IN THE FIRST HALF OF THE XIX CENTURY

Parameter name	Meaning
Article subject:	IN THE FIRST HALF OF THE XIX CENTURY
Rubric (thematic category)	State

First half of the 19th century passed under the auspices of the reign of two tsars - Alexander I (1801 - 1825) and Nicholas I (1825 - 1855).

As a result of the palace coup, Alexander I became the Russian emperor, who promised to rule the people "according to the laws and according to the heart of his grandmother Catherine the Great."

The first years of the reign of Alexander I left the best memories for many contemporaries. "The days of the Alexandrovs are a wonderful beginning" - this is how A.S. Pushkin. During these years, Alexander relied on a small circle of friends that had formed around him even before he ascended the throne. This circle became known as the "Secret Committee". Its members were young and well-intentioned. With their direct participation, the first transformations were carried out: an amnesty was declared for 12 thousand people who suffered under Paul, borders were reopened, European books and goods began to be freely imported.

The meetings of the Unspoken Committee began in July 1801 ᴦ. and continued until May 1802 ᴦ. The main result of the work was to be the limitation of the power of the autocracy, with which the tsar himself agreed.

9.1. social order

At the beginning of the XIX century. The Russian Empire was a huge continental country, which included vast territories of Eastern Europe, North Asia and Transcaucasia. The Russian Empire included the Baltic States, Lithuania, Ukraine, Belarus, Poland, Finland, Bessarabia. Its size has grown to 18 million square meters. km.

The vast space, the variety of natural, economic and ethnic conditions left their mark on the structure of the state and its society.

The crisis of the feudal-serf system intensified in the country.

There have been changes in the social structure of society. Along with the old classes, the classes of bourgeois society appear: the bourgeoisie and the proletariat.

The nobility still remained a privileged social stratum in Russian society. in Russia in the first quarter of the 19th century. There were 127 thousand landowners, who were divided into large and small landowners. Large landowners belonged to the titled nobility and occupied the highest posts in the state. With the development of capitalist relations, the nobles received the right to build factories and factories in the cities, along with the merchants to trade. April 2, 1801 ᴦ. Alexander I restored in full the Letter of Complaint to the nobility. In 1817, a state commercial bank and other credit institutions were established to support the nobles who went bankrupt during the Patriotic War of 1812 ᴦ. In 1831, the Manifesto "On the Order of Nobility Assemblies, Elections and Services for the Nobility" was published. A new procedure for participation in elections was introduced. Only large landowners could participate in direct voting, others voted indirectly, through electors. In the second quarter of the XIX century. The composition of landowners has changed significantly. There were over 250 thousand nobles, of which 150 thousand did not have peasants. Access to the nobility from 1845 ᴦ. became difficult. By Decree 1845 ᴦ. in order to become a hereditary nobleman, one had to rise to the 5th grade in the civil service, ᴛ.ᴇ. become a state adviser, and in military service rise to the rank of major.

Since 1845, reserved noble estates could be inherited only by the eldest son, they could not be divided and transferred to persons from another family.

Clergy. The legal status of the clergy in the first half of the XIX century. has changed significantly. Since 1801 the clergy, and since 1835 ᴦ. and their children were exempted from corporal punishment, from 1807 ᴦ. their houses were exempted from land tax, and from 1821 ᴦ. - and from standing. In 1803 - 1805, clergymen who did not have regular places in churches were allowed to move to other classes, ᴛ.ᴇ. change occupation. The clergy, awarded orders, acquired noble rights. The white clergy received hereditary noble rights, and the black received a piece of land with the right to personal use. Children of priests and deacons, in case of leaving the clergy, received the title of hereditary honorary citizens. Since 1822, the clergy from the nobility were given the right to buy artisans and peasants.

Peasants were divided into three categories: landlords, specific and state. State peasants belonged to the treasury and were officially considered "free rural inhabitants". In 1796, there were 6,034,000 state male peasants. The bulk of the state peasants were concentrated in the northern and central regions of Russia, the Volga region and the Urals. State peasants for the land plots provided to them had to perform duties: quitrent and poll tax. The norms of peasant allotments were 8 tithes per male in small-land provinces and 15 tithes in large-land provinces. Periodically, these allotments were redistributed, which hindered the development of productive forces in the countryside, and on the other hand, prevented the formation of a proprietary psychology among the peasants. State peasants were often transferred to the category of landlords. Alexander I stopped the distribution of state peasants to landlords, but from 1816 ᴦ. part of the state peasants was transferred to the position of military settlers. Οʜᴎ had to carry out military service, engage in agriculture, pay duties to the state. Their life was regulated by the Military Charter.

In 1837-1841, a reform of the management of state peasants was carried out, as a result of which the principle of peasant local self-government was introduced, land allotments were increased, and a seed fund was created in case of crop failure. Elementary schools and hospitals began to open in the villages.

Specific peasants occupied an intermediate position between state and landowners. These are former palace peasants who received the title of appanage in 1797, when the Department of Appanages was created to manage the peasants who belonged to members of the imperial family. In 1797, there were 463 thousand male souls in the specific peasants. Specific peasants mainly lived in the Samara and Simbirsk provinces.

Οʜᴎ paid dues, carried monetary and natural duties. By the middle of the XIX century. the royal family received an annual income from specific estates up to 3 million rubles. silver.

The landlord peasants constituted the largest and most exploited group of the population. Οʜᴎ had to work out the corvée 3-5 days a week and pay taxes in kind and money. The landowners disposed of the peasants as movable property, kept their court over them. Mass actions of peasants forced the government to pay attention to this problem. In 1803, a decree was issued on free cultivators, according to which the landlords received the right to release their peasants into the wild for a certain ransom, but the decree was not widely used, because. the landlords were reluctant to let the peasants go, and the peasants did not have the money to pay the ransom to the landowner. In 1804 ᴦ. Decree was issued on attaching the peasants to the land, and not to the landowner. Under this Decree, it was forbidden to sell peasants without land.

In 1816 - 1819, Alexander I freed the peasants of the Baltic from serfdom, but without land. In the second quarter of the XIX century. it was forbidden to give serfs to factories and exile them to Siberia. In 1841, a law was passed prohibiting the sale of peasants singly and without land. In 1843, landless nobles were prohibited from acquiring peasants. In 1842, the Decree "On obligated peasants" was issued, according to which the landowner could provide the peasants with a land plot for use, and the peasants had to work out certain duties for this. Unfortunately, these were partial measures that did not change the essence of serfdom, and the peasants remained poor, downtrodden, and hungry.

The urban population was divided into five groups: honorary citizens, merchants, artisans (guild masters), small proprietors and working people.

The honorary citizens included the big bourgeoisie and merchants. Honorary citizens were divided into hereditary and personal. The category of hereditary honorary citizens included large capitalists, scientists, artists and children of personal nobles and priests. Lower officials and persons who graduated from higher educational institutions, artists of private theaters and children adopted by hereditary nobles were considered personal honorary citizens. Honorary citizens did not pay the poll tax, were exempted from corporal punishment, and did not bear recruitment duty.

Merchants were divided into two guilds. The first included merchants engaged in wholesale trade, the second - engaged in retail trade. Merchants retained their privileges, could receive ranks and be awarded orders. Money acquired by merchants in trade was invested in industry. This is how the dynasties of the Russian bourgeoisie Morozovs, Kondrashovs, Guchkovs and others gradually took shape.

Groups of guild masters were artisans assigned to guilds. Οʜᴎ were divided into masters and apprentices. The workshops had their own self-government bodies.

In the first half of the XIX century. the number of workers employed in industry has increased significantly. Freelance workers became peasants who left for quitrent. Residents of some villages began to unite in artels and create their own artistic crafts. Some crafts, for example, Palekh, Gzhel, Fedoskino, have survived to this day.

Τᴀᴋᴎᴍ ᴏϬᴩᴀᴈᴏᴍ, in the first half of the 19th century. in Russia began to develop factory production, manufactories, small-scale industry, which was facilitated by the legislation on cities.

9.2. Political system

In the first half of the XIX century. Russia remained an absolute monarchy. The emperor was at the head of the state.
Hosted on ref.rf
In 1810, a new advisory body was created - the State Council, which was supposed to be involved in the preparation of bills. It consisted of senior government officials appointed by the emperor. Under Nicholas I, the role of the State Council was significantly reduced. Instead, His Majesty's Own Chancellery, which controlled all the most important issues in the life of the country, acquired particular importance. It was divided into several departments: the first department exercised control over the activities of the ministries, the second was engaged in the codification of laws. A special place was occupied by the third department, which carried out political investigation in Russia and abroad. The fourth dealt with social institutions and educational institutions. The fifth developed projects for reforms in the management of state peasants, the sixth was engaged in the preparation of proposals for the management of the Caucasus.

In 1802, the central government system was changed. Instead of the Petrovsky collegiums, ministries were created: foreign affairs, military land and naval forces, justice, internal affairs, finance, commerce and public education. The ministries were divided into departments and offices headed by directors. The principle of unity of command was affirmed in the ministries. The Minister was fully responsible for the management of the industry entrusted to him. He was an autocrat in his field. It is important to note that for the joint discussion of certain issues in 1802 ᴦ. created the Committee of Ministers, transformed in 1857 ᴦ. to the Council of Ministers. The Committee of Ministers included the chairmen of the departments of the State Council, the Secretary of State, and the heads of departments. The Committee of Ministers was an advisory body, because none of its conclusions came into effect until approved by the emperor. The creation of secret committees for the development of various projects was widely practiced. The secret activity of the committees was caused by the fear of peasant unrest and the possible dissatisfaction of the nobles during the implementation of certain reforms that infringed on their rights.

Senate in 1802 ᴦ. practically reformed. It became the highest judicial institution in the country. Its departments became the highest courts of appeal for provincial courts. Participation in state administration and law-making was expressed only in the fact that he was given the right to make "representations" to the emperor about obsolete laws and contradictions in newly issued laws. The Senate also retained the right to audit activities of local administrative bodies.

The synod was the highest institution for the affairs of the Russian Orthodox Church. At the head of the Synod was the chief procurator, who, like the members of the Synod, was appointed by the emperor.

In 1817, the Ministry of Spiritual Affairs and Public Education was created, which was given the right to control the activities of the Synod.

9.3. Judiciary

The highest court was the Senate. In 1802, the Ministry of Justice was established, ĸᴏᴛᴏᴩᴏᴇ was supposed to perform the functions of the highest judicial administration and supervision of the activities of judicial institutions.

In the first half of the XIX century. the Upper Zemstvo Courts (for the nobility), the upper and lower reprisals (for the state peasants), and the provincial magistrates (for the philistines) are abolished.

In the provinces there were chambers of criminal and civil courts. Οʜᴎ considered the cases of all classes and were at the same time the appellate instance for city and county courts. Chambers of the civil court considered cases of real estate in the provinces, disputes over city property. The chambers of the criminal court considered cases of malfeasance of nobles, arson, etc.

In each province there were conscientious courts that considered criminal cases committed by the insane and minors, and civil cases on property disputes between relatives. The task of these courts was to reconcile the parties.

In the two capitals there were court courts that tried the cases of military personnel who were away from the location of the military unit, as well as officials and raznochintsy.

The lower courts were estate and county courts, as well as city magistrates. Departmental courts were also created: military, sea, forestry, mountain, communications, peasant, spiritual. Minor criminal cases were dealt with by mayors, quarterly guards and bailiffs.

The courts were subordinate to the administration. The sentences handed down by the courts were approved by the governor, and some by the Minister of Justice, by the State Council. Supervision of the activities of judicial and local government bodies was carried out by provincial prosecutors, and in counties by county lawyers.

The Russian army, created by Peter I, in this period became one of the strongest in Europe. Her campaigns were led by great commanders: Rumyantsev, Suvorov, Kutuzov.

Together with the entire Russian people, the army won a brilliant victory over the French army in the war of 1812, covering itself with unfading glory.

In 1816, military settlements began to be created, the purpose of which was to reduce the huge costs of maintaining the army in peaceful conditions and to create a new system for recruiting the army. State-owned peasants began to be transferred to the category of military settlers, who were supposed to be engaged in agriculture and perform military service on a par with soldiers. By 1825, about a third of the soldiers were transferred to the settlement. Families were assigned to the soldiers. Wives became villagers, sons from the age of seven were enrolled as cantonists, and from the age of 18 they entered the regiment. A.A. was appointed the chief commander of the military settlements. Arakcheev.

Merciless exploitation and military drill caused frequent peasant unrest. After 1831 ᴦ. military settlements that did not justify their purpose began to be abolished, and by the 50s they were completely liquidated.

9.5. Police and punitive authorities

In 1802, the Ministry of the Interior was formed, from which the Ministry of Police was later allocated to manage the police. After the Decembrist uprising, the punitive apparatus intensified. The Third Department of His Imperial Majesty's Own Chancellery was created, ĸᴏᴛᴏᴩᴏᴇ was engaged in investigating political cases, expelling suspicious people, and monitoring foreign citizens living in Russia. He had at his disposal numerous agents of informers and informers.

At the beginning of the XIX century. gendarmerie units were created, which in 1826 ᴦ. were united in a separate corps of gendarmes. In 1837, in connection with the division of counties into stans, the positions of bailiffs appeared, who worked in close connection with the rural and patrimonial police. Punitive functions were performed by all parts of the state apparatus.

9.6. Law codification

At the beginning of the XIX century. the urgent importance of codifying the archaic and intricate Russian legislation has become urgent. By this time, a huge amount of regulatory and legal material had accumulated. The Council Code, the legislation of Peter I and his successors continued to operate. In a number of cases, the normative documents came into conflict with each other. The current situation gave rise to the creation of a codification commission under the leadership of M.M. Speransky - a prominent lawyer and public figure, an outstanding and highly educated person. The complete collection of laws of the Russian Empire, consisting of 45 volumes, was prepared and printed in 1830 ᴦ. It included 330,920 normative acts and 6 volumes of applications. In the Complete Collection of Laws, both the normative legal documents that were in force and those that had lost their force were placed in chronological order, starting with the Cathedral Code and ending with the manifesto on the accession to the throne of Nicholas I.

Based on the prepared material by M.M. Speransky compiled the Code of Laws of the Russian Empire in 15 volumes, which was published in 1832 ᴦ., and from January 1, 1835 ᴦ. It entered into force. The Code includes only existing laws arranged according to a special system developed by M.M. Speransky: laws on authorities, administration and public service; statutes on duties; statutes of state administration; estate laws; civil law; statutes of state improvement; statutes of deanery; criminal laws. The Code system remained unchanged until the October Revolution of 1917 ᴦ., only in 1885 ᴦ. The code was supplemented by procedural legislation.

An important monument of Russian law in the first half of the 19th century. is the Code of Criminal and Correctional Punishments, adopted in 1845 ᴦ.

The codification of the laws of the Russian Empire was of great importance. Speransky managed to systematize the current legislation for 176 years, which facilitated its study and practical application.

9.7. Civil law relations according to the Code of Laws

The current civil legislation was systematized in the 9th, 10th and 11th volumes of the Code of Laws. For the first time in Russian legislation, the content of the owner's powers over his movable and immovable property is disclosed in detail.

Land, villages, houses, factories, factories, shops, any buildings and empty courtyards were considered real estate. Real estate could be acquired or ancestral.

Movable property included sea and river vessels, books, manuscripts, paintings and other items related to science and art, household items, carriages, tools for land production, tools, horses and other livestock, compressed and milk bread, factory products, metals. , minerals and other minerals.

There were two types of property - private and public. An intermediate position was occupied by the property of the persons of the imperial house.

For the first time, the right of ownership to the results of intellectual creativity was established, which later served as the basis for the formation of copyright and patent law. The terms of use and the procedure for resolving disputes on this type of property are stipulated in the Charter on Censorship and in the Laws on Civil Procedure.

The code of laws distinguishes between full and incomplete private ownership of land and property. By the right of full ownership, the owner had the right not only to the land, but also "to everything that was in its bowels, to the waters within its boundaries." Article 430 stated that even the treasure belonged to the owner of the land and without his permission could not be "searched" either by private individuals or by local authorities. But if someone accidentally found a treasure in a foreign land, then the treasure was divided in half.

Chapter 2 (Article 432) defines incomplete ownership. The right of ownership is considered incomplete when it is limited by the rights of other persons to use the same objects of ownership:

the right to participate in the use and receive benefits from someone else's property:

land rights in other people's possessions:

ownership of reserved hereditary estates: ownership of estates that complained about the right of majorates in the western provinces.

The right to participate in the use and benefit from someone else's property was of two types - general and private.

The right of passage and travel along the main roads and along the waterways, in whose possession they were, was fixed for everyone. The owners of land adjacent to the main road did not have the right to mow and etch the grass growing along the road in order to leave pasture for driven cattle. The owners of land adjacent to waterways were forbidden to build insufficiently reliable bridges across navigable rivers; on navigable rivers it was not allowed to build mills, dams and other barriers to navigation. Οʜᴎ were obliged to "allow" the passage and passage of people engaged in lifting lever vessels and fishing.

By the right of private participation (Article 442), the owner, whose lands lay in the upper reaches of the river, could demand that the neighbor not raise the water level with dams so as not to flood his meadows. Article 445 stipulated the rights of the owner of the house, who could demand that the neighbor not attach kitchens and stoves to the wall of his house, do not pour water and sweep garbage on his house, do not pitch the roof on his yard, etc.

Articles 543 and 544 define common ownership. The right of common ownership referred to property, ĸᴏᴛᴏᴩᴏᴇ was indivisible, or to property subject to division. Incomes on such estates were distributed among "all accomplices in proportion to the parts."

The right to full disposal of property arose from the age of 21. Persons who received an inheritance could manage their property from the age of 17, but they could manage capital only with the consent of the trustees.

A number of restrictions were set for subjects of other states, non-believers, women, peasants and townspeople. In particular, the Jewish Pale of Settlement was established, they were forbidden to acquire immovable property outside this line.

Peasants who received freedom were forbidden to stand out from the community. Peasants who did not have trade certificates and did not own real estate could not accept bills of exchange obligations.

The pledge right was regulated in detail. It was possible to pledge both movable and immovable property. To pledge real estate, it was necessary to conclude an agreement with the fulfillment of certain requirements and certification in official bodies. The mortgagee had the right to receive income from real estate. The pledgor was given the right to redeem the mortgaged estate within six months. After this period, the estate was assigned for public sale. Mortgage of movable property was made in writing by private or home order. Only persons who, by law, could alienate them, could pledge things, and only those who could own them on property rights could take a pledge. Pledged items could not be re-pledged. Collateral became widely practiced in credit institutions.

Obligation law. A contract concluded in writing was considered valid, but in some cases an oral form was allowed.

According to the legislation of the beginning of the XIX century. contracts of exchange, purchase and sale, sale, ᴛ.ᴇ are known. preliminary sale with the payment of a cash deposit and the conclusion subsequently of a contract of sale, donation, contract, supply, loan, insurance, personal and property hire, luggage, transportation, partnership.

There were four types of partnerships: complete, when all participants are responsible for transactions with their property, by faith or by contributions, a joint-stock company ("by plots") and an artel, when all participants have a common account. It is important to note that only registration was required to create a partnership, and government permission was extremely important to create a joint-stock company.

Real estate could be rented out for up to 12 years. At the same time, the new owner had the right to unilaterally terminate the lease agreement concluded by his predecessor.

The law established interest (6%) on loans in the event that they were not specified in the contract. Loan letters could be transferred to third parties, assuming obligations to pay the debt and the right to foreclose on the debtor.

The sold family estate within three years could be redeemed by members of this family or clan.

The contract of personal employment was drawn up on stamped paper and entered in the broker's book. Parents had the right to send their children without their consent to learn a craft. Peasants and philistines who did not pay fines were given to forced labor.

The deposit agreement was drawn up in writing, and if the property was stolen along with the property of the receiver or burned down in a fire, then no one was responsible for the safety of this property. In the event of the insolvency of the person who handed over the things for storage, the receiver was obliged to report on the location of his property.

Family law. Family and marriage relations have always been a sedentary, conservative area of ​​law and were strongly influenced by the church. According to the law, only church marriage was recognized. Persons of the Orthodox Christian denomination could not marry persons of other denominations. The subordinate position of women in the family was still preserved. The law allowed the husband to punish his wife. A passport to a wife could be issued only with the permission of her husband. The wife had to follow her husband in the event of a change of residence by the latter. The marriageable age for boys was set at 18, for girls - from 16. At the same time, bishops, in some cases, were given the right to reduce the marriageable age. It was forbidden to marry men over 80, women over 60. Marriage required not only the consent of the spouses, but also their parents or guardians. For the military, the consent of the higher authorities was required, for the landlord peasants - the consent of the landowner.

The spouses had separate property rights. The wife's dowry and property received as a gift or inheritance, as well as acquired personally during marriage, were considered her separate property. Spouses could independently dispose of their property. The spouses were not responsible for each other's debts.

The father had authority over the children. No complaints from children against their parents were accepted in court, and parents had the right to apply to the court with a request to place their children in custody for two to four months. If adult children lived with their parents, they did not have the right to enter into any property transactions. Children separated from their parents had the right to dispose of their property at their own discretion. Illegitimate children did not have the right to the father's surname and to inherit his property.

The power over the children passed to the mother in the event of the death of the father or deprivation of his status by the court.

Inheritance law. The property was transferred to the heirs by law and by will. According to the law, sons were considered the heirs of the first stage, then grandchildren and great-grandchildren.

In the absence of male heirs, the daughters, granddaughters and great-granddaughters of the deceased became heirs. If there were no direct heirs, then the inheritance was transferred to relatives along the collateral line. The property of a deceased childless son or daughter, received from the parents, was returned to the parents. The surviving spouse received 1/7 of the real estate and 1/4 of the movable. Sisters with living brothers received 1/14 of real estate and 1/8 of movable property.

At one's discretion, one could bequeath only acquired property. Family property could be bequeathed only in cases where the testator was childless, and only to a surviving spouse for life use or to a close relative.

The heirs were obliged to pay all the debts of the deceased, even if the inheritance property was not enough.

The inheritance was considered escheated and entered the treasury if there were no heirs at all or none of them appeared within 10 years to receive the inheritance.

9.8. Criminal law

Criminal law was also codified and included in the Code of Laws, but it did not suit Nicholas I, in this regard, in 1845 ᴦ. The Code of Criminal and Correctional Punishments was prepared. The code established the forms of guilt, the stages of the commission of a crime, the types of complicity, mitigating or aggravating circumstances. Criminal liability came from the age of 7. The Code applied to all Russian subjects. Ignorance of the law did not exempt from punishment. Any violation of the law was considered a crime. A misdemeanor was understood as a violation of the rules prescribed for the protection of rights defined by law and personal safety. Crimes and misdemeanors were divided into intentional, ᴛ.ᴇ. premeditated, and unintentional, committed by "sudden prompting." Complicity in a crime was determined, the main perpetrators and participants in the crime were singled out. The accomplices of the crime were divided into: the instigators who controlled the actions during the commission of the crime; accomplices who took part in the crime; conspirators or instigators who persuaded others to commit a crime; accomplices who themselves did not participate in the commission of the crime, but helped to commit it; connivancers who had the opportunity to prevent the crime, but allowed it; the harborers who hid the stolen items and the criminals themselves. Persons who knew about the crime and did not inform about it were recognized as "touched" by the crime.

The most serious crimes were actions directed against the church and state crimes: treason, rebellion, encroachment on the life of "the emperor and members of the imperial court." Crimes against the order of administration and malfeasance are specially highlighted. Such crimes included forgery of documents, embezzlement of public funds, disobedience to the authorities, disclosure of official secrets. New norms "On disobedience of factory and factory people" appeared in the Code. Punishment for strikers was envisaged. The instigators were arrested for up to three months, the participants - from seven days to three weeks.

Murder was considered the most serious crime against citizens, ĸᴏᴛᴏᴩᴏᴇ was divided into qualified, intentional and unintentional. A qualified murder included the murder of parents, a boss, a master, a priest, a master, as well as a murder committed in a way that was painful for the victim. A qualified murder was punishable by the deprivation of all rights of the state and a reference to hard labor.

For property crimes, arson and horse-stealing, imprisonment or hard labor for various terms was supposed.

Crimes against the family and morality included: forced marriage, polygamy, adultery and rape. For such crimes, they were sent to correctional prison departments or hard labor for different periods. Chapter two of the Code lists all types of punishment: the death penalty, exile to hard labor or to settlement in Siberia and the Caucasus, public corporal punishment with whips, deprivation of property rights, loss of family rights, temporary imprisonment in a fortress (in a strait house or in prison), short-term arrest, monetary penalties, remarks and suggestions. The death penalty was sometimes commuted to a political "death" followed by a link to hard labor. The deprivation of all the rights of the state was always accompanied by the deprivation of all titles, ranks and orders. The deprivation of the rights of the state did not extend to the wife and children of the convict. Men over the age of 70 and women were exempted from branding.

Nobles, clerics and merchants were subjected to such a measure of punishment as deprivation of the nobility, ranks, the right to enter the state service, deprivation of a spiritual title, merchants were forbidden to enroll in merchant guilds. In addition to basic punishments, additional ones were also used: church repentance, confiscation of property, police supervision.

The Code provided for a class approach to criminals. Nobles, clergy, merchants of the first and second guilds were exempted from branding, shackling, and whipping. They could serve a short arrest at home, while others - in police stations.

9.9. Trial

The litigation during the period under review had the following features. Decree 1801 ᴦ. torture was prohibited during the investigation, but in practice they were used. The investigation and execution of the sentence were carried out by the police. Supervision of the investigation was carried out by the prosecutor and solicitors. After the end of the investigation, the case went to court. Court hearings were held behind closed doors. The cases were considered only on the basis of written testimony. Parties and witnesses were not admitted to court. The main evidence of guilt was considered a written confession of the accused, ĸᴏᴛᴏᴩᴏᴇ was often pulled out by torture. The verdict was passed on formal grounds: how much - "for", how much - "against". Due to the unprovability of guilt, the case was terminated, but then the person remained "in suspicion" for life. The verdict was almost impossible to appeal. There was no lawyer. Cases were conducted very slowly, and bribery and abuse flourished in court. The educational level of the judges was very low.

On the whole, the Complete Collection of Laws and the Code of Laws of the Russian Empire were of great political and legal significance. The created system of law operated almost until the end of the existence of the empire.

9.10. Socio-political movements

First half of the 19th century characterized by the rise of popular consciousness, as a result of which the socio-political movement became more active. Progressive-minded representatives of different strata of society felt the extreme importance of cardinal changes, developed their own programs to change the socio-political system of the country. The Patriotic War of 1812 ᴦ contributed to the formation of a revolutionary worldview among the advanced part of the nobility. Evidence of this are secret societies in the form of officer associations. In 1816, a secret society of future Decembrists arose - the "Union of Salvation", ĸᴏᴛᴏᴩᴏᴇ developed a program and constitutional projects. The author of the draft "Constitution" was N.M. Muravyov, the author of "Russian Truth" - P.I. Pestel.

N.M. Muravyov was a supporter of the constitutional monarchy. Legislative power, in his opinion, should belong to the people's council, and the executive - to the emperor. The emperor commanded the troops, but did not have the right to start a war and make peace.
Hosted on ref.rf
The emperor could not leave the territory of the empire, otherwise he would lose his imperial rank. He was assigned a salary in the amount of 8 million rubles. annually. He could support the court staff at his own expense.

The electoral rights of citizens were limited by educational and property qualifications. According to the constitution of N. Muravyov, serfdom was to be abolished, and military settlements were liquidated. The Table of Ranks, estates and nationalities were cancelled. The concept of a citizen of the Russian state was introduced. All Russians are equal before the law. The future Russia was presented as a federal state. The empire was divided into 15 powers. Each state had its own capital. Nizhny Novgorod should become the capital of the federation.

P.I. Pestel was a supporter of republican rule. Autocracy in Russia, according to Pestel's Russkaya Pravda, must be destroyed. The royal family physically exterminated

IN THE FIRST HALF OF THE XIX CENTURY - the concept and types. Classification and features of the category "IN THE FIRST HALF OF THE XIX CENTURY." 2017, 2018.

Forty years after the abolition of serfdom, it took the peasants again to want land redistribution

Until 1917, the number of annual peasant uprisings was the best indicator of the political and social situation in the Russian Empire. At the beginning of the 19th century, there were an average of 26 of them every year. Single and collective performances fell under this category. This time was marked by the complete conservation of the situation in the countryside - not a single attempt at a large peasant reform was carried through by the authorities.

After the defeat in the Crimean War, on the eve of the abolition of serfdom, the peasants rebelled more and more often: in 1856 - 66 cases; in 1857 - 100; in 1858 - 378; in 1859 - 797. Later, historians will call this the main sign of the folding of a revolutionary situation in Russia at that time. The abolition of serfdom became an act of self-preservation of imperial power.

After the Great Reforms of Alexander II, the number of performances began to wane. In the 1870s, at the height of the Narodniks, the peasants rebelled with much less desire than in previous decades - an average of 36 cases a year. In the 1880s - the time of the counter-reforms of Alexander III - an average of 73 annual performances were recorded, and in the 1890s the number of uprisings increased to 57 per year.

The relatively low level of social unrest among the peasants continued to convince the monarch and supporters of the autocracy that the peasantry, according to the theory of official nationality, remained the backbone of the throne. At the same time, no one could offer options for the main, every year increasing problem of the post-reform village - the peasant lack of land. In fact, the situation of the first half of the 19th century was repeated, when everyone understood the need to abolish serfdom, but no one wanted to take responsibility for this decision. The revolutionary situation in Russia again began to mature precisely in the countryside.

And the whole of Russia is not enough

In 1861, about 23 million people were liberated from serfdom in Russia, of which 22 million lived in the European part of the empire on the lands of present-day Ukraine, Belarus and Russia. This number did not include another 18 million state peasants who were finally emancipated five years later, in 1866. At the end of the 19th century, the peasantry consisted of about 100 million people throughout the Russian Empire. In the forty years that have passed since the peasant reform, the country's rural population has more than doubled.

"Liberation of the Peasants (Reading the Manifesto)" by Boris Kustodiev

The state faced the problem of peasant shortage of land. If immediately after the reform, there was an average of about 3.3 acres of land per capita of the rural population, then by the beginning of the 20th century, due to population growth, one peasant was sometimes content with less than one acre (1 acre - 1.01 ha), which inevitably led to to a decrease in the living standards of farmers, and the pace of modernization of the village.

The solution to the problem of land shortage was hampered not only by the indecision of the authorities, but also by the inertness of the peasant communities. They were governed by village assemblies, which elected the headman. The gatherings were in charge of the redistribution of land among members of the community and the payment of taxes to the state. The official institution of this institution at the beginning of the 20th century was not even a hundred years old. The community was made the main instrument for regulating peasant life only during the time of Nicholas I, but in a short time it turned into one of the most important phenomena of Russian life. The community members, existing on the principle of mutual responsibility (common responsibility), were not interested in the departure of their members, and the state did not contribute to community reform.

At the same time, the peasants knew where to get land without leaving the community - from the landowners. Despite the general decline in post-reform Russia of "noble nests", landownership continued to be significant. Although the landowners owned only 13% of land suitable for agriculture, as well as a certain amount of forest and water lands.

After the 1860s, some of the landlords were able to turn their estate into an agricultural enterprise using the services of hired workers, while others took the path of least resistance and leased land to peasants who had to not only pay for the use of arable land, but also , for example, to pay for the right to pick mushrooms and berries in the landowner's forests. Some small-land peasants were very happy with the possibility of renting land: the wealthy who were able to pay for it turned into kulaks. But there were a lot of those for whom the rent did not become a salvation from a difficult financial situation.

The socio-economic stratification in the countryside grew. The journalism about the situation in the countryside at the turn of the 19th-20th centuries included previously non-existent terms that reflected this process: kulak, middle peasant and poor peasant. At the same time, the majority of the peasants remained in solidarity with the fact that landownership should be liquidated, the land should be owned by the one who cultivates it.

"Distribution of bread to hungry children by priest Moderatov", 1891-1892. Photo: Maxim Dmitriev

The state, however, was in no hurry with the next round of peasant reform. The landlords, especially those who had become accustomed to the new capitalist realities, stood up for the preservation and increase of large land ownership. The peasants grumbled. After several decades, the populists were awakening - Russian agrarian socialists who staked on the peasantry as a revolutionary class.

At the beginning of the 20th century, it was time to paraphrase the first chief of the gendarmes, Count Alexander Benckendorff, who in the late 1830s called serfdom a powder keg under the state. Now such a “barrel” was the lack of land inherited from serfdom. And the explosion was not long in coming.

"No bread! No land! If you don't give, we'll take anyway!

The first year of the 20th century in Russia turned out to be lean. Its consequences did not lead to large-scale famine, but forced the peasants in the European part of the empire to tighten their belts.

By the spring of 1902, the few products left by the peasants began to run out - the seeds stored for sowing went into action. Many provinces were seriously threatened by the threat of mass starvation.

The situation was especially difficult in Kharkov and Poltava provinces. The rich black earth lands after the arrival of the Russian Empire became a place for the active development of landownership. After 1861, the landowners here continued to retain most of the land, while reducing peasant allotments. In a situation of the threat of famine and the impoverishment of many families at the beginning of 1902, social tension in the village began to grow.

Unrest began to flare up. At first, the authorities did not pay close attention to them, considering them ordinary, which had happened more than once before. But this time they were wrong.

The first riots began in the village of Popovka in the Konstantingrad (now Krasnograd) district of the Poltava province on March 9, according to the old style. Local peasants attacked the economy (farm. - RP) of the Dukes of Mecklenburg-Strelitz. Having expelled the guards, the attackers took out potatoes and hay, which were especially lacking in the district.

A few weeks later, the estate of the landowner Rogovsky caught fire. Again, the main goal of the rebellious peasants was the landowners' barns: food and feed were exported. By the end of March, new estates were already burning every day in the Poltava province. Another conflict quickly came out because of the social stratification in the village - now, along with the landlords, kulaks were also attacked.

In early April, following the Poltava province, peasant revolts swept over Kharkov. On April 1 alone, there were 22 simultaneous attacks on landowners' farms. Witnesses of the uprising noted with surprise that the peasants sought to immediately sow the seized landed estates, hoping that they would not be taken away later.

Ukrainian village, early 20th century. Photo: Culture Club / Getty Images / Fotobank.ru

The investigative materials describe the reasons that prompted the peasants to revolt as follows: “When the victim Fesenko turned to the crowd that came to rob him, asking why they want to ruin him, the accused Zaitsev said: “You alone have 100 acres, and we have one each. a tithe for a family. You could try to live on one tithe of land ... ".

One of the peasants complained to the investigator: “Let me tell you about our masculine, unhappy life. I have a father and six minor children without a mother, and I have to live with an estate of 3/4 tithes and 1/4 tithes of field land. We pay 12 rubles for grazing a cow, and for a tithe for bread we have to work three tithes of harvesting (that is, work off the landowner. - RP). We cannot live like this. We are in a loop. What do we do? We, peasants, turned everywhere ... they don’t accept us anywhere, we don’t get help anywhere. ”

Later, investigators noted that the uprising took place under the general slogan “No bread! No land! If you don't give, we'll take anyway! In total, about 40 thousand peasants from 337 villages took part in it.

The dry statistics on the situation of the peasants in the Poltava and Kharkov provinces say the following. In the Constantinograd district of the Poltava province, for 250 thousand peasants living there, there were only 225 thousand acres of land. In the Valkovsky district of the Kharkov province, 100 thousand peasants were content with only 60 thousand acres. A similar situation was in other counties covered by the uprising.

Only three weeks later in St. Petersburg they realized the gravity of the situation. By this time, 105 noble estates and farms had been destroyed in the Poltava and Kharkov provinces. The troops began a retaliatory punitive operation. Nine infantry battalions and 10 Cossack hundreds were involved in it.

The police and the army usually surrounded the rebellious villages, after which the primary execution began in them, which reduced to whipping and the seizure of the loot. In the village of Kovalevka in the Poltava district, a crowd of gathered peasants was shot for their resistance: two were killed and seven wounded. It should be noted that during the Poltava-Kharkov uprising, not a single landowner died at the hands of the peasants.

An investigation has begun. About a thousand people were brought to trial. In December, about 800 people were sentenced to prison terms of up to four and a half years, of which 761 were pardoned. Instead of a prison term, Nicholas II imposed on the peasants the obligation to pay the affected landowners a total of 800 thousand rubles. Only 123 people were fully justified.

Russian revolution began in Ukraine

The Poltava-Kharkov uprising of the Ukrainian peasants dragged along a whole chain of revolts. Only in 1902 they broke out in the Kyiv, Oryol, Chernigov, Kursk, Saratov, Penza, Ryazan provinces. In these regions, they developed according to the scenario of the spring uprising: a rebellion and plunder of the landowners' economy in one village led to a chain reaction - noble estates caught fire in neighboring settlements. Common in these regions was the presence of a high concentration of landownership, and consequently, a high level of peasant land shortages.

Since the time of the Pugachev uprising (1773-1775), the imperial authorities have lost the habit of large-scale peasant riots. Throughout the 19th century, unrest covered only one settlement - neighbors rarely decided to support. In 1902, the peasant uprising and further unrest began to take place according to a network, viral principle: unrest in one village spread to neighboring ones, gradually capturing new territories. In total, in 1901-1904 there were twice as many of them as in 1897-1900 - 577 against 232 cases.

The new nature of the peasant uprisings meant that profound social changes had taken place in the countryside. The peasants gradually began to realize themselves as a class with common goals: first of all, this is the division of the land on fair, as they understood them, conditions.

A policeman forbids a peasant to plow his landowner's land, 1906. Photo: Slava Katamidze Collection / Getty Images

Over the years since the abolition of serfdom, the Russian intelligentsia managed to form the image of a peasant as a long-bearer and a martyr who preferred to suffer rather than fight for his rights. The defeat of populism in the 1870s and 1880s was largely due to the peasants' resistance to political propaganda. But, as time has shown, during the time of Alexander II, the necessary conditions for revolutionary agitation had not yet developed in the village.

In the party of neo-populists, who at the beginning of the 20th century took the name of Socialist Revolutionaries (SRs), there were long disputes that the peasant is now of no interest for revolutionary agitation and that it is necessary to focus on the working class and intelligentsia. The events of the first years of the 20th century forced the Social Revolutionaries to return to their roots again - to work among the peasants.

In early December 1904, the director of the Police Department Alexei Lopukhin wrote a memorandum to Emperor Nicholas II on the results of the investigation and analysis of the causes of the Poltava-Kharkov uprising. Lopukhin emphasized in the document that everything in the village was already ready for even greater performances. “These riots, truly worthy of the name of rebellion, were so terrible that, assessing them now, almost three years later, it is impossible not to shudder from the consciousness, based on observation of them, of the unexpected simplicity with which a popular rebellion can flare up in Russia and grow. If the moment comes when the peasants become unbearable to live in a significant number of provinces of the empire, and if in one of these provinces there is any external impetus for unrest, they can grow into such an unbridled movement, the waves of which will cover a territory so vast that it is impossible to deal with them. will cope without massacre, ”Lopukhin wrote to the tsar.

Both the minute and the massacre were not long in coming - a month later, "Bloody Sunday" happened in St. Petersburg, from which the First Russian Revolution began. During the years 1905-1907, while it lasted, 7165 peasant uprisings took place in the Russian Empire.

The Minister of Agriculture Alexei Yermolov later specifically emphasized in a letter to Nicholas II: “The slogan of the rebels was the idea that all the land belongs to the peasants.”

First half of the 19th century passed under the auspices of the reign of two tsars - Alexander I (1801 - 1825) and Nicholas I (1825 - 1855).

As a result of the palace coup, Alexander I became the Russian emperor, who promised to rule the people "according to the laws and according to the heart of his grandmother Catherine the Great."

The first years of the reign of Alexander I left the best memories for many contemporaries. "The days of the Alexandrovs are a wonderful beginning" - this is how A.S. Pushkin. During these years, Alexander relied on a small circle of friends that had formed around him even before he ascended the throne. This circle became known as the "Secret Committee". Its members were young and well-intentioned. With their direct participation, the first transformations were carried out: an amnesty was declared for 12 thousand people who suffered under Paul, borders were reopened, European books and goods began to be freely imported.

The meetings of the Unofficial Committee began in July 1801 and continued until May 1802. The main result of the work was to be the limitation of the power of the autocracy, with which the tsar himself agreed.

9.1. social order

At the beginning of the XIX century. The Russian Empire was a huge continental country that included vast territories of Eastern Europe, Northern Asia and Transcaucasia. The Russian Empire included the Baltic States, Lithuania, Ukraine, Belarus, Poland, Finland, Bessarabia. Its size has grown to 18 million square meters. km.

The vast space, the variety of natural, economic and ethnic conditions left their mark on the structure of the state and its society.

The crisis of the feudal-serf system intensified in the country.

There have been changes in the social structure of society. Along with the old classes, the classes of bourgeois society appear: the bourgeoisie and the proletariat.

The nobility still remained a privileged social stratum in Russian society. in Russia in the first quarter of the 19th century. There were 127 thousand landowners, who were divided into large and small landowners. Large landowners belonged to the titled nobility and occupied the highest posts in the state. With the development of capitalist relations, the nobles received the right to build factories and factories in the cities, along with the merchants to trade. On April 2, 1801, Alexander I restored in full the Letter of Complaint to the nobility. In 1817, a state commercial bank and other credit institutions were established to support the nobles who went bankrupt during the Patriotic War of 1812. In 1831, the Manifesto "On the order of noble assemblies, elections and service on them" was published. A new procedure for participation in elections was introduced. Only large landowners could participate in direct voting, others voted indirectly, through electors. In the second quarter of the XIX century. The composition of landowners has changed significantly. There were over 250 thousand nobles, of which 150 thousand did not have peasants. Access to the nobility from 1845 became difficult. According to the Decree of 1845, in order to become a hereditary nobleman, it was necessary to rise to the 5th class in the civil service, i.e. become a state adviser, and in military service rise to the rank of major.

Since 1845, reserved noble estates could be inherited only by the eldest son, they could not be divided and transferred to persons from another family.

Clergy. The legal status of the clergy in the first half of the XIX century. has changed significantly. From 1801, the clergy, and from 1835 and their children, were exempted from corporal punishment, from 1807 their houses were exempted from land tax, and from 1821 - from lodging. In 1803 - 1805, clergymen who did not have regular places in churches were allowed to move to other classes, i.e. change occupation. The clergy, awarded orders, acquired noble rights. The white clergy received hereditary noble rights, and the black received a piece of land with the right to personal use. Children of priests and deacons, in case of leaving the clergy, received the title of hereditary honorary citizens. Since 1822, the clergy from the nobility were given the right to buy artisans and peasants.

Peasants were divided into three categories: landlords, specific and state. State peasants belonged to the treasury and were officially considered "free rural inhabitants". In 1796, there were 6,034,000 state male peasants. The bulk of the state peasants were concentrated in the northern and central regions of Russia, the Volga region and the Urals. State peasants for the land plots provided to them had to perform duties: quitrent and poll tax. The norms of peasant allotments were 8 tithes per male in small-land provinces and 15 tithes in large-land provinces. Periodically, these allotments were redistributed, which hindered the development of productive forces in the countryside, and on the other hand, prevented the formation of a proprietary psychology among the peasants. State peasants were often transferred to the category of landlords. Alexander I stopped the distribution of state peasants to landowners, but since 1816, part of the state peasants was transferred to the position of military settlers. They had to carry out military service, engage in agriculture, pay duties to the state. Their life was regulated by the Military Charter.

In 1837-1841, a reform of the management of state peasants was carried out, as a result of which the principle of peasant local self-government was introduced, land allotments were increased, and a seed fund was created in case of crop failure. Elementary schools and hospitals began to open in the villages.

Specific peasants occupied an intermediate position between state and landowners. These are former palace peasants who received the title of appanage in 1797, when the Department of Appanages was created to manage the peasants who belonged to members of the imperial family. In 1797, there were 463 thousand male souls in the specific peasants. Specific peasants mainly lived in the Samara and Simbirsk provinces.

They paid dues, carried monetary and in-kind duties. By the middle of the XIX century. the royal family received an annual income from specific estates up to 3 million rubles. silver.

The landowning peasants constituted the largest and most exploited group of the population. They had to work off corvée 3-5 days a week and pay dues in kind and money. The landowners disposed of the peasants as movable property, kept their court over them. Mass actions of peasants forced the government to pay attention to this problem. In 1803, a decree was issued on free cultivators, according to which the landowners received the right to release their peasants into the wild for a certain ransom, but the decree was not widely used, because. the landlords were reluctant to let the peasants go, and the peasants did not have the money to pay the ransom to the landowner. In 1804, a decree was issued on attaching peasants to the land, and not to the landowner. Under this Decree, it was forbidden to sell peasants without land.

In 1816 - 1819, Alexander I freed the peasants of the Baltic from serfdom, but without land. In the second quarter of the XIX century. it was forbidden to give serfs to factories and exile them to Siberia. In 1841, a law was passed prohibiting the sale of peasants singly and without land. In 1843, landless nobles were prohibited from acquiring peasants. In 1842, the Decree "On obligated peasants" was issued, according to which the landowner could provide the peasants with a plot of land for use, and the peasants had to work out certain duties for this. Unfortunately, these were partial measures that did not change the essence of serfdom, and the peasants remained poor, downtrodden, and hungry.

The urban population was divided into five groups: honorary citizens, merchants, artisans (guild masters), small proprietors and working people.

The honorary citizens included the big bourgeoisie and merchants. Honorary citizens were divided into hereditary and personal. The category of hereditary honorary citizens included large capitalists, scientists, artists and children of personal nobles and priests. Lower officials and persons who graduated from higher educational institutions, artists of private theaters and children adopted by hereditary nobles were considered personal honorary citizens. Honorary citizens did not pay the poll tax, were exempted from corporal punishment, and did not bear recruitment duty.

Merchants were divided into two guilds. The first included merchants engaged in wholesale trade, the second - engaged in retail trade. Merchants retained their privileges, could receive ranks and be awarded orders. Money acquired by merchants in trade was invested in industry. This is how the dynasties of the Russian bourgeoisie Morozovs, Kondrashovs, Guchkovs and others gradually took shape.

Groups of guild masters were artisans assigned to guilds. They were divided into masters and apprentices. The workshops had their own self-government bodies.

In the first half of the XIX century. the number of workers employed in industry has increased significantly. Freelance workers became peasants who left for quitrent. Residents of some villages began to unite in artels and create their own artistic crafts. Some crafts, for example, Palekh, Gzhel, Fedoskino, have survived to this day.

Thus, in the first half of the XIX century. in Russia began to develop factory production, manufactories, small-scale industry, which was facilitated by the legislation on cities.

9.2. Political system

In the first half of the XIX century. Russia remained an absolute monarchy. The emperor was at the head of the state. In 1810, a new advisory body was created - the State Council, which was supposed to be involved in the preparation of bills. It consisted of senior government officials appointed by the emperor. Under Nicholas I, the role of the State Council was significantly reduced. Instead, His Majesty's Own Chancellery, which controlled all the most important issues in the life of the country, acquired particular importance. It was divided into several branches: the first branch exercised control over the activities of the ministries, the second was engaged in the codification of laws. A special place was occupied by the third branch, which carried out political investigation in Russia and abroad. The fourth dealt with social institutions and educational institutions. The fifth developed projects for reforms in the management of state peasants, the sixth was engaged in the preparation of proposals for the management of the Caucasus.

In 1802, the central government system was changed. Instead of the Petrovsky collegiums, ministries were created: foreign affairs, military land and naval forces, justice, internal affairs, finance, commerce and public education. The ministries were divided into departments and offices headed by directors. The principle of unity of command was affirmed in the ministries. The Minister was fully responsible for the management of the industry entrusted to him. He was an autocrat in his field. For the joint discussion of certain issues in 1802, the Committee of Ministers was created, which in 1857 was transformed into the Council of Ministers. The Committee of Ministers included the chairmen of the departments of the State Council, the Secretary of State, and the heads of departments. The Committee of Ministers was an advisory body, because none of its conclusions came into effect until approved by the emperor. The creation of secret committees for the development of various projects was widely practiced. The secret activity of the committees was caused by the fear of peasant unrest and the possible dissatisfaction of the nobles during the implementation of certain reforms that infringed on their rights.

The Senate in 1802 was practically reformed. It became the highest judicial institution in the country. Its departments became the highest courts of appeal for provincial courts. Participation in state administration and law-making was expressed only in the fact that he was given the right to make "representations" to the emperor about obsolete laws and contradictions in newly issued laws. The Senate also retained the right to audit activities of local administrative bodies.

The synod was the highest institution for the affairs of the Russian Orthodox Church. At the head of the Synod was the chief procurator, who, like the members of the Synod, was appointed by the emperor.

In 1817, the Ministry of Spiritual Affairs and Public Education was created, which was given the right to control the activities of the Synod.

9.3. Judiciary

The highest court was the Senate. In 1802, the Ministry of Justice was established, which was supposed to perform the functions of the highest judicial administration and supervision of the activities of judicial institutions.

In the first half of the XIX century. the Upper Zemstvo Courts (for the nobility), the upper and lower reprisals (for the state peasants), and the provincial magistrates (for the philistines) are abolished.

In the provinces there were chambers of criminal and civil courts. They considered cases of all estates and were at the same time the appellate instance for city and county courts. Chambers of the civil court considered cases of real estate in the provinces, disputes over city property. The chambers of the criminal court considered cases of malfeasance of nobles, arson, etc.

In each province there were conscientious courts that considered criminal cases committed by the insane and minors, and civil cases on property disputes between relatives. The task of these courts was to reconcile the parties.

In the two capitals there were court courts that tried the cases of military personnel who were away from the location of the military unit, as well as officials and raznochintsy.

The lower courts were estate and county courts, as well as city magistrates. Departmental courts were also created: military, sea, forestry, mountain, communications, peasant, spiritual. Minor criminal cases were dealt with by mayors, quarterly guards and bailiffs.

The courts were subordinate to the administration. The sentences handed down by the courts were approved by the governor, and some by the Minister of Justice, by the State Council. Supervision of the activities of judicial and local government bodies was carried out by provincial prosecutors, and in counties by county lawyers.

The Russian army, created by Peter I, in this period became one of the strongest in Europe. Her campaigns were led by great commanders: Rumyantsev, Suvorov, Kutuzov.

Together with the entire Russian people, the army won a brilliant victory over the French army in the war of 1812, covering itself with unfading glory.

In 1816, military settlements began to be created, the purpose of which was to reduce the enormous costs of maintaining the army in peaceful conditions and to create a new system for recruiting the army. State-owned peasants began to be transferred to the category of military settlers, who were supposed to be engaged in agriculture and carry out military service on a par with soldiers. By 1825, about a third of the soldiers had been transferred to the settlement. Families were assigned to the soldiers. Wives became villagers, sons from the age of seven signed up as cantonists, and from the age of 18 they entered the regiment. A.A. was appointed the chief commander of the military settlements. Arakcheev.

Merciless exploitation and military drill caused frequent peasant unrest. After 1831, military settlements that did not justify their purpose began to be abolished, and by the 1950s they were completely liquidated.

9.5. Police and punitive authorities

In 1802, the Ministry of the Interior was formed, from which the Ministry of Police was later allocated to manage the police. After the Decembrist uprising, the punitive apparatus intensified. The Third Branch of His Imperial Majesty's Own Chancellery was created, which was engaged in investigating political cases, expelling suspicious people, and monitoring foreign citizens living in Russia. He had at his disposal numerous agents of informers and informers.

At the beginning of the XIX century. gendarmerie units were created, which in 1826 were merged into a separate corps of gendarmes. In 1837, in connection with the division of counties into stans, the positions of bailiffs appeared, who worked in close connection with the rural and patrimonial police. Punitive functions were performed by all links of the state apparatus.

9.6. Law codification

At the beginning of the XIX century. there is a need to codify the archaic and confusing Russian legislation. By this time, a huge amount of regulatory and legal material had accumulated. The Council Code, the legislation of Peter I and his successors continued to operate. In a number of cases, the normative documents came into conflict with each other. The current situation gave rise to the creation of a codification commission under the leadership of M.M. Speransky - a prominent lawyer and public figure, an outstanding and highly educated person. The complete collection of laws of the Russian Empire, which consisted of 45 volumes, was prepared and printed in 1830. It included 330,920 normative acts and 6 volumes of applications. In the Complete Collection of Laws, both the normative legal documents that were in force and those that had lost their force were placed in chronological order, starting with the Cathedral Code and ending with the manifesto on the accession to the throne of Nicholas I.

Based on the prepared material by M.M. Speransky compiled the Code of Laws of the Russian Empire in 15 volumes, which was published in 1832, and on January 1, 1835 came into force. The Code includes only existing laws arranged according to a special system developed by M.M. Speransky: laws on authorities, administration and public service; statutes on duties; statutes of state administration; estate laws; civil law; statutes of state improvement; statutes of deanery; criminal laws. The Code system remained unchanged until the October Revolution of 1917, only in 1885 the Code was supplemented by procedural legislation.

An important monument of Russian law in the first half of the 19th century. is the Code of Punishment of Criminal and Correctional, adopted in 1845.

The codification of the laws of the Russian Empire was of great importance. Speransky managed to systematize the current legislation for 176 years, which facilitated its study and practical application.

9.7. Civil law relations according to the Code of Laws

The current civil legislation was systematized in the 9th, 10th and 11th volumes of the Code of Laws. For the first time in Russian legislation, the content of the owner's powers over his movable and immovable property is disclosed in detail.

Land, villages, houses, factories, factories, shops, any buildings and empty courtyards were considered real estate. Real estate could be acquired or ancestral.

Movable property included sea and river vessels, books, manuscripts, paintings and other items related to science and art, household items, carriages, tools for land production, tools, horses and other livestock, compressed and milk bread, factory products, metals. , minerals and other minerals.

There were two types of property - private and public. An intermediate position was occupied by the property of the persons of the imperial house.

For the first time, the right of ownership to the results of intellectual creativity was established, which later served as the basis for the formation of copyright and patent law. The terms of use and the procedure for resolving disputes on this type of property are stipulated in the Charter on Censorship and in the Laws on Civil Procedure.

The code of laws distinguishes between full and incomplete private ownership of land and property. By the right of full ownership, the owner had the right not only to the land, but also "to everything that was in its bowels, to the waters located within it." Article 430 stated that even the treasure belonged to the owner of the land and without his permission could not be "searched" either by private individuals or by local authorities. But if someone accidentally found a treasure in a foreign land, then the treasure was divided in half.

Chapter 2 (Article 432) defines partial ownership. The right of ownership is considered incomplete when it is limited by the rights of other persons to use the same objects of ownership:

the right to participate in the use and receive benefits from someone else's property:

land rights in other people's possessions:

ownership of reserved hereditary estates: ownership of estates that complained about the right of majorates in the western provinces.

The right to participate in the use and benefit from someone else's property was of two types - general and private.

The right of passage and travel along the main roads and waterways was secured for everyone, no matter whose possessions they were located. The owners of land adjacent to the main road did not have the right to mow and etch the grass growing along the road in order to leave pasture for driven cattle. The owners of land adjacent to waterways were forbidden to build insufficiently reliable bridges across navigable rivers; on navigable rivers it was not allowed to build mills, dams and other barriers to navigation. They were obliged to "allow" the passage and passage of people engaged in lifting lever vessels and fishing.

Under the right of private participation (Article 442), the owner, whose land lay in the upper reaches of the river, could demand that the neighbor not raise the water level with dams so as not to flood his meadows. Article 445 stipulated the rights of the owner of the house, who could demand that the neighbor not attach kitchens and stoves to the wall of his house, do not pour water and sweep garbage on his house, do not pitch the roof on his yard, etc.

Articles 543 and 544 define common ownership. The right of common ownership referred to property that was indivisible, or to property subject to division. Incomes in such estates were distributed among "all accomplices according to the proportionality of parts."

The right to full disposal of property arose from the age of 21. Persons who received an inheritance could manage their property from the age of 17, but they could manage capital only with the consent of the trustees.

A number of restrictions were set for subjects of other states, non-believers, women, peasants and townspeople. In particular, for the Jews the Pale of Settlement was established, they were forbidden to acquire immovable property outside this Pale.

Peasants who received freedom were forbidden to stand out from the community. Peasants who did not have trade certificates and did not own real estate could not accept bills of exchange obligations.

The pledge right was regulated in detail. It was possible to pledge both movable and immovable property. To pledge real estate, it was necessary to conclude an agreement with the fulfillment of certain requirements and certification in official bodies. The mortgagee had the right to receive income from real estate. The pledgor was given the right to redeem the mortgaged estate within six months. After this period, the estate was assigned for public sale. Mortgage of movable property was made in writing by private or home order. Only persons who, by law, could alienate them, could pledge things, and only those who could own them on property rights could take a pledge. Pledged items could not be re-pledged. Collateral became widely practiced in credit institutions.

Obligation law. A contract concluded in writing was considered valid, but in some cases an oral form was allowed.

According to the legislation of the beginning of the XIX century. barter, purchase and sale, sale contracts are known, i.e. preliminary sale with the payment of a cash deposit and the conclusion subsequently of a contract of sale, donation, contract, supply, loan, insurance, personal and property hire, luggage, transportation, partnership.

There were four types of partnerships: complete, when all participants are responsible for transactions with their property, by faith or by contributions, a joint-stock company ("by plots") and an artel, when all participants have a common account. To create a partnership, only registration was required, and to create a joint-stock company, government permission was required.

Real estate could be rented out for up to 12 years. At the same time, the new owner had the right to unilaterally terminate the lease agreement concluded by his predecessor.

The law established interest (6%) on loans in the event that they were not specified in the contract. Loan letters could be transferred to third parties, assuming obligations to pay the debt and the right to foreclose on the debtor.

The sold family estate within three years could be redeemed by members of this family or clan.

The contract of personal employment was drawn up on stamped paper and entered in the broker's book. Parents had the right to send their children without their consent to learn a craft. Peasants and philistines who did not pay fines were given to forced labor.

The deposit agreement was drawn up in writing, and if the property was stolen along with the property of the receiver or burned down in a fire, then no one was responsible for the safety of this property. In the event of the insolvency of the person who handed over the things for storage, the receiver was obliged to report on the location of his property.

Family law. Family and marriage relations have always been a sedentary, conservative area of ​​law and have been strongly influenced by the church. According to the law, only church marriage was recognized. Persons of the Orthodox Christian denomination could not marry persons of other denominations. The subordinate position of women in the family was still preserved. The law allowed the husband to punish his wife. A passport to a wife could be issued only with the permission of her husband. The wife had to follow her husband in the event of a change of residence by the latter. The marriageable age for boys was set at 18, for girls - from 16. At the same time, bishops, in some cases, were given the right to reduce the marriageable age. It was forbidden to marry men over 80, women over 60. Marriage required not only the consent of the spouses, but also their parents or guardians. For the military, the consent of the higher authorities was required, for the landlord peasants - the consent of the landowner.

The spouses had separate property rights. The wife's dowry and property received as a gift or inheritance, as well as acquired personally during marriage, were considered her separate property. Spouses could independently dispose of their property. The spouses were not responsible for each other's debts.

The father had authority over the children. From children, no complaints against parents were accepted in court, and parents had the right to apply to the court with a request to place their children in custody for two to four months. If adult children lived with their parents, they did not have the right to enter into any property transactions. Children separated from their parents had the right to dispose of their property at their own discretion. Illegitimate children did not have the right to the father's surname and to inherit his property.

The power over the children passed to the mother in the event of the death of the father or deprivation of his status by the court.

Inheritance law. The property was transferred to the heirs by law and by will. According to the law, sons were considered the heirs of the first stage, then grandchildren and great-grandchildren.

In the absence of male heirs, the daughters, granddaughters and great-granddaughters of the deceased became heirs. If there were no direct heirs, then the inheritance was transferred to relatives along the side line. The property of a deceased childless son or daughter, received from the parents, was returned to the parents. The surviving spouse received 1/7 of the real estate and 1/4 of the movable. Sisters with living brothers received 1/14 of real estate and 1/8 of movable property.

At one's discretion, one could bequeath only acquired property. Family property could be bequeathed only in cases where the testator was childless, and only to a surviving spouse for life use or to a close relative.

The heirs were obliged to pay all the debts of the deceased, even if the inheritance property was not enough.

The inheritance was considered escheated and entered the treasury if there were no heirs at all or none of them appeared within 10 years to receive the inheritance.

9.8. Criminal law

Criminal law was also codified and included in the Code of Laws, but it did not suit Nicholas I, so in 1845 the Code of Penal and Correctional Punishments was prepared. The code established the forms of guilt, the stages of the commission of a crime, the types of complicity, mitigating or aggravating circumstances. Criminal liability came from the age of 7. The Code applied to all Russian subjects. Ignorance of the law did not exempt from punishment. Any violation of the law was considered a crime. A misdemeanor was understood as a violation of the rules prescribed for the protection of rights defined by law and personal safety. Crimes and misdemeanors were divided into intentional, i.e. premeditated, and unintentional, committed by "sudden prompting." Complicity in a crime was determined, the main perpetrators and participants in the crime were singled out. The accomplices of the crime were divided into: the instigators who controlled the actions during the commission of the crime; accomplices who took part in the crime; conspirators or instigators who persuaded others to commit a crime; accomplices who themselves did not participate in the commission of the crime, but helped to commit it; connivances who had the opportunity to prevent the crime, but allowed it; the hiders who hid the stolen things and the criminals themselves. Persons who knew about the crime and did not inform about it were recognized as "touched" by the crime.

The most serious crimes were actions directed against the church and state crimes: treason, rebellion, encroachment on the life of "the emperor and members of the imperial court." Crimes against the order of management and malfeasance are specially highlighted. Such crimes included forgery of documents, embezzlement of public funds, disobedience to the authorities, disclosure of official secrets. New norms "On disobedience of factory and factory people" appeared in the Code. Punishment for strikers was envisaged. The instigators were arrested for up to three months, the participants - from seven days to three weeks.

The most serious crime against citizens was considered murder, which was divided into qualified, intentional and unintentional. Qualified murder included the murder of parents, boss, master, priest, master, as well as murder committed in a way that was painful for the victim. A qualified murder was punishable by the deprivation of all rights of the state and a link to hard labor.

For property crimes, arson and horse-stealing, imprisonment or hard labor for various terms was supposed.

Crimes against the family and morality included: forced marriage, polygamy, adultery and rape. For such crimes, they were sent to correctional prison departments or hard labor for various periods. Chapter two of the Code lists all types of punishment: the death penalty, exile to hard labor or to a settlement in Siberia and the Caucasus, public corporal punishment with whips, deprivation of property rights, loss of family rights, temporary imprisonment in a fortress (in a strait house or in prison) , short-term arrest, monetary penalties, remarks and suggestions. The death penalty was sometimes commuted to a political "death" followed by a link to hard labor. The deprivation of all the rights of the state was always accompanied by the deprivation of all titles, ranks and orders. The deprivation of the rights of the state did not extend to the wife and children of the convict. Men over the age of 70 and women were exempted from branding.

Nobles, clerics and merchants were subjected to such a measure of punishment as deprivation of the nobility, ranks, the right to enter the state service, deprivation of a spiritual title, merchants were forbidden to enroll in merchant guilds. In addition to the main punishments, additional ones were also used: church repentance, confiscation of property, police supervision.

The Code provided for a class approach to criminals. Nobles, clergy, merchants of the first and second guilds were exempted from branding, shackling, and whipping. They could serve a short arrest at home, while others - in police stations.

9.9. Trial

The litigation during the period under review had the following features. The decree of 1801 forbade torture during the investigation, but in practice they were used. The investigation and execution of the sentence were carried out by the police. Supervision of the investigation was carried out by the prosecutor and solicitors. After the end of the investigation, the case went to court. Court hearings were held behind closed doors. The cases were considered only on the basis of written testimony. Parties and witnesses were not admitted to court. The main evidence of guilt was the written confession of the accused, which was often torn out by torture. The verdict was passed on formal grounds: how much - "for", how much - "against". Due to the unprovability of guilt, the case was terminated, but then the person remained "in suspicion" for life. The verdict was almost impossible to appeal. There was no lawyer. Cases were conducted very slowly, and bribery and abuse flourished in court. The educational level of the judges was very low.

On the whole, the Complete Collection of Laws and the Code of Laws of the Russian Empire were of great political and legal significance. The created system of law operated almost until the end of the existence of the empire.

9.10. Socio-political movements

First half of the 19th century characterized by the rise of popular consciousness, as a result of which the socio-political movement became more active. Progressive-minded representatives of different strata of society felt the need for fundamental changes, developed their own programs to change the socio-political system of the country. The Patriotic War of 1812 contributed to the formation of a revolutionary worldview among the advanced part of the nobility. Secret societies in the form of officer associations are evidence of this. In 1816, a secret society of future Decembrists, the Union of Salvation, arose, which developed a program and constitutional drafts. The author of the draft "Constitution" was N.M. Muravyov, the author of "Russian Truth" - P.I. Pestel.

N.M. Muravyov was a supporter of the constitutional monarchy. Legislative power, in his opinion, should belong to the people's council, and the executive - to the emperor. The emperor commanded the troops, but did not have the right to start a war and make peace. The emperor could not leave the territory of the empire, otherwise he would lose his imperial rank. He was assigned a salary in the amount of 8 million rubles. annually. He could support the court staff at his own expense.

The electoral rights of citizens were limited by educational and property qualifications. According to N. Muravyov's constitution, serfdom was to be abolished and military settlements liquidated. The Table of Ranks, estates and nationalities were cancelled. The concept of a citizen of the Russian state was introduced. All Russians are equal before the law. The future Russia was presented as a federal state. The empire was divided into 15 powers. Each state had its own capital. Nizhny Novgorod should become the capital of the federation.

P.I. Pestel was a supporter of republican rule. Autocracy in Russia, according to Pestel's Russkaya Pravda, must be destroyed. The royal family was physically exterminated. In his opinion, all estates in the state should be merged "into a single civil estate." All Russians were declared equally noble. All were declared equal before the law. Civil age came at the age of 20 years. All male citizens were given the right to vote. Women, both under the Muravyov project and under the Pestel project, did not have voting rights.

The Republic of Pestel was divided into provinces, provinces - into counties, counties - into volosts. The People's Council should become the legislative body. The executive power in the state was handed over to the State Duma. In addition to the legislative and executive power, there was also a supervisory power. Nizhny Novgorod should become the capital of the republic.

Russkaya Pravda by Pestel is a revolutionary project for the bourgeois reconstruction of serfdom in Russia.

As you know, the Decembrists were defeated, but the social movement became even more active, the delimitation of three ideological directions began: conservative, liberal, radical.

A conservative position was formulated by the Minister of Education S.S. Uvarov, who created the theory of official nationality, which consisted in a voluntary union of the sovereign and the people. Autocracy was recognized as the only form of government. The uselessness of social changes and the need to strengthen the autocracy and serfdom were substantiated.

This theory has drawn sharp criticism from both radicals and liberals. Of the radicals, P.Ya. Chaadaev with his Philosophical Letters, in which he sharply criticized serfdom and autocracy. In his opinion, neither in the past nor in the present, the Russian people have anything bright. He saw the main reason for the backwardness and stagnant existence of Russia in the absence of progressive social and cultural traditions. He saw the salvation of Russia in the unification of all Christian countries into a new community that would ensure the spiritual freedom and progress of all peoples.

Chaadaev's ideas about the role and fate of church life were picked up and continued by Vl. Solovyov and A. Herzen.

Among the noble intelligentsia at the turn of the 30s - 40s, two currents developed - Slavophiles and Westerners.

The Slavophils considered it necessary to re-evaluate the experience of pre-Petrine Russia on the importance of the peasant community, local self-government, the role of the state principle and the relationship between law and custom. They considered Orthodoxy the only true and deeply moral religion. The Slavophiles fought against servility to the West.

The Westerners believed that Russia should develop according to the Western model. They advocated a broad education of the people, criticized the feudal system.

Numerous educational circles arose during the period under review. Their members shared the ideology of the Decembrists, read the famous message of A.S. Pushkin to Siberia and the response of the Decembrists. According to V.I. Lenin, the Decembrists woke up Herzen, and Herzen woke up the Narodniks.

Alexander I. On the night of March 11-12, 1801, the last palace coup took place in Russia. Emperor Paul I was killed as a result of a conspiracy of the St. Petersburg nobility. His son Alexander, who ruled for almost a quarter of a century (1801-1825), entered the Russian throne. The most contradictory testimonies of contemporaries remained about the emperor himself, his views. He expressed directly opposite views, took the same actions. This feature gave contemporaries the impression of insincerity of the emperor. This was due to both the innate traits of his character and the conditions in which he was brought up. Cut off from his family and father, he was brought up from early childhood by his grandmother Catherine II. She personally oversaw his education and upbringing. Therefore, Alexander constantly had to maneuver between his grandmother and father, to dissemble and hide his true feelings. Some contemporaries talked about his hypocrisy and insincerity, others - about education, good breeding, friendliness. Both were combined in it, complementing one another. Napoleon's statement is known: "Alexander is smart, pleasant, but he cannot be trusted: he is insincere: he is a true Byzantine ... subtle, feigned, cunning." Obviously, Alexander I was a liberal in his views. He was smart and could not help but reckon with the spirit of the times, primarily with the influence of the ideas of the French Revolution.

Alexander I was a real politician. Having ascended the throne, he promised a number of transformations in the domestic and foreign policy of the Russian state. Assuming the throne, Alexander I solemnly proclaimed that from now on, politics would be based not on the personal will or whim of the monarch, but on strict observance of laws. The population was promised legal guarantees against arbitrariness. All this had a great public outcry, there were hopes for the introduction of a constitution in Russia.

Alexander had a good idea of ​​the consequences of Russia's political, economic and social lagging behind the advanced European states. He thought about the prospects of bringing a huge country out of a lethargic state. However, gradually his views on the development of Russia, Russian society changed. From a liberal, he turns into a conservative, and in the last years of his life even into a reactionary politician. He became religious, suspicious, which could not but affect his specific deeds in government.

Public administration reforms. In 1802, the Committee of Ministers was established as the highest administrative institution. It included ministers, other leaders in the empire's management system. The boards created by Peter I as government bodies were replaced by ministries. This completed the process of delimiting the functions of state administration bodies according to the European type of executive power. With the introduction of ministries, unity of command in state administration was strengthened.

The first eight ministries were created: the army, the navy, foreign affairs, justice, the interior, finance, commerce, and public education. In the future, their number increased, and the functions were even more clearly delineated.

This allowed the management of industries to be concentrated more centrally and efficiently. As a result, a layer of bureaucracy rapidly grew and developed in the Russian Empire, completely dependent on the mercy of the tsar and receiving guaranteed salaries for their service. In 1802, the Senate was reformed, becoming the highest judicial and controlling body in the system of state administration. His participation in legislative activity was expressed in the fact that he received the right to make "representations" to the emperor about outdated laws. In 1810, the State Council was created - a legislative advisory body under the tsar. The chairman and his members were appointed by the king. "No law can be submitted for the approval of the emperor other than the State Council," the emperor's decree said. He centralized legislative activity, streamlined the introduction of new legal norms.

These changes, the organized formation of the executive power, affected the position of the Senate. He became a body supervising the correct execution of laws in the state.

There were church reforms. The church was subordinate to the state. Spiritual affairs were in charge of the Holy Synod, whose members were appointed by the emperor. At the head of the Synod was the chief procurator, a man who, as a rule, was close to the tsar, from military or civil officials. His role and powers were very large. Under Alexander I, the position of Chief Prosecutor was performed in 1803-1824 by Prince A.N. Golitsyn, who from 1816 was also the Minister of Public Education.

M. M. Speransky took the greatest part in all state reforms. Many reform projects were proposed by him and came out in the form of decrees of the emperor.

Alexander I died in Taganrog in November 1825. He didn't have children. An emergency situation has developed in Russia - an interregnum. After long negotiations and clarifications, the Senate and the army swore allegiance to the new Russian emperor - the third son of Paul I - Nicholas.

Nicholas I. The reign of Nicholas I on the Russian throne lasted about 30 years (1825-1855). The personality of the new emperor was estimated by contemporaries ambiguously. Some admired his extraordinary capacity for work, modesty, goodwill. Others called him a tyrant and a despot. Nicholas ascended the throne, unprepared to rule, frightened by the Decembrists' revolt, imbued with hatred for all revolutionary and liberal currents. Acquaintance with the case of the Decembrists showed him that the social system and government apparatus of Russia needed serious reforms, but, not trusting public circles, he set out to make all the necessary improvements exclusively by the forces of the bureaucracy, under his direct command. Therefore, "His Majesty's own office", which previously did not play an important role in public administration, now turned into an important government agency and was divided into several departments: the 1st department was the personal office of the sovereign; The 2nd branch, which replaced the former "commission for drafting laws," was supposed to codify Russian legislation; The 3rd branch, relying on the newly established special Corps of gendarmes, was supposed to be in charge of the political police; The 4th branch managed charitable and educational institutions, which later received the name "department of institutions of the Empress Maria" (the mother of Emperor Nicholas I); in 1836, another 5th department arose to manage state property and state peasants, but soon after that a special ministry was established for this. In 1826, a special ministry of the imperial court and appanages was also established.

The drafting of the legislative code was entrusted to Nicholas I Speransky, who now abandoned all the liberal ideas and aspirations of his youth and stood with both feet on the basis of existing facts. Under the energetic and skillful leadership of Speransky, the second department, the codification department, finally carried out that colossal codification work that many commissions had tried in vain to do since 1700. In 1830, the Complete Collection of Laws of the Russian Empire was completed, which amounted to 45 huge volumes, containing in chronological order the old laws and decrees from the Code of 1649 to the accession of Emperor Nicholas I. By 1833, the Code of Laws of the Russian Empire was compiled and printed in 15 volumes . It laid down in a systematic way the laws that were in force at that time.

To carry out the necessary reforms in public administration, on December 6, 1826, Nicholas I formed a special committee chaired by Kochubey, but the reform projects drawn up by him were not put into effect. After the July Revolution (1830) in France and the Polish uprising that followed it, Nicholas finally abandoned his thoughts on fundamental reforms of the state system. Some private changes have been made to the local government system. After the abolition of the provincial class courts under Paul I, all court cases in the provinces were concentrated in the chambers of the civil criminal court. Under Nicholas I, the nobility was granted the right to elect assessors to these chambers, as well as to present candidates for chairmen appointed by the tsar. To strengthen the local police, in addition to police officers elected by the nobility, bailiffs appointed by the government were introduced. Thus, the nobility in local government was closely intertwined with the bureaucracy and itself began to serve as an instrument of state administration. Under Nicholas "the building of the Russian bureaucracy" (Klyuchevsky) was completed, which formed in the center a complex and ramified mechanism of offices that flooded the whole country with paper streams of orders, circulars, "relationships", requests, etc. Often in this paper sea of ​​"incoming" and "outgoing" the living needs and interests of living people were drowned - it was not for nothing that it was said under Nicholas that the state was ruled not by the emperor, but by the clerk.

The peasant question under Nicholas I. The new emperor's constant attention and interest in the peasantry were caused by their constant demands and unrest. During the reign of Nicholas I, there were over 500 cases of major peasant uprisings. Nicholas established secret (or "secret") committees on peasant affairs, which collected information and materials, wrote memos, drew up projects and "proposals", but they were not considered, since the tsar could not decide on a serious breakdown of the existing social order. During the discussion in the State Council of the draft law on "obliged peasants" (in 1842), the emperor declared in his speech: "There is no doubt that serfdom in its present state is an evil for us, tangible and obvious to everyone; but now it was would be evil, of course, even more disastrous. The Law on "Obliged Peasants" granted the landowners the right to voluntarily conclude agreements with the peasants on the termination of personal serfdom and on the provision of land allotments, for which the peasants were obliged to bear the obligations specified in the contract or pay a certain quitrent. None of the landowners took advantage of this law. In 1847, in the Kyiv, Volyn and Podolsk provinces, the so-called inventory rules were introduced, according to which the amount of land that the landlords had to provide to the peasants was determined, and the amount of peasant duties was established. A similar device was introduced in 1846 in the provinces of the Kingdom of Poland (where the peasants received personal freedom, but without any land rights, by decree of Napoleon in 1807). In 1837-1838, a special Ministry of State Property was established to manage "state property" (including state peasants) (until then, state peasants were under the jurisdiction of the Ministry of Finance, which was interested in them only as one of the sources of state income). The enlightened and humane General P. D. Kiselev was appointed Minister, who saw in the peasants not only "state property", but also living people and sincerely and persistently strove for a comprehensive improvement in their situation. The organs of the new ministry in the provinces were the chambers of state property, the provinces were subdivided into districts with district chiefs at the head.

Volost and rural administration was built on the basis of peasant self-government. Its first instance was the village assembly, which consisted of elected officials (two from every 10 households). The gathering elected those authorized for the volost gathering, the village foreman (who was subject to approval by the chamber of state property) and a member of the "rural reprisal" - the first instance of the village court, which consisted, under the chairmanship of the village foreman, of two "rural conscientious". The volost gathering consisted of elected from rural societies (one from every 20 households); he elected the volost head, two assessors of the volost board and two "conscientious" "volost reprisals" (second instance of the rural court). The organs of peasant self-government were subordinated to the supervision of state officials, but Kiselev tried not to allow any abuses on the part of the latter. Kiselyov's ministry took care of meeting the economic and domestic needs of the peasants: it demarcated land, allotted additional allotments for those with little land, set up food reserve stores, savings banks, schools and hospitals. Largely due to the noble activity of Kiselev (who remained Minister of State Property for about 20 years), by the time the serfdom fell, the economic situation of the state peasants turned out to be, in general, much better than the situation of the landlord peasants, and the self-government of state peasants regulated by Kiselev served as a model for the organization of landowners. peasants after their liberation from serfdom.

Education and social life. In the field of public education, "true enlightenment" was planted on the basis of "Orthodoxy, autocracy and nationality." The new university charter of 1835 transferred the leadership of education to the trustees of educational districts (appointed by some of the generals) and limited (but did not destroy) university autonomy. Minister of Education Uvarov was an enlightened person, university science had the opportunity to develop under his leadership. However, this process was very slow. The situation changed after the European revolution of 1848-1849, when Nicholas I, frightened by the revolution, switched to a system of unrestrained reaction and obscurantism. The reactionary Shirinsky-Shikhmatov was appointed Minister of Public Education, who introduced strict supervision of university teaching, the departments of philosophy and some other "harmful" sciences were closed, the number of students was limited to 300 people at each faculty (except medical). In 1848, a special committee was set up to oversee the press, chaired by Count Buturlin, and this "Buturlin committee" takes the censorship of books and periodicals to absurd extremes. The police are on the trail of the circle of M. V. Petrashevsky, whose members were influenced by the ideas of modern French socialism and discussed social issues. Although the members of the circle were not conspirators, they (including F. M. Dostoevsky) were first sentenced to death, and then exiled to Siberia for hard labor. The "protective" policy of Nicholas I continued until the end of his life. The Crimean War showed that he was guarding a deeply rotten fortress system.

The era of political reaction under Nicholas I was not, however, an era of spiritual hibernation and stagnation for Russian society. On the contrary, mental life at that time, especially in Moscow and at Moscow University, was in full swing. A number of magazines were published: "Moskovsky Vestnik", "Moskovsky Telegraph", "Telescope", "Moskvityanin", "Domestic Notes", "Contemporary". Of the circles that arose among university youth, the most famous were the circle of N. V. Stankevich, who was mainly interested in questions of ethics and philosophy and united future Westerners and future Slavophiles, the circle of A. G. Herzen, discussing mainly political and social problems of our time. The most prominent spiritual leaders of the intelligentsia in the 1930s and 1940s were the Moscow professor, idealist historian N. T. Granovsky and the literary critic V. G. Belinsky - the "frantic Vissarion", who was first under the influence of German idealistic philosophy, and then - French socialism.

The time of Nicholas I was the golden age of Russian fiction: Pushkin, Lermontov and Gogol wrote under him, Turgenev, Dostoevsky and Tolstoy began to write.

Slavophiles and Westernizers. Among the ideological currents of the first half of the 19th century, the most striking and interesting were two systems of historical and philosophical views that clashed with each other in an irreconcilable conflict: these were the teachings of the "Westerners" (Belinsky, Granovsky, Kavelin) and the "Slavophiles" (A. S. Khomyakov, brothers Ivan and Peter Kireevsky, brothers Konstantin and Ivan Aksakov, Yu. F. Samarin). Westerners believed in the unity of human civilization and argued that Western Europe is at the head of this civilization, most fully and successfully implements the principles of humanity, freedom and progress, and shows the right path to the rest of humanity. Therefore, the task of Russia, a backward, ignorant, semi-barbarian country, which only since the time of Peter the Great embarked on the path of universal cultural development, is to get rid of its inertia and Asiaticism as soon as possible and, having joined the European West, merge with it into one universal cultural family.

The Slavophils argued, first of all, that there is no single universal civilization and, consequently, a single path of development for all peoples. Each people, or a group of close peoples, lives its own independent, "original" life, which is based on a deep ideological principle, a "folk spirit", penetrating into all aspects of people's life. For Russia, these primordial ideological principles are the Orthodox faith and the principles of inner truth and spiritual freedom associated with it. The embodiment of these principles in life is the community, the peasant world, as a voluntary union for mutual help and support. In contrast to the moral and religious basis of Russian life, the Western, or Germanic-Roman, world builds its life on the principles of formal legal justice and external organization. According to the Slavophiles, neither Western principles nor Western organizational forms are necessary and unacceptable for Russia. Their political ideal was a patriarchal democratic monarchy based on the voluntary support of the people, the "strength of opinion" of this people should be expressed in a deliberative Zemsky Sobor, which the tsar would have to convene, following the example of the Moscow tsars. In general, the Muscovite kingdom, according to the Slavophiles, was much more in line with the spirit and character of the Russian people than the St. Petersburg bureaucratic monarchy, built by Peter the Great according to European models.

Despite all the ideological differences, the Slavophiles and the Westerners closely converged on the practical issues of Russian life: both trends had a negative attitude towards serfdom and the modern bureaucratic-police system of state administration, both demanded freedom of speech and the press, and, therefore, in the eyes of the government, both were the same " untrustworthy."

Foreign policy of Russia in the first half of the 19th century. The foreign policy of Russia in the first half of the 19th century was closely connected with such historical events as the struggle against Napoleonic France, the wars of Russia with Turkey and Iraq, the annexation of Finland, etc. But the most significant event in the national history of this period was the Patriotic War of 1812 and the catastrophic defeat of Napoleonic France in it.

Russia and France before the war of 1812. One of the reasons for the events of the war of 1812 was the collision of Napoleon's claims to world domination with the desire of Alexander I to lead European politics. By 1812, Napoleon was left to seize only Russia for complete dominance in Europe: only she stood on the road to become, as the emperor himself put it, "master of the world". Reasons for war were found: Russia violated the agreement on the continental blockade (Russia traded with England under the American flag); the conflict in the Polish and German principalities is ripe. (Napoleon rashly annexed the Duchy of Oldenburg to France, and the duke was the uncle of Alexander I), personal insults and insults (Napoleon inadvertently reminded Alexander I of his personal participation in the conspiracy against his father, the Russian emperor, in response, did not accept Napoleon's matchmaking with Grand Duchess Anna Pavlovna) . Napoleon brought troops to Warsaw and from there moved to Russia. Thus began the War of 1812.

At this time, Russia was already waging two wars - with Turkey and Iran. Thus, Russia could not oppose Napoleon with a large army. France was occupied only with a naval war with England, for France Russia was the main and only target on land, and she could completely concentrate all her forces on a war with Russia. In addition, there were very bad roads in Russia, which complicated the communication of the army, the supply of everything necessary for the front. True, this was a problem for Napoleon when he entered Russia. In economic terms, France was more than a prosperous country. Capitalist relations were developed in it, so France had more than enough money for the war.

Russia was almost the exact opposite of France - there were almost no capitalist relations, feudal relations dominated, serfdom was preserved, money came to the treasury from taxes and duties. Everything that Russia had, she achieved through the oppression of the masses and the efforts of wealthy patriots. Russia had huge reserves of resources, and they were being developed, but mostly only in the Urals and in the center of Russia.

The Peace of Tilsit, concluded between Russia and France, after the defeat of Russian troops near Austerlitz (1807), joining the continental blockade led to the fact that in 1808-1812 Russia's foreign trade decreased by 43%. France could not compensate for this damage, since economic ties with Russia were superficial. At first glance, Russia had little chance of winning the war with France. Since 1810, Alexander I began to pull up troops to the western borders of the empire, counting on a strike in Poland, and not on the territory of Russia. In general, Napoleon's sudden attack on Russia is out of the question - the military command of the Russian troops prepared more than 40 plans for a campaign against France. Napoleon already in 1809 began preparing a campaign to the East. However, he did not take into account that Russia had already once saved Europe, standing as a wall in the XIII-XIV centuries on the path of countless waves of nomads from Central Asia.

There was a lot in common between the commanders-in-chief of the armies Kutuzov and Napoleon. They both loved their homeland, they were loved in the army: Napoleon - because he was hitherto invincible, Kutuzov - because he was Suvorov's successor, they were talented commanders who knew their job well. Prior to that, Napoleon won their confrontations, so he had an advantage over Kutuzov, in addition, he was younger and more energetic than Kutuzov. Kutuzov and Napoleon achieved success through their work, both of them started as junior officers. During this time, they gained not only military, but also civilian experience. Both of them were subtle diplomats.

Patriotic War of 1812. This war was the biggest event in Russian history. Its emergence was caused by the desire of Napoleon to achieve world domination. In Europe, only Russia and England retained their independence. Napoleon did not hide his aggressive plans, created warehouses on the borders with Russia, accumulated troops. The continental blockade was constantly violated. In combination with a number of other, smaller conflicts, this led to an aggravation of Russian-French relations. In June 1812, Napoleon, at the head of an army of 600,000, began a campaign against Russia. On the part of France, it was an aggressive, unjust war, since Napoleon set as his goal the enslavement of the peoples of Russia.

The French army was much better equipped than the Russian army. The Russian army has always been famous for the lack of good officers and courageous ordinary soldiers. The lack of good officers was explained by the fact that although there was a Peter's law on the compulsory military service of the nobles, the nobility bypassed it. The soldiers were taken from the common people, from the serfs. The Russian army was famous for its artillery. In addition to artillery, there was another pride - the Russian imperial guard, it consisted of hefty men of two meters in height and was used only as a last resort. In the French army, officer ranks were not so easily given away - they had to be earned. The army had courageous, disciplined soldiers. They showed these qualities in every battle. In addition, they had a special reserve, the Old Guard, which consisted of old, battered soldiers. The advantage of the French army was also characterized by the fact that it was larger and more united. The Russian army was scattered across the country and was divided into four parts. True, in addition to the army, there were also partisan detachments that played a big role in the war.

The French army consisted of more than 600 thousand people with 1372 guns. It included the elite of the French troops - the imperial guard under the command of marshals Lefebvre, Mortier, Bessieres, Dutch infantrymen, Polish uhlans. In addition to the French, there were Poles, Prussians and Germans of the Confederation of the Rhine, Spaniards and others.

The main forces of Napoleon were deployed in two echelons: the first crossed the Neman, the second remained in the rear, between the Vistula and the Oder. This immediately outlined the backlog of the troops of the center and the right wing. In an effort to carry out the encirclement of the Russian army, Napoleon demanded the fastest movement to disorganize the Russian command.

The Russian army consisted of 220-240 thousand people with 942 guns. The 1st Western Army, under the command of the Minister of War, General of Infantry M. B. Barclay de Tolly, numbered 110-127 thousand people with 558 guns and stretched for 200 kilometers. The 2nd Western Army was under the command of General of Infantry P.I. Bagration, consisting of 45-48 thousand people with 216 guns. The 3rd Western Army, stationed in Volhynia near Lutsk under the command of General of the Cavalry A.P. Tormakov, had 46 thousand people with 168 guns. The goal pursued by Napoleon is not to allow the armies to unite, but to defeat them one by one or to impose a decisive battle on the Russian army. However, Napoleon's strategic plan cracked from the very beginning. The Russians were not going to go to the general battle, reasonably believing that the time was ahead for him.

At Smolensk, the 1st and 2nd Western armies joined. On August 18, 1812, a battle took place, where the courage and heroism of Russian soldiers were clearly manifested. First, they detained the enemy at the walls of the city, and then, undefeated, they crossed to the Moscow road, preparing for new inevitable battles. The capture of Smolensk cost Napoleon 20 thousand soldiers, and in the meantime, more and more militia joined the Russian army. The turbulent events of 1812 stirred up the broad masses of the people of Russia, aroused unprecedented energy of the people, aroused the people's consciousness and national pride. The national liberation character of the war of 1812 showed that the people did everything to support the army, its fighting capacity, its morale.

From the very beginning of hostilities, most of the peasants of Lithuania and Belarus expressed disobedience to the invaders. Peasant partisan detachments were born spontaneously, during the retreat of the Russian army. The Belarusian land, covered with forests and swamps, burned under the feet of the invaders. As we moved deeper into Russia, the resistance of the people grew. The just and defensive nature of the war led to the active participation of the broad masses of Russia in it.

Seeing the active resistance of the peasants, Napoleon began to spread provocative rumors about the upcoming liberation of the peasants from serfdom. But in reality, his war against Russia was exclusively of an aggressive nature, and his army suppressed anti-serf actions. Lithuanian and Polish landlords supported Napoleon, but the peasants of Lithuania and Belarus began partisan actions against the enemy troops. At first, the peasants acted passively, refusing to supply fodder and food to the French army, leaving their villages and retreating to the forests. But soon the peasantry switched to more active forms of partisan struggle: attacks on individual enemy detachments, active assistance to the Russian army. The uprisings against the Polish and Lithuanian pans were now also directed against the Napoleonic army. In Mogilev, Vitebsk and other cities of Lithuania and Belarus, the French command was forced to leave entire military units to fight the peasants.

The broad masses of the Russian peasantry rose to the partisan struggle, as soon as the Napoleonic troops entered the borders of the Smolensk province. A partisan movement was born here, since the population of the western counties suffered primarily from the invaders. In August 1812, a number of peasant partisan detachments were created in the Smolensk province. The Sychevsk district police officer P. Boguslavsky, the leader of the Sychevsk nobility N. Nakhimov, Major I. Emelyanov, retired captain Timashev and others took part in their organization. In just half a month, these detachments had about 15 major skirmishes with the French. The partisans of the Smolensk province dealt a tangible blow to the enemy, and also helped the Russian army a lot. In particular, the detachment of the merchant of the city of Porechye Nikita Minchenkov helped the army detachment to eliminate the French detachment under the command of General Pino. Just as in the Smolensk province, Napoleon was met in other areas. The popular partisan movement assumed an increasingly mass character. Everywhere the peasants rose up to fight the enemy.

After Smolensk, the State Council considered candidates for the post of commander in chief. Many names were called. The Council decided to appoint 67-year-old General of Infantry M. I. Kutuzov. The documents show what a great job M. I. Kutuzov did after his appointment. He paid attention to literally everything: the plan of military operations and reserves, the supply of the army and the condition of roads, the organization of the militia and partisan detachments, medical care and attitude towards prisoners, etc. Only such an understanding of all problems could be the key to future success. While Kutuzov was driving towards the army, she fought back to the east. Napoleonic troops captured a significant part of the Russian Empire. After reviewing the affairs in the army, Kutuzov realized that it was no longer possible to postpone the conduct of the general battle, and he made the final decision to give it. The people and the army can't wait any longer. He gives the corresponding order to the acting Chief of the General Staff, L. L. Bennigsen, to find a suitable position. The command stopped at the Borodino field, to which the army began to approach on the morning of August 22. Kutuzov, having carefully examined the area, ordered the construction of fortifications to begin.

Borodino. The area in the Borodino region, located 12 kilometers west of Mozhaisk, is heavily hilly and crossed by a significant number of rivers and streams that have formed deep ravines. The eastern part of the field is more elevated than the western. The Koloch River flows through the village, which flows into the Moscow River 4 kilometers from the village. The river had a high and steep bank, well covering the right flank of the positions of the Russian army. The left flank came close to a small forest, heavily overgrown with small shrubs and swampy in places.

Two Smolensk roads passed through the village - the new one and the old one. Having taken a position at Borodino, the Russian army had many advantages. Choosing a place is one of Kutuzov's military arts. This was an obstacle to the movement of the enemy's cavalry and infantry - blocking the roads leading to Moscow.

Napoleon had a goal - to defeat the Russian army and achieve the surrender of Russia. Kutuzov wanted to weaken the enemy, inflict significant damage on him. The balance of power was still on Napoleon's side, but Kutuzov had superiority in artillery. Kutuzov tried to take advantage of this superiority and positioned the army in such a way that Napoleon could not bypass it and attack from the rear. The Russian commander-in-chief placed the battery at a height right in the center of the army, infantry regiments were placed next to the battery to repel French attacks on the battery. On the right wing of the Russian armies, Kutuzov placed the 1st army of Barclay de Tolly, on the left wing there were earthen fortifications (flashes) in the form of an angle, they were occupied by the 2nd army of Bagration. Also, a few kilometers ahead on the left flank, the Shevardinsky redoubt was put up, and even more to the left was Tuchkov's corps. On August 24, the French attacked the Shevardino redoubt. This allowed us to gain time and strengthen the main positions. The Battle of Borodino began the day after that, on August 26, 1812. Early in the morning, the first shot rang out, then another and another - this was how the "battle of the giants" began.

Napoleon, using tried and tested tactics, moved the main forces to the left flank. He hoped to quickly defeat them and, taking advantage of the confusion, attack from the flank and from the rear. On the left flank, Napoleon pulled almost all the artillery. French attacks followed uninterruptedly, to which the Russians responded with counterattacks. Russian soldiers fought to the death, the fight lasted 7 hours. Only in the middle of the day, after 8 attacks, the French took the flushes, but the Russians did not give up their positions, they only retreated behind the ravine. Napoleon failed to break through in the center. The French stubbornly sought to capture the battery, but each time they were driven back by bayonet charges. Only at the end of the day, at the cost of huge losses, the French managed to capture the central battery, but even here the Russians did not give up their positions, they only retreated 800 meters. The Russian soldiers fought as best they could, but the losses were quite large and it was clear that they would not last long. Then Kutuzov made a move that decided the outcome of the battle. He sent two cavalry units of generals M. I. Platov and F. P. Uvarov to bypass Napoleon's army. Parts appeared so unexpectedly that they panicked the French. Napoleon did not dare to bring the Old Guard into battle. Experts believe that if he brought the Old Guard into battle, the Russians would not have survived. The battle lasted 15 hours, subsided only late in the evening. Kutuzov carried out his plan and practically won the battle. Napoleon failed to break the heroic resistance of the Russian soldiers who defended their native land.

Napoleon's actions were like an attack, where the strong chest and strong will of the Russian people were a fortress. The proud feeling of being the defenders of holy Russia has never been a more glorious example. "Europe, through the eyes of its sons, was convinced in Borodino that the Russians could rather fall with weapons in their hands than remain defeated," - this is how A. I. Mikhailovsky spoke about the battle. "The Russian army on this day has crowned itself with immortal glory!" - said A.P. Ermolov.

“When evaluating the battle of Borodino,” notes military historian P. A. Nellin, “3 main results should be noted: the Napoleonic army did not break the resistance of the Russians, it was not possible to defeat them, thereby opening the way to Moscow. The Russian army wrested half of it from the enemy troops; on the Borodino field, the French army suffered an irreparable moral shock, while the Russian troops increased confidence in victory.

In the battle, Russian soldiers showed great stamina, heroism, courage, numerous reports and reports testify to this. M. I. Kutuzov himself highly appreciated the feat of Russian soldiers on the Borodino field: "This day will remain an eternal monument of courage and excellent courage of Russian soldiers, where all the infantry, cavalry, artillery fought perfectly, everyone wanted to die on the spot and not give in to the enemy The French army, under the leadership of Napoleon himself, being in superior strength, did not overcome the firmness of the spirit of the Russian soldier, who sacrificed his life with vigor for his fatherland.

Preparing for a counteroffensive, Commander-in-Chief M. I. Kutuzov launched a "small war" with the forces of army and peasant partisan detachments. A number of militias were also involved in the partisan struggle.

The tsarist government was afraid of the development of the peasant partisan movement, as it feared that the peasants might also start a struggle against the feudal landowners. Therefore, it was decided to create army partisan detachments that would fight the French and at the same time control the actions of the peasants.

Defeat of Napoleon. After Borodino, Russian troops began to retreat to Moscow. M. I. Kutuzov decided to leave her for tactical reasons, and, as events showed, this was a brilliant decision. The French army entered Moscow on September 2, 1812. The occupation of Moscow did not benefit Napoleon. Moscow met him with fire and desertion. There were no inhabitants in it (they left Moscow earlier), no food, no fodder. In the Napoleonic army, robberies and looting began. Napoleon, looking for a way out of the catastrophic situation, proposed a truce to Alexander I, but it was rejected. In early October, the French left Moscow. During the retreat near the city of Maloyaroslavets, another bloody battle took place with the Russian troops. In it, neither side achieved success, but the French were forced to retreat along the Smolensk road they had devastated. The retreat of the French army resembled a disorderly flight.

The final battle on November 14-17 near the Berezina River completed the defeat of the French army. Napoleon, leaving the perishing troops, secretly left for Paris. The Manifesto of Alexander I of December 25, 1812 marked the end of the Patriotic War.

The victory of the Russian people in the Patriotic War of 1812 is of the greatest importance. This is evidence of heroism, courage, patriotism of all strata of society, love for one's Motherland, one's Fatherland.

Decembrists. The internal and external processes taking place in Russia gave rise to a revolutionary movement of the nobility, the result of which was the December speech of the best representatives of the nobility against autocracy and serfdom in Russia.

Causes and nature of the movement. The Patriotic War of 1812, and especially its consequences, tied the knot of all the contradictions of the feudal-serf system even tighter, and exposed its rotten foundations even more. The main, peasant question still remained unresolved. In the Manifesto of Alexander I, published on the occasion of the end of the war, the hopes of the peasants for liberation were rejected. It directly stated: "Peasants, our faithful people, may they receive bribes from God ..." The tsar and landlords, trying to bring the country's economy out of the post-war devastation, brought down new hardships on the peasants. In response, the mass anti-serfdom movement intensified. In 1816-1825, the number of anti-feudal actions increased significantly, the social composition of the participants expanded (along with serfs, peasants of other categories, as well as working people and soldier masses, participated in the movement). The anti-serfdom movement engulfed the central provinces of Russia, from the spring of 1818 - vast areas of the lower Don and Azov regions. There were speeches in the military settlements created by Arakcheev. The largest uprising of that time was the uprising of military settlers in Chuguev that broke out in the summer of 1819. However, in relation to the entire oppressed working population of Russia, the number of participants in the movement was still small. Shackled by "naive monarchism", the Russian peasantry could not independently liquidate the autocratic-feudal order. The best representatives of the Russian noble intelligentsia became the bearers of the progressive interests and needs of their country, their people.

The most important reason for the movement of the Decembrists was the Patriotic War of 1812. "We were children of the 12th year," the Decembrists said about themselves, thus emphasizing the great importance of the Patriotic War for the formation of their revolutionary ideology. Of course, in 1812 the future Decembrists were still far from recognizing revolutionary ideas. But the Patriotic War, and especially its outcome, paved the way for the emergence and development of the Decembrist movement in Russia, primarily because the victory in the Patriotic War preserved national independence, raised the people's forces, and intensified the formation of national consciousness. "...Napoleon invaded Russia, and then the Russian people for the first time felt their strength, then a sense of independence awakened in all hearts, first political, and later national. war for the growth of national self-consciousness, the talented writer and poet Decembrist A. A. Bestuzhev.

Already in the first post-war years, for many future Decembrists it became clear that "the peoples, deceived in their expectations by governments, resorted to secret means against their obvious oppression. Secret political alliances were established throughout Europe ...". The Decembrists saw the differences between the secret societies that existed then in Europe and at the same time singled out their common features. As the Decembrist M. A. Fonvizin noted, European secret societies were united by a common goal - "to counteract the monarchical reaction of governments and free the peoples from their autocracy."

The speech of the Decembrists against tsarism was also prepared in secret political organizations. In 1816, the future Decembrists founded the secret society "Union of Salvation", or "Society of True and Faithful Sons of the Fatherland", in 1818 - a new society "Union of Welfare". There was a formation of the Decembrist movement.

The Decembrists themselves considered the fight against tsarism not only as an internal task of the country, but also as an important factor in the common struggle of the European peoples against the absolutist-feudal orders of the old world. P. I. Pestel vividly revealed the commonality of the task of the entire European liberation movement of that time - the struggle against the old system. He also showed that it had become the main task of the century.

The Decembrist movement in Russia developed under conditions largely different from those in which the formation of liberation movements in a number of European countries took place. Where serf relations were abolished, some political freedoms were proclaimed, the struggle was for the consolidation of these gains and for their expansion, while in Russia the Decembrists acted under the conditions of an autocratic monarchy and the complete domination of serf relations. The task of destroying the autocracy and serfdom made the program of the Decembrist secret societies more radical than the program of many contemporary foreign secret societies. The peasant question occupied a large place in the Decembrist programs. The historical merit of the Decembrists was that, caring for the well-being of their country, the entire nation, they raised a question, the solution of which was primarily related to the interests of the serfs. The specific conditions of the existing reality left a mark not only on the class composition of the participants in the Decembrist movement, but also on their ideology. The Decembrists - revolutionaries of the nobility - fought for a radical breakdown of feudalism, in which the masses of the serf peasantry were primarily interested. But at the same time, the Decembrists did not act on behalf of the people, fearing the people themselves.

The first political organizations They were the Union of Salvation and the Union of Prosperity. The "Union of Salvation" was headed in February 1816 by A. A. Muravyov, S. P. Trubetskoy, P. I. Pestel, M. I. Lunin, M. and S. Muravyov-Apostles, I. D. Yakushkin and others. The program of the "Union of Salvation" set the task of destroying the autocracy - the main force of serfdom and introducing a constitutional monarchy. But the methods by which these tasks were to be carried out were not clear.

The "Union of Salvation" was a small organization, its status was determined in the spirit of Masonic institutions. The ongoing internal transformation of society, the revision of the program and tactics led to the emergence on its basis of a new large organization - the Union of Welfare. He set as his goal the elimination of the autocratic-feudal system in Russia, the introduction of a political system based on firm and immutable laws and popular representation, and the introduction of a constitution.

The Moscow Congress of 1821 was of great importance for the development of the Decembrist movement. As a result, for tactical reasons, the former union was declared dissolved. This tactic made it possible to weed out temporary fellow travelers - liberals, to gather more revolutionary-minded participants in secret societies in order to begin developing specific plans for the overthrow of the autocratic-feudal order in Russia in a revolutionary way. The most moderate elements, supporting this decision for their part, hoped to get rid of the radical members. The decisions taken by the Union of Welfare in the early 1920s testified to the fact that the conditions of Russian reality itself determined the change in the ideology of the Decembrists. At the same time, they reflected the spirit of an era saturated with revolutionary ideas. In such a difficult situation, on the basis of the Union of Welfare, two new secret organizations arose - the Southern and Northern Societies. In them, the tasks of the revolutionary seizure of power and the implementation of socio-political transformations with the aim of destroying the feudal foundations were put in the foreground.

The southern society was headed by a directory, to which Pestel, the quartermaster-general of the second army Yushnevsky and the "northerner" Nikita Muravyov, elected in absentia, were elected. The founders of the Northern Society were Nikita Muravyov, Trubetskoy, Lunin, Pushchin, Obolensky, Turgenev and others. New societies, setting common tasks, considered their activities to be closely connected. In turn, the government in 1821 created a secret police in the army. The next year was the decision of the autocracy to ban all secret societies in Russia, which testified to the strengthening of the reactionary policy of tsarism. Changes in tactical guidelines adopted by the Union of Welfare led to a change in the nature of the conspiracy of the Southern and Northern societies.

constitutional projects. In the Northern Society, for several years, a program document was created, known as the "Constitution" by Nikita Muravyov, and in the Southern Society - "Russian Truth" by P. I. Pestel. When developing constitutional drafts, the Decembrists relied on the historical experience of their country, based on the most important tasks that confronted them. They used the ideological heritage of the leading thinkers of Russia, the great ideological predecessor A. N. Radishchev. At the same time, the Decembrists were influenced by the progressive ideas of other countries. The preparation of the constitution went through several stages. Despite the general irreconcilable attitude of both authors towards serfdom and absolutism, many important issues found rather different interpretations in their political views. And most clearly it was reflected in their political projects. Thus, Muravyov's constitution differed from the guidelines of Russkaya Pravda by the very fact that, after the revolutionary overthrow of the old order, it affirmed the system of a constitutional monarchy with a federation of regions. This constitution declared the people to be the sole source of supreme power. In Muravyov's interpretation, the law is an external reflection of the people's will, which significantly distinguished his legal concept from "the English parliament and the German charters that affirmed the original power of the monarch." In the introduction to the first version of the constitution, it was emphasized that its intransigence towards absolutism is based on the historical experience of "all peoples and all times." It also substantiated the need to eliminate the autocratic-feudal system in Russia. This constitution put forward the principle of equality of all before the law, the abolition of class distinctions, freedom of the press, inviolability of the person, etc.

According to the provision of the constitution on the supreme power in the country, legislative power was given to a bicameral parliament - "The People's Council, consisting of the Supreme Duma and the House of People's Representatives ...", executive power - to the hereditary emperor, who was considered only "the supreme official of the Russian state." In fact, he did not have legislative powers, having only the right to delay, but not withdraw laws. The high property qualification that N. Muraviev proposed in his constitution for voters, and even more so for those elected to the supreme bodies of power, limited the penetration of representatives of low-income strata into them. The political system, approved by Muravyov's constitution, was in fact far from consolidating the rights of all citizens. The ideas of social rights and political freedoms were class-limited. And yet it is quite obvious that this constitution dealt a blow to the autocratic-feudal order, clearing the way for the capitalist system.

An analysis of Nikita Muravyov's constitution allows us to conclude that the constitutional monarchy proclaimed by her, in its basic principles, was close to the principles of a republic with a president at the head.

Russkaya Pravda is the most important monument to the ideology of the Decembrists. After the adoption of the main provisions at the Kiev Congress of the leaders of the Southern Society in 1823, Russkaya Pravda became the program document of this society. It has been discussed more than once in Northern society. Not becoming in 1824 the general ideological platform for the future revolution, as Pestel advocated, it nevertheless had a significant influence on the ideology of the northerners, as a result of which republican ideas were strengthened in plans for future joint actions. Russkaya Pravda resolutely abolished autocratic rule and proclaimed a republic. At the same time, Pestel defended such a form of the republican system, in which the political advantages of the nobility and the bourgeoisie would be excluded. Therefore, one of the primary tasks he considered the introduction of equality of all citizens before the law.

First of all, serfdom was abolished. Pestel provided for a democratic state system for Russia, the supreme power belongs to the unicameral People's Council. Pestel opposed the bicameral system, which made it possible to strengthen the significant influence of large owners from both noble and bourgeois circles. Executive power was transferred to 5 persons elected by the People's Council for 5 years and constituting the State Duma. Every year the composition of the Duma was updated, as one member dropped out and another was chosen to take his place. Each member of the State Duma in the last year of his stay in it became president for one year. With such a system, Pestel thought to ensure the power of the people in the state. He believed that the elections, in which all Russian citizens who had reached the age of 20, with the exception of those convicted by court and who were in personal service, would take part, would select "the most worthy and most enlightened people" to participate in government. Under the bourgeois system, the road to which was objectively cleared by Russkaya Pravda, this was a utopia.

According to the plans of Russkaya Pravda, Russia was to become a "united and indivisible" state. Any idea of ​​a federation was resolutely rejected by the author, since he associated it with the times of fragmentation of the Russian state, with the specific feudal system. N. Muraviev, who stood on more moderate positions, did not agree with all the provisions of Russkaya Pravda (for example, the agrarian question, in which Pestel advocated the division of land into public and private property).

The uprising of the Decembrists, the consequences and causes of its defeat. Early in the morning of December 14, 1825, the Decembrists were already in the barracks to lead their subordinate military units to the Senate building. The first to come to Senate Square was the Moscow Guards Regiment under the command of Mikhail and Alexander Bestuzhev and Dmitry Shchepin-Rostovsky. Other military units followed them. In total, about 3 thousand soldiers and sailors gathered on the square. Ryleev, Obolensky, Pushchin, Kakhovsky, Kuchelbecker and many other Decembrists were also there. However, the plan, developed on the eve of the uprising, could not be implemented.

The Senate and the State Council swore an oath to the new Emperor Nicholas I. Trubetskoy, who was appointed leader of the uprising, did not appear on the square. By evening, a new leader had just been elected - Prince Obolensky.

The Decembrists did not take offensive actions: they did not capture the Winter Palace, although they had such an opportunity, they did not take possession of the artillery. They were afraid to attract the people to the uprising, which gathered in large numbers in the square and energetically expressed sympathy for the rebels. According to contemporaries, the "rabble" asked the rebels to hold out until the evening, promising support, threw stones and logs at government troops. Meanwhile, Nicholas I pulled together the remaining troops loyal to him, which surrounded the Senate Square. Several times the guards cavalry attacked the rebels, but they repulsed the attacks with rifle fire. By evening, Nicholas I ordered to shoot the rebels with artillery.

Several artillery volleys in the midst of the rebels shook their ranks and scattered the soldiers. M. A. Bestuzhev tried to build soldiers on the ice of the Neva in order to capture the Peter and Paul Fortress. But he didn't succeed. The nuclei broke the ice, the soldiers fell into the river and drowned. By nightfall, the uprising was finally crushed.

The tsarist government brutally dealt with the Decembrists: five of them were hanged - Ryleev, Pestel, Muravyov-Apostol, Bestuzhev-Ryumin, Kakhovsky. In 1825 Russia saw for the first time an open uprising, an open revolutionary movement against tsarism. The revolutionary movement differed from spontaneous peasant uprisings in its political program and organization. But it was limited, since the Decembrists were far from the people. However, their performance was a significant event in Russian history. The Decembrists developed the first revolutionary program and plan for the future structure of the country. For the first time, a practical attempt was made to change the socio-political system of Russia. The ideas and activities of the Decembrists, participants in the December uprising on Senate Square in 1825, played a special role in the further development of the socio-political thought of Russia.

Nicholas I, in an effort to distort the true goals and objectives of the Decembrists, made great efforts to disseminate in Russia and abroad the official version of the uprising on December 14, 1825. The uprising was portrayed as a narrow conspiracy, in which 7-8 officers allegedly took part and several people of a "vile appearance in evening coats", dragging the soldiers along with them. The purpose of the uprising was reduced to the overthrow of the throne, laws and the spread of anarchy.

Peasants of the Urals in the first half of the XIX century. actively participated in the anti-feudal struggle of the working people of all Russia. Wide protest at the beginning of the century was observed in the assigned village. Ascribed peasants protested against the violent process of "depeasantization" - separation from the land and turning into factory workers.

They defended their right to remain peasants, to plow the land. In 1800, the unrest of the assigned peasants of the Revdinsky plant began, and from 1802 to 1814, two or three performances took place here almost every year. Ascribed peasants of the Nizhny Tagil plant in 1803 oppose factory work, and the following year their "disobedience" extends to other Demidov plants. In 1805, the peasants assigned to the Sylvinsky plant began to worry. The owner of this plant, Yakovlev, divided the work into more souls than was supposed to, and due to this additional work, he started another one, the Serginsky plant. However, the peasants refused to work at two factories at once. Under the pressure of the growing movement of ascribed in 1807, the institution of ascribed peasants was liquidated. But the ascribed peasants were not released immediately: they had to work at state-owned factories until May 1, 1813, and at private ones until May 1, 1814. These conditions caused a new upsurge in the unrest of ascribed peasants, who did not subside until the end of 1814. Performances most often took the form of refusing to go to work. A major performance in March 1812 by 550 ascribed peasants of the Verkhisetsky plant, who lived in the Kalinovskaya volost of the Kamyshlov Uyezd. It quickly spread to other volosts of this county, was transferred to the Yekaterinburg and Irbit counties, covering over 20 thousand ascribed peasants of the Yakovlev, Demidov and state Goroblagodatsky factories. The peasants declared that they had allocated indispensable workers and would no longer perform factory work. A good connection was established between the indignant volosts, literate people who had the texts of laws with them and interpreted them directed the actions of the peasants. Meanwhile, “attorneys” from different volosts were sent with petitions to Perm, Yekaterinburg, and St. Only in May the unrest was liquidated by armed means. In the course of the implementation of the decree on indispensable workers, there were performances by the assigned Izhevsk plant, who refused to go into the composition of the indispensable workers in 1807, the unrest of the assigned Blagoveshchensk plant in the Orenburg province - the owner of this plant took away their land, did not issue provisions and set an extremely low pay for work. The struggle of other categories of state peasants also assumed a wide scope. At the beginning of 1830, in the provinces of Perm and Vyatka, the administration, which was in charge of the state-owned village, tightened the collection of arrears, increased the rate of collection of "reserve grain" intended for the event of a lean year. State peasants considered this the beginning of their transfer to the category of specific or even transfer to private ownership as serfs. In the same sense, the replacement of the state emblem on the official papers with the coat of arms of the Perm province, which contained the image of a bear, was interpreted. The peasants were convinced that this meant their transfer to the property of "Senator Medvedev", and they perceived the increase in requisitions as the collection of dues in favor of the new master. Unrest in the Perm province. began in the fall of 1834, initially in the Krasnoufimsk and Kungur districts. The peasants refused to pay duties to the treasury, did not want to elect precinct elders in accordance with the new rules. Among the peasants, a significant part of whom were Old Believers, rumors spread about the forthcoming forced introduction of official Orthodoxy. Similar fears worried the Muslim part of the population - the Bashkirs and Teptyars. The main requirement was the destruction of documents on the transfer of state volosts to the property of "master Medvedev" or to a specific department. By the beginning of 1835, the authorities managed to weaken the unrest, but in the spring they resumed with even greater force. In some villages, crowds of several hundred, and sometimes more than a thousand people gathered. In the Brodovsky volost of the Kungur district in June 1835, 4-5 thousand peasants were involved in the movement, most of them were armed with edged weapons. There were up to 150 people on horseback. A real military battle unfolded here. The peasants were led by energetic leaders - Vasily Sukhanov and his nephew Fyodor. Vasily Sukhanov addressed the authorities of the military teams with a letter in which he proved the rightness of the peasants and tried to prevent bloodshed. The officials who arrived in the area of ​​peasant unrest, guarded by a small military cover of 50 people, asked for reinforcements from the Perm governor Slastenin, but before the reinforcements arrived, the peasants began active operations. They attacked a military detachment near the village of Baikina. The officials themselves managed to hide in Kungur. The peasants at first acted actively and could have achieved complete success, but entered into negotiations with the officer, demanding the extradition of officials. Then the battle resumed, but two new military detachments had already approached. The peasants, fighting back, began to retreat into the surrounding forests. The next day, the "rebels" were searched in the thickets and surrounding villages. The epilogue of the events was the usual brutal reprisal in such cases, expressed in mass corporal punishment, exile to Siberia and hard labor [i.e. 1, p. 234]. The events in the Brodovsky volost were only one of many episodes of the struggle of the peasants of the Urals, though outstanding in scale and intensity, but still far from isolated. In the second half of the summer of 1835, unrest began in six cantons of the Bashkir army in the north of the Orenburg province. The Bashkirs protested against the transfer of their ancestral lands to the treasury, which distributed these lands to generals and officials, and also put part of the land fund on sale. In addition, they feared the destruction of the so-called canton organization, which maintained the administrative isolation and military service of the "Bashkir cavalry" instead of most other duties. Bashkir cavalry detachments began to gather near the village of Bolshaya Oka, Ufa district. They smashed the buildings of the canton administrations, dealt with the authorities. In a number of cases, detachments of Bashkirs and Russian state peasants acted together. In the Urals in 1835, a situation developed very close to that which preceded the beginning of the Peasants' War led by E. Pugachev. Orenburg governor Perovsky and Perm governor Slastenin organized a number of punitive expeditions against peasants and Bashkirs. By the end of August, the movement was largely broken. Hundreds of participants in the unrest paid with their lives in a collision with the troops, hundreds of peasant families were deported to Siberia. During the struggle in 1834-1835. the peasants showed steadfastness and heroism: they did not give out leaders, went on the offensive under bullets, and even forced the tsarist teams to retreat. However, in many cases, the peasants succumbed to the persuasion of government appeals and expressed their obedience without a fight. The tsarist illusions were supported by rumors that the officials had sold the peasants to "master Medvedev" without the knowledge of the tsar. There were cases of sending peasant walkers to Nicholas I. Social contradictions clearly manifested themselves among the Bashkir population as a result of the struggle. While the bulk of the Bashkirs acted together with the Russian peasants, representatives of the wealthy stratum managed to organize the Bashkir cavalry hundreds, who took part in Perovsky's punitive expeditions. Events of 1834-1835 prompted tsarism to start preparing a reform of the management of the “state village”, carried out by P. D. Kiselev. The reform did not bring “calmness” to the state village, but, on the contrary, exacerbated discontent even more. The severity of duties and taxes increased, while the positive consequences of the state "guardianship" remained on paper. Administrative innovations, such as uniform caftans with braids for officials of the peasant self-government, were considered by the peasants as proof of their grant to the serfs to "Minister Kiselev". The allocation of part of the peasant land for potato cultivation - an undertaking poorly prepared, carried out by methods of brutal violence - outraged the peasants and served as a pretext for the speeches of 1841-1843, which received the name "potato riots" in the old historical literature. The name is unfortunate and unreasonable. By the beginning of 1840, the potato was not a novelty for the peasants of the Urals and the Urals. He was known to them in the second half of the 18th century. The protest was caused by measures in which the peasants saw confirmation of their transfer to the specific department. In this sense, the forced allocation of land plots for potatoes was also interpreted, since such a measure was already practiced in many volosts inhabited by appanage peasants. In March-April 1841, Osinsky district of the Perm province was engulfed in unrest. The peasants believed that already several years ago the administration had sold them to "Minister Kiselev" or "master Kulnev" and that the allocation of plots for potatoes and the collection of "reserve bread" was a consequence of this sale. Sometimes another version was put forward: the state peasants were transferred to an inheritance. The peasants refused to plant potatoes, to put bread in spare stores. They removed the volost authorities imposed on them, replaced them with people of their choice. At the head of the movement were the villages of Stepanovskoye, Ordynskoye, Medyanskoye. The events in Medyanskoye in June 1841 took a particularly dramatic turn. The arrival of the governor at the head of an armed detachment did not break the steadfastness of the peasants. Even the artillery pieces put up against them did not frighten the recalcitrant. "Let's go to the guns!" shouted the peasant Yushkov, and drew a group of fellow villagers with him. Only by using weapons did the soldiers force the excited crowd to submit, after which a brutal massacre followed. A new upsurge in the movement came in the spring of 1842. Unrest swept the Kamyshlov, Irbit, Yekaterinburg, Shadrin districts. Kamyshlov uyezd became the center of the movement. Crowds of thousands of peasants besieged the volost and rural administrations, cracked down on the local administration, sought the issuance of documents that supposedly handed over the peasants “in inheritance” or turned them into the property of royal dignitaries. The peasants kept under siege the buildings where the authorities were hiding. The events in the Dalmatov volost of the Shadrinsk district were especially stormy. Here the peasants armed themselves with home-made weapons, displaced the head of the volost, established their own elective government. The large and rich Dalmatovsky Monastery, which was a stronghold of the tsarist authorities back in the time of E. Pugachev, again played the same role in April 1842. The monastery turned out to be an island surrounded by the raging elements of the peasant uprising. The monks fired at the peasants from the monastery wall with cannons, and in addition, they used a religious procession, exhortations addressed to the religious feeling of the peasants, etc. They were supported by the wealthy part of the population of the volost. As a result, it was possible to break the will of the peasants to fight, to free the representatives of the local administration who fell into their hands, and even to capture the instigators of the unrest. In the spring of 1843, the unrest unfolded with renewed vigor. Starting from the Shadrinsk district, the movement spread beyond the borders of the province. The population of the Chelyabinsk district of the Orenburg province, Tobolsk and Kurgan districts of the Tobolsk province became agitated. The performances of the peasants in the spring of 1843 were distinguished by great tension and scope. In some volosts of the Chelyabinsk and Shadrinsk districts, thousands of peasants were drawn into the struggle, and there were clashes with the troops. In some cases, guns were directed at the defiant crowd. In with. Baturinsky, Shadrinsk district, the peasants kept officials, soldiers and priests under siege for five days. 500 peasants of the village of Gagareva, Chelyabinsk district, entered into hand-to-hand combat with soldiers and Cossacks. About 3,600 peasants were imprisoned in Shadrinsk uyezd, and over 700 in Chelyabinsk uyezd. Somewhat later, the state peasants of the Vyatka province came out against the Kiselyov administration and its innovations. The destruction of potato plantations and other forms of disobedience began in the spring of 1842 in the Nolinsk district, which later remained the most "restless". In June-July, unrest spread to Slobodskoy, and then to Glazov and Vyatka districts. The Vyatka governor Mordvinov sent 150 soldiers to the Gorbunovskaya volost against the peasants. When they approached the village of Kalininskaya, the entire male population went into the forest, stealing cattle with them and seizing food. Then, armed with what they could, the peasants returned to the village and forced the soldiers to retreat. The governor arrived with reinforcements and two cannons in the area of ​​unrest. The meeting with recalcitrant peasants took place near the village of Bykovskaya, Gorbunovskaya volost. After the peasants refused to obey, Mordvinov ordered to open fire. 18 peasants were killed. The astonishingly passive courage of the peasants, who stood in a crowd, holding each other by the sashes, even after the first volley. The next episode of bloody pacification was the massacre perpetrated by the governor in the Tarankovsky repair of the Taloklyuchinsky volost. Up to 1,500 peasants gathered here, and reinforcements from the surrounding villages joined them. The peasants were shot with buckshot. More than 100 people were killed and wounded. Simultaneously with the peasants of the Nolinsk district, the population of the Glazovsky, Slobodsky, Sulaevsky and Vyatka counties rose. The peasants refused to plant potatoes, did not obey the authorities. In the Glazov district, together with the Russians, the Udmurts came out. The military court sentenced 267 peasants to various punishments, 43 of them were exiled to hard labor in the Bobruisk fortress, 19 with preliminary punishment with gauntlets. The social heterogeneity of the Ural village manifested itself in the behavior of individual strata of the peasantry. Wealthy owners tried to evade active participation in the struggle or even supported their superiors. So it was, for example, during the siege of the Dalmatov Monastery by the peasants, during the armed struggle of the peasants with the troops in the village. Baturinsky, Shadrinsk district. In the course of the unrest, some peasants had already begun to shed their tsarist illusions. A group of peasants of the Chelyabinsk district of the Perm province. at the end of 1842, she drew up a forged decree in which the transfer of state peasants to inheritance was proclaimed on behalf of the tsar. The compilers of the document, of course, wanted to shake the faith in the king as a people's intercessor in this way. This is how the state peasants of the Urals and the Urals responded to the reform of P. D. Kiselev. According to the estimates of the tsarist administration, in 1841-1843. on the territory of the Perm province alone. over 200 thousand people participated in the movement. Although the actions of the state peasants took place in other regions of the country, they did not reach such a scale there. Not only state peasants, but also patrimonial and appanage peasants rose to fight in the Urals. Most of the performances of the patrimonial peasants were associated with their desire to free themselves from factory service. The population of the estates of Vsevolozhsk, Butero-Rodali, Stroganovs, Golitsyns was worried. During the pre-reform decades of the XIX century. in the mining estates of these breeders there were 25 mass demonstrations. The reason for the unrest was usually an increase in the corvée served by the peasants at factory jobs, and harassment by the factory administration. There were unrest among the peasants who were serving their corvée duties on ship caravans of factory owners, who floated factory products along the Kama. In the Vyatka province. from 1800 to 1860 there were at least 76 relatively large actions of peasants of all categories, and this number also includes the actions of indispensable workers in factories. About two dozen cases of disobedience should be attributed to the landlord serfs. In 1815, the peasants of the villages of Aristovo and Shepelevo in the Iranian district, sold by their former owners to the Perm factory owner A.I. Yakovlev, refused to move 400 miles away to the Kholuninsky plant. The peasants resisted the military command sent by the governor, and yielded only when up to 700 soldiers were sent against them. Even Colonel Pankratov, sent to clarify the circumstances, was forced to admit that the peasants "were deprived of all property and driven, like a herd of sheep, from their peaceful dwellings to hard labor." However, the matter ended with the fact that the peasants were assigned to Yakovlev's Kholuninsky plant, and the leaders of the peasant resistance were severely punished. From 1832 to 1834 the peasants of the village fought hard for their rights. Novopokrovsky Urzhum district, which belonged to the landowners Depreis and Naumova, but considered themselves descendants of archers and, on this basis, sought freedom. After the verdict of the district court in favor of the landlords, the peasants refused to obey his decision. When a detachment sent by the governor entered the village, the most resolute peasants locked themselves in the house of the 120-year-old old man Rogov and fought back with iron tools and clubs. By decision of the military court, they were punished with gauntlets and batogs. In 1844-1846. there were long unrest in the estates of the largest landowner of the Vyatka province. Durnovo. The peasants deposed and beat the clerk Olenev. To manage the patrimony, they elected six of their representatives, calling them "six voices." And in this case, the unrest was suppressed by military force. The largest uprising of the specific peasants was the unrest in the Kachkinsky order of the Yelabuga district in 1828. Up to 1,500 peasants refused to pay monetary taxes and fulfill the duties established by the specific department. Women took an active part in the events. The massacre was carried out by an equestrian Cossack detachment. The last pre-reform decade, especially its second half, in the Vyatka province. was marked by the rise of the peasant movement. In 1850, about 50 peasant uprisings took place here, that is, more than in the entire previous period from the beginning of the century. Thus, the peasants of the Urals and the Urals actively fought against all forms of feudal oppression. Their struggle, gradually growing, joined the general flow of the popular protest movement, which forced tsarism to abolish serfdom.