Introduction
I. Reforms of Peter I
1.1. Economic transformation
1.2. Church reform
1.3. Changes in the field of culture, science and everyday life
II. Reforms of Catherine II
Conclusion

Introduction
During the reign of Peter the Great, reforms were carried out in all areas of the country's public life. Many of these transformations go back to the 17th century. The socio-economic transformations of that time served as the prerequisites for Peter's reforms, the task and content of which was the formation of a noble-bureaucratic apparatus of absolutism.
Peter turned Russia into a truly European country (at least as he understood it) - it’s not for nothing that the expression “cut a window to Europe” became so frequently used. Milestones on this path were the conquest of access to the Baltic, the construction of a new capital - St. Petersburg, and active intervention in European politics.
Peter's activities created all the conditions for Russia's wider acquaintance with the culture, way of life, and technologies of European civilization.
Another important feature of Peter’s reforms was that they affected all layers of society, unlike previous attempts by Russian rulers. The construction of the fleet, the Northern War, the creation of a new capital - all this became the work of the entire country.
The reforms of Catherine II were also aimed at creating a powerful absolute state. The policy pursued by her in the 60s and early 70s was called the policy of enlightened absolutism. This policy brought closer the moment of transition of social life to a new, more progressive formation.
The time of Catherine II was the time of awakening of scientific, literary and philosophical interests in Russian society, the time of the birth of the Russian intelligentsia.

I. Reforms of Peter I

Economic transformation
During the Petrine era, the Russian economy, and above all industry, made a giant leap. At the same time, the development of the economy in the first quarter of the 18th century. It followed the paths outlined by the previous period. In the Moscow state of the 16th-17th centuries. There were large industrial enterprises - the Cannon Yard, the Printing Yard, arms factories in Tula, a shipyard in Dedinovo, etc. Peter's policy regarding economic life was characterized by a high degree of use of command and protectionist methods.
In agriculture, opportunities for improvement were drawn from the further development of fertile lands, the cultivation of industrial crops that provided raw materials for industry, the development of livestock farming, the advancement of agriculture to the east and south, as well as more intensive exploitation of peasants. The state's increased needs for raw materials for Russian industry led to the widespread spread of crops such as flax and hemp. The decree of 1715 encouraged the cultivation of flax and hemp, as well as tobacco, mulberry trees for silkworms. The decree of 1712 ordered the creation of horse breeding farms in the Kazan, Azov and Kyiv provinces, and sheep breeding was also encouraged.
In the Peter the Great era, the country sharply divided into two zones of feudal farming - the barren North, where the feudal lords transferred their peasants to cash rent, often releasing them to the city and other agricultural areas to earn money, and the fertile South, where noble landowners sought to expand the corvee system. .
State duties for peasants also increased. With their efforts, cities were built (40 thousand peasants worked for the construction of St. Petersburg), manufactories, bridges, roads; annual recruitment drives were carried out, old levies were increased and new ones were introduced. The main goal of Peter's policy was always to obtain as much monetary and human resources as possible for state needs.
Two censuses were carried out - 1710 and 1718. According to the census of 1718, the unit of taxation became the male “soul,” regardless of age, from which a poll tax of 70 kopecks per year was levied (from state peasants 1 ruble 10 kopecks per year). This streamlined tax policy and sharply increased state revenues.
In industry there was a sharp reorientation from small peasant and handicraft farms to manufactories. Under Peter, at least 200 new manufactories were founded, and he encouraged their creation in every possible way. State policy was also aimed at protecting the young Russian industry from Western European competition by introducing very high customs duties (Customs Charter of 1724).
Russian manufactory, although it had capitalist features, but the use of predominantly peasant labor - sessional, assigned, quitrent, etc. - made it a feudal enterprise. Depending on whose property they were, manufactories were divided into state-owned, merchant and landowner. In 1721, industrialists were given the right to buy peasants to assign them to the enterprise (possession peasants).
State-owned factories used the labor of state peasants, assigned peasants, recruits and free hired craftsmen. They mainly served heavy industry - metallurgy, shipyards, mines. The merchant manufactories, which produced mainly consumer goods, employed both sessional and quitrent peasants, as well as civilian labor. Landowner enterprises were fully supported by the serfs of the landowner-owner.
Peter's protectionist policy led to the emergence of manufactories in a wide variety of industries, often appearing in Russia for the first time. The main ones were those that worked for the army and navy: metallurgical, weapons, shipbuilding, cloth, linen, leather, etc. Entrepreneurial activity was encouraged, preferential conditions were created for people who created new manufactories or leased state ones.
Manufactories appeared in many industries - glass, gunpowder, papermaking, canvas, paint, sawmills and many others. Nikita Demidov, who enjoyed the special favor of the Tsar, made a huge contribution to the development of the metallurgical industry of the Urals. The emergence of the foundry industry in Karelia on the basis of Ural ores, the construction of the Vyshevolotsky Canal, contributed to the development of metallurgy in new areas, and brought Russia to one of the first places in the world in this industry. At the beginning of the 18th century. About 150 thousand pounds of cast iron were smelted in Russia, in 1725 - more than 800 thousand pounds (since 1722, Russia exported cast iron), and by the end of the 18th century. – more than 2 million poods.
By the end of Peter's reign, Russia had a developed diversified industry with centers in St. Petersburg, Moscow, and the Urals. The largest enterprises were the Admiralty Shipyard, Arsenal, St. Petersburg gunpowder factories, metallurgical plants in the Urals, and Khamovny Dvor in Moscow. The all-Russian market was being strengthened and capital was being accumulated thanks to the mercantilist policy of the state. Russia supplied competitive goods to world markets: iron, linen, potash, furs, caviar.
Thousands of Russians were trained in various specialties in Europe, and in turn, foreigners - weapons engineers, metallurgists, and locksmiths - were hired into Russian service. Thanks to this, Russia was enriched with the most advanced technologies in Europe.
As a result of Peter's policy in the economic field, a powerful industry was created in an extremely short period of time, capable of fully meeting military and government needs and not depending on imports in any way.

1.2. Church reform

The church reform of Peter played an important role in the establishment of absolutism. In the second half of the 17th century. The positions of the Russian Orthodox Church were very strong; it retained administrative, financial and judicial autonomy in relation to the tsarist government. The last patriarchs Joachim (1675-1690) and Adrian (1690-1700) pursued policies aimed at strengthening these positions.
Peter's church policy, as well as his policy in other areas of public life. Was aimed primarily at as much as possible efficient use churches for the needs of the state, and more specifically, to squeeze money out of the church for government programs, primarily for the construction of the fleet. After Peter’s journey as part of the great embassy, ​​he was also occupied with the problem of the complete subordination of the church to its power.
Turn to new policy occurred after the death of Patriarch Hadrian. Peter orders an audit to take a census of the property of the Patriarchal House. Taking advantage of the information about the revealed abuses, Peter cancels the election of a new patriarch, at the same time entrusting Metropolitan Stefan Yavorsky of Ryazan with the post of “locum tenens of the patriarchal throne.” In 1701, the Monastic Prikaz was formed - a secular institution to manage the affairs of the church. The Church begins to lose its independence from the state, the right to dispose of its property.
Peter, guided by the educational idea of ​​the public good, which requires the productive work of all members of society, launches an attack on monks and monasteries. In 1701, the royal decree limited the number of monks: for permission to take tonsure, you now need to apply to the Monastic Order. Subsequently, the king had the idea to use the monasteries as shelters for retired soldiers and beggars. In a decree of 1724, the number of monks in the monastery was directly dependent on the number of people they cared for.
The existing relationship between the church and the authorities required new legal registration. In 1721, a prominent figure of the Petrine era, Feofan Prokopovich, drew up the Spiritual Regulations, which provided for the destruction of the institution of the patriarchate and the formation of a new body - the Spiritual Collegium, which was soon renamed the “Holy Government Synod”, officially equal in rights with the Senate. Stefan Yavorsky became president, Feodosius Yanovsky and Feofan Prokopovich became vice-presidents.
The creation of the Synod was the beginning of the absolutist period of Russian history, since now all power, including church power, was concentrated in the hands of Peter. A contemporary reports that when Russian church leaders tried to protest, Peter pointed them to the Spiritual Regulations and declared: “Here is a spiritual patriarch for you, and if you don’t like him, then here is a damask patriarch (throwing a dagger on the table).”
The adoption of the Spiritual Regulations actually turned Russian clergy into government officials, especially since a secular person, the chief prosecutor, was appointed to supervise the Synod.
The church reform was carried out in parallel with the tax reform. Registration and classification of priests were carried out, and their lower strata were transferred to a per capita salary. According to the consolidated statements of the Kazan, Nizhny Novgorod and Astrakhan provinces (formed as a result of the division of the Kazan province), only 3,044 priests out of 8,709 (35%) were exempted from taxes. A violent reaction among priests was caused by the Resolution of the Synod of May 17, 1722, in which clergy were obliged to violate the secret of confession if they had the opportunity to communicate any information important to the state.
As a result of church reform, the church lost a huge part of its influence and became part of the state apparatus, strictly controlled and managed by secular authorities.

1.3. Changes in the field of culture, science and everyday life.
The process of Europeanization of Russia in the era of Peter the Great is the most controversial part of Peter’s reforms. Even before Perth, the preconditions for widespread Europeanization had been created, ties with foreign countries had noticeably strengthened, Western European cultural traditions were gradually penetrating into Russia, even barber shaving had its roots in the pre-Petrine era. In 1687, the Slavic-Greek-Latin Academy was opened - the first higher educational institution in Russia. And yet Peter’s activities were revolutionary. V.Ya. Ulanov wrote: “What was new in the formulation of the cultural question under Peter the Great was that now culture was called upon as a creative force not only in the field of special technology, but also in its broad cultural and everyday manifestations, and not only in application to a chosen society... but also in relation to the broad masses of the people."
The most important stage in the implementation of reforms was Peter’s visit to a number of European countries as part of the Grand Embassy. Upon his return, Peter sent many young nobles to Europe to study various specialties, mainly mastering marine sciences. The Tsar also cared about the development of education in Russia. In 1701, in Moscow, in the Sukharev Tower, the School of Mathematical and Navigational Sciences was opened, headed by a professor at the University of Aberdeen, the Scot Forvarson. One of the teachers of this school was Leonty Magnitsky, the author of “Arithmetic...” In 1711, an engineering school appeared in Moscow.
Peter strove to overcome as soon as possible the disunity between Russia and Europe that had arisen since the time of the Tatar-Mongol yoke. One of its appearances was different chronology, and in 1700 Peter transferred Russia to a new calendar - the year 7208 became 1700, and the New Year celebration was moved from September 1 to January 1.
In 1703, the first issue of the Vedomosti newspaper, the first Russian newspaper, was published in Moscow, and in 1702 the Kunsht troupe was invited to Moscow to create a theater.
Important changes took place in the life of the nobles, remaking the Russian nobility “in the image and likeness” of the European one. In 1717, the book “An Honest Mirror of Youth” was published - a kind of etiquette textbook, and since 1718 there were Assemblies - noble meetings modeled on European ones.
However, we must not forget that all these transformations came exclusively from above, and therefore were quite painful for both the upper and lower strata of society.
Peter strove to make Russia a European country in every sense of the word and attached great importance to even the smallest details of the process.

II. Reforms of Catherine II

As a result of the latter, in the 18th century. In the palace coup carried out on June 28, 1762, the wife of Perth III was elevated to the Russian throne, becoming Empress Catherine II (1762-1796).
Catherine II began her reign by confirming the Manifesto on the freedom of the nobility and generous gifts to the participants in the coup. Having proclaimed herself the successor of the work of Peter I, Catherine directed all her efforts towards creating a powerful absolute state.
In 1763, a Senate reform was carried out in order to streamline the work of the Senate, which had long ago turned into a bureaucratic institution. The Senate was divided into six departments with clearly defined functions for each of them. In 1763-1764. The secularization of church lands was carried out, which was associated with a reduction (from 881 to 385) in the number of monasteries. Thus, the economic viability of the church was undermined, which from now on became completely dependent on the state. The process of transforming the church into part of the state apparatus, begun by Peter I, was completed.
The economic base of the state has strengthened significantly. In 1764, the hetmanate in Ukraine was liquidated, control passed to the new Little Russian Collegium, located in Kyiv and headed by Governor General P.A. Rumyantsev. This was accompanied by the transfer of the mass of ordinary Cossacks to the position of peasants, and serfdom began to spread to Ukraine.
Catherine received the throne illegally and only thanks to the support of noble officers, she sought support in the nobility, realizing the fragility of her position. A whole series of decrees expanded and strengthened the class rights and privileges of the nobility. The Manifesto of 1765 on the implementation of the General Land Survey secured the monopoly right to own land for the nobility, and also provided for the sale of 5 kopecks to the nobles. for a tithe of serf lands and wastelands.
Super-preferential conditions for promotion to officer ranks were assigned to the nobility, and funds for the maintenance of class nobles increased significantly educational institutions. At the same time, the decrees of the 60s consolidated the omnipotence of the landowners and the complete lack of rights of the peasants. According to the Decree of 1767, any, even just, complaint from peasants against landowners was declared a grave state crime.
Thus, landowner power under Catherine II acquired wider legal boundaries.
Unlike her predecessors, Catherine II was a major and intelligent politician, a deft politician. Being well educated and familiar with the works of French enlighteners, she understood that it was no longer possible to rule with the old methods. The policy pursued by her in the 60s and early 70s. called the policy of enlightened absolutism. The socio-economic basis of the policy of enlightened absolutism was the development of a new capitalist structure, which destroyed old feudal relations.
The policy of enlightened absolutism was a natural stage of state development and, despite the half-heartedness of the reforms carried out, brought closer the moment of transition of social life to a new, more progressive formation.
Within two years, Catherine II drew up a program of new legislation in the form of an order for the convened commission to draw up a new Code, since the Code of 1649 was outdated. Catherine II’s “mandate” was the result of her previous reflections on educational literature and a unique perception of the ideas of French and German educators. The “order” concerned all the main parts government structure, governance, supreme power, rights and responsibilities of citizens, classes, and, to a greater extent, legislation and the courts. The “Nakaz” substantiated the principle of autocratic rule: “The sovereign is autocratic; for no other power, as soon as the power united in his person, can act similarly to the space of such a great state...” The guarantee against despotism, according to Catherine, was the establishment of the principle of strict legality, as well as the separation of the judicial power from the executive and the continuous transformation associated with it legal proceedings that eliminate outdated feudal institutions.
The economic policy program inevitably brought to the fore the peasant question, which was of great importance under the conditions of serfdom. The nobility showed itself as a reactionary force (with the exception of individual deputies), ready to defend serfdom by any means. Merchants and Cossacks thought about acquiring privileges to own serfs, and not about mitigating serfdom.
In the 60s, a number of decrees were issued that dealt a blow to the dominant system of monopolies. A decree of 1762 allowed the free opening of calico factories and sugar factories. In 1767, freedom of urban trades was declared, which was of great importance. Thus, the laws of the 60-70s. created favorable conditions for the growth of peasant industry and its development into capitalist production.
The time of Catherine II was the time of awakening of scientific, literary and philosophical interests in Russian society, the time of the birth of the Russian intelligentsia. Although it reached only a small part of the population, it was an important step forward. During the reign of Catherine, the first Russian charitable institutions appeared. Catherine's time is the heyday of Russian culture, this is the time of A.P. Sumarokova, D.I. Fonvizina, G.I. Derzhavina, N.I. Novikova, A.N. Radishcheva, D.G. Levitsky, F.S. Rokotova, etc.
In November 1796, Catherine passed away. Her son Paul (1796-1801) ascended the throne. Under Paul I, a course was established towards strengthening absolutism, maximum centralization of the state apparatus, and strengthening the personal power of the monarch.

Conclusion
The main result of the totality of Peter's reforms was the establishment of absolutism in Russia, the crown of which was the change in the title of the Russian monarch in 1721 - Perth declared himself emperor, and the country began to be called the Russian Empire. Thus, what Peter was aiming for all the years of his reign was formalized - the creation of a state with a coherent system of governance, a strong army and navy, a powerful economy, influencing international politics. As a result of Peter's reforms, the state was not bound by anything and could use any means to achieve its goals. As a result, Peter came to his ideal of government - a warship, where everything and everyone is subordinated to the will of one person - the captain, and managed to lead this ship out of the swamp into the stormy waters of the ocean, bypassing all the reefs and shoals.
The role of Peter the Great in the history of Russia is difficult to overestimate. No matter how you feel about the methods and style of his reforms, one cannot help but admit that Peter the Great is one of the most famous figures in world history.
All reforms of Catherine II were also aimed at creating a powerful absolutist state. The policy pursued by her was called the “policy of enlightened absolutism.”
On the one hand, Catherine proclaimed the advanced truths of educational philosophy (especially in the chapters on legal proceedings and economics), on the other hand, she confirmed the inviolability of the autocratic serfdom system. While strengthening absolutism, it maintained autocracy, introducing only adjustments (greater freedom of economic life, some foundations of the bourgeois legal order, the idea of ​​​​the need for enlightenment) that contributed to the development of the capitalist structure.
Catherine's undoubted merit was the introduction of universal public education.

Bibliography.
1. Soloviev S.M. About the history of new Russia. – M.: Education, 1993
2. Anisimov E.V. The time of Peter's reforms. – L.: Lenizdat, 1989
3. Anisimov E.V., Kamensky A.B. Russia in the 18th – first half of the 19th centuries: History. Document. – M.: MIROS, 1994
4. Pavlenko N.I. Peter the Great. – M.: Mysl, 1990

In the second half of the 18th century. The feudal-serf system in Russia began to be undermined by the growth of capitalist relations. The penetration of commodity production into agriculture accelerated the stratification of property among the peasantry, especially in quitrent areas. Hundreds of thousands of ruined peasants broke ties with the land and sought income in non-agricultural trades. This created a labor market for large-scale industry and other conditions for the development of capitalist manufacturing.

A clear indicator of the beginning of the disintegration of the feudal system was the desire of some landowners to introduce agricultural improvements, as well as to engage in commercial and industrial activities. This indicated that traditional methods of organizing the economy and exploiting labor required significant changes.

1. Agriculture

Agriculture during this period, as before, remained the basis of the country's economy, and rural residents dominated the population (by the end of the century, about 4% lived in cities).

The development of agricultural production was mainly extensive in nature and was achieved due to the following factors:

1. Population growth, which was ensured both by the annexation of new territories and by population growth in the central regions of Russia. If in 1721 15.5 million people lived in the Russian Empire, then in 1747 - 18 million people, and in 1796 - 36 million people.

2. Development of new territories. After the annexation of Novorossia (Northern Black Sea and Azov regions), Crimea, some regions of the North Caucasus, Ukrainian, Belarusian and Lithuanian lands that belonged to Poland, the territory of the country increased significantly. At the same time, the increase occurred, first of all, due to fertile black soil lands, which were provided not only to landowners for the removal of serfs (1.5 -12 thousand dessiatines each), but also to state peasants (60 dessiatines each), retired soldiers , foreign colonists (Germans, Greeks, Armenians, Jews, Swiss, etc.).

In addition, the agricultural development of Siberia and the Urals continued, where, in addition to migration from the central regions, there was a gradual transition of the local population - Bashkirs, Buryats, from nomadic cattle breeding to settled arable farming.

3. A major role in the growth of agricultural production, primarily grain production, was played by the preservation and strengthening of serfdom, as well as the expansion of the zone of serfdom to the Left Bank Ukraine and the Volga region.

At the same time, progressive factors for the development of agricultural production began to operate. Some of them contributed to a slight intensification of production in certain areas and farms.

Regional specialization of agricultural production has increased.

New crops were introduced. If potatoes still remained a garden crop, then sunflower became widespread in Ukraine and Novorossiya. Sugar beets began to be cultivated.

The marketability of agriculture increased. On the one hand, the landowners needed everything more money to purchase luxury goods. On the other hand, purchases of grain for the army and industrial crops for the growing industry increased, and grain exports to Western Europe increased several times. In addition, with the development of industry and cities, an increasing part of the population moved away from self-sufficiency in agricultural products and needed to purchase them.

Due to increasing demand, prices for agricultural products have increased.

By the end of the 18th century, based on the growth of marketability, the strengthening of trade ties between different regions of the country, and the transformation of such ties into regular ones, a single all-Russian grain market had emerged.

As a result of these processes, commodity-money relations developed in the country.

During this period, the first attempts to apply new methods and technologies, scientific achievements for the development of agricultural production began. For this purpose, in 1765, on the initiative of Catherine 2, the Free Economic Society was created. But his activities under the conditions of the serf system did not lead to significant results; only on a few small estates did the landowners buy some agricultural equipment and try to introduce multi-field crop rotation.

2. Industrial development

The growth in industrial production was more significant than in agriculture, which was ensured by the growing needs of the Russian army and navy, increased demand on the world market for iron and sailing cloth, as well as the growth of the non-agricultural population in Russia.

Heavy industry. Ferrous metallurgy developed especially quickly (primarily in the Urals), increasing production volume by 5 times. Russian iron not only became one of the important factors in strengthening the army and navy, but was also exported to Western Europe - at the end of the century, most of the cast iron transported to England was of Russian origin. Gold mining began in Siberia.

Light industry also grew rapidly. Textile production developed rapidly, accounting for more than 80% of the value of all products of large, medium and light industry. New enterprises arose in the center of the country, and were especially active in Ukraine (cloth factories), Estonia and Latvia.

Various forms of industrial organization developed in Russia. The main ones were handicraft, small commodity production, as well as medium and large commodity production in the form of manufactories.

Handicraft production was widespread both in the city and in the countryside. In a number of areas of the Center and the Volga region, a leather and textile peasant industry developed, which constituted such serious competition for urban craft and merchant enterprises that in the 1760-1770s. Complaints from merchants in many provinces about peasants' untidy factories became commonplace. In some large villages of the Center, peasants abandoned agriculture altogether.

Manufacture (medium and large commodity production based on the division of labor and manual labor) dominated in ferrous metallurgy, the production of linen, cloth, silk and a number of other industries. The number of manufactories grew rapidly - from 600 in the era of Elizabeth to 1200 by the end of the reign of Catherine II.

Main types of manufactories

State-owned - belonged to the state, were provided with government orders and were based on serf labor. Their products were intended primarily for the army and navy. These manufactories developed slowly.

Possession private manufactories were provided by workers attached to enterprises from which they could not be alienated. The labor of sessional workers, who had their own plots of land, was paid in money; they could not be used in agricultural work, nor could they be recruited; they were subject to the jurisdiction of the Berg and Manufactory Collegiums. But otherwise their position was no different from that of a serf.

Such enterprises were especially common in the Urals (mining and metallurgy) and in the Central regions (linen and cloth production), and their products were also mainly purchased by the state.

Patrimonial - belonged to the landowners. The serfs worked their corvee work on them. Such enterprises (primarily distilleries and textiles), despite very low productivity, were profitable due to the free labor of serfs, but developed more and more slowly. The position of the serf workers in these manufactories was extremely difficult. According to the memoirs of a contemporary, the peasants said - there is a factory in this village - with an expression as if they were saying: There is a plague in this village.

Merchant and peasant manufactories were based on civilian labor. The number of such manufactories grew very quickly, and their size increased. Such enterprises formed the backbone of the cotton industry, where at the turn of the 18th-19th centuries. Over 80% of the workers worked as freelancers.

According to some quantitative indicators of large-scale industrial production, Russia was ahead of all continental Europe, including France, Holland, and Prussia; Russian metallurgy continued to be a supplier of iron to European countries. But while England entered the era of the industrial revolution, Russia's industrial technology remained old. Production relations also took backward forms in such industries as metallurgy and cloth. The mining industry of the Urals and the cloth industry of European Russia were, according to V.I. Lenin, an example of “that original phenomenon in Russian history, which consists in the application of serf labor to industry” (Lenin, Development of capitalism in Russia, Works, x. 3 , page 411.).

By 1767, there were 385 manufactories in Russia (cloth, linen, silk, glass, etc.) and 182 iron and copper foundries, i.e. a total of 567 industrial enterprises. The number of large enterprises by the end of the 16th century. doubled.

The presence of large reserves of their own raw materials (flax, hemp, leather, wool, grain, etc.) and free labor, the possibility of profitable sales of products pushed landowners to establish patrimonial manufactories. Cloth, linen, leather, glass, distillery and other enterprises were created on the estates of Russian, Ukrainian, and Baltic landowners. The work of serfs in these enterprises was the most severe form of corvee.

But, despite the absolute increase in the number of noble manufactories, by the end of the century their share was falling due to the increase in the number of merchant and peasant manufactories, which were the immediate predecessors of the capitalist factory.

Capitalist manufacture most often grew out of peasant crafts, primarily in light industry. So, in the late 40s of the 18th century. In the Ivanovo textile region, with rare exceptions, the manufactories no longer used the labor of sessional peasants, but hired workers.

Manufactories in the light industry of Russia were large in size. Among them there were those that employed up to 2 thousand people or even more, and enterprises served by 300-400 workers were considered medium-sized. At the sailing manufactory of the Goncharovs at the end of the 18th century. There were 1,624 workers; at the cloth factory of the Khovansky princes there were up to 2,600 workers.

3.Trade

Development of the domestic market

The breadbasket of Russia in the middle of the 18th century. there were central black earth regions, especially the Belgorod and Voronezh provinces, and by the end of the century - the Middle Volga region. From here grain was exported to Moscow and St. Petersburg, Yaroslavl, Kostroma. Both landowners and peasants acted as bread sellers. Landowners sold bread and other agricultural products in order to increase their monetary income. Most of the peasants sold the grain they needed for their own consumption, because they needed money to pay rent and poll tax, to buy salt and industrial products.

The separation of peasants from agriculture and household crafts contributed to the expansion of the capacity of the domestic market for industrial goods. The products of large metallurgical plants and manufactories that produced linen gradually penetrate into the peasant and landowner economy, displacing household handicrafts. Both of these industries, which for a long time supplied most of their products abroad, due to the expansion of the domestic market, began to produce consumer goods.

The development of domestic trade prompted the government to make major changes in its economic policy. They were determined both by the interests of the trading nobility, who sought the elimination of trade monopolies and restrictions, and by the interests of the merchants.

In the middle of the XVIII century. 17 different types of internal customs duties were levied. The existence of internal customs hindered the development of the all-Russian market. By decree of December 20, 1753, internal customs duties were abolished.

Equally important for the growth of trade and industry were the abolition of industrial monopolies by decree of 1767 and the manifesto of 1775 and the proclamation of freedom of industry and trade. Peasants were given the opportunity to freely engage in “handicrafts” and sell industrial products, which contributed to a more rapid development of small-scale commodity production into capitalist manufacture.

International trade

If in 1749 the export of goods from Russia amounted to about 7 million rubles, then 35 years later, in 1781-1785, it reached almost 24 million rubles annually, and exports significantly exceeded imports.

In the first place in Russian exports, as in previous times, were raw materials and semi-finished products - flax, hemp and tow, amounting to 20 to 40% of all exports. They were followed by leather, fabrics, timber, ropes, bristles, potash, lard, and furs.

Industrial goods became increasingly important in exports. For example, iron accounted for 6% of Russian exports in 1749, and 13% in 1796. The maximum figure for Russian iron exports occurred in 1794, when it reached almost 3.9 million poods; in subsequent years, the export of iron abroad steadily declined. The export of grain fluctuated depending on the harvest and grain prices on the domestic market, and on the prohibitions imposed on the export of grain. In 1749, for example, the export of grain was expressed in an insignificant figure - 2 thousand rubles (0.03% of all exports). Since the 60s, the export of bread began to grow rapidly, reaching an amount of 2.9 million rubles in the early 90s.

Among the goods imported to Russia, items of noble consumption continued to prevail: sugar, cloth, silks, wines, fruits, spices, perfumes, etc.

4. Position of the main classes

The main socio-economic tasks of the state during this period were: adaptation of the ruling class - the nobility to developing commodity-money relations, adaptation of the serfdom to the new economic system, and, ultimately, strengthening of the renewed noble feudal state.

On the other hand, it was necessary to contribute to the economic strengthening of the country in order to facilitate its further transformation into a great power, ensure the fulfillment of foreign policy tasks, and also relieve social tension, which resulted in protests and even uprisings of various segments of the population. Catherine II, a supporter of free trade and industrial activity, considered it her task to free entrepreneurship from oppression.

These two tasks, which objectively contradicted each other, at this stage were relatively successfully combined in the economic policy of the state.

Peter III provided new benefits to entrepreneurs from the nobility - in 1762, manufacturers of non-noble origin were forbidden to buy serfs for their enterprises, nobles were exempted from compulsory public service, which was supposed to direct their efforts to the national economy.

These benefits were confirmed and expanded by the Charter of the Nobility, issued by Catherine II in the 2nd century. 1785 In 1782, mining freedom was abolished - landowners were declared owners not only of the land, but also of its subsoil. But the nobles were not very willing to go into business due to the lack of sufficient funds and class remnants in their worldview.

Catherine’s main liberal measure was the Manifesto of 1775, which greatly facilitated the development of entrepreneurship. Representatives of all classes, including serfs, received the right to start camps and handicrafts, without asking for any permission and without any registration (this is why the manifesto of 1775 is usually called in the literature the manifesto on freedom of enterprise). This contributed rapid growth peasant crafts and handicraft industries.

Strengthening serfdom in the second half of the 18th century. reached its apogee. This happened due to: the expansion of the zone of application of serf labor to the Left Bank and Sloboda Ukraine (in 1783, peasants here were forbidden to move from landowner to landowner), the areas of the Kursk-Belgorod and Voronezh serf lines, to the Don, Trans-Volga region, and the Urals. In addition, state lands and lands seized from the church were actively distributed to the nobility: thus, under Catherine II, more than 800 thousand peasants became serfs; strengthening the power of landowners over peasants: decrees of Peter III and Catherine II proclaimed the right of the landowner to send peasants into exile in Siberia (1760) without trial, to hard labor (1765), peasants were forbidden to complain to the monarch about their landowner (1767), etc. Moreover, the exiled serfs were counted as conscripts to the landowner, and as a result he did not suffer any losses. Over the course of 5 years, about 20 thousand serfs were exiled and sent to hard labor. The sale and resale of serfs without land flourished, and auctions were held.

As a result, serfdom at the end of the enlightened 18th century differed from slavery only in that the peasants ran their own households, while the serfs were practically equated with slaves.

The possibilities for economic development based on feudalism were seriously reduced. Serfdom became a brake on economic progress.

Extensive economic development prevailed. The level of development of the Russian economy and its growth rate lagged behind the advanced countries of the West.

At the same time, progressive trends developed in the country's economy. Industry, including manufacturing, and trade grew rapidly. Commodity-money relations developed, including in agriculture. In public policy, under the influence of the ideas of the European Enlightenment, elements of economic liberalism were practiced.

The development of commodity-money relations, the formation of an all-Russian market, and the emergence of the capitalist structure led to the deformation of the main features of serfdom. The process of disintegration of the feudal-serf system gradually began.

At the same time, in the second half of the 18th century. Russia's economy, primarily industry and trade, developed at a relatively high pace. During this period, the combination of pro-noble policies and elements of economic liberalism still bore fruit and, by the end of the reign of Catherine II, ensured the creation of a powerful army and navy, the solution of foreign policy problems and socio-political stabilization in the country.

Ticket 19.

Russia at the turn of the 17th-18th centuries.

Russia at the turn of the XVII-XVIII was a state whose politics and social life were characterized by complete confusion. Society understood that the old ways of life were gradually becoming a thing of the past, but it was not ready to accept innovations.

Russia in the early stages of the Emperor's reign

After the death of Alexei Mikhailovich, contenders for the throne began to wage a fierce struggle among themselves, which further complicated the already unstable economic state of the country. In August 1689, supporters of the son of Tsar Alexei Mikhailovich, 17-year-old Peter, were able to install their protege as king.

At the beginning of his reign, Peter showed absolute indifference to state affairs. He was content with the fact that the country was actually ruled by his closest relatives, in whose hands he was simply a puppet who carried out their will.

Instead of being interested in the problems of society and gradually solving them, Peter indulged in various amusements, which consisted of making models of ships and organizing competitions in which the functionality of the royal crafts was tested.

As history will show us, over time, Peter, thanks to his hobby, will be able to create the most powerful fleet in Europe. But that will happen later, but for now the young king idly indulged in fun and completely ignored his direct responsibilities.

Peter was incredibly lucky to have an entourage that was very capable and wise, and was able to maintain the tsar’s prestige in the eyes of the people. The tsar's associates - J. Bruce, F. Lefort, P. Gordon - were gradually able to convince the tsar of the need to change priorities and engage in public administration. Thanks to their influence, the first state activity of the tsar began as a sole ruler.

Peter's first achievements

Peter's military amusements gradually transformed into the military strategy of the state. The king began to realize the need to open new trade routes that would make it possible to improve the economy of the state.

Peter logically understood that this required a strong flotilla. However, it was not possible to open exits to strategically important seas due to the unpreparedness of the army. The king did not have the opportunity to reform it at the early stage of his reign, therefore, Special attention began to focus on the construction of river ports on the Volga, which contributed to the development of domestic trade.

But the idea of ​​gaining access to the seas did not leave Peter; for this he had to find out the political situation in Europe in order to find future allies for himself in the war with the Ottoman Empire.

The Tsar initiated the creation of the Grand Embassy in 1689, the main function of which was to visit European countries and renew diplomatic relations with them. Incognito Peter himself was among the Russian delegations.

The activities of the Grand Embassy played a huge role in the history of Russia and became a turning point in its further course. Peter was not only able to find allies for his state, he realized the depth of the large-scale abyss that separated progressive Europe and boyar Russia.

It was from this moment that a new stage in the tsar’s policy began - the reformism of Peter, who was able to subsequently not only strengthen the Russian state, but make it a powerful European empire.

The situation of Spain at the end of the 17th century.

The decline of productive forces, financial disorder and disorder in administration affected the size of the army. In wartime, it numbered no more than 15-20 thousand soldiers, and in peacetime - 8-9 thousand. The Spanish fleet also did not represent any significant force. If in the 16th and first half of the 17th centuries. Spain was a threat to its neighbors, but by the beginning of the 18th century it had already weakened so much that the question arose about the division of its possessions between France, Austria and England.

Preparations for the War of the Spanish Succession

The last Spanish Habsburg, Charles II (1665-1700), had no offspring. The end of the dynasty, expected with his death, during Charles’s lifetime, prompted negotiations between the great powers on the division of the Spanish inheritance - the largest that had previously been known in the history of Europe. In addition to Spain itself, it included the Duchy of Milan, Naples, Sardinia and Sicily, the Canary Islands, Cuba, Saint-Domingue (Haiti), Florida, Mexico with Texas and California, Central and South America, with the exception of Brazil, the Philippine and Caroline Islands and others smaller holdings.

The reason for the conflict over Spanish possessions was a dispute over dynastic rights that arose in connection with “Spanish marriages.” Louis XIV and Emperor Leopold I were married to the sisters of Charles II and expected the Spanish crown to pass to their offspring. But behind the disagreements over inheritance rights, the aggressive aspirations of the strongest states of Western Europe were hidden. The real reasons for the war were rooted in the contradictions between France, Austria and England. The Russian commissioner at the Karlovitsky Congress (1699) Voznitsyn wrote that France wants to establish its dominance in Western Europe, and “the naval powers (England and Holland - Ed.) and Austria are preparing for war so as not to allow the French to reach the Kingdom of Gishpan, Once he has acquired it, he will crush them all.”

In the last years of Charles II's life, French troops were concentrated on the border near the Pyrenees. Charles II and the most influential Spanish grandees were afraid of a break with France. They decided to transfer the crown to the French prince, hoping that France would be able to protect the integrity of the Spanish possessions from other powers. Charles II bequeathed his throne, that is, Spain with all its colonies, to the second grandson of Louis XIV, Duke Philip of Anjou, with the proviso that Spain and France would never unite under the rule of one monarch. In 1700, Charles II died and the Duke of Anjou ascended the Spanish throne; in April of the following year he was crowned in Madrid under the name of Philip V (1700-1746). Soon, Louis XIV recognized the right of Philip V to the French throne with a special charter and occupied the border fortresses of the Spanish Netherlands with his troops. The rulers of the Spanish provinces received orders from Madrid to obey all orders of the French king as if they came from the Spanish monarch. Subsequently, trade duties were abolished between both countries. Intending to undermine the trading power of England, Louis XIV wrote to Philip V in Madrid that the time had come to “exclude England and Holland from trade with the Indies.” The privileges of English and Dutch merchants in Spanish possessions were abolished.

To weaken France, the “maritime powers” ​​entered into an alliance with Austria, France’s main enemy on land. Austria sought to seize Spanish possessions in Italy and the Netherlands, as well as Alsace. By transferring the Spanish crown to the Austrian pretender to the Spanish throne, Archduke Charles, Emperor Leopold I wanted to create a threat to France from the Spanish border. Prussia also joined the coalition.

Military operations began in the spring of 1701. At the very beginning of the war, the English fleet destroyed 17 Spanish and 24 French ships. In 1703, Archduke Charles and allied troops landed in Portugal, which immediately submitted to England and concluded an alliance and trade agreement with it on duty-free import of English goods into Portugal. In 1704, the English fleet bombarded Gibraltar and, landing troops, captured this fortress. France's ally, the Duke of Savoy, went over to the side of the emperor.

The French offensive in Southwestern Germany, which suffered terrible devastation, was stopped by Anglo-Dutch troops under the command of the Duke of Marlborough. Having united with the Austrians, they inflicted a severe defeat on the French at Hochstedt. In 1706, the French army suffered a second major defeat at Turin from the Austrians under the command of Prince Eugene of Savoy. The following year, imperial troops occupied the Duchy of Milan, Parma and most of the Kingdom of Naples.

The French held out in the Spanish Netherlands somewhat longer than in Italy. But in 1706 and 1708. Marlborough inflicted two defeats on them - at Ramilly and at Oudenard - and forced them to clear Flanders. Although the French troops took revenge in a bloody battle near the village of Malplaquet (1709), where the allies suffered enormous losses, the war clearly went on with an advantage on the side of the latter. The English fleet captured Sardinia and Minorca, and in America the British captured Acadia. Archduke Charles landed in Spain and proclaimed himself king in Madrid.

However, in 1711, when Charles ascended the Austrian throne, the prospect, unpleasant for England, of the unification of Austria and Spain under one authority arose. In addition, the depletion of financial resources, dissatisfaction with the theft and bribery of Marlborough and other Whigs contributed to their fall and the transfer of power to the Tory party, which was inclined to peace with France. Without involving Austria in the matter, the British and Dutch governments entered into secret negotiations with France and Spain. In March 1713, the Peace of Utrecht was signed, ending France's claims to hegemony in Western Europe. England and Holland agreed to recognize Philip V as king of Spain on the condition that he renounce all rights to the French throne for himself and his descendants. Spain abandoned Lombardy, the Kingdom of Naples, Sardinia in favor of the Austrian Habsburgs, ceded Sicily to the Duke of Savoy, Prussia - Geldern and England - Minorca and Gibraltar.

Agrarian relations

The 18th century saw the complete dominance of feudal relations in Spain. The country was agricultural, agricultural products even at the end of the 18th century. significantly (almost five times) higher than industrial production, and the population engaged in agriculture was six times larger than the population associated with industrial production.

About three-quarters of the cultivated land belonged to the nobility and the Catholic Church. Peasants performed many different feudal duties in favor of both secular and spiritual lords. They made to the lords, in addition to direct payments for holding the land, also laudemia (payment to the lord for the provision of an allotment or for the renewal of a feudal lease), kavalgada (ransom for military service), a monetary contribution, which was a commutated form of labor in the lord’s fields and vineyards, “division fruits" (the lord's right to 5-25% of the peasant harvest), fees for permission to drive cattle across the lord's land, etc. The lord, in addition, owned a number of banalities. Church taxes, especially tithes, were also extremely difficult.

Rent was largely paid in kind, since monetary relations were still relatively poorly developed. The price of land, due to the monopoly of feudal owners on it, remained excessively high, while rents continuously increased. In the province of Seville, for example, it doubled in the decade from 1770 to 1780.

For these reasons, capitalist agriculture was unprofitable. Spanish economists of the late 18th century. noted that in Spain capital avoids agriculture and seeks application in other areas.

For feudal Spain of the 18th century. characterized by a huge army of landless day laborers, who made up about half of the entire peasantry. According to the census of 1797, there were 805 thousand day laborers among the 1,677 thousand rural population (including large landowners). This phenomenon arose from the peculiarities of Spanish feudal land tenure. Vast latifundia, especially in Andalusia and Extremadura, were concentrated in the hands of a few aristocratic families who were not interested in intensive exploitation of land wealth due to the enormous size of their holdings, the varied nature of other sources of income and the unprofitability of commercial agriculture. Large landowners were not even interested in renting out land. The lords turned vast areas of arable land in Castile, Extremadura and Andalusia into pastures. For their personal needs, they cultivated a small part of the land with the help of hired agricultural workers. As a result, a huge mass of the population, especially in Andalusia, was left without land and without work; At best, day laborers worked four to five months a year, and spent the rest of the time begging.

But the situation of the peasant holders was little better. Only in the form of rent, not counting other feudal exactions, they gave the lord from one quarter to half of the harvest. Forms of short-term holding, which were extremely unprofitable for peasants, prevailed. The most difficult situation was for peasant holders in Castile and Aragon; The population of Valencia lived somewhat better thanks to the spread of long-term rentals, as well as more favorable climatic conditions. The Basque peasants were in a relatively prosperous state, among whom there were many small land owners and long-term tenants. There were also strong, prosperous farms here that did not exist in other parts of Spain.

The hopeless situation of the Spanish peasantry pushed it to fight against the oppressive lords. Very common in the 18th century. there was a protest in the form of robbery. The famous robbers, hiding in the gorges of the Sierra Morena and other mountains, took revenge on the lords and helped the poor peasants. They were popular among the peasants and always found refuge and support among them.

A direct consequence of the plight of the Spanish peasants and the extremely harsh forms of feudal tenancy was the general low level of agricultural technology. The traditional three-field system prevailed; The ancient irrigation system in most areas was abandoned and fell into disrepair. Agricultural tools were extremely primitive. Yields remained low.

State of industry and trade

In Spanish industry of the 18th century. craft, regulated by guild regulations, prevailed. In all provinces there were small workshops that produced haberdashery, leather goods, hats, woolen, silk, and linen fabrics for the local market. In the North, especially in Vizcaya, iron was mined using artisanal methods. The metalworking industry, located mainly in the Basque provinces and Catalonia, was also primitive. Largest share industrial production accounted for three provinces - Galicia, Valencia and Catalonia. The latter was the most industrialized of all the regions of Spain.

In Spain in the 18th century. Such an important factor of capitalist development as the national market was still missing.

The marketability of agriculture (excluding sheep farming) was very low. The sale of agricultural products usually did not go beyond the local market, and there was very limited demand for industrial goods: the poor peasantry could not buy them, while the nobility and higher clergy preferred foreign products.

The formation of a national market was also hampered by the lack of roads, countless internal duties and alcabala - a burdensome tax on transactions with movable property.

A sign of the narrowness of the domestic market was also weak money circulation. Money capital at the end of the 18th century. rarely met. Wealth at that time was represented mainly by lands and houses.

The weakness of domestic trade and the absence of a national market reinforced the historical isolation and isolation of individual regions and provinces, which resulted in a catastrophic rise in food prices and famine in some areas of the country in the event of a bad harvest, despite relative prosperity in other areas.

The coastal provinces conducted quite active foreign trade, but its balance remained sharply passive for Spain, since Spanish goods were for the most part unable to compete on the European market with goods from other countries due to the backwardness of industrial technology and the exceptionally high costs of agricultural production.

In 1789, Spanish exports amounted to only 290 million reais, and imports - 717 million. Spain exported to European countries mainly fine wool, some agricultural products, colonial goods and precious metals. Spain had the busiest trade relations with England and France.

In the second half of the 18th century. In Spain, capitalist industry is growing in the form of mainly dispersed manufacturing. In the 90s, the first machines appeared, primarily in the cotton production of Catalonia. The number of workers at some Barcelona enterprises reached 800 people. Throughout Catalonia, more than 80 thousand people were employed in the cotton industry. In this regard, in Catalonia in the second half of the 18th century. The population of cities has increased significantly. In its capital and largest industrial center, Barcelona, ​​there were 53 thousand inhabitants in 1759, and 111 thousand in 1789. Around 1780, one Spanish economist noted that “now in Barcelona, ​​compared to all of Catalonia, it is difficult to find agricultural workers and domestic servants, even at greatly increased wages,” explaining this by the emergence of a large number of industrial enterprises.

In 1792, a metallurgical plant with the first blast furnace in Spain was built in Sargadeloye (Asturias). The development of industry and the needs of military arsenals caused a significant increase in coal mining in Asturias.

Thus, in the last decades of the 18th century. In Spain there is a certain growth of capitalist industry. This is evidenced by the change in the composition of the population: the censuses of 1787 and 1797. show that during this decade the population employed in industry increased by 83%. At the very end of the century, the number of workers in factories and centralized manufactories alone exceeded 100 thousand.

The role of the American colonies in the Spanish economy

Its American colonies played an important role in the economic life of Spain. Having taken possession in the 16th century. vast and rich territories in America, the Spaniards first of all tried, through numerous prohibitions, to turn them into their closed market. Until 1765, all trade with the colonies was carried out only through one Spanish port: until 1717 - through Seville, later - through Cadiz. All ships departing for and arriving from America were subject to inspection at this port by agents of the Indian Chamber of Commerce. Trade with America was actually a monopoly of the richest Spanish merchants, who incredibly inflated prices and made huge profits.

The weak Spanish industry was not able to provide its colonies with even a starvation standard of goods. In the 17th-18th centuries. foreign products accounted for from half to two-thirds of all goods imported into America on Spanish ships. In addition to the legal trade in foreign goods, extensive smuggling trade took place in the colonies. Around 1740, for example, the British were smuggling as much goods into America as the Spanish themselves were smuggling there legally. Nevertheless, the American market was of the utmost importance to the Spanish bourgeoisie. In conditions of the extreme narrowness of the domestic market, the American colonies, where Spanish merchants enjoyed special privileges, were a profitable market for the products of Spanish industry. This was one of the reasons for the weakness of the bourgeois opposition.

The colonies were no less important for the Spanish government, which, with a total state income of approximately 700 million reais, received at the end of the 18th century. from America 150-200 million reais per year in the form of royalties from precious metals mined in the colonies (kinto) and numerous taxes and duties.

The weakness of the Spanish bourgeoisie

Spanish bourgeoisie in the 18th century. was small in number and had no influence. Due to the underdevelopment of capitalism, the most conservative group, the merchants, predominated in its ranks, while the industrial bourgeoisie was just emerging.

The overwhelming part of the Spanish bourgeoisie, in conditions of the extreme narrowness of the internal market, served mainly the nobility, clergy, bureaucracy and officers, that is, the privileged strata of feudal society, on which it was thus economically dependent. Such economic ties also contributed to the political conservatism of the Spanish bourgeoisie. In addition, the bourgeoisie was bound by the common interests of exploiting the colonies with the ruling classes of the feudal-absolutist monarchy, and this also limited its opposition to the existing system.

The conservatism of the Spanish bourgeoisie was also strengthened by the traditions of blind obedience to authorities, which had been cultivated for centuries by the Catholic Church.

Feudal nobility

The ruling class in Spain was the feudal nobility, which even at the beginning of the 19th century. retained in its hands more than half of all cultivated land and an even larger percentage of uncultivated land. In fact, it also disposed of the 16% of cultivated land that belonged to the church, since high church positions were held, as a rule, by people from the nobility.

Land wealth and the associated feudal taxes, as well as such additional sources of income as command in spiritual knightly orders, court sinecures, etc., were mainly concentrated in the hands of the titled aristocracy. Most of the Spanish nobles, thanks to the existence of the institution of primogeniture, did not have land holdings. The poor nobility sought sources of food in the military and government service or in the ranks of the clergy. But a significant part of it remained without a place and eked out a miserable existence.

Spanish absolute monarchy of the 18th century. represented the interests of the richest part of the nobility - large landowners-latifundists who belonged to the titled aristocracy.

The dominance of the Catholic Church

Along with the nobility, the most important social force guarding the foundations of the Middle Ages in Spain was the Catholic Church with its huge army of clergy and untold wealth. At the end of the 15th century with a total population of 10.5 million people in Spain, there were about 200 thousand black (monastic) and white clergy. In 1797 there were 40 different male monastic orders with 2,067 monasteries and 29 female orders with 1,122 monasteries. The Spanish Church owned vast land holdings that brought it more than a billion reais in annual income.

In economically and culturally backward feudal Spain of the 18th century. The Catholic Church, as before, dominated in the field of ideology.

Catholicism was the state religion in Spain. Only Catholics could live in the country. Any person who did not perform church rituals aroused suspicion of heresy and attracted the attention of the Inquisition. This threatened the loss of not only property and freedom, but also life. When entering the service, attention was paid to “purity of blood”: places in the church apparatus and in the civil service were available exclusively to “old Christians”, pure from any stain or admixture of the “bad race”, i.e. to persons who did not count among their ancestors of not a single Moor, Jew, heretic, victim of the Inquisition. When entering military educational institutions and in a number of other cases, it was required to present documentary evidence of “purity of race.”

The Spanish Inquisition was a terrible weapon of the Catholic Church. Reorganized in the 15th century, it retained its Grand Inquisitor until 1808, high council and 16 provincial tribunals, not counting the special tribunals in America. Only in the first half of the 18th century. The Inquisition burned over a thousand people, and in total about 10 thousand people were persecuted during this period.

The entire huge church apparatus, from the highest-ranking princes of the church to the last mendicant monk, stood guard over the medieval social system, trying to block access to enlightenment, progress, and free thought. The Catholic clergy controlled universities and schools, the press and the spectacle. Mainly due to the fault of the church, Spanish society, even by the end of the 18th century. struck foreign travelers with its backwardness. The peasantry was almost entirely illiterate and extremely superstitious. The cultural level of the nobility, bourgeoisie and aristocracy, with rare exceptions, was slightly higher. Even in the middle of the 18th century. Most educated Spaniards rejected the Copernican astronomical system.

Bourgeois enlighteners

In the second half of the 18th century. Spanish enlighteners opposed the reactionary medieval ideology. They were weaker and acted more timidly than, for example, the French educators. To protect themselves from persecution by the Inquisition, Spanish scientists were forced to make public statements that science has absolutely no contact with religion, that religious truths are higher than scientific truths. This gave them the opportunity to more or less calmly study at least natural science. Only towards the end of the century did science force the church to retreat in some ways. In the 70s, some universities began to present the doctrine of the rotation of the earth, Newton's laws and other scientific theories.

The progressive people of Spain showed great interest in socio-economic issues. They condemned the brutal exploitation of blacks and Indians, questioned the privileges of the nobles, and discussed the causes of property inequality. It was in economic literature, as well as in fiction, that the philosophy that took shape in the 18th century primarily found its expression. ideology of the Spanish bourgeoisie.

The revolutionary consciousness of the Spanish bourgeoisie arose during a period of acute crisis in feudal society. The contrast between the backward economy of Spain and the rapidly growing industry of the advanced countries of Europe forced Spanish patriots to study the reasons that led their homeland to such a sad state. In the 18th century A significant number of theoretical works on political economy, letters and treatises appeared on the problems of the development of the Spanish national economy, elucidating the reasons for its backwardness and ways to overcome this backwardness. Such are the works of Macanas, Ensenada, Campomanes, Floridablanca, Jovellanos and others.

In the second half of the 18th century. In Spain, “Patriotic (or, as they were otherwise called, Economic) Societies of Friends of the Motherland” began to be created, with the goal of promoting the progress of industry and agriculture. The first such society arose in the province of Guipuzcoa around 1748.

Members of patriotic societies were characterized by a deep interest in the past and present of their homeland. They traveled around the country to better understand the state of all its regions, their natural resources; comparing Spain with advanced countries, they emphasized its backwardness and shortcomings in order to focus the attention of their compatriots on them. They fought for the use of their native language in science and university teaching instead of Latin and studied the cultural heritage of the Spanish people, searching for and publishing ancient texts. The heroic epic about Side first appeared in print in the second half of the 18th century. Members of patriotic societies studied archives to restore the history of their country and educate their contemporaries using the example of the best traditions of the past.

Patriotic societies sought from the government legislative measures to encourage the development of industry and agriculture. The most prominent representative of the Spanish Enlightenment, Jovellanos (1744-1811), on behalf of the Madrid Society, compiled his famous “Report on the Agrarian Law,” which expressed the demands of the rising bourgeoisie.

The creation of patriotic societies was a manifestation of the growth of class and national consciousness of the Spanish bourgeoisie.

Spanish educated society showed great interest in the works of English, French and Italian educators. Despite the fact that the government banned the distribution in Spain of the works of Rousseau, Voltaire, Montesquieu, and the encyclopedists, this literature was widely represented in the libraries of Patriotic Societies; many Spaniards subscribed to the French Encyclopedia. By the end of the century, overcoming censorship slingshots, original philosophical works of Spanish authors, written in the spirit of the Enlightenment, began to appear. Such, for example, is “The New System of Philosophy, or the Fundamental Principles of Nature Underpinning Politics and Morality” by Perez Lopez. In the same 1785, when this book was published, the first political magazine appeared in Spain - “Sensor”, which, however, was soon banned by censorship.

The progressive ideas of the Spanish bourgeoisie even at the end of the 18th century. were of a half-hearted, compromise nature. Jovellanos demanded the abolition of the inalienability of land, the abolition of feudal duties and duties that delayed the development of agriculture and constrained trade, the organization of an irrigation system and the creation of communication routes, and the dissemination of agricultural knowledge. But his program did not include the transfer of the lords' land to the peasants. He was against any government intervention in the economic relations of private individuals and considered property inequality useful.

As the ideologist of the Spanish bourgeoisie, closely linked economically with the nobility, Jovellanos did not dare to encroach on the landed property of the nobles. He was far from the idea of ​​revolution and only sought to eliminate some of the main obstacles to the development of capitalism in Spain through reforms from above. Only towards the end of the century, especially under the influence of the French Revolution, did representatives of the advanced circles of the Spanish bourgeoisie begin to discuss the problems of political reform more widely, but at the same time they, as a rule, remained monarchists.

Administrative and military reforms

By the beginning of the 18th century. Spain was still a weakly centralized state with significant remnants of medieval fragmentation. The provinces still retained different monetary systems, weights, different laws, customs, taxes, and duties. The centrifugal aspirations of individual provinces also manifested themselves sharply during the War of the Spanish Succession. Aragon, Valencia and Catalonia took the side of the Austrian Archduke, who promised to preserve their ancient privileges. The resistance of Aragon and Valencia was broken, and their statutes and privileges were abolished in 1707, but in Catalonia the fierce struggle continued for some time. Only on September 11, 1714, that is, after the conclusion of peace, the Duke of Berwick, commander of the French army in Spain, took Barcelona. After this, the charters of the ancient Catalan liberties-fueros were publicly burned by the hand of the executioner, and many leaders of the secessionist movement were executed or exiled. The laws and customs of Castile were introduced in Catalonia, and the use of the Catalan language in legal proceedings was prohibited. However, even after this, complete unity of laws, weights, coins and taxes throughout Spain was not achieved; in particular, the ancient liberties of the Basques were completely preserved.

The process of centralization of state power continued under the sons of Philip V - Ferdinand VI (1746-1759) and Charles III (1759-1788). The royal secretaries of the most important departments (foreign affairs, justice, military, financial, navy and colonies) begin to play a more independent role, gradually turning into ministers, while the medieval councils, with the exception of the Council of Castile, lose their importance. In all provinces except Navarre, which was governed by the viceroy, and New Castile, the highest civil and military authority was entrusted to captain-generals appointed by the king. Intendants, following the French model, were placed at the head of the provincial financial departments. The court and police were also reformed.

The measures aimed at strengthening the central government also included the expulsion of the Jesuits. The reason for this was unrest in Madrid and other cities at the end of March 1766, caused by the actions of the Neapolitan Minister of Finance and Economy, Schilacce. The monopoly he introduced on Madrid's food supply led to higher prices. The minister's unpopularity increased further when he tried to ban the Spaniards from wearing their traditional clothing - a wide cloak and a soft hat (sombrero). The masses destroyed the Schilacce Palace in Madrid and forced the king to expel him from Spain. A group of prominent figures of “enlightened absolutism”, led by the Chairman of the Council of Ministers, Count Aranda, took advantage of these unrest, in which the Jesuits were involved, to pass through the Council of Castile a decision on the total expulsion of members of this order from Spain and all its colonies. Aranda put this decision into effect very energetically. On the same day the Jesuits were sent into exile from all Spanish possessions, their property was confiscated and their papers were sealed.

The government of Charles III paid much attention to strengthening the armed forces of Spain. The Prussian system of training was introduced into the army; recruiting the army with volunteer mercenaries was replaced by a system of forced recruitment by lot. However, this reform met with strong resistance, and in practice the government often had to resort to recruiting arrested vagabonds and criminals, who naturally turned out to be poor soldiers.

The reform of the naval forces also yielded insignificant results. The government was unable to revive the Spanish fleet; there were not enough people or money for this.

Government economic policy

The 18th century brought forward a number of statesmen in Spain who sought to carry out the reforms necessary for the country in the spirit of “enlightened absolutism,” especially in the spheres of economics and culture. The development of capitalism in industry in the second half of this century caused particularly energetic activity of the ministers of Charles III - Aranda, Campomanes and Floridablanca. These ministers carried out a number of economic activities, mainly in the spirit of the teachings of the physiocrats, while relying on the assistance of patriotic societies.

The focus of their attention was industry, the rise of which they sought to ensure through various measures. To improve the skills of workers, technical schools were created, technical textbooks were compiled and translated from foreign languages, qualified craftsmen were sent from abroad, and young Spaniards were sent abroad to study technology. For success in the development of production, the government awarded craftsmen and entrepreneurs with prizes and provided them with various benefits. Privileges and monopolies of workshops were abolished or limited. Attempts were made to establish protective duties, but without significant results due to widespread smuggling. The experience of creating exemplary state-owned manufactories was not much more successful: most of them soon fell into disrepair.

In the interests of trade, roads were laid and canals were built, but they were poorly built and they quickly collapsed. Postal services and passenger service by stagecoaches were organized. In 1782 the National Bank was established.

For the development of trade and industry, the most important reform was carried out by Floridablanca in 1778, namely the establishment of free trade between Spanish ports and the American colonies. This led to a significant expansion of Spanish-American trade and contributed to the development of the Catalan cotton industry.

Something was done in the interests of agriculture. The sale of part of the communal and municipal lands, noble majorates and some lands belonging to spiritual corporations was allowed. But these measures failed to bring about any significant mobilization of land ownership due to the resistance of the nobles and clergy.

To protect fields from incursions by wandering flocks of sheep, laws were passed that limited the medieval rights and privileges of the Place and allowed peasants to fence arable land and plantings to protect them from grass.

To set an example of rational farming, the government in the 70s organized model agricultural colonies in the wastelands of the Sierra Morena, for which the Germans and Dutch were involved. At first, the colonists' economy developed successfully. However, after a few decades, the colonies fell into decline, mainly due to heavy taxes, as well as poor roads, which hampered the marketing of agricultural products.

Ministers who tried to carry out progressive reforms encountered fierce resistance from reactionary forces. Very often a progressive measure carried out by a minister was followed by a countermeasure imposed by the reactionaries, limiting or canceling its effect. In general, the government was often forced, under pressure from reactionary circles, to limit and cancel its own events.

Foreign policy

In the foreign policy of the first king of the Bourbon dynasty, Philip V, dynastic motives played a decisive role. On the one hand, Philip sought to regain the French crown for himself or his sons (which forced him to look for an ally in England against the French Bourbons and make concessions to the English in America); on the other hand, he tried to return the former Italian possessions to Spain. As a result of a series of wars and diplomatic agreements, Philip's sons Charles and Philip were recognized: the first as King of the Two Sicilies (1734), the second as Duke of Parma and Piacenza (1748), but without annexing these possessions to Spain. Spain's attempts to expel the British from Gibraltar were also unsuccessful.

Under Ferdinand VI, supporters of the English and French orientations fought for influence, and the advantage remained on the side of the former. The result of this was a trade agreement with England that was unfavorable for Spain in 1750.

In 1753, a special concordat regulated relations with the papacy to the benefit of the Spanish monarchy. From now on, the king could influence the appointment of vacant ecclesiastical positions, participate in the disposal of free church property, etc.

Under Charles III, there was a rapprochement with France and a break with England. This turn in Spanish policy was explained by the fact that England’s military and economic aggression in Spanish America began in the mid-18th century. especially persistent and systematic. The British smuggling trade in America continued and intensified; they established trading posts in Spanish Honduras and cut down valuable dye wood there. At the same time, the British prohibited the Spaniards from fishing off the coast of Newfoundland, even outside their territorial waters, and from the beginning of the Seven Years' War they began to search and seize Spanish ships on the high seas.

Spain abandoned its policy of neutrality. The so-called family pact (1761) was concluded with France - a defensive and offensive alliance, and Spain joined the Seven Years' War, speaking out against England in January 1762. But Spain and France were defeated. According to the Treaty of Paris in 1763, Spain ceded Florida and the lands east and southeast of the Mississippi to England, abandoned fishing in the waters of Newfoundland and allowed the British to cut down the dye tree in Honduras, although the English trading posts were subject to liquidation. France, in order to maintain an ally, ceded the remaining part of Louisiana to Spain.

Relations between Spain and England continued to remain tense after the Peace of Paris. A manifestation of Spanish-English contradictions were frequent clashes between Spain and Portugal over the borders of their possessions in South America, which led in 1776-1777. to hostilities in America. In October 1777, a peace treaty was signed, ending centuries of border disputes. Under this treaty, Spain received the Portuguese colony of Sacramento on La Plata, an important center of English smuggling in the Spanish colonies, which had long been a bone of contention, and retained in its hands the colony of Paraguay, which was claimed by Portugal.

In 1775, the war of the North American colonies of England for independence began. Some Spanish politicians, such as the Count of Aranda, pointed out the danger that a North American victory would pose to Spanish rule in the Americas. Nevertheless, Spain has been providing secret assistance to the Americans with money, weapons and ammunition since 1776. But while its ally, France, was increasingly inclined to open military assistance to the Americans and in 1778 entered the war against England, Spain tried to avoid such a decisive step. She made several attempts to mediate between the warring parties, hoping to get Minorca and Gibraltar for this. However, these attempts were rejected by the British, who also did not stop their attacks on Spanish ships on the high seas. On June 23, 1779, Spain declared war on England. Since the latter's main forces were tied up in America, the Spaniards were able to regain Minorca and Florida and expel the British from Honduras and the Bahamas. According to the Treaty of Versailles in 1783, Florida and Minorca were left to Spain, the rights of the British in Honduras were limited, but the Bahamas were returned to England.

General results of Spanish foreign policy in the 18th century. indicated some growth in its international importance, but due to its economic and political backwardness, it could only play a secondary role in international politics.

Excellent definition

Incomplete definition ↓

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

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

Belgorod Law Institute of the Ministry of Internal Affairs of Russia

Department of Humanities and Socio-Economic Disciplines

TEST

BY DISCIPLINE:

NATIONAL HISTORY

TOPIC No. 9: Russia in the second half of the 17th century

Performed:

Listener (student)

_____ course ______ group

Record book No.________

Checked:_________________

Job evaluation: ______

Belgorod 2008

1. Socio-economic development of the country

By the middle of the 17th century, the devastation and destruction of the Time of Troubles had been overcome. The economy recovered slowly in the conditions of maintaining traditional forms of farming (weak productivity of peasant farming with its primitive equipment and technology; sharply continental climate; low soil fertility in the Non-Black Earth Region).

In the second half of the 17th century, agriculture remained the leading sector of the Russian economy. Progress in this area material production at that time was associated with the widespread use of three-field farming and the use of natural fertilizers. Bread gradually became the main commercial product of agriculture. By the middle of the century, the Russian people, through hard work, overcame the devastation caused by foreign invasions. Peasants repopulated previously abandoned villages, plowed wastelands, acquired livestock and agricultural implements. As a result of Russian peasant colonization, new areas were developed: in the south of the country, in the Volga region, Bashkiria, and Siberia. In all these places new centers of agricultural culture arose. But the overall level of agricultural development was low. Such primitive tools as plows and harrows continued to be used in agriculture. In the forest regions of the North, felling still existed, and in the steppe zone of the South and Middle Volga region there was fallowing.

The basis for the development of livestock farming was peasant farming. Cattle breeding especially developed in Pomerania, the Yaroslavl region, and the southern districts. Noble land ownership grew rapidly as a result of numerous grants by the government of estates and estates to the nobles. By the end of the 17th century, patrimonial noble land ownership began to exceed the previously dominant local land ownership. The center of the estate or patrimony was the village or hamlet. Usually there were about 15-30 peasant households in the village. But there were villages with two or three courtyards. The village differed from the village not only in its large size, but also in the presence of a church with a bell tower. It was the center for all the villages included in his church parish. Agricultural production was dominated by subsistence farming. Small-scale agricultural production was combined with domestic peasant industry and small urban crafts. Trade in agricultural products also increased noticeably, which was associated with the development of fertile lands in the south and east, the emergence of a number of fishing areas that did not produce their own grain, and the growth of cities. A new and very important phenomenon in agriculture was its connection with industrial entrepreneurship. Many peasants, in their free time from field work, mainly in autumn and winter, were engaged in handicrafts: they made linens, shoes, clothes, dishes, agricultural tools, etc. Some of these products were used on the peasant farm itself or given as quitrent to the landowner, while others were sold at the nearest market. The feudal lords increasingly established contact with the market, where they sold products and handicrafts received on rent. Not satisfied with the quitrent, they expanded their own ploughing and established their own production of products. Mainly retaining a natural character, the agriculture of the feudal lords was already largely connected with the market. The production of products to supply cities and a number of industrial areas that did not produce bread increased. The southern districts of the state turned into grain-producing areas, from where grain was supplied to the Don Cossack region and to the central regions (especially to Moscow). The Volga region districts also provided a surplus of grain. The main way of development of agriculture at this time was extensive: landowners included an increasing number of new territories into economic turnover.

Among all classes and estates, the dominant place, of course, belonged to the feudal lords. In their interests, the state government took measures to strengthen the ownership of the land and peasants by the boyars and nobles, and to unite the strata of the feudal class. Service people formed a complex and clear hierarchy of ranks, obligated to the state for service in the military, civil, and court departments in exchange for the right to own land and peasants. They were divided into the ranks of Duma (boyars, okolnichy, Duma nobles and Duma clerks), Moscow (stewards, solicitors, Moscow nobles and tenants) and city (elected nobles, nobles and boyar courtyard children, nobles and boyar police children). Based on merit, service and nobility of origin, feudal lords moved from one rank to another. The nobility turned into a closed class - an estate.

The authorities strictly and consistently sought to preserve their estates and estates in the hands of the nobles. The demands of the nobles and the measures of the authorities led to the fact that by the end of the 17th century the difference between an estate and a fiefdom was reduced to a minimum. Throughout the century, the government, on the one hand, distributed huge tracts of land to the feudal lords; on the other hand, part of the possessions, more or less significant, was transferred from the estate to the estate. Large land holdings with peasants belonged to spiritual feudal lords. In the 17th century, the authorities continued the course of their predecessors to limit church land ownership. The Code of 1649, for example, prohibited the clergy from acquiring new lands. The privileges of the church in matters of court and administration were limited. Unlike the feudal lords, especially the nobility, the position of peasants and slaves in the 17th century deteriorated significantly. Of the privately owned peasants, the best life was for the palace peasants, the worst of all for the peasants of the secular feudal lords, especially small ones. The peasants worked for the benefit of the feudal lords in corvee labor and contributed quitrents in kind and in cash. The nobles and boyars hired carpenters and masons, brickmakers and other craftsmen from their villages. Peasants worked in the first factories and factories that belonged to feudal lords or the treasury, and produced cloth and canvas at home, etc. Serfs, in addition to work and payments to the feudal lords, bore duties for the treasury. In general, their taxation and duties were heavier than those of the palace and black sowing people. The situation of the peasants dependent on the feudal lords was aggravated by the fact that the trial and reprisal of the boyars and their clerks were accompanied by overt violence, bullying, and humiliation of human dignity. After 1649, the search for runaway peasants became widespread. Thousands of them were captured and returned to their owners. In order to survive, the peasants went into retirement, to become “farmers”, to earn money. Impoverished peasants moved into the category of peasants. Feudal lords, especially large ones, had many slaves, sometimes several hundred people. These are clerks and servants for parcels, grooms and tailors, watchmen and shoemakers, falconers, etc. By the end of the century, serfdom merged with the peasantry. Life was better for the state-owned, or black-growing, peasants. They depended on the feudal state: they paid taxes in its favor and carried out various duties. Despite the modest share of traders and artisans in the total population of Russia, they played a very significant role in its economic life. The leading center of handicraft, industrial production, and trade operations was Moscow. Here in the 40s worked masters of metalworking, fur making, making various foods, leather and leather goods, clothing and hats, and much more - everything that a large, crowded city needed. A significant part of the artisans worked for the state and the treasury. Some of the artisans served the needs of the palace (palace artisans) and the feudal lords living in Moscow and other cities (patrimonial artisans). Simple capitalist cooperation also appeared, and hired labor was used. Poor townspeople and peasants became mercenaries for the rich blacksmiths, boilermakers, grain makers and others. The same thing happened in transport, river and horse-drawn. The development of handicraft production, its professional and territorial specialization brings revitalization to the economic life of cities and trade relations between them and their districts. It was by the 17th century. refers to the beginning of the concentration of local markets, the formation of an all-Russian market on their basis. Guests and other wealthy merchants appeared with their goods in all parts of the country and abroad. Rich merchants, artisans, and industrialists ruled everything in the townspeople's communities. They shifted the main burden of taxes and duties onto small artisans and traders.

In industry, unlike agriculture, things were much better. The most widespread industry is the home industry; Throughout the country, peasants produced canvas and homespun cloth, ropes and ropes, felted and leather shoes, a variety of clothes and dishes, and much more. Gradually, peasant industry turns into small-scale commodity production. Among the artisans, the largest group was made up of tax workers - artisans of urban suburbs and black-mown volosts. They carried out private orders or worked for the market. Palace artisans served the needs of the royal court; government and clerks worked on orders from the treasury; privately owned - from peasants, peasants and slaves - produced everything necessary for landowners and patrimonial owners. Metalworking, which has long existed in the country, was based on the extraction of bog ores. Metallurgy centers developed in the districts south of Moscow: Serpukhovsky, Kashirskoye, Tula, Dedilovsky, Aleksinsky. Another center is the counties north-west of Moscow: Ustyuzhna Zheleznopolskaya, Tikhvin, Zaonezhye. Moscow was a major metalworking center - back in the early 40s there were more than one and a half hundred forges here. The best gold and silver craftsmen in Russia worked in the capital. The centers of silver production were also Ustyug Veliky, Nizhny Novgorod, Veliky Novgorod, Tikhvin and others. Copper and other non-ferrous metals were processed in Moscow and Pomorie. Metalworking is largely turning into commodity production, not only in urban suburbs, but also in the countryside. Blacksmithing shows trends towards consolidation of production and the use of hired labor. This is especially typical for Tula, Ustyuzhna, Tikhvin, and Ustyug Veliky.

Similar phenomena, although to a lesser extent, are observed in woodworking. Throughout the country, carpenters worked mainly to order - they built houses, river and sea vessels. Carpenters from Pomerania were particularly skilled. The largest center of the leather industry was Yaroslavl, where raw materials for the manufacture of leather products arrived from many districts of the country. A large number of small “factories” - craft workshops - worked here. Leather processing was carried out by craftsmen from Kaluga and Nizhny Novgorod. Yaroslavl tanners used hired labor; some factories grew into manufacturing-type enterprises with a significant division of labor. With all its development, handicraft production could no longer satisfy the demand for industrial products. This leads to the emergence in the 17th century of manufactories - enterprises based on the division of labor between workers. If in Western Europe manufactories were capitalist enterprises, serviced by the labor of hired workers, then in Russia, under the dominance of the feudal-serf system, the emerging manufacturing production was largely based on serf labor. Most of the manufactories belonged to the treasury, the royal court and large boyars. Palace manufactories were created to produce fabrics for the royal court. One of the first palace linen manufactories was Khamovny Dvor, located in the palace settlements near Moscow. State-owned manufactories, which arose back in the 15th century, were, as a rule, founded for the production of various types of weapons. State-owned manufactories were the Cannon Yard, the Armory, the Money Yard, the Jewelry Yard and other enterprises. The population of Moscow state and palace settlements worked in state-owned and palace manufactories. The workers, although they received salaries, were feudal-dependent people and did not have the right to quit their jobs. Patrimonial manufactories had the most pronounced serf character. Iron-making, potash, tanning, linen and other manufactories were created in the estates of the boyars Morozov, Miloslavsky, Stroganov and others. Here, almost exclusively forced labor of serfs was used. Merchant manufactories used hired labor. In Ustyuzhna, Tula, Tikhvin, and Ustyug the Great, some wealthy merchants began to found metalworking enterprises. In the 90s of the 17th century, the Tula blacksmith-artisan Nikita Antufiev, who became rich, opened an iron smelter. Some manufactories and trades were founded by rich peasants, for example, the Volga salt trades, leather, ceramic and textile manufactories. In addition to merchant manufactories, hired labor is also used in brick production, construction, fishing and salt-making industries. Among the workers there were many peasants-obrochniks, who, although personally not free people, sold their labor power to the owners of the means of production.

The growth of productive forces in agriculture and industry, the deepening of the social division of labor and territorial production specialization led to a steady expansion of trade relations. At the end of the 17th century, trade ties already existed on a national scale. In the North, in need of imported bread, grain markets were formed, the main of which was Vologda. Novgorod remained a trading center in the northwestern part of the state - a large market for the sale of flax and hemp products. Important markets for livestock products were Kazan, Vologda, Yaroslavl, fur markets were some cities in the northern part of Rus': Solvychegodsk, Irbit, etc. The largest producers of metal products were Tula, Tikhvin and other cities. The main trading center throughout Russia was still Moscow, where trade routes from all over the country and from abroad converged. In 120 specialized rows of the Moscow trade, silks, furs, metal and woolen products, wines, lard, bread and other domestic and foreign goods were sold. The fairs - Makaryevskaya, Arkhangelsk, and Irbitskaya - have acquired all-Russian significance. The Volga connected many Russian cities with economic ties. The dominant position in trade was occupied by the townspeople. In trade, specialization was poorly developed, capital circulated slowly, and there were no available funds or credit. In Russia, the demand for industrial products increased, and the development of agriculture and crafts provided the opportunity for stable exports. Therefore, trade was carried out with the countries of the East, through Astrakhan. Silks, various fabrics, spices, luxury goods were imported, furs, leather and handicrafts were exported. The Russian merchants suffered losses due to Western competition, especially if the government granted duty-free trade rights to European merchants. Therefore, the government adopted the New Trade Charter in 1667, according to which retail trade by foreigners in Russian cities was prohibited, duty-free wholesale trade was allowed only in border cities, and in internal Russia foreign goods were subject to very high duties, often amounting to 100% of the cost.

The development of the country's economy was accompanied by major social movements. It is no coincidence that the 17th century is called the “rebellious century.” It was during this period that two peasant “unrest” occurred (Bolotnikov’s uprising and the peasant war led by S. Razin), as well as the Solovetsky rebellion and two Streltsy uprisings in the last quarter of the 17th century. The history of urban uprisings opens with the “Salt Riot” in 1648 in Moscow. Various segments of the capital's population took part in it: townspeople, archers, nobles dissatisfied with the policies of B.I. Morozov (1590-1611), who headed the Russian government. By decree of February 7, 1646, a high tax on salt was introduced. And salt was a product that people in the 17th century could not avoid. In 1646-1648, salt prices increased 3-4 times. The people began to starve. Everyone was unhappy. Expensive salt was sold less than the previous treasury suffered significant losses. In 1647, the salt tax was rejected, but it was too late. The reason for the speech was the defeat by the archers of a delegation of Muscovites who were trying to sell the petition to the tsar at the mercy of the officials. The uprising began on June 1 and lasted for several days. The people destroyed the courts of Moscow boyars and nobles, clerks and rich merchants, demanding the extradition of the hated officials Pleshcheev, who was in charge of the administration of the capital and the head of the government, boyar Morozov. The Duma clerk Nazariy Chistoy was killed, Leonty Pleshcheev and others were given over to the crowd. The Tsar managed to save only Morozov, urgently sending him into exile at the Kirillo-Belozersky Monastery. The Moscow “salt riot” echoed with uprisings of 1648-1650 in other cities. The most persistent and lengthy uprisings in 1650 were in Pskov and Novgorod. They were caused by a sharp increase in bread prices. To stabilize the situation, the authorities convened the Zemsky Sobor, which decided to prepare a new “Code”.

On July 25, 1662, the “Copper Bund” occurred in Moscow, caused by the protracted Russian-Polish War financial crisis. Monetary reform (minting depreciated copper money) led to a sharp drop in the exchange rate of the ruble. As a result, counterfeit money appears on the market. At the beginning of 1663, copper money was abolished, openly motivating this measure with the desire to prevent new bloodshed. As a result of the brutal massacre, several hundred people died and 18 were publicly hanged.

In 1667, a Cossack uprising led by Stepan Razin broke out on the Don.

The introduction of a new code of laws, the “Conciliar Code” of 1649, a brutal search for fugitives, and an increase in war taxes intensified the already tense situation in the state. Wars with Poland and Sweden ruined the bulk of the working population. During these same years, crop failures and epidemics occurred more than once, the situation of the archers, gunners, etc. worsened. Many fled to the outskirts, especially to the Don. In the Cossack regions, it has long been the custom not to hand over fugitives. The bulk of the Cossacks, especially the fugitives, lived poorly and meagerly. The Cossacks did not engage in agriculture. The salary they received from Moscow was not enough. By the mid-60s, the situation on the Don had deteriorated to the extreme. A large number of fugitives have accumulated here. Hunger began. The Cossacks sent an embassy to Moscow with a request to accept them into the royal service, but they were refused. By 1667, the Cossack uprisings had become a well-organized movement under the leadership of Razin. A large army of rebels was defeated in 1670 near Simbirsk. At the beginning of 1671, the main centers of the movement were suppressed by punitive detachments of the authorities.

The social crisis was accompanied by an ideological crisis. An example of the development of a religious struggle into a social one is the “Solovetsky Uprising” (1668-1676). It began with the fact that the brothers of the Solovetsky Monastery flatly refused to accept the corrected liturgical books. The government decided to tame some of the monks by blockading the monastery and confiscating its land holdings. High thick walls and rich food supplies extended the siege of the monastery for several years. The Razinites, exiled to Solovki, also joined the ranks of the rebels. Only as a result of betrayal, the monastery was captured; out of 500 defenders, 60 remained alive.

Thus, during the seventeenth century, great changes occurred in history. They touched all aspects of life. By this time, the territory of the Russian state had expanded noticeably, and the population was growing. The feudal-serf system also further developed, with a significant strengthening of feudal land ownership. The ruling class in the 17th century were feudal landowners, secular and ecclesiastical landowners and patrimonial owners. The development of trade is also of particular importance. Several large shopping centers were formed in Russia, among which Moscow stood out with its enormous trade. Meanwhile, during these same years, uprisings broke out every now and then in the country, in particular the quite powerful Moscow uprising of 1662. The largest uprising was the uprising of Stepan Razin, who in 1667 led the peasants to the Volga. Russia's economic situation was negatively affected by the fact that the country actually did not have free access to the sea, so it continued to lag behind the main Western European countries.

The economic prerequisites for reforms at the beginning of the 18th century were created by the entire course of development of Russia in the 17th century. - growth in production and expansion of the range of agricultural products, advances in crafts, the emergence of manufactories, development of trade and growth economic role merchants.

2. Top coups and favoritism in the political life of Russia

The 37-year period of political instability (1725-1762) that followed the death of Peter I was called the “Era of Palace Revolutions.” During this period, state policy was determined by individual groups of the palace nobility, who actively intervened in resolving the issue of the heir to the throne, fought among themselves for power, and thus carried out palace coups. Also, the decisive force in the palace coups was the guard, a privileged part of the regular army created by Peter (these are the famous Semenovsky and Preobrazhensky regiments, in the 30s two new ones were added to them, the Izmailovsky and Horse Guards). Her participation decided the outcome of the matter: which side the guard was on, that group would win. The Guard was not only a privileged part of the Russian army, it was a representative of an entire class (the nobility), from whose midst it was almost exclusively formed and whose interests it represented. The reason for the intervention of certain groups of the palace nobility in the political life of the country was the Charter “on the succession to the throne” issued by Peter I on February 5, 1722, which abolished “both orders of succession to the throne that were in force before, both the will and the conciliar election, replacing both with personal appointment, at the discretion of the reigning sovereign." Peter I himself did not take advantage of this charter. He died on January 28, 1725, without appointing a successor. Therefore, immediately after his death, a struggle for power began between representatives of the ruling elite. Also, palace coups testified to the weakness of absolute power under the successors of Peter I, who were unable to continue reforms with energy and in the spirit of a pioneer and who could govern the state only relying on their entourage. Favoritism flourished in full bloom during this period. Temporary favorites received unlimited influence on state policy.

The only heir of Peter I in the male line was his grandson - the son of the executed Tsarevich Alexei Peter. Grouped around the grandson were mainly representatives of the high-born feudal aristocracy, now a few boyar families. Among them, the leading role was played by the Golitsyns and Dolgorukys, and they were also joined by some of Peter I’s associates (Field Marshal Prince B.P. Sheremetev, Field Marshal Nikita Repnin, etc.). But the wife of Peter I, Catherine, laid claim to the throne. Peter's two daughters, Anna (married to a Holstein prince) and Elizabeth, who was still a minor by that time, were also heirs. The decree of February 5, 1722, which abolished the old rules of succession to the throne and ratified the personal will of the testator into law, contributed greatly to the ambiguity of the general situation. The figures of Peter the Great's era, who were always at odds with each other, temporarily rallied around Catherine's candidacy. They were: A.D. Menshikov, P.I. Yaguzhinsky, P.A. Tolstoy, A.V. Makarov, F. Prokopovich, I.I. Buturlin and others. The issue of a successor was resolved by the quick actions of A. Menshikov, who, relying on the guard, carried out the first palace coup in favor of Catherine I (1725-1727) and became an all-powerful temporary worker under her.

In 1727, Catherine I died. According to her will, the throne passed to 12-year-old Peter II (1727-1730). The affairs of the state continued to be managed by the Supreme Privy Council. However, changes took place in it: Menshikov was removed and exiled with his family to the distant Western Siberian city of Berezov, and the Tsarevich’s educator Osterman and two princes Dolgoruky and Golitsyn entered the Council. Ivan Dolgoruky, who had a huge influence on the young emperor, became Peter II's favorite.

In January 1730, Peter II dies of smallpox, and the question of a candidate for the throne again arises. The Supreme Privy Council, at the suggestion of D. Golitsyn, chose the niece of Peter I, the daughter of his brother Ivan, the Dowager Duchess of Courland Anna Ioannovna (1730-1740), but limited her power. The “sovereigns” offered the throne to Anna under certain conditions - conditions, according to which the empress actually became a powerless puppet. The reign of Anna Ioannovna (1730-1740) is usually assessed as a kind of timelessness; the empress herself is characterized as a narrow-minded, uneducated woman with little interest in state affairs, who did not trust the Russians, and therefore brought a bunch of foreigners from Mitau and from various “German corners”. “The Germans poured into Russia like rubbish from a leaky bag - they surrounded the courtyard, settled in the throne, and climbed into all the lucrative positions in government,” Klyuchevsky wrote. The guards, protesting against the conditions, demanded that Anna Ioanovna remain the same autocrat as her ancestors. Upon arrival in Moscow, Anna was already aware of the mood of wide circles of the nobility and the guard. Therefore, on February 25, 1730, she broke her standards and “committed herself to sovereignty.” Having become an autocrat, Anna Ioannovna hastened to find support for herself mainly among foreigners who occupied the highest positions at court, in the army and in the highest government bodies. A number of Russian surnames also fell into the circle of people devoted to Anna: relatives Saltykovs, P. Yaguzhinsky, A. Cherkassky, A. Volynsky, A. Ushakov. Anna Biron's Mittava favorite became the de facto ruler of the country. In the system of power that developed under Anna Ioannovna without Biron, her confidant, a rude and vindictive temporary worker, not a single important decision was made at all.

According to Anna Ioannovna's will, her great-nephew, Ivan Antonovich of Brunswick, was appointed as her heir. Biron was appointed regent under him. A palace coup was carried out against the hated Biron just a few weeks later. His mother Anna Leopoldovna was proclaimed ruler under the young Ivan Antonovich. However, there were no changes in policy; all positions continued to remain in the hands of the Germans. On the night of November 25, 1741, the grenadier company of the Preobrazhensky Regiment carried out a palace coup in favor of Elizabeth, the daughter of Peter I (1741-1761). Under Elizabeth, there were no fundamental changes in the composition of the ruling elite of the state apparatus - only the most odious figures were removed. So, Elizabeth appointed A.P. as chancellor. Bestuzhev-Ryumin, who was at one time Biron’s right hand and creation. The highest Elizabethan dignitaries also included brother A.P. Bestuzhev-Ryumina and N.Yu. Trubetskoy, who by 1740 was the Prosecutor General of the Senate. There was a certain continuity of the highest circle of people who actually exercised control over the key issues of foreign and domestic policy, testified to the continuity of this policy itself. Despite all the similarities of this coup with similar palace coups in Russia in the 18th century. (apex character, guard striking force), it had a number of distinctive features. The striking force of the November 25 coup was not just the guard, but the lower ranks of the guards - people from the tax-paying classes, expressing the patriotic sentiments of broad sections of the capital's population. The coup had a pronounced anti-German, patriotic character. Wide layers of Russian society, condemning the favoritism of German temporary workers, turned their sympathies towards Peter's daughter, the Russian heiress. A feature of the palace coup on November 25 was that Franco-Swedish diplomacy tried to actively interfere in the internal affairs of Russia and, in exchange for offering assistance to Elizabeth in the struggle for the throne, to obtain from her certain political and territorial concessions, which meant a voluntary renunciation of the conquests of Peter I.

Elizabeth Petrovna's successor was her nephew Karl-Peter-Ulrich - Duke of Holstein - the son of Elizabeth Petrovna's elder sister Anna, and therefore on his mother's side - the grandson of Peter I. He ascended the throne under the name of Peter III (1761-1762) on February 18, 1762 The Manifesto was published on granting “the entire Russian noble nobility liberty and freedom,” i.e. on exemption from compulsory service. The “Manifesto,” which removed the age-old conscription from the class, was received with enthusiasm by the nobility. Peter III issued Decrees on the abolition of the Secret Chancellery, on allowing schismatics who had fled abroad to return to Russia, with a ban on prosecution for schism. However, soon the policies of Peter III aroused discontent in society and turned metropolitan society against him. Particular dissatisfaction among the officers was caused by Peter III's refusal of all conquests during the victorious Seven Years' War with Prussia (1755-1762), which was waged by Elizaveta Petrovna. A conspiracy was ripe in the guard to overthrow Peter III. As a result of the latter, in the 18th century. In the palace coup carried out on June 28, 1762, the wife of Peter III was elevated to the Russian throne and became Empress Catherine II (1762-1796).

Thus, palace coups did not entail changes in the political, much less social, system of society and boiled down to a struggle for power among various noble groups pursuing their own, most often selfish, interests. At the same time, the specific policies of each of the six monarchs had their own characteristics, sometimes important for the country. In general, the socio-economic stabilization and foreign policy successes achieved during the reign of Elizabeth created the conditions for more accelerated development and new breakthroughs in foreign policy that would occur under Catherine II. Historians see the reasons for palace coups in the decree of Peter I “on changing the order of succession to the throne”, in the clash of corporate interests of various groups of the nobility. With the light hand of V.O. Many historians assessed Klyuchevsky from the 1720s to the 1750s. as a time of weakening of Russian absolutism. N.Ya. Eidelman generally considered palace coups as a peculiar reaction of the nobility to the sharp increase in the independence of the state under Peter I and as historical experience showed, he writes, referring to the “unbridledness” of Peter’s absolutism, that such a huge concentration of power is dangerous both for its bearer and for the ruling class itself." V.O. himself Klyuchevsky also associated the onset of political instability after the death of Peter I with the “autocracy” of the latter, who decided, in particular, to break the traditional order of succession to the throne (when the throne passed through a direct male descendant line) - the charter of February 5, 1722 gave the autocrat the right to appoint a successor for himself at his own request. “Rarely has autocracy punished itself so cruelly as in the person of Peter with this law on February 5,” concluded Klyuchevsky. Peter I did not have time to appoint an heir for himself; the throne, according to Klyuchevsky, turned out to be given “to chance and became its toy”: it was not the law that determined who should sit on the throne, but the guard, which was the “dominant force” at that time. Thus, the reasons that determined this era of revolutions and temporary workers were rooted, on the one hand, in the state of the royal family, and on the other, in the peculiarities of the environment that managed affairs.

3. Catherine II

Catherine II was born on April 21, 1729 in the German seaside town of Stettin, and died on November 6, 1796 in Tsarskoe Selo (Pushkin). Born Sophia Frederica Augusta of Anhalt-Zerbst, she came from a poor German princely family. Catherine II was a rather complex and certainly extraordinary person. On the one hand, she is a pleasant and loving woman, on the other, she is a major statesman. From early childhood she learned a worldly lesson - to be cunning and pretend. In 1745, Catherine II converted to the Orthodox faith and was married to the heir to the Russian throne, the future Peter III. Having arrived in Russia as a fifteen-year-old girl, she set herself two more lessons - to master the Russian language, customs and to learn to please. But with all her abilities, the Grand Duchess had a hard time adapting: there were attacks from the Empress (Elizabeth Petrovna) and neglect from her husband (Peter Fedorovich). Her pride suffered. Then Catherine turned to literature. Possessing remarkable abilities, will and hard work, she studied the Russian language, read a lot, and acquired extensive knowledge. She read a lot of books: French enlighteners, ancient authors, special works on history and philosophy, works of Russian writers. As a result, Catherine adopted the ideas of the enlighteners about the public good as the highest goal of a statesman, about the need to educate and educate subjects, about the primacy of laws in society. In 1754, Catherine gave birth to a son (Pavel Petrovich), the future heir to the Russian throne. But the child was taken from his mother to the empress’s apartment. In December 1761, Empress Elizaveta Petrovna died. Peter III ascended the throne. Catherine II was distinguished by her enormous capacity for work, willpower, determination, courage, cunning, hypocrisy, unlimited ambition and vanity, in general, all the traits that characterize a “strong woman.” She could suppress her emotions for the sake of developed rationalism. She had a special talent - to win general sympathy. Catherine slowly but surely moved towards the Russian throne, and eventually took power from her husband. Soon after the accession of Peter III, unpopular among the clan nobility, she overthrew him, relying on the guards regiments.

On June 28, 1762, a manifesto was drawn up on behalf of Catherine, speaking about the reasons for the coup and the emerging threat to the integrity of the fatherland. 06/29/1762 Peter III signed a manifesto of his abdication. Not only the guard regiments, but also the Senate and Synod readily swore allegiance to the new empress. However, among the opponents of Peter III there were influential people who considered it more fair to place the young Paul on the throne, and Catherine to allow her son to rule until he came of age. At the same time, it was proposed to create an Imperial Council that would limit the power of the Empress. This was not part of Catherine's plans. In order to force everyone to recognize the legitimacy of her power, she decided to be crowned in Moscow as soon as possible. The ceremony took place on September 22, 1762 in the Assumption Cathedral of the Kremlin. On this occasion, the people were offered a rich treat. From the first days of her reign, Catherine wanted to be popular among the broadest masses of the people; she demonstratively attended pilgrimages and went to worship holy places.

The reign of Catherine II is called the era of “enlightened absolutism.” The meaning of enlightened absolutism is the policy of following the ideas of the Enlightenment, expressed in carrying out reforms that destroyed some of the most outdated feudal institutions (and sometimes took a step towards bourgeois development). The idea of ​​a state with an enlightened monarch capable of transforming social life on new, reasonable principles became widespread in the 18th century. The monarchs themselves, in the conditions of the decay of feudalism, the maturation of the capitalist system, and the spread of the ideas of the Enlightenment, were forced to take the path of reform.

The development and implementation of the principles of enlightened absolutism in Russia acquired the character of an integral state-political reform, during which a new state and legal image of the absolute monarchy was formed. At the same time, social and legal policy was characterized by class divisions: nobility, philistinism and peasantry. The domestic and foreign policy of the second half of the 18th century, prepared by the events of the previous reigns, was marked by important legislative acts, outstanding military events and significant territorial annexations. This is due to the activities of major government and military figures: A.R. Vorontsov, P.A. Rumyantseva, A.G. Orlova, G.A. Potemkina, A.A. Bezborodko, A.V. Suvorova, F.F. Ushakov and others. Catherine II herself actively participated in public life. The thirst for power and glory was an essential motive for her activities. The policy of Catherine II was noble in its class orientation. In the 60s, Catherine II covered up the noble essence of her policy with a liberal phrase (which is characteristic of enlightened absolutism). The same goal was pursued by her lively relations with Voltaire and the French encyclopedists and generous monetary gifts to them.

Catherine II imagined the tasks of the “enlightened monarch” as follows: “1. It is necessary to educate the nation that is to be governed. 2. It is necessary to introduce good order in the state, support society and force it to comply with the laws. 3. It is necessary to establish a good and accurate police force in the state. 4. It is necessary to promote the flourishing of the state and make it abundant. 5. It is necessary to make the state formidable in itself and inspiring respect among its neighbors.” But in real life, the empress’s declarations often diverged from her deeds.

4. Domestic policy of Catherine II

Catherine II considered the main task of domestic policy to be the reform of central government bodies. For this purpose, the Senate was divided into 6 departments and deprived of legislative initiative. Catherine II concentrated all legislative and part of the executive power in her hands.

In 1762, a manifesto “on the freedom of the nobility” was published, where nobles were exempted from compulsory military service.

In 1764, the lands were secularized.

In 1767, the Statutory Commission was established. Catherine II convened a special commission to draw up a set of new laws of the Russian Empire instead of the Council Code of 1649. This law provided for the class structure of Russian society. But in 1768 these commissions were dissolved, and no new legislation was adopted.

In 1775, to make it easier to manage the state, Catherine II issued an Institution for the Administration of Provinces, which strengthened the bureaucratic apparatus of local government and increased the number of provinces to 50. There are no more than 400 thousand inhabitants per province. Several provinces made up the viceroyalty. Governors and governors were elected by Catherine II herself from among Russian nobles. They acted according to her orders. The governor's assistants were the vice-governor, two provincial councilors and the provincial prosecutor. This provincial government was in charge of all affairs. State revenues were in charge of the Treasury Chamber (treasury income and expenses, state property, tax farming, monopolies, etc.). The Treasury Chamber was headed by the Vice-Governor. The provincial prosecutor was in charge of all judicial institutions. In cities, the position of mayor, appointed by the government, was introduced. The province was divided into districts. Many large villages were converted into district towns. In the district, power belonged to a police captain elected by the noble assembly. A court has been established in each county town. The provincial city has the highest court. The accused could bring a complaint to the Senate. To make it more convenient to pay taxes, a Treasury was opened in each county town. A system of class courts was created: each class (nobles, townspeople, state peasants) had its own special judicial institutions. Some of them introduced the principle of elected lay judges. The center of gravity in control moved to places. There was no longer a need for a number of colleges; they were abolished; the Military, Naval, Foreign and Commerce Collegiums remained. The system of local government created by the provincial reform of 1775 was preserved until 1864, and the administrative-territorial division introduced by it until the October Revolution. The nobility was recognized as a special main class. Merchants and philistines were also recognized as special classes. The nobles had to carry out public service and conduct agriculture, and merchants and townspeople were supposed to engage in trade and industry. Some areas were previously governed differently, Catherine II made sure that new legislation was introduced everywhere.

In 1785, the Charter of the Nobility was issued. “The Charter for the Rights of Liberty and Advantages of the Noble Russian Nobility” was a set of noble privileges, formalized by a legislative act of Catherine II of April 21, 1785. The freedom of nobles from compulsory service was confirmed. The complete emancipation of the nobility made sense for several reasons:

1) there was a sufficient number of trained people knowledgeable in various matters of military and civil administration;

2) the nobles themselves were aware of the need to serve the state and considered it an honor to shed blood for the fatherland;

3) when the nobles were cut off from the lands all their lives, farms fell into decay, which had a detrimental effect on the country’s economy.

Now many of them could manage their peasants themselves. And the attitude towards the peasants on the part of the owner was much better than on the part of a random manager. The landowner was interested in ensuring that his peasants were not ruined. By granting a charter, the nobility was recognized as the superior class in the state and was exempt from paying taxes; they could not be subjected to corporal punishment; only a court of the nobility could judge them. Only nobles had the right to own land and serfs; they also owned mineral resources on their estates, could engage in trade and set up factories, their houses were free from troop billets, and their estates were not subject to confiscation. The nobility received the right to self-government and formed a “noble society,” the body of which was a noble assembly, convened every three years in the province and district, which elected provincial and district leaders of the nobility, judicial assessors and police captains who headed the district administration. This charter called upon the nobility to participate broadly in local government. Under Catherine II, nobles occupied positions of local executive and judicial power. The charter granted to the nobility was supposed to strengthen the position of the nobility and consolidate its privileges. The letter granted to the nobility testified to the desire of Russian absolutism to strengthen its social support in an environment of aggravated class contradictions. The nobility turned into the politically dominant class in the state.

04/21/1785 - Along with the Letter of Grant to the nobility, the “Charter of Grant to the Cities” was released. This legislative act of Catherine II established new elected city institutions, somewhat expanding the circle of voters. The townspeople were divided into six categories based on property and social characteristics: “real city dwellers” - property owners from the nobility, officials, and clergy; merchants of the three guilds; artisans registered in workshops; foreigners and non-residents; “famous citizens”; “Posadskie”, i.e. all other citizens who live in the city by fishing or handicrafts. These categories under the Charter of Grant to the cities received the basics of self-government, in a certain sense similar to the foundations of the Charter of Grant to the nobility. Once every three years, a meeting of the “city society” was convened, which included only the wealthiest townspeople. The permanent city institution was the “general city council,” consisting of the city mayor and six councilors. Magistrates were the elected judicial institutions in cities. However, the privileges of the townspeople against the backdrop of the permissiveness of the nobility turned out to be imperceptible, the bodies of city self-government were strictly controlled by the tsarist administration, and the attempt to lay the foundations of the bourgeois class failed.

Catherine is a traditional figure, despite the negative attitude towards the Russian past, despite, finally, the fact that she introduced new techniques in management, new ideas into social circulation. The duality of the traditions that she followed also determines the dual attitude of her descendants towards her. If some, not without reason, point out that Catherine’s internal activities legitimized the abnormal consequences of the dark eras of the 18th century, then others bow to the greatness of the results of her foreign policy. The historical significance of the activities of Catherine II is determined quite easily on the basis of what was said above about individual aspects of Catherine’s policy. Many of her outwardly spectacular undertakings, conceived on a large scale, led to modest results or gave unexpected and often erroneous results. It can also be said that Catherine simply implemented the changes dictated by the times and continued the policies outlined in her previous reigns. Or recognize her as a major historical figure who took the second, after Peter I, step along the path of Europeanization of the country, and the first along the path of reforming it in a liberal-educational spirit.

Bibliography

1. Minenko N.A. History of Russia from ancient times to the second half of the 19th century century, - Ekaterinburg: USTU Publishing House, 1995

2. Klyuchevsky V.O. Course of general history, -M.: Nauka, 1994

3. Kobrin V.K. Troubled times - lost opportunities. History of the Fatherland: people, ideas, decisions. -M.: EKSMO, 1991

4. Bushchik L.P. Illustrated history of the USSR. XV-XVII centuries A manual for teachers and students. Inst. M., "Enlightenment", 1970.

5. Danilova L.V. Historical conditions for the development of the Russian nationality during the period of formation and strengthening of the centralized state in Russia // Questions of the formation of the Russian nationality and nation. Digest of articles. M.-L., USSR Academy of Sciences, 1958.

6. Druzhinin N.M. Socio-economic conditions for the formation of the Russian bourgeois nation // Questions of the formation of Russian nationality and nation. Digest of articles. M.-L., USSR Academy of Sciences, 1958.

7. Chuntulov V.T. and others. Economic history of the USSR: Textbook. for economical universities.-M.,: Higher.

8. Borzakovsky P. “Empress Catherine the Second the Great”, M.: Panorama, 1991.

9. Brickner A. “The History of Catherine the Second”, M.: Sovremennik, 1991.

10. Zaichkin I.A., Pochkaev I.N. “Russian history: From Catherine the Great to Alexander II” M.: Mysl, 1994.

11. Pavlenko N. “Catherine the Great” // Rodina. - 1995. - No. 10-11, 1996. - No. 1.6.

12. “Russia and the Romanovs: Russia under the scepter of the Romanovs.” Essays on Russian history from 1613 to 1913. Ed. P.N. Zhukovich. M.: “Russia”. Rostov-on-Don: JSC “Tanais”, 1992.

13. Derevianko A.P. “History of Russia: textbook.” M.: “Russia”, 2007.

14. Valishevsky K. Daughter of Peter the Great., Chisinau, 1990.

15. Klyuchevsky V.O. “Russian history. Complete course of lectures” Volume 1-3, 2000.

Similar documents

general characteristics Russian domestic and foreign policy in the second half of the 18th century. Palace coups as a characteristic feature of the internal political life of Russia in the 18th century. Analysis of the uprising of E. Pugachev, which became the largest in Russian history.

abstract, added 07/24/2011


Studying the features of the socio-economic development of Russia in the second half of the 18th century. Personality of Empress Catherine II, distinctive features and image of her reign. The essence of the policy of enlightened absolutism and the domestic policy of Catherine II.

abstract, added 11/09/2010


Socio-economic prerequisites for the formation of Russian culture in the second half of the 19th century. The state of enlightenment and education, artistic culture (fine arts, literature, theater, music, architecture). Phenomenon of the "Silver Age".

course work, added 08/20/2012


Analysis of the main reasons and prerequisites for mass popular uprisings in Russia in the 17th century. The essence and content of the “Salt Riot”, the demands of the townspeople, the degree of satisfaction. "Copper riot" and its consequences. The war led by Razin.

presentation, added 02/19/2011


Characteristics of Russian domestic policy in 1855-1881. and bourgeois reforms of 1863-1874. Russian economy in the second half of the 19th century. and the formation of an industrial society in the state. Study of the social movement in the second half of the 19th century.

test, added 10/16/2011


Historical stages of development of the noble class in Russia, its originality and features. The state of the nobility in post-reform Russia. Historical prerequisites for the creation of the life of a noblewoman in the second half of the 19th century and the beginning of the 20th century.

test, added 12/27/2009


Characteristics and analysis of the consequences of the Time of Troubles for Russia at the beginning of the 17th century. Features of the socio-economic development of Russia in the middle and second half of the 17th century. A study of the internal politics of the Romanovs, as well as their main reforms.

abstract, added 10/20/2013


Socio-economic development of the Vladimir province and its features in the second half of the 19th century. Peasant reform, its features and results. Peasant crafts and handicraft production, otkhodnichestvo, directions of industrial development.

abstract, added 04/26/2011


Prerequisites and features of the development of absolutism in Russia. Reforms of Peter I in the development of absolutism in Russia. Socio-economic development of Russia since the second quarter of the 18th century. "Enlightened absolutism" of Catherine II. "Laid Commission" 1767.

thesis, added 02/26/2008


Characteristics of Catherine's reign. The need of an absolutist state for secular culture. The state of Russia at the beginning of the reign of Catherine II. The place of the 18th century in the history of Russian culture. A manifestation of the empress's enlightened absolutism.

Alexey Mikhailovich (1645-1676)

Alexey Mikhailovich experienced a turbulent era of “rebellions” and wars, rapprochement and discord with Patriarch Nikon. Under him, Russia's possessions expanded in the east, in Siberia, and in the west. Active diplomatic activity is being carried out.

Much has been done in the field of domestic policy. A course was pursued to centralize control and strengthen the autocracy. The backwardness of the country dictated the invitation of foreign specialists in manufacturing, military affairs, first experiments, attempts at transformation (establishing schools, regiments of the new system, etc.).

In the middle of the 17th century. tax burden has increased. The treasury felt the need for money both for the maintenance of the expanding apparatus of power, and in connection with an active foreign policy (wars with Sweden, the Polish-Lithuanian Commonwealth). According to the figurative expression of V.O. Klyuchevsky, “the army seized the treasury.” The government of Tsar Alexei Mikhailovich increased indirect taxes, raising the price of salt by 4 times in 1646. However, the increase in the salt tax did not lead to replenishment of the treasury, since the solvency of the population was undermined. The salt tax was abolished in 1647. It was decided to collect arrears for three last year. The entire amount of the tax fell on the population of the “black” settlements, which caused discontent among the townspeople. In 1648 it resulted in an open uprising in Moscow.

At the beginning of June 1648, Alexei Mikhailovich, returning from a pilgrimage, was presented with a petition from the Moscow population demanding to punish the most selfish representatives of the tsarist administration. However, the demands of the townspeople were not satisfied, and they began to destroy merchants' and boyars' houses. Several major dignitaries were killed. The Tsar was forced to expel boyar B.I. Morozov, who headed the government, from Moscow. With the help of bribed archers, whose salaries were increased, the uprising was suppressed.

The uprising in Moscow, called the “salt riot,” was not the only one. Over the course of twenty years (from 1630 to 1650), uprisings took place in 30 Russian cities: Veliky Ustyug, Novgorod, Voronezh, Kursk, Vladimir, Pskov, and Siberian cities.

Cathedral Code of 1649“For the sake of fear and civil strife from all black people,” as Patriarch Nikon later wrote, the Zemsky Sobor was convened. Its meetings took place in 1648-1649. and ended with the adoption of the “Conciliar Code” of Tsar Alexei Mikhailovich. It was the largest Zemsky Sobor in the history of Russia. 340 people took part in it, the majority of whom (70%) belonged to the nobility and the elite of the settlement.

The “Conciliar Code” consisted of 25 chapters and contained about a thousand articles. Printed in an edition of two thousand copies, it was the first Russian legislative monument published in printing, and remained valid until 1832 (with changes, of course). It was translated into almost all European languages.

The first three chapters of the Code spoke about crimes against the church and royal power. Any criticism of the church and blasphemy was punishable by burning at the stake. Persons accused of treason and insulting the honor of the sovereign, as well as boyars and governors, were executed. Those who “will come in a crowd and in a conspiracy, and teach someone to rob or beat,” were ordered to be “deathed without any mercy.” A person who drew a weapon in the presence of the king was punished by cutting off his hand.

The “Conciliar Code” regulated the performance of various services, the ransom of prisoners, customs policy, the position of various categories of the population in the state.. It provided for the exchange of estates, including the exchange of estates for patrimony. Such a transaction was required to be registered in the Local Order. The “Conciliar Code” limited the growth of church land ownership, which reflected the tendency for the church to subordinate to the state.

The most important section of the “Conciliar Code” was Chapter XI “The Court of Peasants”: an indefinite search for fugitive and taken away peasants was introduced, and peasant transfers from one owner to another were prohibited. This meant the legalization of the serfdom system. Simultaneously with the privately-owned peasants, serfdom extended to the black sowing and palace peasants, who were forbidden to leave their communities. If they escaped, they were also subject to indefinite investigation.

Chapter XIX of the “Cathedral Code” “On the townspeople” brought changes to the life of the city. The “white” settlements were liquidated, their population was included in the settlement. The entire urban population had to bear the tax on the sovereign. Under penalty of death, it was prohibited to move from one posad to another and even to marry women from another posad, i.e. the population of the posad was assigned to a specific city. Citizens received a monopoly right to trade in cities. Peasants did not have the right to keep shops in cities, but could only trade from carts and in shopping arcades.

By the middle of the 17th century. Russia, having restored its economy, could focus on solving foreign policy problems. In the northwest, the primary concern was regaining access to the Baltic Sea. In the west, the task was to return the Smolensk, Chernigov and Novgorod-Seversky lands lost during the Polish-Lithuanian intervention. The solution to this problem has become more acute due to the struggle of the Ukrainian and Belarusian peoples for reunification with Russia. In the south of Russia, it was constantly necessary to repel the incessant raids of the Crimean Khan, a vassal of powerful Turkey.

The Zaporozhye Sich became the center of the struggle against foreign enslavers in the 40-50s of the 17th century. To protect against the attacks of the Crimean Tatars here, beyond the Dnieper rapids, the Cossacks built a special system of fortifications from felled trees - “zaseki” (hence the name of this territory). Here, in the lower reaches of the Dnieper, a kind of Cossack republic, a free military brotherhood led by elected koshevoy and kuren atamans, took shape.

The Polish-Lithuanian Commonwealth, wanting to attract the Cossacks to its side, began to compile special lists - registers. A Cossack registered in the register was called a registered Cossack, was considered to be in the service of the Polish king and received a salary. In accordance with the established order, the hetman was at the head of the Zaporozhye army. In 1648, Bohdan Khmelnytsky was elected hetman of the Zaporozhye Sich, receiving the traditional signs of power: a mace, a bunchuk and a military seal.

He showed himself early as a talented leader. The Cossacks elected him to the post of military clerk (one of the most important in the Zaporozhye Sich).

Like many other residents of Ukraine, Bogdan Khmelnitsky experienced cruelty and injustice on the part of foreign enslavers. So, the Polish nobleman Chaplinsky attacked the farm of B. Khmelnitsky, plundered the house, burned the apiary and threshing floor, pinned his ten-year-old son to death, and took away his wife. In 1647, B. Khmelnitsky openly opposed the Polish government.

B. Khmelnitsky understood that the fight against the Polish-Lithuanian Commonwealth would require enormous effort, and therefore, from the first steps of his activities, he advocated an alliance with Russia, seeing in it a faithful ally of Ukraine. However, urban uprisings were raging in Russia at that time, and, moreover, it was not yet strong enough to enter into confrontation with the Polish-Lithuanian Commonwealth. Therefore, at first, Russia limited itself to providing economic assistance and diplomatic support to Ukraine.

Having announced the general mobilization of the gentry, the Polish-Lithuanian Commonwealth moved its troops against the army of B. Khmelnitsky. In the summer of 1649, near Zborov (Prikarpattya), B. Khmelnytsky defeated the Polish army. The Polish government was forced to conclude the Peace of Zborov. According to this agreement, the Polish-Lithuanian Commonwealth recognized B. Khmelnytsky as hetman of Ukraine.

The Zboriv peace turned out to be a temporary truce. In the summer of 1651, the superior forces of the Polish magnates met with the troops of B. Khmelnitsky. The defeat at Berestechko and the defeat of individual uprisings by punitive expeditions forced B. Khmelnitsky to conclude peace at Bila Tserkva on difficult terms.

On October 1, 1653, war was declared on Poland. An embassy headed by boyar Buturlin left for Ukraine. On January 8, 1654, a Rada (Council) was held in the city of Pereyaslavl (now Pereyaslav-Khmelnitsky). Ukraine was accepted into the Russian state. Russia recognized the election of the hetman, the local court and other authorities that emerged during the liberation war. The tsarist government confirmed the class rights of the Ukrainian nobility. Ukraine received the right to establish diplomatic relations with all countries except Poland and Turkey, and to have registered troops of up to 60 thousand people. Taxes were supposed to go to the royal treasury. The reunification of Ukraine with Russia was of enormous historical significance. It liberated the people of Ukraine from national and religious oppression and saved them from the danger of enslavement by Poland and Turkey. It contributed to the formation of the Ukrainian nation. The reunification of Ukraine with Russia led to a temporary weakening of serfdom relations on the Left Bank (serfdom was legally introduced in Ukraine in the second half of the 18th century).

The reunification of Left Bank Ukraine with Russia was an important factor in strengthening Russian statehood. Thanks to reunification with Ukraine, Russia managed to return the Smolensk and Chernigov lands, which made it possible to begin the fight for the Baltic coast. In addition, a favorable prospect opened up for expanding Russia’s ties with other Slavic peoples and Western states.

The Polish-Lithuanian Commonwealth did not recognize the reunification of Ukraine with Russia. The Russian-Polish war became inevitable. The war was marked by the success of Russian and Ukrainian troops. Russian troops occupied Smolensk, Belarus, Lithuania; Bohdan Khmelnitsky - Lublin, a number of cities in Galicia and Volyn.

Sweden opened military action against her. The Swedes took Warsaw and Krakow. Poland stood on the brink of destruction.

Alexei Mikhailovich, counting on the royal throne, declared Sweden a warrior (1656-1658). A Russian-Polish truce was concluded.

Russia's successes were crossed out by the betrayal of the Ukrainian hetman I. Vygovsky, who replaced B. Khmelnytsky, who died in 1657. I. Vygovsky entered into a secret alliance with Poland against Russia.

In 1658, a Russian-Swedish truce was concluded for three years, and in 1661 - the Kardis (near Tartu) peace. Russia was returning the territories it had conquered during the war. The Baltic remained with Sweden. The problem of access to the Baltic Sea remained the top priority and most important task of foreign policy.

The grueling, protracted Russian-Polish war ended in 1667 with the conclusion of the Andrusovo (near Smolensk) truce for thirteen and a half years. Russia abandoned Belarus, but retained Smolensk and Left Bank Ukraine. Kyiv, located on the right bank of the Dnieper, was transferred to Russia for two years (after the completion of this period it was never returned). Zaporozhye came under the joint control of Ukraine and Poland.