entire family from slavery. The serf, on the other hand, had about 30 acres of land, from which he paid an interest-free quitrent to the landowner.

fortress village

With the "liberated" peasants, the following situation developed - it was not possible to develop a full-fledged economy on 12 acres (and the administrators-landlords of Alexander II were well aware of this), the peasant had to take the missing land from the landowner for rent at the rates that the master set and pay the same tribute as before. As a result, most of the "liberated" serfs were completely ruined, only a few of them, especially hardworking and capable of commerce, were able to benefit from freedom "from the father-king." A noteworthy point is that peasants cultivating less fertile lands had to pay a higher tax than those who were lucky enough to receive fertile plots. There was no logic in this, but the landowners were happy - after all, the former serfs were forced to rent large plots of barren land from them in order to feed themselves.

Assassination attempt on Alexander II

March 13, 1881, 20 years after the "liberation" of the serfs, Alexander II "Liberator" was killed by Ignaty Grinevitsky, a member of the terrorist "Narodnaya Volya". Only in the 20th century, faced with the threat of a global rebellion in the Russian Empire, did the “managers” of the tsar-priest decide to make concessions and, in 1907, completely canceled payments on land debts and arrears. However, this belated measure did not save the autocracy from collapse - the Bolsheviks used the discontent among the peasantry and destroyed the Russian Empire.