TOPIC 19 The abolition of serfdom. Reforms 1863 -1874 PLAN

1. The historical necessity of the abolition of serfdom and the preparation of a peasant reform.

3. Liberal reforms of the 60s - 70s. XIX century: zemstvo, city, judicial, financial, public education, press. Military reform 1861 -1874, the role of D.A. Milyutin in its implementation.

4. Significance of the reforms of 1863 - 1874

The historical necessity of the abolition of serfdom

and the preparation of the peasant reform.

By the middle of the XIX century. the prerequisites that led to the collapse of the feudal system have finally matured. First of all, it has outlived itself economically. The landlord economy, based on the labor of serfs, increasingly fell into decay. This worried the government, which was forced to spend huge amounts of money to support the landlords.

Objectively, serfdom also interfered with the industrial modernization of the country, as it prevented the formation of a free labor market, the accumulation of capital invested in production, an increase in the purchasing power of the population and the development of trade.

The need to abolish serfdom was also conditioned by the fact that the peasants openly protested against it. People's Movement could not but influence the position of the government.

The defeat in the Crimean War played the role of a particularly important political prerequisite for the abolition of serfdom, as it demonstrated the backwardness and rottenness of the country's socio-political system. Exports and imports of goods dropped sharply. The new foreign policy situation that developed after the Peace of Paris testified to Russia's loss of its international prestige and threatened to lose influence in Europe.

Thus, the abolition of serfdom was due to political, economic, social and moral prerequisites. These prerequisites also led to the implementation of other important bourgeois reforms: in the field of local government, courts, education, finance, and military affairs.

The preparation of the reform began immediately after the end of the Crimean War. In 1857, a Secret Committee was formed "to discuss measures to organize the life of the landlord peasants", which behind the scenes began to develop a plan for the liberation of the peasants. Various projects began to come to the Committee. So, the Polish and Lithuanian nobles asked to release the peasants without land, the Tver landowners offered to release the peasants with land for a ransom.

In November 1857, Alexander II instructed the governors of Vilna and St. Petersburg to establish provincial committees to prepare local projects for improving the life of the landlord peasants. Thus, the reform began to be developed in an atmosphere of openness. All projects were submitted to the Main Committee, headed by Grand Duke Konstantin Nikolayevich.

In 1859, two so-called Editorial Commissions were set up under the Main Committee to review the materials prepared by the provincial committees and to draw up a draft law on the emancipation of the peasants. In fact, both commissions merged, retaining the plural name - "Editorial Commissions". The commission was headed by General Rostovtsev Ya.I., who attracted liberal landowners and officials to work - Milyutin N.A., Samarin Yu.F., Semenov N.P. and others. In the summer of 1859, the draft "Regulations on the Peasants" was prepared, later, at different stages of the discussion, it underwent changes and clarifications.

When discussing the reform project, the landowners put forward various proposals on the conditions for the liberation of the peasants:

Large landlords-serfs offered to free the peasants, retaining the landlord's ownership of the land, and allow the peasants to use the land for corvée and dues;

· the middle landed nobles of the non-chernozem zone offered to release the peasants with land, but for a huge ransom;

· the nobles of the black earth zone offered to free the peasants with only small allotments, in order to later force the peasants to rent land or work as laborers;

· The liberal landowners proposed to release the peasants with land, that is, with arable plots, but leave the rest of the land with the landowners;

Democrats (Herzen A.I., Chernyshevsky N.G.) believed that it was necessary to free the peasants with land, without redemption, and Dobrolyubov N.A. actually called for a revolutionary solution of the land question.

On February 19, 1861, in the State Council, Alexander II signed the "Regulations on the Reform" (they included 17 legislative acts) and the "Manifesto on the abolition of serfdom." These documents were published in print on March 5, 1861.

The “Regulations” of February 19, 1861 include 17 legislative acts: “General Regulations”, four “Local Regulations on the Land Arrangement of Peasants”, “Regulations” - “On Redemption”, “On the Arrangement of Household People”, “On Provincial on Peasant Affairs institutions”, as well as the “Rules” - “On the Procedure for Enacting the Regulations”, “On Peasants of Small Land Owners”, “On People Assigned to Private Mining Plants”, etc. These legislative acts extended to 45 provinces, in which 100 428 landowners, there were 22,563 thousand serfs of both sexes, including 1,467 thousand households and 543 thousand assigned to private factories and factories.

The liquidation of feudal relations in the countryside was not a one-time act of 1861, but a long process that stretched over more than two decades. The peasants did not receive full release immediately from the moment the Manifesto and the “Regulations” were promulgated on February 19, 1861. The Manifesto announced that the peasants for another two years (until February 19, 1863 - such a period was set for the implementation of the “Regulations”) are obliged were serving, although in a slightly modified form, but in essence the same duties as under serfdom.

According to the Manifesto, the peasants immediately received personal freedom. The importance of this act must be emphasized: the granting of "will" was the main requirement in centuries of history peasant movement.

Subsequent reforms in the field of court, local government, education, military service expanded the rights of the peasantry: a peasant could be elected to jurors of new courts, to zemstvo self-government bodies, he was given access to middle and higher educational establishments. Of course, this did not completely remove the class inequality of the peasantry. It continued to be the lowest, taxable class.

From the date of the promulgation of the Manifesto on February 19, 1861, it was planned to introduce "peasant public administration" in the villages of the former landlord peasants within a nine-month period. It was introduced during the summer of 1861.

Great importance in the implementation of the peasant reform on the ground, he had the institute of peace mediators, created in the summer of 1861, who were entrusted with numerous mediation and administrative functions: verification, approval and introduction of charters (determining post-reform obligations and land relations between peasants and landlords), certification of redemption acts during the transition of peasants to redemption, the resolution of disputes between peasants and landowners, the approval of village elders and volost foremen, supervision of peasant self-government bodies. Peace mediators were appointed by the Senate from local hereditary landowning nobles on the proposal of the governors together with the provincial marshals of the nobility.

The central place in the reform was occupied by the question of land. The published law proceeded from the principle of recognizing the landowners' right of ownership to all the land on their estates, including the peasant allotment, and the peasants were declared only users of this land, obliged to serve for it the duties established by the "Regulations" ( quitrent or corvée). To become the owner of his allotment land, the peasant had to buy it from the landowner.

When determining the norms of peasant allotments, the peculiarities of local natural and economic conditions were taken into account. Proceeding from this, the entire territory of European Russia was divided into three bands - non-chernozem, chernozem and steppe, and the "bands" were in turn divided into "localities" (from 10 to 15 in each "band"). In the non-chernozem and chernozem "bands", the "higher" and "lower" (1/3 "higher") norms of allotments were established, and in the steppe - one, the so-called "instruction" norm. The law provided for a cut off from the peasant allotment in favor of the landowner if its pre-reform dimensions exceeded the “higher” or “indicative” norm, and cutting if it did not reach the “lower” norm.

Under serfdom, the land use of the peasants was not limited to the allotments provided to them. The peasants also used the pastures of the landlord free of charge, received permission to graze cattle in the landowner's forest, on the mowed meadow and harvested landowner's field. With the abolition of serfdom, peasants could use these landowners' lands (as well as forests) for an additional fee.

The law gave the landowner the right to transfer peasant estates to another place, and before the peasants went for redemption, to exchange their allotments for their own land if any minerals were discovered on the peasant allotment or this land turned out to be necessary for the landowner for his economic needs. Thus, the peasant, having received an allotment, did not yet become his full owner.

When switching to redemption, the peasant received the name "peasant-owner". However, the land was not provided to a separate peasant household (with the exception of the peasants of the western provinces), but to the community. The communal form of land ownership excluded the possibility for the peasant to sell his allotment, and the lease of the latter was limited to the boundaries of the community.

To protect the interests of the small landed nobility, special "rules" established a number of benefits for them, which created even more difficult conditions for the peasants in these estates. Smallholders were those who had less than 21 husbands. gender. There were 41 thousand of them, or 42% of the total number of the landed nobility.

Small landowners were also given the right not to allocate land to the peasants at all, if by the time of the abolition of serfdom they had not used it. In addition, small landowners were not obliged to cut the land to the peasants if their allotments were less than the lowest norm. If the peasants of small estate owners did not receive allotments at all, then they were given the right to move to state-owned lands and receive benefits from the treasury for acquiring a farm.

Finally, a small landowner could hand over the peasants with their field plots, for which he received a reward in the amount of 17 annual quitrents that he had previously charged from his peasants.

Receiving a deed of gift exempted from high redemption payments, the donor completely broke with the landowner. But the peasant could go "to the gift" only with the consent of his landowner. The desire to go "to the gift" was predominantly manifested in the sparsely populated provinces with lots of land, and mainly in the first years of the reform, when market and rental prices for land were relatively low in these provinces.

The “Redemption Regulations” allowed the peasant to leave the community, but it was extremely difficult: it was necessary to pay dues to the landowner a year in advance, state, worldly and other fees, pay off arrears, etc.

The law provided for before the transition of the peasants to redemption, i.e. for the period of a temporarily obligated state, serving them for the provided land of service in the form of corvée and dues. The sizes of both were fixed in the law. If for corvée estates a single norm of corvée days was established (40 days for men and 30 for women for one shower allotment), then for quitrents the amount of dues was determined depending on the fishing and trade "benefits" of the peasants. The law established the following rates of quitrent: for the highest allotment in industrial provinces - 10 rubles, in estates located within 25 miles from St. Petersburg and Moscow, it increased to 12 rubles, and in the rest the quitrent was determined in the amount of 8-9 rubles. from the heart of a husband. gender. In the case of the proximity of the estate to the railway, navigable river, to the commercial and industrial center, the landowner could apply for an increase in the amount of dues.

According to the law, it was impossible to increase the size of the dues above the pre-reform ones, if the land allotment did not increase. However, the law did not provide for a reduction in dues in connection with the reduction of the allotment. As a result of the cut off from the peasant allotment, there was an actual increase in quitrent per 1 tithe.

The discrepancy between the dues and the yield from the allotment was aggravated by the so-called system of "gradations". Its essence was that half of the dues fell on the first tithe, a quarter - on the second, and the other quarter was laid out on the remaining tithes. The system of "gradations" pursued the goal of establishing a maximum of duties for a minimum allotment. It also extended to the corvee: half of the corvee days were served for the first tithe, a quarter - for the second, the other quarter - for the remaining tithes. 2/3 of corvee work was served in the summer and 1/3 in the winter. The summer working day was 12 hours, and the winter day was 9 hours. At the same time, a “lesson system” was established, i.e. a certain amount of work ("lesson"), which the peasant was obliged to complete during the working day. However, due to the widespread poor performance of corvee work by peasants in the first years after the reform, corvee turned out to be so inefficient that landowners began to quickly transfer peasants to quitrent. In this regard, in a relatively short time (1861-1863), the proportion of corvée peasants decreased from 71 to 33%.

As noted above, the final stage of the peasant reform was the transfer of peasants for ransom, but the law of February 19, 1861 did not establish a deadline for completing such a transfer.

The ransom was based not on the real, market price of the land, but on feudal duties, i.e. the peasants had to pay not only for allotments, but also for their freedom - the loss of serf labor by the landowner. The amount of the ransom for the allotment was determined by the so-called "capitalization of quitrent". Its essence was as follows. The annual rent was equal to 6% of the capital (this is the percentage that was accrued annually on bank deposits).

The state took over the ransom by carrying out a ransom operation. For this purpose, in 1861, the Main Redemption Institution was established under the Ministry of Finance. The redemption operation consisted in the fact that the treasury paid the landowners immediately in cash or securities of interest 80% of the redemption amount if the peasants of the estate received the highest allotment at the rate, and 75% if they were given a less than the highest allotment. The remaining 20-25% of the redemption amount (the so-called "additional payment"), the peasants paid directly to the landowner - immediately or in installments, in cash or by working off (by mutual agreement). The redemption amount paid by the state to the landowner was considered as a “loan” provided to the peasants, which was then collected from them as a “redemption payment” in the amount of 6% of this “loan” annually for 49 years.

In general, the reform of 1861 created favorable conditions for a gradual transition from the feudal landowner economy to the capitalist one.

Significance of canceling cr right

The peasant reform of 1861, despite its inconsistency and inconsistency, was ultimately the most important historical act of progressive significance. It became a turning point, a line between serf Russia and free enterprise Russia, creating the necessary conditions for the establishment of capitalism in the country. Compared with the fortress era, the pace of economic development, a new social structure has developed, characteristic of a capitalist country: new social strata of the population have formed - the proletariat and the industrial bourgeoisie. The peasantry has also changed. The dark, downtrodden, patriarchal peasant was replaced by a peasant who had been working in the city, who had seen a lot and learned a lot. Given the relatively rapid economic development of Russia in late XIX- early XX century. and the rise of culture, a significant layer of people of intellectual labor was formed in various fields of science and technology, literature and art, school and medical affairs.

The abolition of serfdom and the implementation of reforms in the courts, education, the press, in the field of finance, military affairs, the implementation of a number of government measures for the industrial development of the country ensured Russia's strong position among the world's largest powers.

Liberal reforms of the 60-70s. XIX in .: zemstvo, city, judicial, financial, public education, press. Military reform of 1861-1874, the role of Milyutin D.A. in its implementation.

Establishment of zemstvos . The abolition of serfdom made it possible to involve all segments of the population in solving local problems. At the same time, when establishing new governing bodies, the government could not ignore the moods of the nobles, many of whom were dissatisfied with the abolition of serfdom.

On January 1, 1864, an imperial decree introduced the "Regulations on provincial and district zemstvo institutions", which provided for the creation of elective zemstvos in the counties and provinces. Only men had the right to vote in the elections of these bodies. Voters were divided into three curia (categories): landowners, city voters and elected from peasant societies. Owners of at least 200 acres of land or other real estate in the amount of at least 15 thousand rubles, as well as owners of industrial and commercial enterprises that generate income of at least 6 thousand rubles a year, could be a voter in the landowning curia. The small landowners, uniting, put forward only representatives in the elections.

The voters of the city curia were merchants, owners of enterprises or trading establishments with an annual turnover of at least 6,000 rubles, as well as owners of immovable property in the amount of 600 rubles or more (not including big cities) up to 3.6 thousand rubles (in large cities).

Elections for the peasant curia were multi-stage: at first, rural assemblies elected representatives to volost assemblies. Electors were first elected at volost gatherings, who then nominated representatives to county self-government bodies. At district assemblies, representatives from the peasants were elected to the provincial self-government bodies.

Zemstvo institutions were divided into administrative and executive. Administrative bodies - zemstvo assemblies - consisted of vowels of all classes. Both in the counties and in the provinces, vowels were elected for a period of three years. Zemstvo assemblies elected executive bodies - zemstvo councils, which also worked for three years. The range of issues that were resolved by zemstvo institutions was limited to local affairs: the construction and maintenance of schools, hospitals, the development of local trade and industry, etc. The legitimacy of their activities was monitored by the governor. The material basis for the existence of zemstvos was a special tax, which was imposed on real estate: land, houses, factories and trade establishments.

Despite the fact that representatives of the nobility prevailed in the zemstvos, their activities were aimed at improving the situation of the broad masses of the people.

Zemstvo reform was not carried out in the Arkhangelsk, Astrakhan and Orenburg provinces, in Siberia, in Central Asia - where there was no noble landownership or was insignificant. Poland, Lithuania, Belarus, Right-Bank Ukraine, and the Caucasus did not receive local governments, since there were few Russians among the landowners.

self-government in cities. In 1870, following the example of the Zemstvo, a city reform was carried out. It introduced all-estate self-government bodies - city dumas, elected for four years. Vowels of the Dumas elected for the same period permanent executive bodies - city councils, as well as the mayor, who was the head of both the thought and the council.

The right to choose new governing bodies was enjoyed by men who had reached the age of 25 and paid city taxes. All voters, in accordance with the amount of fees paid in favor of the city, were divided into three curia. The first was a small group of the largest owners of real estate, industrial and commercial enterprises, who paid 1/3 of all taxes to the city treasury. The second curia included smaller taxpayers contributing another 1/3 of the city fees. The third curia consisted of all other taxpayers. At the same time, each of them elected an equal number of vowels to the city duma, which ensured the predominance of large owners in it.

The activity of city self-government was controlled by the state. The mayor was approved by the governor or the minister of the interior. The same officials could impose a ban on any decision of the city duma. To control the activities of city self-government in each province, a special body was created - the provincial presence for city affairs.

For all its limitations, urban emancipation reform Russian society, like the zemstvo, contributed to the involvement of the general population in solving management issues. This served as a prerequisite for the formation of civil society and the rule of law in Russia.

Judicial reform

An important step in a number of liberal reforms was the judicial reform. November 20, 1864 Alexander II approved the judicial statutes. They introduced crown and magistrate courts. Elected jurors took part in the trial, establishing the guilt or innocence of the defendant. The measure of punishment was determined by the judge and his two assistants - members of the court. The highest court of cassation was the Senate. For the analysis of minor offenses and civil cases with a claim up to 500 rubles. in counties and cities, a world court was established with simplified legal proceedings (orality and publicity).

The chairmen and members of the court were approved by the emperor, justices of the peace - by the Senate, as a result of which they were not subject to administrative dismissal or suspension from office. Judges could be removed from office only if they were held criminally liable by a court decision.

Judicial statutes of 1864 introduced the institution of sworn attorneys, the bar and the institution of judicial investigators - officials of the judicial department, who were transferred from the police to conduct preliminary investigations in criminal cases. All members of the court, judicial investigators and attorneys at law were required to have a higher legal education, and lawyers, in addition, had to have five years of experience in judicial practice. Supervision over the legality of the actions of the judiciary was carried out by prosecutors directly subordinate to the Minister of Justice.

The judicial reform was the most consistent, although it retained the features of the class (spiritual court, a special court for high officials). The reform was carried out at a time when the liberal movement was in decline, and the reactionary "party" in the highest spheres was gaining more influence and was trying to curtail the reform. In 1872, laws were passed that restricted the publicity of court hearings and their coverage in the press. By the law of 1878, political cases were transferred from the jury to the military courts.

In the 80s. Attempts were made to curtail judicial reform in a political reaction: the world court was abolished (restored in 1912) and a special authority was established - "special meetings" "to find measures to better protect peace and security in the empire", i.e. for administrative decision political affairs.

financial reforms.

Conducted in the 60s of the 19th century. a series of financial reforms was aimed at centralizing the financial affairs and affected mainly the apparatus of financial management. Decree of 1860. The State Bank was established, which replaced the former lending institutions - zemstvo and commercial banks, while maintaining the treasury and orders of public charity. The State Bank received the pre-emptive right to lend to trade and industrial establishments. The state budget was streamlined. Law of 1862 established a new procedure for the preparation of estimates by individual departments. The only responsible manager of all income and expenses was the Minister of Finance. From the same time, the list of income and expenses began to be published for general information.

In 1864 the state control was reorganized. In all provinces, departments of state control were established - control chambers independent of governors and other departments. The Chambers of Control audited the revenues and expenditures of all local institutions on a monthly basis. Since 1868 began to publish annual reports of the state controller, who was at the head of state control.

The farming system was abolished, in which most of the indirect tax went not to the treasury, but to the pockets of tax farmers. However, all these measures did not change the general class orientation of the government's financial policy. The main burden of taxes and fees still lay on the taxable population. The poll tax for peasants, philistines, and artisans was preserved. The privileged classes were exempted from it. The poll tax, quitrent and redemption payments accounted for more than 25% of state revenues, but the bulk of these revenues were indirect taxes. More than 50% of the expenditures in the state budget went to the maintenance of the army and the administrative apparatus, up to 35% - to the payment of interest on public debts, the issuance of subsidies, and so on. Expenses for public education, medicine, and charity accounted for less than 1/10 of the state budget.

3.5. Reforms in the field of public education and the press.

Reforms of administration, courts and the army logically demanded a change in the education system. In 1864, a new “Charter of the Gymnasium” and “Regulations on public schools governing primary and secondary education. The main thing was that all-class education was actually introduced. Along with the state schools, zemstvo, parochial, Sunday and private schools arose. Gymnasiums were divided into classical and real ones. They accepted children of all classes capable of paying tuition fees. In the 70s. was the beginning of higher education for women.

In 1865, "Provisional Rules" on printing were introduced. They abolished preliminary censorship for a number of printed publications: books designed for the wealthy and educated part of society, as well as central periodicals. The new rules did not apply to the provincial press and mass literature for the people. Special spiritual censorship was also preserved. From the end of the 60s. the government began to issue decrees, largely nullifying the main provisions of the education reform and censorship.

military reforms. Liberal transformations in society, the desire of the government to overcome backwardness in the military field, as well as to reduce military spending, necessitated fundamental reforms in the army. They were carried out under the leadership of the Minister of War D. A. Milyutin. In 1863-1864. reform of military educational institutions began. General education was separated from special education: future officers received general education in military gymnasiums, and professional training in military schools. The children of the nobility studied mainly in these educational institutions. For those who did not have a secondary education, cadet schools were created, where representatives of all classes were admitted. In 1868, military progymnasiums were created to replenish the cadet schools.

In 1867 the Military Law Academy was opened, in 1877 the Naval Academy. Instead of recruitment sets, all-class military service was introduced. According to the charter approved on January 1, 1874, persons of all classes from the age of 20 (later - from the age of 21) were subject to conscription. General term service for the ground forces was set at 15 years, of which 6 years - active service, 9 years - in reserve. In the fleet - 10 years: 7 - valid, 3 - in reserve. For persons who received an education, the period of active service was reduced from 4 years (for those who graduated from elementary schools) to 6 months (for those who received higher education).

The only sons and the only breadwinners of the family were released from service, as well as those recruits whose older brother was serving or had already served a term of active service. Those released from the draft were enrolled in the militia, which was formed only during the war. Clerics of all faiths, representatives of some religious sects and organizations, the peoples of the North, Central Asia, part of the inhabitants of the Caucasus and Siberia were not subject to conscription. Corporal punishment was abolished in the army, punishment with rods was retained only for fines, food was improved, barracks were re-equipped, and literacy was introduced for soldiers. There was a rearmament of the army and navy: smooth-bore weapons were replaced by rifled ones, the replacement of cast-iron and bronze guns with steel ones began; The rapid-fire rifles of the American inventor Berdan were adopted for service. The system of combat training has changed. A number of new statutes, instructions, teaching aids, who set the task of teaching soldiers only what is needed in the war, significantly reducing the time for drill training.

As a result of the reforms, Russia received a massive army that met the requirements of the time. The combat readiness of the troops has significantly increased. The transition to universal military service was a serious blow to the class organization of society.

Significance of the reforms of 1863-1874

The reforms of the 50-70s of the XIX century, starting with the abolition of serfdom, marked significant changes in the political system of Russia. The general course of the socio-economic development of Russia has caused an urgent need for reforms, which in turn gave impetus to the rapid growth of the economy and culture of the country. However, the reforms of the 1960s and 1970s, bourgeois in their content, were not consistent and incomplete. Along with bourgeois principles in the new bodies of local government, the judiciary, public education, etc. At the same time, the reforms protected the estate advantages of the nobility and actually preserved the unequal position of the taxable estates. The concessions made primarily to the big bourgeoisie did not in the least violate the privileges of the nobility. New local governments, schools and the press were subordinated to the tsarist administration. The controversial policy of Emperor Alexander II combined both reformism and reactionary tendencies. The latter openly declared themselves after the assassination attempt on Alexander II Karakozov D.V. in 1866. These tendencies slowed down the course of reforms and in some cases distorted their nature. Carrying out reforms, the autocracy, at the same time, applied the old administrative and police methods of management, supported estates in all spheres of the country's socio-political life. This created the conditions for a series of "counter-reforms" in the reign of Alexander III.

60s - 70s XIX years century - the time of radical transformations in Russia, which affected almost all the most important aspects of life, both society and the state.

The reason for the transformation was the lost Crimean War. The defeat of Russia in the war showed the complete failure of the political and economic system of Russia. The abolition of serfdom (peasant reform) occupies a central place in the transformations of Alexander II.

Reasons for the abolition of serfdom:

1. Serfdom was immoral and condemned by all sections of Russian society.
2. The preservation of serfdom made it impossible to modernize the country and overcome technical and economic backwardness.
3. The labor of the serfs was unproductive and therefore unprofitable.
4. Since dependent peasants were deprived of the opportunity to fully participate in market relations, serfdom caused the narrowness of the internal market and hindered the development of capitalism.
5. The continuation of the serf policy created the threat of a repetition of Pugachevism.
6. The presence of serfdom, very similar to slavery, undermined the international authority of Russia.

In January 1857, Alexander II established Secret Committee on Peasant Affairs. At the end of 1857, a decree was issued “On the organization and improvement of the life of landowner peasants” (“ Rescript to Nazimov”), according to which in each province, from among the local landowners, provincial editorial commissions were formed to develop a project for the abolition of serfdom. In February 1858, the Secret Committee was reorganized into the Main Committee for Peasant Affairs.

In 1859, the drafts drawn up in the provincial committees were submitted for generalization to the editorial commissions formed under the Main Committee.

A significant role in the commissions was played by liberal-minded figures - Ya.I. Rostovtsev (chairman of the commission) and, who replaced him in this post, N.A. Milyutin.

February 19, 1861 Mr. Alexander II signed " Regulations on peasants who emerged from serfdom" and " Manifesto about the liberation of the peasants.

The main provisions of the peasant reform:

1. Peasants received personal freedom (without redemption).
2. The peasants received the land allotment for ransom. About 20% of the ransom amount the peasant had to pay the landowner at a time. The remaining amount received a loan from the state for 49 years.
3. Before the redemption of the land, the peasant was considered " temporarily liable» in relation to the landowner, i.e. continued to bear feudal duties: he paid dues (“ share-cropping"") and worked out the corvee (" working off»).
4. The redeemed land became the property of the peasant community. The right of private ownership of land was the privilege of only noble landowners.
5. The “Regulations” determined the minimum amount of land that the landowners should keep. In the chernozem zone, it was 2/3 of the earth, in the non-chernozem - 1/2, in the steppe - 1/3.
6. If the pre-reform peasant land plot exceeded the post-reform one, then the surplus went to the landowner (the so-called " segments»).
7. Relationships between peasants and landowners were regulated by Statutory letters". They determined the size of allotments and duties. The landowner signed the charter not with each individual peasant, but with the community.
8. The peasants received the right to engage in entrepreneurship, to enter into any legal relations, to move to other classes.

In 1863, under the same conditions, the specific (royal) peasants were released.

In 1866 the state peasants received their freedom. They did not have to redeem their land, but were heavily taxed.

The peasant reform was the result of a compromise between the interests of the landlords, peasants and the government. Moreover, the interests of the landowners were taken into account as much as possible.

One of the consequences of the reform was the massive ruin of the landed estates. The nobles simply could not properly manage the redemption payments and rebuild their production in a capitalist way.

The burden of the peasants with various payments and duties, the peasant shortage of land, agrarian overpopulation caused by the preservation of the community, and the presence of large landownership became sources of constant conflicts between peasants and landowners (the so-called. agrarian question).

The reform prevented mass protests by peasants, although local ones did take place. The most significant of them date back to 1861 - peasant uprisings in the village of Bezdna, Kazan province and Kandeevka, Penza province.

Zemstvo reform of 1864

The main reasons for the zemstvo reform was the need to create an effective system of local self-government and the improvement of the Russian village. Zemstvo councilors (deputies) were elected by curiae. Most of the deputies were representatives of the landowning curia, i.e. The zemstvo reform increased the political influence of the landlords (this was one of the goals of the reform), however, the zemstvo bodies were considered all-estate.

The zemstvos were in charge of local economy, trade, industry, health care, public education, organization of charitable institutions, etc. Zemstvos were deprived of any political functions. Inter-provincial associations of zemstvos were forbidden.

Zemstvo reform is an attempt to create a new system of local self-government based on all-estate representation. Subsequently, zemstvo institutions became centers of liberal opposition to the government.

AT 1870 City reform was carried out, in accordance with which city Dumas were created - an analogue of Zemsky assemblies in the city.

Judicial reform of 1864

It was based on the following principles: classlessness of the court, equality of all subjects before the law, independence of the court from the administration, creation of a court jurors and the institute of sworn attorneys (lawyers).

During the reform process, Justices of the Peace for peasants, established in the counties. They tried minor criminal offenses and civil cases. Justices of the peace were elected by the county zemstvo assemblies.

Decisions in criminal cases in the district courts were made by jurors who delivered a verdict to the accused. They were elected according to special lists from persons of different classes.

The functions of the supreme court were received by the Senate.

The trial became open and competitive. This meant that the prosecutor (state prosecutor) was confronted by a lawyer independent of the administration.

In accordance with the judicial reform, the institution of notaries was created.

The judicial reform was the most democratic, radical and consistent among the reforms of the 1960s and 1970s.

Military transformations of the 60s - 70s.

The need for military reform was determined by the general military-technical backwardness of the Russian army, which posed a threat to Russia's security and undermined its international prestige. In addition, the army, based on recruitment, did not correspond to the new social structure Russian society. The initiator and leader of the reform was Minister of War D.A. Milyutin.

In the course of the reform, military settlements were abolished, military districts were created (headed by commanders in chief), the military ministry and the main headquarters were reorganized, and cadet and military schools were established. The military industry began to develop rapidly.

The central element of the military reform was the introduction of 1874 d. universal conscription, which applied to the entire male population over the age of 20. Service life was 6 years ground forces and 7 years in the Navy. For those who had an education, and depending on its level, the service life was reduced from 4 years to 6 months.

Transformations in the army became an important factor in the democratization of society, the modernization of the army, and contributed to an increase in its combat effectiveness - all this was fully manifested in the war with Turkey in 1877-1878.

Significant changes were made to the education system. The university charter of 1863 expanded the autonomy of the universities. In accordance with the Charter high school(1864) gymnasiums were divided into classical and real. The first prepared mainly for admission to the university, the second - to higher technical educational institutions.

In 1865, a censorship reform was carried out. Preliminary censorship was abolished for most books and literary magazines.

Reforms of the 1860s and 70s significantly advanced Russia along the path of economic and political modernization. However, the political reorganization of the country was not completed. Russia still remained an autocratic monarchy. There were no mechanisms for the influence of society on government policy.

Socio-economic development of post-reform Russia

Reforms of the 60s - 70s. created favorable conditions for the development of the country's economy and the formation of capitalist relations.

Railway construction was the most important direction of the economic development of post-reform Russia, because. this new type of transport made it possible to significantly facilitate the export of grain and strengthen the country's defense capability. AT 1851 The railway from St. Petersburg to Moscow was opened.

In the 60s. began "railway fever" - a real boom in railway construction. Private capital, including foreign capital, was widely attracted to this industry. Moscow became the center of the railway network. In 1869, a road was put into operation, connecting Moscow with the southern grain-growing provinces of southern Russia.

A new stage of reinforced railway construction began in the 90s. Finance Minister S.Yu. Witte (the author of the monetary reform (introduction of the gold equivalent of the ruble), later Chairman of the Government) attached particular importance to it. Now it was carried out mainly at public expense. In 1891, the construction of the Trans-Siberian Railway began. In 1896, construction began in Manchuria of the Chinese East railway(CER) - the eastern branch of the Trans-Siberian Railway.

The abolition of serfdom caused a short hitch in the industrial development of the country, because. Possession peasants left the manufactory. Soon, however, industrial development revived. The most significant successes were observed in textile production, which at that time was the leading branch of Russian industry. Significant growth was observed in Food Industry especially in sugar.

It was very difficult for the metallurgical industry to adapt to the new conditions, where it was required not only to switch to civilian labor, but also to carry out technical re-equipment. Many Ural factories are falling into decay. However, at the same time (since the mid-70s) a new center of industrial production began to form in the Donets Basin.

The Russian economy gradually entered the world economy and began to experience cyclical fluctuations in its development. AT 1873 Russia was first affected by the global industrial crisis.

In the first post-reform 20th anniversary, the main industrial regions of Russia were finally formed - Moscow, St. Petersburg, Ural and Yuzhny (Donbass). The textile industry dominated in the Moscow region. Petersburg - metalworking and mechanical engineering. The Ural and Southern regions were the base of the metallurgical industry.

Back to top 1890 -s. in Russia ends, which began in 1830-40 years, industrial revolution, i.e. the transition from manufactory to factory, from manual labor to machine. It had an industrial revolution and social consequences - there was a transition from the class structure of society to the class one. The main classes of society were the proletariat and the bourgeoisie.

The agricultural development of Russia in the post-reform period was not so successful. It was especially difficult in the black earth regions, where the peasants had difficulty switching to new ways of farming.

The main supplier of export grain remained the landowners' farms. This indicates that the development of agriculture in Russia proceeded mainly along Prussian way.

Signs of the Prussian path of development of capitalism in agriculture:

• Large sizes of allotments - latifundia.
• The owners of the latifundia are the privileged latifundist landowners.
• The plots are cultivated by numerous low-paid hired workers (farm laborers) or slaves (as in the USA or in pre-reform Russia).

Only in the steppe Trans-Volga region and in the North Caucasus, where landownership was weak or non-existent, did agriculture develop according to American(farm) way. These areas became the breadbasket of Russia and the main supplier of bread for export.

Signs of the American way of development of capitalism in agriculture:

• Put on small sizes.
• The allotment belongs to the farmer. In Russia they are called fists.
• The farmer himself and a few laborers handle the allotment.

After the reform of 1861 in the Russian countryside, the social differentiation- the process of separation from the total mass of the peasantry of the rural bourgeoisie ( fists), owners of strong peasant farms serving their own needs ( middle peasants) and the rural poor ( laborers).

The development of capitalism in the countryside was hampered by the preservation of the community ("rural society"). The community acted as the owner of the land. She was engaged in the distribution of land allotments (in order to equalize the chances of a good harvest, the peasants received land in strips, that is, in different parts of the communal lands). The main organs of community administration were the village assembly and the village headman elected by him. One of the fundamental principles for the community was the principle of mutual responsibility.

Social movement of the second half of the 50-60s of the XIX century.

The reforms of Alexander II provoked opposition from the conservatives. The brightest representative of this trend was M.N. Katkov is the editor of Moskovskie Vedomosti, who left after the Polish uprising of 1863-1864. liberal camp. He believed that the reforms led to the separation of the intelligentsia from the people and violated the previously existing unity of the people with the king.

In the second half of the XIX century. in Russia, the ideas of liberalism are being further developed, which are approved in a number of zemstvos. Liberal zemstvo leaders put forward the slogan of "positive work in the field", and attempts were also made to create an all-Russian zemstvo center. The Russian liberals saw the main goal in the establishment of constitutional government. The most famous figures of the liberal Zemstvo movement were I.I. Petrunkevich, D.N. Shipov, B.N. Chicherin, K.D. Kavelin.

At the same time, a significant part of the educated society was captured by revolutionary sentiments. This direction of the social movement quickly lost its noble character. The children of peasants, philistines, the clergy, the impoverished nobility quickly turned into intellectuals - raznochintsev standing outside the estates. Parting with their past, they quickly ceased to respect the foundations, traditions ( nihilism). The mood of general pessimism and hatred of the state was intensified by the introduction in 1861 of high tuition fees at universities. It was the raznochintsy intelligentsia that became the main base revolutionary movement in post-reform Russia.

The reform of 1861 in no way satisfied the radical public. Chernyshevsky becomes her idol and inspiration. Obviously, he was the main organizer of the "proclamation campaign" of 1861. The proclamations circulating in Moscow and St. Petersburg contained demands for more decisive and consistent reforms, reinforced by the threat of a popular uprising. In response, the authorities in 1861-1862. made a number of arrests, Chernyshevsky was sentenced to hard labor. Throughout the 1860s. the radical intelligentsia tried several times to create a strong organization. However, neither the "Land and Freedom" group (1861-1863, Chernyshevsky's organization), nor the circle of N.A. could become such. Ishytin (whose member D.V. Karakozov shot at Alexander II in 1866), nor “National Reprisal” (1869) under the leadership of S.T. Nechaev (members of the organization killed student Ivanov on suspicion of betrayal). S.T. Nechaev is the author of the book " Revolutionary catechism».

Revolutionary Populism

At the turn of the 1860-1870s. the formation of an ideology revolutionary populism. It found its final expression in the works of M.A. Bakunin, P.L. Lavrova, P.N. Tkachev. Firmly convinced that mankind in its development must inevitably come to socialism, these ideologists placed special hopes on the peasant community in Russia, considering it as the germ of socialism (A.I. Herzen's theory of "communal socialism"). The populists were characterized by a negative attitude towards capitalism, which could destroy the peasant community. Converging on the basic theoretical principles, the leading ideologues of populism proposed various means for their implementation.

M.A. Bakunin ( 6untarian direction of populism) saw such a means in an immediate peasant revolt, to which the peasants should be inspired by their example by the revolutionary intelligentsia. At the same time, Bakunin and his supporters denied the need for a state, relying on the self-government of communities. M.A. Bakunin and his colleague P. Kropotkin became the founders of Russian anarchism.

P.L. Lavrov ( propaganda direction) supported the idea of ​​a peasant revolution and considered revolutionary intellectuals as a force capable of inspiring the masses to participate in it through prolonged propaganda.

P.N. Tkachev ( conspiratorial direction) proceeded from the fact that the gap between the people and the intelligentsia is too significant and, in essence, insurmountable. It is impossible to raise the peasants to a conscious revolutionary movement. The intelligentsia must liberate the community by seizing power by means of an armed coup and carrying out the necessary transformations from above.

In the late 1860s - early 1870s. in Russia, a number of populist circles arose among the students. AT 1874 d. their members start mass going to the people for the purpose of conducting revolutionary propaganda. However, it was not possible to raise the peasants to the revolution - all their calls were met with distrust and hostility among the peasantry. The reason for this lay in the belief in the "good king" that persisted among the peasantry.

After unsuccessfully going to the people, the populists decide to change their tactics and move on to " settled» (constant, systematic) propaganda. AT 1876 g. arises " Earth and Will"(second) - an organization that played the role of a coordinating center for populist propaganda. Its unsuccessful activities lead the populists to the idea of ​​the need to abandon propaganda methods of struggle. AT 1879 Zemlya i Volya is split into Black Repartition and Narodnaya Volya.

« Black redistribution”, whose leaders were G.V. Plekhanov, P.B. Axelrod and V.I. Zasulich, remained on the positions of propaganda. Soon its members left Russia and in 1883 created the first Russian Marxist organization in Geneva. Emancipation of labor».

« People's Will” united the populists - supporters of the tactics of individual terror. This method of struggle also existed earlier as a disorganizing method of work for Land and Freedom. The most famous terrorist of that time was V. Zasulich (later a member of the Black Redistribution), who in 1878 made an attempt on the life of the St. Petersburg mayor D.F. Trepov. Later, the jury acquitted Zasulich, thereby justifying political terror in general. Zasulich herself later retired from terror.

The leaders of the "Narodnaya Volya" were A.I. Zhelyabov, A.D. Mikhailov, S.L. Perovskaya and V.N. Figner.

The activities of the "Narodnaya Volya" led to retaliatory measures from the government. Not wanting to completely curtail the reformist policy, Alexander II begins to pursue a kind of policy (“ Dictatorship of the Heart"). On February 12, 1880, the Supreme Administrative Commission was formed. M. T. Loris-Melikov was put at its head, who, on the one hand, continued the merciless struggle against the revolutionary underground; on the other hand, he carried out a number of measures that softened the censorship and arbitrariness of the local administration. In addition, Loris-Melikov presented to the tsar a draft of democratic reforms, providing, in particular, for the convening of a central all-Russian zemstvo body (“ Constitution of Loris-Melikov"). He was enthusiastically received by the liberals and approved by Alexander II.

March 1, 1881 Mr. Alexander II was killed by Narodnaya Volya. His son Alexander III came to power. Loris-Melikov's project was rejected. Reaction reigned in the country, and the populist organizations were crushed. People's Volunteers Perovskaya, Mikhailov, Kibalchich, Zhelyabov and Rysakov were hanged.

In the post-reform period, in conditions of intensive development of industry, a noticeable phenomenon in public life is labor movement. In 1875, the “South Russian Union of Workers” was founded in Odessa (headed by E.O. Zaslavsky), in 1878 in St. Petersburg, the “Northern Union of Russian Workers” (V.P. Obnorsky, S.N. Khalturin). Their participants advocated the overthrow of the autocracy, political freedom, social reorganization. The workers' organizations, being essentially Marxist, were strongly influenced by the Narodniks during this period.

In the 80s. the labor movement becomes more organized, mass strikes begin. The most significant of these took place in 1885 city ​​at Morozov's textile factory in Ivanovo-Voznesensk ("Morozov strike"). In the 90s. there is a new upsurge in the strike movement. The protests of the workers prompted the government to adopt a number of laws.

The internal policy of the autocracy at the end of the XIX century.

The reign of Alexander III (1881 - 1894) went down in history as the time of "counter-reforms". The ideologists of the new political course were Chief Prosecutor of the Synod K.P. Pobedonostsev (educator of the new emperor), Minister of the Interior D.A. Tolstoy, well-known publicist and public figure M.N. Katkov, who considered any borrowing from the West harmful and insisted on correcting the reforms already carried out.

The practical implementation of the new course was reduced to the following:

1. The introduction of the institute of Zemsky chiefs ( 1889 ). They were appointed by the Minister of the Interior from among the local noble landowners and exercised administrative and police control and judicial functions over the peasants. The power of the zemstvo chiefs strengthened the positions of the landlords and the government.
2. Zemstvo counter-reform ( 1890 ). During the elections to the zemstvos, the number of vowels from the landowners increased due to the reduction of the property qualification. For urban residents, the qualification, on the contrary, increased. All these measures were designed to strengthen the position of the nobility in local governments.
3. The property and educational qualifications for jurors increased, which increased the representation of the nobility (1887).
4. University Charter 1884 effectively abolished the autonomy of universities. Representatives of the "lower classes" found it difficult to get an education. " Cook's Children Circular» ( 1887 ) recommended closing the doors of the gymnasium to children not from noble families.
5. In accordance with " Regulations on Measures to Protect State Security and Public Peace» ( 1881 ) a state of emergency could be declared in any part of the empire. Local authorities received the right to arrest "suspicious persons", exile them without trial for up to 5 years in any locality and bring them to a military court, close educational institutions and press organs, and suspend the activities of zemstvos.
6. The attitude towards religious dissent was toughened, the rights of persons of non-Orthodox faith, especially Jews, were limited. The government pursued a policy of forcible Russification of the national outskirts.

Considering the domestic policy of Alexander III, it is important to emphasize that the government carried out a number of measures aimed at improving the situation of peasants and workers.

AT 1881 d. all former landlord peasants were transferred to compulsory redemption, i.e. temporary relationships were cancelled. The Peasants' Bank was created (1882), which was supposed to assist peasants and peasant societies in the purchase of privately owned lands. In 1883 - 1885. the poll tax from the peasants was reduced and then abolished.

In the 1980s, the first attempts were made to regulate relations between workers and industrialists, to develop the foundations of labor legislation: the labor of minors was prohibited, fines were reduced, and a factory inspectorate was established to monitor compliance with working conditions.

Foreign policy of Russia in the second half of the XIX century.

After the end of the Crimean War, the main task of the Russian foreign policy was the revision of the terms of the Paris Peace Treaty (1856). Taking advantage of the contradictions between European states (primarily Prussia and France), Russian diplomacy, headed by A.M. Gorchakov was able to successfully solve this problem by declaring in 1870 d. refusal to comply with the conditions Treaty of Paris. Already in the early 1870s. Russia creates a navy on the Black Sea, restores destroyed fortresses and proceeds to resolve the Eastern Question.

1877-1878 gg. - the last Russian-Turkish war.

Reasons for the war:

1. Russia's desire to solve the Eastern question.
2. The need to assist the fraternal Balkan peoples in their liberation struggle against the Ottoman yoke.
3. Russia is faced with the task of returning South Bessarabia, lost as a result of the Crimean War.
4. Russia is striving to regain the international prestige it lost after the defeat in the Crimean War.

April 12, 1877 d. Russia declared war Ottoman Empire. fighting went simultaneously in the Balkans (under the leadership of I.V. Gurko and M.D. Skobelev) and in the Transcaucasus (M.T. Loris-Melikov). The main events of the war were the defense of the Shipka Pass and the siege of the Turkish fortress of Plevna (it was only possible to take it in November 1877, E.I. Totleben participated in the siege). In Transcaucasia, the fortresses of Batum and Erzurum were taken. AT February 1878 in the town San Stefano an agreement was signed near Constantinople, according to which Serbia, Montenegro and Romania received complete independence. Bulgaria became an autonomous principality. Russia returned South Bessarabia.

However, the strengthening of Russia in the Balkans and in the Middle East region frightened the Western European powers and, above all, Germany. They protested against the terms of the San Stefano Treaty. Summer 1878 A congress was held in Berlin, at which Russia found itself in complete isolation. As a result, the Treaty of San Stefano was revised. Serbia, Montenegro and Romania retained their independence, but Bulgaria was divided into two parts: the North received full autonomy, and the South remained a Turkish province. Turkey's colonies were divided among European states.

At the end of the nineteenth century. German Empire intensifies and begins to be perceived by the Russian government as the most dangerous adversary. Also in 1873 d. Russia agrees to the creation of " Union of the Three Emperors"with the participation of Austria-Hungary and Germany, hoping in this way to prevent an aggravation of relations with them. However, the disagreements between its members turned out to be too great and in 1878 the "Union" broke up.

In 1882, Germany, Austria-Hungary and Italy concluded the so-called. Triple Alliance, directed against France, but also threatening Russia.

The Russian government was forced to start looking for an ally, now for a joint fight against tripartite alliance. In 1891-92. a Franco-Russian alliance is created. That's how it started Entente(from French - consent), opposing the Triple Alliance.

An important task facing the Russian Foreign Ministry was the demarcation (clear definition) of the border with China. AT 1858 The Aigun Treaty was signed, according to which the border was drawn along the Amur River. The Ussuri taiga and the mouth of the Amur remained in the joint possession of both states. AT 1860 d. - Beijing Treaty. Taking advantage of China's weakness, Russia annexes the Ussuri taiga and the mouth of the Amur.

Another direction of foreign policy was the accession of Central Asia.

In 1864, the Emirate of Bukhara and the Khanate of Khiva, having suffered a series of military defeats, recognized their vassal dependence on Russia. The Kokand Khanate, which declared a gazavat to Russia, was destroyed as a state: in 1876 its lands were included in the Turkestan region. The fight against the Turkmen tribes ended only in 1881, when M.D. Skobelev took Ashgabat and Geok-Tepe.

Accession to Russia was a boon for the local population: feudal civil strife ceased; blood feud began to fade into the past; slavery was abolished. The local population retained their language, religion, culture, and national customs.

AT 1867 Alaska was sold to the US for $7.2 million.

Culture of the second half of the XIX century.

The basis of secondary education was still made up of gymnasiums, real and commercial schools. However, the right to enter the university was given only to gymnasiums. In 1878, the Higher Women's (Bestuzhev) Courses were opened, which laid the foundation for higher education for women.

Russian science and technology in the post-reform period was represented by a galaxy of outstanding scientists. In the field of mathematics, P.L. Chebyshev, A.M. Lyapunov, S.V. Kovalevskaya (the world's first female professor of mathematics). In chemical science A.M. Butlerov proposed a theory chemical structure substances, D.I. Mendeleev discovered the periodic law of chemical elements.

Large scientific discoveries were made in physics. A.G. Stoletov investigated and described photoelectric phenomena. P.N. Yablochkov created an arc lamp and for the first time carried out the transformation of alternating current. A.N. Lodygin designed an incandescent lamp. The main direction of scientific activity of A.S. Popov was the study of electromagnetic phenomena, its result was the invention of radio. The works of N.I. Zhukovsky, the founder of modern hydro- and aeromechanics. The first experiments on the design of aircraft (aircraft) were made by A.F. Mozhaisky.

Biological sciences during this period developed under the influence of evolutionary doctrine. Works by I.I. Mechnikov in evolutionary embryology, pathology and immunology were recognized by scientists around the world. At the origins of the national physiological school was I.M. Sechenov. One of the directions of his scientific activity was the study of the human psyche. I.P. Pavlov carried out extensive experimental research in the field of higher nervous activity and formulated the main provisions of the theory conditioned reflexes. The development of agronomic science is associated with the names of V.V. Dokuchaev (the founder of modern soil science) and K.A. Timiryazev (researcher of plant physiology).

New generalizing works on Russian history appear: the 29-volume " History of Russia since ancient times" CM. Solovyov and " Russian history course» his student V.O. Klyuchevsky. They begin their scientific, pedagogical and social activities such prominent representatives of Russian historical science as S.F. Platonov and M.N. Pokrovsky. A notable event in scientific life was the work of M.M. Kovalevsky on world history.

Russian geographers and travelers continue to explore the little-studied territories of our planet. Admiral F.P. Litke carried out a survey of Kamchatka, Chukotka and some islands in the northern part of the Pacific Ocean. N.M. Przhevalsky, P.K. Kozlov, P.P. Semenov-Tienshansky during his travels studied the regions of Central and Central Asia. N.N. Miklukho-Maclay - the coast of New Guinea and the Pacific Islands.

The main process taking place in Russian literature and art of this period was democratization. Artistic culture acquires a simpler, generally accessible character.

Second half of the 19th century - the most important stage in the development of domestic literature. Creativity L.N. Tolstoy, F.M. Dostoevsky, A.P. Chekhov, I.S. Turgenev, E. Saltykov-Shchedrin, A.A. Fet and many others had a huge impact on Russian and world literature.

In painting, as well as in literature, the realistic direction becomes dominant. AT 1870 g. arises " Association of Traveling Exhibitions”, which united the majority of realist artists - I.N. Kramskoy (portrait of L.N. Tolstoy), A.K. Savrasov (" The Rooks Have Arrived”), I.E. Repin ( "Barge Haulers on the Volga", "They Didn't Wait", "The Cossacks Write a Letter to the Turkish Sultan"), IN AND. Surikov ( "Boyar Morozova", "Morning of the Streltsy Execution", "Conquest of Siberia by Yermak"), who opposed "academism" in the visual arts.

In terms of his aesthetic views, the outstanding Russian sculptor M.M. Antokolsky. He is the author of sculptural portraits "Ermak", "Nestor the Chronicler", "Ivan the Terrible".

According to the project of M.O. Mikeshin in Novgorod erected a monument " Millennium of Russia". Mikeshin was also the author of monuments to Catherine II in St. Petersburg and Bogdan Khmelnitsky in Kyiv. Monuments erected according to the designs of A.M. Opekushin (Pushkin - in Moscow and Lermontov - in Pyatigorsk).

The use of folk motifs was distinguished in these years by the musical art. The motifs of folk music were most vividly presented in the operas of A.S. Dargomyzhsky (" Mermaid”), M.P. Mussorgsky (" Boris Godunov"), ON THE. Rimsky-Korsakov royal bride”), A.P. Borodin (" Prince Igor”), who made up a circle of musicians known as“ mighty bunch". The most popular in these years was the work of P.I. Tchaikovsky, who created outstanding opera ( "Eugene Onegin", "The Queen of Spades"), ballet ( "Swan Lake", "The Nutcracker") and symphonic (1st Piano Concerto) works.

In a number of architectural styles, eclecticism dominated (a combination of features of different styles in one work). A variety of eclecticism was the pseudo-Russian style.

Buildings in Moscow became examples of this style. Historical Museum(architects A.A. Semenov and V.O. Sherwood), City Duma(architect D.N. Chichagov), the current Gumma(architect A.N. Pomerantsev).

For the widest strata of Russian society, one of the most accessible forms of art was theater. The basis of the repertoire of both metropolitan and provincial theaters were plays by A.N. Ostrovsky, A.P. Chekhov, N.V. Gogol. Realistic traditions in acting, established by M.S. Shchepkin, successfully continued and developed by outstanding Russian actors M.P. and O.O. Sadovskie, G.N. Fedotova, M.N. Ermolova, P.A. Strepetova. The Maly Theater in Moscow was rightfully considered the center of the theatrical life in Russia.

The abolition of serfdom inevitably entailed reforms in the field of central and local administration, courts, military affairs, and education. The reform of 1861 changed the economic basis of the country, and the superstructure changed accordingly, i.e. political, legal, military, cultural institutions serving this basis. The same need for national development, which made the reform of 1861 necessary, mainly forced tsarism to the reforms of 1862-1874.

The second reason that led to the reforms of 1862-1874 was the rise of a mass and revolutionary movement in the country. Tsarism faced an alternative: either reform or revolution. All the reforms of that time were by-products of the revolutionary struggle.

Finally, she pushed tsarism to the reforms of 1862-1874. the strength of public opinion, pressure from the bourgeoisie and part of the landowners who have embarked on a capitalist footing and are therefore interested in bourgeois reforms. The feudal landlords and the tsar himself would have preferred to do without reforms. As early as 1859, Alexander II called local self-government, freedom of the press, and trial by jury "Western tomfoolery", not assuming that in two or three years circumstances would force him to introduce these tomfoolery in his own empire. The main of the reforms of 1862-1874. there were four: zemstvo, city, judicial and military. They deservedly stand on a par with the peasant reform of 1861 and after it as great reforms.

Zemstvo reform changed local government. Previously, it was class and without election. The landlord unlimitedly reigned over the peasants, ruled over them and judged them according to his own arbitrariness. After the abolition of serfdom, such management became impossible. Therefore, in parallel with the peasant reform, it was being prepared in 1859-1861. and land reform. During the years of democratic upsurge (1859-1861), the liberal N.A. led the preparation of the Zemstvo reform. Milyutin, but in April 1861, when the “tops” considered that the abolition of serfdom would defuse tensions in the country that were dangerous for tsarism, Alexander II replaced Milyutin with the conservative P.A. Valuev. The Milyutinsky project was adjusted by Valuev in favor of the nobles, in order to make them, as they said about themselves, "the advanced army of the Zemstvo." The final version of the reform, set out in the "Regulations on provincial and district zemstvo institutions", Alexander II signed on January 1, 1864 / 201 /

The Zemstvo reform was based on two new principles - non-estate and electivity. Regulatory bodies zemstvos, those. new local government, zemstvo assemblies became: in the county - county, in the province - provincial (zemstvo was not created in the volost). Elections to county zemstvo assemblies were held on the basis of a property qualification. All voters were divided into three curia: 1) county landowners, 2) city voters, 3) elected from rural societies.

The first curia included owners of at least 200 acres of land, real estate worth more than 15 thousand rubles. or annual income over 6 thousand rubles. Owners of less than 200 (but not less than 10) acres of land were united, and from the number that owned a land mass of at least 200 (at least) acres, one representative was elected to the congress of the first curia.

The second curia consisted of merchants of all three guilds, owners of real estate for at least 500 rubles. in small and 2 thousand rubles. in large cities or commercial and industrial establishments with an annual turnover of more than 6 thousand rubles.

The third curia consisted mainly of officials of the peasant administration, although local nobles and rural clergy could also run here. So, in the Saratov and Samara provinces, even five marshals of the nobility passed to the vowels from the peasants. According to this curia, unlike the first two, the elections were not direct, but multistage: the village assembly elected representatives to the volost assembly, electors were elected there, and then the county congress of electors elected deputies ( vowels as they were called) to the county zemstvo assembly. This was done in order to "weed out" unreliable elements from the peasantry and generally limit peasant representation. As a result, according to the data for 1865-1867, the nobles made up 42% of the district councilors, the peasants - 38%, and the rest - 20%.

Elections to the provincial zemstvo assemblies took place at the county zemstvo assemblies at the rate of one provincial vowel for six district assemblies. Therefore, in the provincial assemblies, the predominance of nobles was even greater: 74.2% against 10.6% of peasants and 15.2% of others. The chairman of the zemstvo assembly was not elected, he was ex officio the marshal of the nobility: in the county - county, in the province - provincial.

This is what the administrative bodies of the zemstvo looked like. Its executive bodies were zemstvo councils - county and provincial. They were elected at zemstvo assemblies (for 3 years, like assemblies). The chairman of the county council was approved by the governor, and the governor - by the minister of the interior. In the zemstvo councils, the nobles absolutely prevailed: 89.5% of the vowels of all provincial councils against 1.5% of the peasants and 9% of others. /202/

It is indicative that in those provinces where nobility and landownership was absent or weak (in the Arkhangelsk and Astrakhan provinces, in Siberia and Central Asia), as well as in national regions with a small number of Russians landlords (Poland, Lithuania, Belarus, Western Ukraine, the Caucasus), the Zemstvo was not created. In total, by the end of the 70s, it was introduced in 34 of the 50 provinces of European Russia.

The predominance of the nobility in zemstvo institutions made them safe for the government. However, tsarism did not even dare to give real power to such institutions. They were deprived of any political functions and dealt exclusively with the economic needs of the county or province: food, local crafts, property insurance, post office, schools, hospitals. But even such activities of the Zemstvo were placed under the vigilant control of the central authorities. Any decision of the zemstvo assemblies could be canceled by the governor or the minister of the interior.

Politically, the zemstvo was weak. IN AND. Lenin called it "the fifth wheel in the cart of the Russian government controlled". M.N. Katkov assessed the Zemstvo even more pejoratively: “They (Zemstvo institutions.- N.T.) as if a hint at something, as if the beginning of something unknown, and resemble the grimace of a person who wants to sneeze, but cannot.

Nevertheless, the zemstvo, as a progressive institution, contributed to national development countries. Its employees established statistics on the economy, culture and everyday life, disseminated agronomic innovations, organized agricultural exhibitions, built roads, raised local industry, trade and especially public education and health care, opened hospitals and schools, and replenished the cadres of teachers and doctors. Already by 1880, 12,000 zemstvo schools had been opened in the countryside, which accounted for almost half of all schools in the country. Before the introduction of zemstvos, there were no doctors in the countryside at all (except for rare cases when the landowner himself opened a hospital at his own expense and invited a paramedic). Zemstvos maintained specially trained rural doctors (their number quadrupled in 1866-1880). Zemsky doctors (as well as teachers) were deservedly considered the best. Therefore, one can understand the delight of K.D. Kavelin, who proclaimed Zemstvo a "significant phenomenon", a seed for the development of a "many-branched tree of progress".

The second local government reform was the city reform. Its preparation began in 1862; again in a revolutionary situation. In 1864, the reform project was prepared, but by that time the democratic onslaught was repulsed, and the government began to revise the project: it was redone twice / 203 /, and only on June 16, 1870 did the tsar approve the final version of the “City Regulations”.

The urban reform was based on the same, only more narrowed, principles as the Zemstvo reform. According to the “City Regulations” of 1870, the city duma remained the administrative body of the city government. However, if until 1870 the city dumas that had existed in Russia since the time of the "City Regulations" of Catherine II (1785) consisted of deputies from estate groups, now they became without estates.

Deputies (vowels) of the city duma were elected on the basis of property qualification. Only the payers of city taxes participated in the elections of vowels, i.е. owners of immovable property (companies, banks, houses, etc.). All of them were divided into three electoral meetings: 1) the largest taxpayers, who collectively paid a third total amount city ​​taxes; 2) medium payers, who also paid a total of one third of all taxes, 3) small payers, who contributed the remaining third of the total tax amount. Each assembly elected the same number of vowels, although the number of assemblies was glaringly different (in St. Petersburg, for example, the 1st curia consisted of 275 voters, the 2nd - 849, and the 3rd - 16355). This ensured the predominance in the thoughts of the big and middle bourgeoisie, which made up two electoral assemblies out of three. In Moscow, the first two assemblies did not have even 13% of the total number of voters, but they elected 2/3 of the vowels. As for the workers, employees, intellectuals who did not own immovable property (that is, the vast majority of the urban population), they did not have the right to participate in city elections at all. In the ten largest cities of the empire (with a population of more than 50 thousand people), 95.6% of the inhabitants were thus excluded from participating in the elections. In Moscow, 4.4% of citizens received voting rights, in St. Petersburg - 3.4%, in Odessa - 2.9%.

The number of vowels in city dumas ranged from 30 to 72. Two dumas stood apart - Moscow (180 vowels) and St. Petersburg (250). The city government, which was elected by the city duma (for 4 years, like the thought itself), became the executive body of the city government. The mayor was at the head of the council. He was ex officio the chairman of the city duma. In addition to him, the council included 2-3 vowels.

The "city regulation" of 1870 was introduced in 509 cities of Russia. At first it operated only in the indigenous Russian provinces, and in 1875-1877. tsarism extended it to the national outskirts of the empire, except for Poland, Finland and Central Asia, where the pre-reform urban structure was preserved. /204/

The functions of city government, like those of the zemstvo, were purely economic: the improvement of the city (paving streets, water supply, sewerage), fire fighting, taking care of local industry, trade, health care, and education. Nevertheless, the city government was even more strictly controlled than the zemstvo government by the central government. The mayor was approved by the governor (for a county town) or the minister of the interior (for a provincial center). The minister and the governor could cancel any resolution of the city duma. Especially for the control of city government in each province, a provincial presence for city affairs was created under the chairmanship of the governor.

City dumas, like zemstvos, had no coercive power. To carry out their decisions, they were forced to request the assistance of the police, which was not subordinate to city councils, but to government officials - mayors and governors. These latter (but by no means urban self-government) exercised real power in the cities - both before and after the "great reforms".

And yet, in comparison with the purely feudal "City status" of Catherine II, the city reform of 1870, based on the bourgeois beginning of the property qualification, was a significant step forward. It created much better conditions than before for the development of cities, since now the city dumas and councils were no longer guided by the class, but by the general civil interests of the townspeople.

Much more consistent than the zemstvo and city reforms was the reform of the court. Of all the reforms of 1861-1874. in judicial reform, the bourgeois beginning was expressed with the greatest force. It `s naturally. After all, the judicial system and the order of legal proceedings are one of the main criteria of human civilization. Meanwhile, this criterion in pre-reform Russia looked as odious as nothing else. The pre-reform court was class-based, it was based on the "justice of the feudal lord":

That court was entirely dependent on the administration, which, according to the Minister of Internal Affairs S.S. Lansky, "went to justice." The secrecy of judicial proceedings, the use of corporal punishment, arbitrariness, venality and red tape that reigned in the pre-reform court were the talk of the town, the eternal themes of folk proverbs: “A crooked court and a just cause will twist”, “Court is like a cobweb: a bumblebee will slip through, and a fly will get stuck ”, “It’s useful for the judge that it got into his pocket”, “It’s better to drown yourself than to sue.” Even /205/ Minister of Justice of Alexander I D.P. Troshchinsky defined the pre-reform court as "the great sea, in which reptiles are innumerable."

In Russia until 1864 there was no institution of advocacy. Nicholas I, who believed that it was lawyers who “destroyed France” at the end of the 18th century, said bluntly: “As long as I reign, Russia does not need lawyers, we will live without them.” And so it happened. “In the courts it is black with black lies” (in the words of A.S. Khomyakov) Russia has been for centuries, but after the abolition of serfdom, it could not remain so. Alexander II understood this and, to his credit (and most importantly, for the good of Russia), ordered the preparation of a judicial reform by a commission of the best lawyers, who were actually headed by a remarkable lawyer and patriot, State Secretary of the State Council S.I. Zarudny. To him, more than to anyone else, Russia owes the Judicial Charters of 1864.

The preparation of the judicial reform began in the autumn of 1861, at the highest point of the democratic upsurge in the country, and was completed by the autumn of 1862. But only on November 20, 1864, Alexander II approved the new Judicial Charters. Instead of the feudal class courts, they introduced civilized judicial institutions, common to persons of all classes with one and the same judicial procedure.

From now on, for the first time in Russia, four cornerstone principles of modern law were affirmed: judicial independence from the administration irremovability of judges, publicity and competitiveness legal proceedings. The judiciary has been significantly democratized. In criminal courts, the institution of jurors from the population, elected on the basis of a moderate property qualification (at least 100 acres of land or any other property worth 2,000 rubles in the capitals and 1,000 rubles in provincial cities), was introduced. For each case, 12 jurors were appointed by lot, who decided whether the defendant was guilty or not, after which the court released the innocent and determined the punishment for the guilty. For legal assistance to the needy and to protect the accused, the institution of lawyers (sworn attorneys) was created, and the preliminary investigation in criminal cases, previously in the hands of the police, now passed to the judicial investigators. Attorneys at law and judicial investigators had to have a higher legal education, and the first, in addition, had to have five years of experience in judicial practice.

According to the Charters of 1864, the number of judicial instances was reduced, and their competence was strictly delineated. Three types of courts were created: the magistrate's court, the district court and the judicial chamber. /206/

Justices of the peace were elected by district zemstvo assemblies or city dumas on the basis of a high property qualification (at least 400 acres of land or other real estate in the amount of at least 15,000 rubles), and members of district courts and judicial chambers were appointed by the tsar.

The Magistrate's Court (consisting of one person - the justice of the peace) considered petty misdemeanors and civil claims in a simplified procedure. The decision of the magistrate could be appealed at the county congress of magistrates.

The district court (consisting of the chairman and two members) acted in each judicial district, equal to one province. The apparatus of the district court included the prosecutor and his comrades (ie, assistants), judicial investigators, and lawyers were involved. The district court had jurisdiction over all civil and almost all (with the exception of the most important) criminal cases. Decisions made by the district court with the participation of jurors were considered final and not subject to appeal on the merits, they could only be appealed in cassation (ie, in case of violation of the law in the proceedings). The decisions of the district court, taken without the participation of jurors, were appealed to the judicial chamber. Without a jury, such cases were considered in which the accused was not threatened with deprivation or restriction of civil rights.

The Judicial Chamber (consisting of four members and three class representatives: the leader of the nobility, the mayor and the volost foreman) was established one for several provinces. Its apparatus was similar to that of the district court (the prosecutor, his comrades, judicial investigators, lawyers), only of a larger size. The Judicial Chamber considered especially important criminal and almost all (except the most important) political cases. Its decisions were considered final and could only be appealed on cassation.

The most important political cases were to be considered by the Supreme Criminal Court, which did not function permanently, but was appointed in exceptional cases at the highest command. Such cases in the XIX century. there were only two, and both of them were associated with assassination attempts on Alexander II - in 1866 (the case of D.V. Karakozov) and 1879 (the case of A.K. Solovyov).

The single cassation instance for all the courts of the empire was the Senate - with two departments: criminal and civil. He could cancel the decision of any court (except the Supreme Criminal Court), after which the case was returned for a second consideration by the same or another court. /207/

Judicial reform was completed after the democratic upsurge subsided. Therefore, tsarism found it possible to limit the bourgeois principle here too, and in the following years it infringed on it even more. So, the classlessness of the court was immediately violated, since special courts for peasants (volost court) and clergy (consistory) were preserved. There was also a departmental court for the military. The law of 1871 transferred inquiries on political matters to the gendarmerie. In 1872, all major political cases were withdrawn from the jurisdiction of the judicial chambers and transferred to the specially established Special Presence of the Governing Senate (OPPS), and in 1878 some of these cases (on "resistance to the authorities") went to the military courts.

The irremovability of judges turned out to be very conditional, inquisitorial methods of investigation, arbitrariness, venality and red tape in the courts were preserved. Although in 1863 corporal punishment with gauntlets, whips, branding, etc., was abolished, as they said then, the “privilege to be insects” with rods for peasants (according to decisions of volost courts), as well as for exiled, hard labor and penal soldiers . An example of red tape in the post-reform court is the case with the lawsuit of mining workers against the Ural industrialist Stroganov, which dragged on for 51 years (from 1862 to 1913).

Even the territorial judicial reform (however, like other reforms of 1861-1874) was limited. New judicial statutes were introduced only in 44 provinces of the empire out of 82. In Belarus, Siberia, Central Asia, northern and northeastern outskirts of European Russia, they did not spread.

Nevertheless, the judicial reform of 1864 was the largest step in the history of Russia towards the rule of law. All its principles and institutions (especially its two most democratic institutions - the jury and the bar), despite the restrictions and even oppression on the part of tsarism, contributed to the development of civilized norms of law and justice in the country. The jurors, contrary to the hopes and direct pressure of the authorities, sometimes delivered defiantly independent verdicts, justifying, for example, in 1878 Vera Zasulich, and in 1885 - Morozov weavers. As for the Russian legal profession, it has managed to place itself - both legally and even politically - at an extraordinary height for an autocratic country. By 1917, there were 16.5 thousand lawyers in Russia, i.e. per capita more than in the USSR in 1977 (as we said then, in the state of "developed socialism"). Most importantly, Russian pre-revolutionary lawyers won national and world recognition for their self-governing corporation (sworn attorneys), putting forward a constellation of first-class legal talents and political fighters. The names of V.D. Spasovich and F.N. Plevako, D.V. Stasova and N.P. Karabchevsky, P.A. Alexandrova and /208/ S.A. Andreevsky, V.I. Taneeva and A.I. Urusova and many others were known throughout the country and far beyond its borders, and a long series of trials won by them in the struggle for law and truth caused an all-Russian and world outcry. Today's Russia, unfortunately, can only dream of such a strong and authoritative advocacy, which tsarism endured with it.

This is how the landowner boasted in N. A. Nekrasov’s poem “Who should live well in Russia”.

The trial with the participation of jurors was vividly portrayed by L..N. Tolstoy in the novel "Resurrection".

Each county with a city located in it, and sometimes a separate large city, constituted a world district. It was divided into sections, and a justice of the peace acted in each section.

In politics, as in all social life, not moving forward means being thrown back.

Lenin Vladimir Ilyich

Alexander 2 went down in history as a reformer. During his reign, significant changes took place in Russia, the main of which concerns the solution of the peasant question. In 1861, Alexander II abolished serfdom. Such a cardinal step was long overdue, but its implementation was associated with large quantity complexities. The abolition of serfdom required the emperor to carry out other reforms that were supposed to return Russia to a leading position on the world stage. A huge number of problems have accumulated in the country that have not been resolved since the era of Alexander 1 and Nicholas 1. The new emperor had to place great emphasis on solving these problems, carrying out largely liberal reforms, since the previous path of conservatism did not lead to positive consequences.

The main reasons for reforming Russia

Alexander 2 came to power in 1855, and he immediately faced an acute problem in carrying out reforms in almost all spheres of state life. The main reasons for the reforms of the era of Alexander 2 are as follows:

1. Defeat in the Crimean War.
2. Growing public discontent.
3. Losing economic competition to Western countries.
4. Progressive entourage of the emperor.

Most of the transformations were carried out in the period 1860 - 1870. They went down in history under the name "liberal reforms of Alexander 2". Today, the word “liberal” often scares people, but in fact it was in this era that the basic principles of the functioning of the state were laid down, which lasted until the end of the existence of the Russian Empire. Here it is also important to understand that even though the previous era was called the "apogee of autocracy", it was flattery. Nicholas 1 reveled in victory in Patriotic war, and seeming dominance over European countries. He was afraid to make significant changes in Russia. Therefore, the country actually reached a dead end, and his son Alexander 2 was forced to solve the gigantic problems of the Empire.

What reforms have been carried out

We have already said that the main reform of Alexander 2 is the abolition of serfdom. It was this transformation that put the country in front of the need to modernize all other areas. Briefly, the main changes were as follows.

Financial reform 1860 - 1864. A state bank, zemstvo and commercial banks are being created. The activity of banks was mainly aimed at supporting industry. AT Last year the implementation of reforms, control bodies are created, independent from local governments, which audit the financial activities of government bodies.

Zemstvo reform of 1864. With its help, the problem of attracting broad masses people to solve everyday problems. Elective bodies of zemstvo and local self-government were created.

Judicial Reform of 1864. After the reform, the court became more "legal". Under Alexander 2, a jury trial was first introduced, publicity, the ability to bring any person to trial, regardless of his position, the independence of the court from local administrations, corporal punishment was abolished, and much more.

Education reform of 1864. This reform completely changed the system that Nicholas 1 tried to build, who sought to limit the population from knowledge. Alexander 2 promoted the principle of public education, which would be accessible to all classes. For this, new elementary schools and gymnasiums were opened. In particular, it was in the Alexander era that the opening of a women's gymnasium began and women were admitted to public service.

1865 censorship reform. These changes absolutely supported the previous course. As before, control was exercised over everything that is published, since the activities of a revolutionary nature in Russia were extremely active.

City reform of 1870. It was mainly directed to the improvement of cities, the development of markets, health care, education, the establishment of sanitary standards, and so on. Reforms were introduced in 509 cities out of 1130 that were in Russia. The reform was not applied to cities located in Poland, Finland and Central Asia.

Military reform of 1874. It was mainly directed to the modernization of weapons, the development of the fleet and the training of personnel. As a result, the Russian army has again become one of the leading in the world.

Consequences of the reforms

The reforms of Alexander 2 had the following consequences for Russia:

• Prospects for building a capitalist model of the economy have been created. The level of state regulation of the economy was reduced in the country, and a free labor market was created. However, the industry was not 100% ready to accept the capitalist model. This required more time.
• The foundations for the formation of civil society have been laid. The population received more civil rights and freedoms. This applies to all areas of activity, from education to real freedom of movement and work.
• Strengthening of the opposition movement. The main part of the reforms of Alexander 2 were liberal, so the liberal movements, which were ranked by Nicholas the First, began to gain strength again. It was in this era that the key aspects that led to the events of 1917 were laid.

Defeat in the Crimean War as a rationale for reforms

Russia lost the Crimean War for several reasons:

• Lack of communications. Russia is a huge country and it is very difficult to move an army across it. Nicholas 1 began the construction of a railway to solve this problem, but this project was not implemented due to banal corruption. The money intended for the construction of the railway connecting Moscow and the Black Sea region was simply cut off.
• Discord in the army. Soldiers and officers did not understand each other. Between them there was a whole abyss, both class and educational. The situation was aggravated by the fact that Nicholas 1 demanded severe punishment for soldiers for any offense. It is from here that the nickname of the Emperor among the soldiers comes - "Nikolai Palkin".
• Military-technical lag behind Western countries.

Today, many historians say that the extent of the defeat in the Crimean War was simply gigantic, and this is the main factor indicating that Russia needed reforms. This idea is supported and supported, including in Western countries. After the capture of Sevastopol, all European publications wrote that autocracy had outlived itself in Russia, and the country needed changes. But the main problem lay elsewhere. In 1812 Russia won great victory. This victory created an absolute illusion among the emperors that the Russian army was invincible. And so the Crimean War dispelled this illusion, the Western armies demonstrate their superiority in technical terms. All this led to the fact that officials, who pay great attention to opinion from abroad, accepted a national inferiority complex and began to try to transmit it to the entire population.

But the truth is that the extent of the defeat in the war is grossly overestimated. Of course, the war was lost, but this does not mean that Alexander 2 ruled a weak Empire. It must be remembered that in the Crimean War, Russia was opposed by the best and most developed countries of Europe at that time. And despite this, England and its other allies still recall with horror this war and the valor of Russian soldiers.