home Repair

Document protecting class privileges, 19th century. The estate system of Russia at the end of the 18th-19th centuries. Estates in the Russian Empire

The population of a state may consist either of various ethnographic groups, or of one nation, but in any case it consists of different social unions (classes, estates).
estate- a social group that occupies a certain position in the hierarchical structure of society in accordance with its rights, duties and privileges enshrined in custom or law and inherited.

in Russia at the beginning of the 20th century. the Code of Laws of the Russian Empire, which determined the provisions of the estates, continues to operate. The law distinguished four main classes:

nobility,
clergy,
urban population,
rural population.

The urban population, in turn, was divided into five groups:

honorary citizens,
merchants,
workshop craftsmen,
tradesmen,
small proprietors and working people, those. employed

As a result of the class division, society was a pyramid, at the base of which were broad social strata, and at the head was the highest ruling stratum of society - the nobility.

Nobility.
Throughout the XVIII century. there is a process of strengthening the role of the nobility as the ruling class. Serious changes took place in the very structure of the nobility, its self-organization and legal status. These changes took place on several fronts. The first of these consisted in the internal consolidation of the nobility, the gradual erasure of differences between the previously existing main groups of service people “in the fatherland” (boyars, Moscow nobles, city nobles, boyar children, residents, etc.).

In this regard, the role of the Decree on Uniform Heritage of 1714 was great, eliminating the differences between estates and estates and, accordingly, between the categories of nobility that owned land on patrimonial and local rights. After this decree, all noble landowners had land on the basis of a single right - real estate.

There was also a big role Tables of ranks (1722) finally eliminated (at least in legal terms) the last remnants of parochialism (appointments to positions “according to the fatherland”, i.e. the nobility of the family and the past service of the ancestors) and at the one who becamefor all nobles, the obligation to begin service from the lower ranks of the 14th class (ensign, cornet, midshipman) in the military and naval service, collegiate registrar - in the civil service and consistent promotion, depending on their merits, abilities and devotion to the sovereign.

It must be admitted that this service was really difficult. Sometimes a nobleman did not visit his estates for most of his life, because. was constantly on campaigns or served in distant garrisons. But already the government of Anna Ivanovna in 1736 limited the term of service to 25 years.
Peter III Decree on the liberties of the nobility of 1762 abolished compulsory service for the nobles.
A significant number of nobles left the service, retired and settled on their estates. At the same time, the nobility was exempted from corporal punishment.

Catherine II, during her accession in the same year, confirmed these noble liberties. The abolition of the obligatory service of the nobility became possible due to the fact that by the second half of the 18th century. the main foreign policy tasks (access to the sea, the development of the South of Russia, etc.) had already been resolved and there was no longer any need for extreme exertion of the forces of society.

A number of measures are being taken to further expand and confirm noble privileges and strengthen administrative control over the peasants. The most important of them are the Establishment for the management of the provinces in 1775 and Letter of commendation to the nobility in 1785

By the early 20th century, the nobility continued to be the dominant class, the most united, the most educated, and the most accustomed to political power. The first Russian revolution gave impetus to the further political unification of the nobility. In 1906, at the All-Russian Congress of Authorized Noble Societies, the central body of these societies was created - Council of the United Nobility. He had a significant influence on government policy.

Clergy.
The next privileged estate after the nobility was the clergy, which was divided into white (parish) and black (monasticism). It enjoyed certain estate privileges: the clergy and their children were exempted from the poll tax; recruiting duty; were subject to ecclesiastical court according to canon law (with the exception of cases “according to the word and deed of the sovereign”).

The subordination of the Orthodox Church to the state was a historical tradition rooted in its Byzantine history, where the emperor was the head of the church. Based on these traditions, after the death of Patriarch Adrian in 1700, Peter 1 did not allow the election of a new patriarch, but first appointed Archbishop Stefan Yavorsky of Ryazan as locum tenens of the patriarchal throne with a much smaller amount of church power, and then with the creation state colleges, among them was formed the Theological Board consisting of the president, two vice-presidents, four advisers and four assessors to manage church affairs.

In 1721 the Theological College was renamed into Holy Governing Synod. A secular official was appointed to oversee the affairs of the Synod - Chief Prosecutor of the Synod subordinate to the Attorney General.
The synod was subordinated to the bishops who headed the church districts - dioceses.

After creation Synod, the lands were again returned to the church and the church was obliged to maintain part of the schools, hospitals and almshouses from its income.

The secularization of church property was completed by Catherine II. By decree of 1764, the church began to be financed from the treasury. Its activities were regulated by the Spiritual Regulations of 1721.

Reforms of church administration were carried out not only in the Orthodox Church, but also in Muslim. To manage the Muslim clergy in 1782 was established Muftiate. The head of all Muslims of the Russian Empire - the mufti was elected council of high Muslim priests and was approved in this position by the empress. In 1788, the Muslim Spiritual Administration (later transferred to Ufa) was established in Orenburg, headed by a mufti.

Urban population.
Posadskoye, i.e. the urban trade and craft population constituted a special estate, which, unlike the nobility and clergy, was not privileged. It was subject to the “sovereign tax” and all taxes and duties, including recruitment duty, it was subject to corporal punishment.

Urban population in the first half of the XIX century. divided into five groups: honorary citizens, merchants, craftsmen, burghers, small proprietors and working people, i.e. employed.
A special group of eminent citizens, which included large capitalists who owned capital over 50 thousand rubles. wholesale merchants, owners of ships from 1807 were called first-class merchants, and from 1832 - honorary citizens.

Philistinism- the main urban taxable estate in the Russian Empire - originates from the townspeople of Moscow Russia, united in black hundreds and settlements.

The philistines were assigned to their city societies, which they could leave only with temporary passports, and transfer to others - with the permission of the authorities.

They paid a poll tax, were subject to recruitment and corporal punishment, did not have the right to enter the state service, and upon entering the military service did not enjoy the rights of volunteers.

Petty trade, various crafts, and work for hire were allowed for the townspeople. To engage in craft and trade, they had to enroll in workshops and guilds.

The organization of the petty-bourgeois class was finally established in 1785. In each city they formed a petty-bourgeois society, elected petty-bourgeois councils or petty-bourgeois elders and their assistants (the councils were introduced from 1870).

In the middle of the XIX century. the townspeople are exempted from corporal punishment, since 1866 - from the soul tax.

Belonging to the bourgeois class was hereditary.

Enrollment in the philistines was open to persons obliged to choose a way of life, for state (after the abolition of serfdom - for all) peasants, but for the latter - only upon dismissal from society and permission from the authorities

The tradesman was not only not ashamed of his estate, but was even proud of it...
The word "philistine" - comes from the Polish word "misto" - a city.

Merchants.
The merchant class was divided into 3 guilds: - the first guild of merchants with a capital of 10 to 50 thousand rubles; the second - from 5 to 10 thousand rubles; the third - from 1 to 5 thousand rubles.

honorary citizens divided into hereditary and personal.

Rank hereditary honorary citizen was assigned to the big bourgeoisie, children of personal nobles, priests and clerks, artists, agronomists, artists of imperial theaters, etc.
The title of personal honorary citizen was awarded to persons who were adopted by hereditary nobles and honorary citizens, as well as those who graduated from technical schools, teacher's seminaries and artists of private theaters. Honorary citizens enjoyed a number of privileges: they were exempted from personal duties, from corporal punishment, etc.

Peasantry.
The peasantry, which in Russia accounted for over 80% of the population, practically ensured the very existence of society with their labor. It was it that paid the lion's share of the poll tax and other taxes and fees that ensured the maintenance of the army, navy, the construction of St. Petersburg, new cities, the Ural industry, etc. It was the peasants as recruits that made up the bulk of the armed forces. They also conquered new lands.

Peasants made up the bulk of the population, they were divided into: landowners, state possessions and appanages belonging to the royal family.

In accordance with the new laws of 1861, the serfdom of the landlords over the peasants was abolished forever and the peasants were declared free rural inhabitants with the empowerment of their civil rights.
Peasants had to pay a poll tax, other taxes and fees, gave recruits, could be subjected to corporal punishment. The land on which the peasants worked belonged to the landlords, and until the peasants bought it they were called temporarily liable and carried various duties in favor of the landowners.
The peasants of each village who emerged from serfdom united in rural societies. For the purposes of administration and court, several rural societies formed a volost. In the villages and volosts, the peasants were granted self-government.

COSSACKS AS A MILITARY ESTATE WERE ABSENT IN THE MAIN TEXT OF THE MATERIAL

I FILL THIS GAP WITH MY MODERATOR'S INSERT

COSSACKS

military estate in Russia in the 18th - early 20th centuries. In the XIV-XVII centuries. free people who worked for hire, persons who carried out military service in the border areas (city and guard Cossacks); in the XV-XVI centuries. beyond the borders of Russia and the Polish-Lithuanian state (on the Dnieper, Don, Volga, Ural, Terek), self-governing communities of the so-called free Cossacks (mainly from fugitive peasants) arose, which were the main driving force of the uprisings in Ukraine in the 16th-17th centuries. and in Russia XVII-XVIII centuries. The government sought to use the Cossacks to guard the borders, in wars, etc., and in the 18th century. subjugated him, turning him into a privileged military class. At the beginning of the XX century. there were 11 Cossack troops (Don, Kuban, Orenburg, Transbaikal, Tersk, Siberian, Ural, Astrakhan, Semirechensk, Amur and Ussuri). In 1916 the Cossack population was over 4.4 million people, over 53 million acres of land. 1st world war put up about 300 thousand people

By the middle of the 19th century, in addition to merchants, breeders, bankers, there appeared in cities new intelligentsia(architects, artists, musicians, doctors, scientists, engineers, teachers, etc.). The nobility also began to engage in entrepreneurship.

The peasant reform opened the way for the development of market relations in the country. A significant part of the business was the merchant class.

The industrial revolution in Russia at the end of the 19th century. turned entrepreneurs into a significant economic force in the country. Under the powerful pressure of the market, estates and estate privileges are gradually losing their former significance....

The Provisional Government, by its Decree of March 3, 1917, abolished all class, religious and national restrictions.

Estates and classes.

The entire urban and rural population was divided "according to the difference in the rights of the state" into four main categories: nobility, clergy, urban and rural inhabitants.

The nobility remained a privileged class. It was shared on personal and hereditary.

Right to personal nobility, which was not hereditary, were received by representatives of various classes, who are in the public service and have the lowest rank in the Table of Ranks. Serving the Fatherland, one could receive hereditary, i.e., inherited, nobility. To do this, it was necessary to receive a certain rank or order. The emperor could be awarded by hereditary nobility and for successful entrepreneurial or other activities.

city dwellers- hereditary honorary citizens, merchants, philistines, artisans.

Rural inhabitants, Cossacks and other people involved in agriculture.

The formation of a bourgeois society was going on in the country with two of its main classes - the bourgeoisie and the proletariat. At the same time, the predominance of semi-feudal agriculture in the Russian economy contributed to the preservation and two main classes of feudal society - landowners and peasants.

The growth of cities, the development of industry, transport and communications, the increase in the cultural demands of the population lead in the second half of the 19th century. to increase the proportion of people professionally engaged in mental work and artistic creativity - intelligentsia: engineers, teachers, doctors, lawyers, journalists, etc.

Peasantry.

The peasants are still constituted the vast majority population of the Russian Empire. Peasants, both former serfs and state, were part of self-governing rural societies - communities. Several rural communities made up the volost.

The members of the community were bound mutual responsibility in paying taxes and performing duties. Therefore, there was a dependence of the peasants on the community, manifested primarily in the restriction of freedom of movement.

For the peasants there was special parish court, whose members were also elected by the village assembly. At the same time, the volost courts made their decisions not only on the basis of the norms of laws, but also guided by customs. Often, these courts punished peasants for such offenses as wasteful spending of money, drunkenness, and even witchcraft. In addition, the peasants were subjected to certain punishments that had long been abolished for other classes. For example, volost courts had the right to sentence members of their class under the age of 60 to flogging.

Russian peasants revered their elders, considering them as bearers of experience and traditions. This attitude also extended to the emperor, served as a source of monarchism, faith in the “tsar-priest” - an intercessor, guardian of truth and justice.

Russian peasants professed Orthodoxy. Unusually harsh natural conditions and the hard work associated with them - suffering, the results of which did not always correspond to the efforts expended, the bitter experience of lean years immersed the peasants in the world of superstitions, signs and rituals.

Liberation from serfdom brought to the village big changes:

P First of all, the stratification of the peasants intensified. The horseless peasant (if he was not engaged in other, non-agricultural work) became a symbol of rural poverty. At the end of the 80s. in European Russia, 27% of households were horseless. The presence of one horse was considered a sign of poverty. There were about 29% of such farms. At the same time, from 5 to 25% of the owners had up to ten horses. They bought up large land holdings, hired laborers and expanded their economy.

a sharp increase in the need for money. The peasants had to pay redemption payments and a poll tax, have funds for zemstvo and worldly dues, for rent payments for land and for repayment of bank loans. There was an involvement of the majority of peasant farms in market relations. The main item of peasant income was the sale of bread. But due to low yields, peasants were often forced to sell grain to the detriment of their own interests. The export of grain abroad was based on the malnutrition of the villagers and was rightly called by contemporaries "hungry exports."

Poverty, hardships associated with redemption payments, lack of land and other troubles firmly tied the bulk of the peasants to the community. After all, it guaranteed its members mutual support. In addition, the distribution of land in the community helped the middle and poorest peasantry to survive in the event of a famine. Allotments were distributed among the community members striped rather than being reduced to one place. Each member of the community had a small allotment (band) in different places. In a dry year, a plot located in a lowland could give a quite tolerable harvest; in rainy years, a plot on a hill helped out.

There were peasants who were committed to the traditions of their fathers and grandfathers, the community with its collectivism and security, and there were also “new” peasants who wanted to manage on their own at their own peril and risk. Many peasants went to work in the cities. The prolonged isolation of men from the family, from village life and rural work led to an increase in the role of women not only in economic life, but also in peasant self-government.

The most important problem of Russia on the eve of the XX century. was to turn the peasants - the main part of the country's population - into politically mature citizens who respect both their own and other people's rights and are capable of actively participating in public life.

Nobility.

After the peasant reforms In 1861, the stratification of the nobility proceeded rapidly due to the active influx into the privileged class of people from other segments of the population.

Gradually, the most privileged class also lost its economic advantages. After the peasant reform of 1861, the area of land owned by the nobility decreased by an average of 0.68 million acres per year. The number of landowners among the nobles was declining. At the same time, almost half of the landowners considered the estates to be small. In the post-reform period, most of the landlords continued to apply semi-serf forms of farming and went bankrupt.

Simultaneously part of the nobility actively participated in entrepreneurial activity: in railway construction, industry, banking and insurance. Funds for doing business were received from the redemption under the reform of 1861, from the lease of land and on bail. Some nobles became owners of large industrial enterprises, took prominent positions in companies, became owners of shares and real estate. A significant part of the nobles joined the ranks of the owners of small commercial and industrial establishments. Many acquired the professions of doctors, lawyers, became writers, artists, artists. At the same time, part of the nobles went bankrupt, replenishing the lower strata of society.

Thus, the decline of the landlord economy accelerated the stratification of the nobility and weakened the influence of the landowners in the state. In the second half of the XIX century. there was a loss by the nobles of the dominant position in the life of Russian society: political power concentrated in the hands of officials, economic - in the hands of the bourgeoisie, the intelligentsia became the ruler of thoughts, and the class of the once all-powerful landlords gradually disappeared.

Bourgeoisie.

The development of capitalism in Russia led to growth of the bourgeoisie. Continuing to officially be listed as nobles, merchants, petty bourgeois, peasants, representatives of this class played an increasing role in the life of the country. Since the time of the "railway fever" of the 60-70s. the bourgeoisie was actively replenished at the expense of officials. Entering the boards of private banks and industrial enterprises, officials provided a link between state power and private production. They helped industrialists get lucrative orders and concessions.

The period of the formation of the Russian bourgeoisie coincided in time with the vigorous activity of the Narodniks within the country and with the growth of the revolutionary struggle of the Western European proletariat. Therefore, the bourgeoisie in Russia looked at autocratic power as its protector from revolutionary uprisings.

And although the interests of the bourgeoisie were often infringed upon by the state, they did not dare to take active steps against the autocracy.

Some of the founders of well-known commercial and industrial families - S. V. Morozov, P. K. Konovalov - remained illiterate until the end of their days. But they tried to give their children a good education, including a university one. Sons were often sent abroad to study commercial and industrial practice.

Many representatives of this new generation of the bourgeoisie sought to support scientists, representatives of the creative intelligentsia, invested in the creation of libraries and art galleries. A. A. Korzinkin, K. T. Soldatenkov, P. K. Botkin and D. P. Botkin, S. M. Tretyakov and P. M. Tretyakov, S. I. Mammoths.

Proletariat.

Another The main class of industrial society was the proletariat. The proletariat included all hired workers, including those employed in agriculture and crafts, but its core was factory, mining and railway workers - the industrial proletariat. His education went along with the industrial revolution. By the mid 90s. 19th century about 10 million people were employed in the sphere of wage labor, of which 1.5 million were industrial workers.

The working class of Russia had a number of features:

He was closely associated with the peasantry. A significant part of the factories and plants were located in the villages, and the industrial proletariat itself was constantly replenished with people from the village. The hired factory worker was, as a rule, a proletarian in the first generation and maintained close ties with the village.
Representatives became workers different nationalities.
In Russia, there was a significant increase concentration proletariat in large enterprises than in other countries.

The life of the workers.

In the factory barracks (dormitories), they settled not in the workshops, but in the provinces and counties from which they came. At the head of workers from one locality was a master who recruited them to the enterprise. Workers hardly got used to city conditions. Separation from their native places often led to a drop in morale, drunkenness. The workers worked long hours and, in order to send money home, huddled in damp and dark rooms and ate poorly.

The speeches of the workers for the improvement of their situation in the 80-90s. became more numerous, sometimes they took sharp forms, accompanied by violence against the factory authorities, the destruction of factory premises and clashes with the police and even with the troops. The largest was the strike that broke out on January 7, 1885 at Morozov's Nikolskaya manufactory in the city of Orekhovo-Zuevo.

The labor movement during this period was a response to the specific actions of "their" factory owners: increasing fines, lowering prices, forced payment of wages in goods from the factory shop, etc.

Clergy.

Church ministers - the clergy - constituted a special estate, divided into black and white clergy. The black clergy - the monks - assumed special obligations, including leaving the "world". The monks lived in numerous monasteries.

The white clergy lived in the "world", their main task was the implementation of worship and religious preaching. From the end of the 17th century the order was established according to which the place of the deceased priest was inherited, as a rule, by his son or other relative. This contributed to the transformation of the white clergy into a closed class.

Although the clergy in Russia belonged to a privileged part of society, the rural priests, who made up the vast majority of it, eked out a miserable existence, as they were fed by their own labor and at the expense of parishioners, who themselves often barely made ends meet. In addition, as a rule, they were burdened by large families.

The Orthodox Church had its educational establishments. At the end of the XIX century. in Russia there were 4 theological academies, in which about a thousand people studied, and 58 seminaries, which trained up to 19 thousand future clergy.

Intelligentsia.

At the end of the XIX century. out of more than 125 million inhabitants of Russia, 870 thousand could be attributed to the intelligentsia. There were over 3 thousand scientists and writers, 4 thousand engineers and technicians, 79.5 thousand teachers and 68 thousand private teachers, 18.8 thousand doctors, 18 thousand artists, musicians and actors in the country.

In the first half of the XIX century. the ranks of the intelligentsia were replenished mainly at the expense of the nobility.

Part of the intelligentsia was never able to find a practical application of their knowledge. Neither industry, nor zemstvos, nor other institutions could provide employment for many university graduates whose families were experiencing financial difficulties. Getting a higher education was not a guarantee of an increase in living standards, and hence social status. This created a mood of protest.

But in addition to material rewards for their work, the main need of the intelligentsia is freedom of expression, without which true creativity is unthinkable. Therefore, in the absence of political freedoms in the country, the anti-government sentiments of a significant part of the intelligentsia intensified.

Cossacks.

The emergence of the Cossacks was associated with the need to develop and protect the newly acquired marginal lands. For their service, the Cossacks received land from the government. Therefore, the Cossack is both a warrior and a peasant.

At the end of the XIX century. there were 11 Cossack troops

In the villages and settlements there were special primary and secondary Cossack schools, where much attention was paid to the military training of students.

In 1869, the nature of land ownership in the Cossack regions was finally determined. The communal ownership of the stanitsa lands was consolidated, of which each Cossack received a share in the amount of 30 acres. The rest of the land was a military reserve. It was intended mainly to create new stanitsa sections as the Cossack population grew. In public use were forests, pastures, reservoirs.

Conclusion:

In the second half of the XIX century. there was a breakdown of estate partitions and the formation of new groups of society along economic, class lines. Representatives of the merchant class, successful peasant entrepreneurs, and the nobility are also joining the new business class - the bourgeoisie. The class of hired workers - the proletariat - is replenished primarily at the expense of the peasants, but the tradesman, the son of the village priest and even the "noble gentleman" were not uncommon in this environment. There is a significant democratization of the intelligentsia, even the clergy are losing their former isolation. And only the Cossacks to a greater extent remain committed to their former way of life.

First estate: Aristocrats, boyars.

Rights: The upper class in the country. They owned lands, herds of cattle and serfs as personal property. Their power over the serfs was practically unlimited, and often any atrocities were committed against them. The rights of the boyars could be limited only by representatives of their own estate, or the royal family.

Responsibilities: To serve for the benefit of the state. This service consisted in holding public posts, that is, administrative activities, military and diplomatic activities. These are ministers, generals, governor-generals of large regions, ambassadors in major powers. For this they are called "service people"

Estate: nobles and boyar children(lower strata of aristocratic society)

Rights: Similar to the first estate, but they had few lands and lackeys, they obeyed the boyars in everything.

Responsibilities: Serving obligatory (until the 18th century) service for the benefit of the state. "Service people". Most often they occupied managerial positions of a lower rank. This class included officers, ambassadors of small principalities, more often Asian ones, governors and mayors of insignificant provinces.

Condition: Sagittarius

Rights: The lowest class of all "service people" was traditionally called "instrument people" (that is, those who were called up to the army from the outside). They received monetary and food salaries from the state, as well as the right to use land plots. They lived in the streltsy settlements on the outskirts of the city "posads". These are the wealthy segments of the population.

Responsibilities: Military service for the benefit of the state. This is the regular army of Russia. Their commanders were noblemen and boyar children. Sometimes the archers themselves became commanders (they were called "initial people")

Estate: Posad people(lower strata of city dwellers, commoners)

Rights: Minimum. Submit to all the higher classes and work for them. These are artisans called "black people". Personally free.

Responsibilities: To serve the "tax"(a system of duties and taxes in favor of the state), for this they were called "tax people". It was most often quitrent or payment of taxes. For example, a city dweller served for some time in the service of a coachman and brought income from the service to the treasury. They did not have the right to own land, they lived in communities, the community owned the land, obeyed it.

Estate: Peasants

Rights: Minimum. Until the end of the 18th century, the peasants did not even have the right to complain about the cruelty to them of the state. Personally free. Also "Tight people", "black people", "black souls", residents of "black settlements".

Responsibilities: Work on communal land (they did not have private ownership of it), submit to the community, pay a lot of taxes to the treasury.

Estate: Serfs:

Rights: Zero. Full property of the master. They can be killed, maimed, sold or separated from the family by order of the master. The murder of a serf was not considered murder by law, the owner did not answer for it - only the killer of someone else's serf answered with a fine. The lowest class of the whole society. They did not even treat "hard people." They did not answer before the court for theft or other offense, because they were not considered subjects of the law, only the master could punish. They did not pay taxes to the treasury, the master decided everything for them.

Responsibilities: To work for a gentleman, to serve a corvée, that is, the amount of labor in favor of the owner, even unbearable. In general, the rights and obligations of a slave. It was possible to sell oneself into slaves for debts. They did menial work, sometimes handicraft.

19th century table of estates

Class: nobles

Rights: This is the feudal privileged class. A nobleman could simultaneously belong to the clergy. Until 1861, the nobles were mainly landowners in Russia - the owners of land and peasants. After the reform, the right to own people was taken away from them, but most of the lands and lands remained in their possession. They had their own estate self-government, freedom from corporal punishment, the exclusive right in the country to buy land.

Responsibilities: Officers were recruited from among the nobles, but the military and state service has not been compulsory since 1785. Local power - gubernatorial, city self-government in large cities, in the 19th century was exclusively from the nobility. Most of the nobles also sat in the zemstvos. There was a personal and hereditary nobility. The first was appointed for services to the Fatherland and could not be inherited.

Class: clergy.

Rights: They were freed from corporal punishment, taxes and duties, they had class self-government inside. The clergy were only half of one percent of the total population of the country. They were exempted from military service (and recruitment from their abolition during the reform of 1861).

Responsibilities: They served in churches - Russian Orthodox, Catholic or other denominations. Part of the clergy could inherit their estate. Some acquired it only for the duration of their lives. If the priest took off his rank, he returned to the estate in which he had been before taking the rank.

Condition: urban. It was divided into five very dissimilar states. These included honorary citizens of cities, merchants, philistines, artisans and workers. Merchants, in turn, were divided into guilds according to the degree of the number of privileges.

Rights: Merchants have the right to be called the merchant class only as long as they pay the fee to their guild. Honorary citizens, like nobles and clergy, were exempt from corporal punishment. Honorary citizens (not all) could transfer their fortune in the estate by inheritance.

Responsibilities: Workers and artisans (since they united in workshops, they were also called guild people, they had practically none of the privileges. The urban estate did not have the right to move to the villages (as well as the peasants were forbidden to move to the city). The urban estate paid the bulk of taxes in the country.

Estate: peasants

Rights: Peasants received personal freedom only in 1861. Prior to this, there were virtually no free peasants in Russia - they were all serfs. According to the principle of who they belonged to, the peasants were divided into landowners, state-owned, that is, state and property (belonged to the enterprise). They had the right to file complaints against their landowners for ill-treatment. They had the right to leave the village only with the consent of the landowner (or a representative of the administration). Those at their own discretion gave them passports.

Responsibilities: To work for the owner, serve a corvee, or, working outside his household, bring him quitrent in monetary terms. They didn't have land. The peasants received the right to own land or rent it from the landowner only after 1861.

Initially, it was used to designate a collegium, a corporation, and only then it was transferred to corporately organized groups of people.

A coherent system of estates was never formed in the Russian Empire, so some researchers (M. Confino) believe that there were never any estates of the Western European type in Russia at all.

Classification at the beginning of the 20th century

Reforms of Alexander II

Notes

Sources

Wikimedia Foundation. 2010 .

See what "Estates in the Russian Empire" is in other dictionaries:

This term has other meanings, see State control. Z ... Wikipedia

During the entire two-century period of its existence, it was multinational, although the core of the population of the empire, called the titular nation, were Russians, whose national identity was formed among the East Slavic population ... ... Wikipedia

The population of the Russian Empire at the time of its proclamation and throughout the entire two-century period of its existence was multinational, although the core of the population of the empire, called the titular nation, were Great Russians (Russians), national ... ... Wikipedia

The first general census of the population of the Russian Empire in 1897 was a general census of the population of the Russian Empire (excluding the Grand Duchy of Finland outside of Helsingfors), conducted on January 28, 1897 by direct ... ... Wikipedia

The 1897 census is a general census of the population of the Russian Empire (except Finland), conducted on January 28, 1897 by direct questioning of the entire population on the same date. The initiator of the census was the Russian ... ... Wikipedia

Books

Noble families of the Russian Empire. Volume 1. Princes,. The 10-volume edition summarizes and systematizes material on the noble families of the Russian Empire, whose descendants currently live in many countries of the world. Documentary presentation and ...

MINISTRY OF EDUCATION OF THE RUSSIAN FEDERATION

FEDERAL AGENCY FOR EDUCATION

TYUMEN STATE UNIVERSITY

Semester report

Power and Society in the Russian Empire XVIII- 19th century:

nobility

Completed:

Checked:

Tyumen 200_

Introduction

1.1 Nobility under Peter I

2.1 1762-1785

3.1 1796-1861

3.2 Nobility under Paul I

3.3 Nobility under Nicholas I

4.1 1861-1904

Conclusion

Introduction

AT late XVIII - early XIX centuries, with a significant lag behind the West, a class system was finally formed in Russia. The design of the domestic estate structure is characteristic of the era of "enlightened absolutism", which aimed to preserve the order in which each estate performs its purpose and function.

An estate is a social group of pre-capitalist societies that has rights and obligations enshrined in custom or law and inherited. The estate organization is characterized by a hierarchy of several estates, expressed in the inequality of their position and privileges. Very often the concepts of "estate" and "class" are used as synonyms, but this is not true, since they mean different things. So, estates are large social groups that differ from others in their legal status, which is inherited. As for classes, these are also large social groups, but they differ from each other according to other, not legal, but socio-economic criteria, namely: in their attitude to property, place in social production, and others.

The social structure of society, the type of stratification and the relationship between estates and power has a very serious impact on the history of the state and its political development. In this connection, it was topic report: power and society in the Russian Empire XVIII- 19th century From the era of Peter I, the nobility began to play an important role in the life of the state, becoming the most influential and privileged part of the population. Therefore, I decided to devote the work to this particular class. Main purpose of the work: to study and draw a conclusion about the relationship between power and nobility in the Russian Empire from the 18th century until the abolition of serfdom. To achieve the goal, the following tasks :

select and study literature on the topic;

consider the history of the Russian nobility in the XVIII-XIX centuries;

to study the relationship between power and the nobility;

draw a conclusion based on the data obtained;

The plan of my work was the division of the history of the Russian nobility by the American historian R. Jones into 3 periods, which is based on changes in the policy of the autocracy in relation to the nobility.

1. Russian nobility in the first half of the 18th century

This chapter covers the reign of Emperor Peter I and the era palace coups, which lasted from the death of Emperor Peter the Great until 1762.

1.1 Nobility under Peter I

The reign of Peter - 1682-1725 - can be described as a period of transformation of the nobility into a full-fledged estate, occurring simultaneously with its enslavement and increasing dependence on the state. The process of forming the nobility as a single class consists in the gradual acquisition of class rights and privileges.

One of the first events in this area was the adoption of the Decree on uniform inheritance. In March 1714, a decree “On the order of inheritance in movable and immovable property” appeared, better known as the “Decree on Uniform Succession”. This decree was an important milestone in the history of the Russian nobility. He legislated the equality of estates and estates as forms of real estate, i.e. there was a merger of these two forms of feudal landed property. From that moment on, land holdings were not subject to division among all the heirs of the deceased, but went to one of the sons at the choice of the testator. It is quite obvious that the rest, according to the legislator, having lost their source of income, should have rushed to the state service. In this regard, most researchers believe that the involvement of nobles in the service or some other activity useful to the state was the main purpose of this decree. Others believe that Peter I wanted to turn part of the nobility into the third estate. Still others - that the emperor took care of the preservation of the nobility itself and even sought to turn it into a kind of Western European aristocracy. The fourth, on the contrary, are convinced of the anti-noble orientation of this decree. This decree, which had many progressive features, caused discontent among the upper class. In addition, like many normative acts of the Petrine era, it was not well developed. The ambiguity of the wording created difficulties in the execution of the decree. Here is what Klyuchevsky notes about this: “It is poorly processed, does not foresee many cases, gives vague definitions that allow for conflicting interpretations: in the 1st paragraph it strongly prohibits the alienation of real estate, and in the 12th it provides and normalizes their sale as needed; establishing a sharp difference in the order of inheritance of movable and immovable property, does not indicate what is meant by one and the other, and this gave rise to misunderstandings and abuses. These shortcomings caused repeated clarifications in subsequent decrees of Peter. By 1725, the decree had undergone significant revision, allowing significant deviations from the original version. But anyway, according to V.O. Klyuchevsky: “The law of 1714, without achieving the intended goals, only introduced confusion and economic disorder into the landowning environment.”

According to some historians, the Decree on Uniform Succession was created in order to attract the nobles to the service. But despite this, Peter was constantly faced with an unwillingness to serve. This is explained by the fact that service under this emperor was not only obligatory, but also indefinite, for life. Every now and then, Peter received news of dozens and hundreds of nobles hiding from service or study on their estates. In the fight against this phenomenon, Peter was merciless. So, in the decree to the Senate it was said: "Whoever hides from the service, will announce to the people, whoever finds or announces such, give all the villages of the one who was guarded." Peter fought not only with punishments, but also by legislatively creating a new system of service. Peter I considered the professional training of a nobleman, his education, to be the most important sign of fitness for service. In January 1714, there was a ban on marrying noble offspring who did not have at least a primary education. A nobleman without education was deprived of the opportunity to occupy command positions in the army and leadership in civil administration. Peter was convinced that a noble origin could not be the basis for a successful career, so in February 1712 it was ordered not to promote nobles who did not serve as soldiers, that is, who did not receive the necessary training, as officers. Peter's attitude to the problem of the relationship of various social groups between themselves and the state was fully manifested in the course of the tax reform that began in 1718. Almost from the very beginning, the nobility was exempted from taxation, which legally secured one of its most important privileges. But even here problems arose, since it was not so easy to distinguish a nobleman from a non-nobleman. In the pre-Petrine era, there was no practice of awarding the nobility with the accompanying legal and documentary registration. Thus, in practice, the main sign of belonging to the nobility in the course of the tax reform was the real official position, i.e. service in the army as an officer or in the civil service at a fairly high position, as well as the presence of an estate with serfs.

Another important event of Peter I was the adoption on January 24, 1722 of the "Table of Ranks". Peter personally took part in editing this decree, which was based on borrowings from the "schedules of ranks" of the French, Prussian, Swedish and Danish kingdoms. All the ranks of the "Table of Ranks" were divided into three types: military, civilian (civil) and courtiers and were divided into fourteen classes. Each class was assigned its own rank. Chin - official and social position established in civil and military service. Although some historians considered the rank as a position. Petrovsky "Table", determining a place in the hierarchy of the civil service, to some extent made it possible for talented people from the lower classes to advance. All those who have received the first 8 ranks in the state or court department are ranked as hereditary nobility, “even if they were of low breed”, i.e. regardless of their origin. In military service, this title was given at the rank of the lowest XIV class. Thus, Peter I expressed his preference for military service over civilian. Moreover, the title of nobility applies only to children born after the father has received this rank; if, upon receiving the rank of children, he will not be born, he can ask for the grant of nobility to one of his previously born children. With the introduction of the table of ranks, the ancient Russian ranks - boyars, okolnichy and others - were not formally abolished, but the award to these ranks ceased. The publication of the report card had a significant impact on both the official routine and the historical fate of the nobility. The only regulator of service was personal length of service; "father's honor", the breed, has lost all meaning in this respect. Military service was separated from civil and court service. The acquisition of the nobility by the length of service of a certain rank and the grant of the monarch was legalized, which influenced the democratization of the noble class, the consolidation of the service nature of the nobility and the stratification of the noble mass into new groups - the hereditary and personal nobility.

1.2 Nobility in the era of palace coups

The era of palace coups is usually called the period from 1725 to 1762, when in the Russian Empire the supreme power passed to another ruler mainly through coups that were carried out by noble groups with the support and direct participation of the guard. During these four decades, eight rulers have changed on the throne.

Despite the frequent change of monarchs, the main line of government policy is clearly visible - the further strengthening of the position of the nobility. In one government decree, the nobility was called “the main member of the state.” The Russian nobility received benefits after benefits. Now the officer rank of noble children grew up with the children themselves: having reached adulthood, they automatically became officers. The term of service for the nobles was limited to 25 years. Nobles received the right not to serve at all, vacations of nobles to manage their estates became more frequent. All restrictions on any transactions with noble estates were canceled. Those nobles who actively contributed to the establishment of any reigning person on the throne were gratuitously complained of land, peasants and state-owned factories. received the exclusive right to distillation.In the interests of the nobility, the collection of internal customs duties was abolished.

During the reign of Catherine I, the Supreme Privy Council was established (1726). He received great powers: the right to appoint senior officials, manage finances, manage the activities of the Senate, the Synod and collegiums. It included the most prominent representatives of the old noble families, such as Menshikov, Tolstoy, Golovkin, Apraksin, Osterman and Golitsyn. After the death of Catherine I, it was this Council that decided to invite the Russian Duchess of Courland Anna Ivanovna to the throne. Its members sent her "conditions" (conditions) designed to limit the autocratic royal power. According to the "conditions", the future empress was obliged, without the consent of the Supreme Privy Council, not to appoint senior officials, not to resolve issues of war and peace, not to manage public finances, etc. Only after Anna signed them, she was allowed to take the throne. However, no matter how hard the leaders tried to hide their plan to limit the royal power, this became known to the broad layers of the nobility, which had already received so much from this power and hoped to receive even more. A broad opposition movement unfolded among the nobility. Conditions limited the autocracy, but not in the interests of the nobility, but in favor of its aristocratic elite, which sat in the Supreme Privy Council. The mood of the ordinary gentry was well conveyed in one of the notes that went from hand to hand: "God save that instead of one autocratic sovereign, ten autocratic and strong families do not become!" At a reception at the Empress's on February 25, 1730, the opposition directly turned to Anna with a request to accept the throne as it is, and to destroy the conditions sent by the Supreme Privy Council. After that, the Empress publicly tore the document and threw it on the floor. The guards were on the alert here too, expressing their full approval of the preservation of autocratic tsarist power. The reign of Empress Anna lasted 10 years (1730-1740). At this time, many German nobles arrived in Russia, and the complete dominance of foreigners was established in the country. The Empress relied on her favorite, Biron, in everything. This time was dubbed "Bironism", because Biron, a greedy and mediocre man, personified all the dark sides of the rulers of that time: unrestrained arbitrariness, embezzlement, senseless cruelty. The problem of "Bironism" has attracted the attention of historians more than once. There are still conflicting assessments of the state activities of Anna Ivanovna. Some historians say that it was during her reign that "the Germans poured into Russia like rubbish from a holey bag", others agree that foreigners appeared in Russia long before Anna's reign, and their number was never frightening for the Russian people . Foreign specialists came to work in Russia even before Peter the Great. Many of Anna Ivanovna's orders were not aimed at protecting the interests of foreigners, but, on the contrary, defended the honor of Russians. So, for example, it was under Anna that the difference in salaries was eliminated: foreigners stopped receiving twice as much as Russians. Thus, "Bironism" did not put foreigners in any special conditions. The Russian nobles were not worried about the "dominance of foreigners", but the strengthening under Anna Ioannovna of the uncontrolled power of both foreign and Russian "strong people", the oligarchic claims of part of the nobility. At the center of the struggle that went on within the nobility, therefore, was not the national, but the political question. Anna Ivanovna herself took an active part in government. During her reign, the right to dispose of estates was returned to the nobility, which allowed, upon inheritance, to divide their estates among all children. From now on, all estates were recognized as the full property of their owners. The collection of the poll tax from the serfs was transferred to their owners. In 1731, the government of Anna Ivanovna responded to the numerous demands of the nobility by establishing a Military Commission, which, with the Manifesto of 1736, limited the term of service to 25 years. In addition, a nobleman who had several sons had the right to leave one of them to manage the estate, thereby freeing him from service.

Thus, we can conclude that, in general, the absolutist state pursued a pro-noble policy, making the nobility its social support.

Important transformations in the sphere of the nobility took place during the reign of Elizabeth Petrovna - 1741 - 1761. After Peter, by the time of Elizabeth, the conditions of life were improved for the nobility: the obligations to the state were facilitated, the restrictions that lay on its property rights were eliminated, and the nobility received greater power than before over the peasants. Under Elizabeth, the successes of the nobility continued both in the sphere of its property rights and in relation to the peasants. Only long-term compulsory service remained unchanged. In 1746, Elizabeth's decree appeared, forbidding anyone, except the nobles, to buy peasants. Thus, one nobility could have peasants and real estates. This right, having been assigned to only one class, now turned into a class privilege, a sharp line separating the privileged nobleman from people of the lower classes. Having granted this privilege to the nobility, the government of Elizabeth, naturally, began to take care that the privileged position was enjoyed by persons only by right and deservedly. Hence a number of government concerns about how to define more clearly and close the noble class. From the time of Peter the nobility began to be divided into hereditary and personal. By the decrees of Elizabeth, the personal nobility, i.e. those who reached the title of nobility by their own merits were deprived of the right to buy people and land. This prevented the possibility for the personal nobility to enjoy the benefits of the hereditary nobility. Nobles by birth became separate from the nobles by service. But from the environment of the nobility, who enjoyed all the rights and benefits, the government sought to withdraw all those people whose noble origin was doubtful. Only those who could prove their nobility began to be considered a nobleman. With all these measures, Elizabeth turned the nobility from an estate, the hallmark of which was state duties, began to turn into an estate, the distinction of which was made special exclusive rights: ownership of land and people. In other words, the nobility became a privileged estate in the state, hereditary and closed. This was a very important step in the historical development of the Russian nobility. However, the time has not yet come for the release of the nobles from compulsory service. Until now, the desire to avoid service in any way has not diminished. This was the reason for Elizabeth's refusal to reduce the service life and its cancellation. Since there was a threat to be left without employees. The establishment of the Noble Bank in 1754 should also be noted. This bank provided the nobility with an inexpensive loan (6% per year) in fairly large amounts (up to 10,000 rubles) secured by precious metals, stones, and estates. To simplify the procedure for assessing the property of a nobleman, it was customary to take into account not the size of the estate or the area of arable land, but the number of serf souls. One male soul was valued at 10 rubles. Of course, the creation of the Noble Bank was seen as a way to stimulate trade and support the nobility. However, in fact, the establishment of this bank became a new milestone in the development of the institution of serfdom. The nobility acquired another form of disposition of the serfs, and the state legally established the monetary equivalent of the peasant soul. The following year, 1755, another important event took place - the introduction of a noble monopoly on distillation. The implementation of this reform was due to the intensification of competition between the nobility and the merchant class. The concentration of the financially most important sector of the economy in the hands of the nobility was a serious concession to him from the state.

After the death of Elizabeth Petrovna, Peter III took the throne on completely legal grounds. One of the most significant legislative acts of his short reign was the Manifesto on the Granting of Liberty and Freedom to the Russian Nobility, published on February 18, 1762. The appearance of this Manifesto meant a decisive victory for the nobility in the struggle against the state for the acquisition of their class rights. For the first time, a truly free social category appeared in Russia. The legal base of the nobility was replenished with the most important act, which formulated its class privileges. This was of paramount importance for the process of consolidating the nobility as an estate, the formation of its estate self-awareness. By issuing this document, the state recognized that it did not have full power over all subjects, and for some of them it acts as a partner with whom contractual relations are possible. The immediate consequence of the appearance of this Manifesto is the massive exodus of nobles from military service. According to I.V. Faizova, during the first 10 years of this act, about 6 thousand nobles retired from the army. The publication of this legislative act, containing the rights and privileges of the nobility, sharply separated it from the rest of society. In addition, its introduction meant the destruction of the centuries-old hierarchy of all social groups and the expansion of the social gap between the higher and the lower. Thus, the Manifesto on the Liberty of the Nobility essentially brought about a kind of revolution, a revolution in the entire system of social relations. Russian state.

2. Nobles in the second half of the 18th century

2.1 1762-1785

This chapter covers two-thirds of the reign of Catherine II, Catherine the Great. This period of her reign is characterized by active internal politics consisting in the implementation of a large number of important reforms. Among them are the Senate Reform of 1763, the creation in 1765 of the Free Economic Society - the first public organization in Russia, the Provincial Reform of 1775. Based on the principles of the Enlightenment, Catherine the Great paid much attention to the court and legal proceedings, education. Codification of laws by the Legislative Commission of 1767-1768. - one of the most striking episodes not only of Catherine's reign, but of the entire history of Russia in the 18th century.

Speaking of domestic politics At this time, it should be noted that the interests of the state, and not of any class, were taken into account first of all during the transformations. So, many historians talk about the pro-noble nature of the Provincial reform, referring to the fact that Catherine took into account the desire of the nobility to take control of the localities into their own hands. Indeed, a number of posts in local government - zemstvo judges, county police captains and others - were replaced by elected from local nobles. In addition, the position of the district marshal of the nobility was legalized. All these actions, of course, were of a pro-noble nature, however, upon careful analysis, one can see that, in satisfying the wishes of the upper class, Catherine II, first of all, thought about the interests of the state. The noble class organization was integrated into the state apparatus and became part of it. As a result, the real independence of local governments was largely imaginary. The nobles elected to the position became, in fact, government officials who carried out the policy of the center on the ground.

In parallel with the reforms of the 1780s in the field of administration and education, important transformations were carried out in the estate sphere. On April 21, 1785, two important legislative acts appeared

Catherine II - Letters of grant to the nobility and cities. The main purpose of their creation is the design of estate legislation and the design of the estate organization of society. The name “Letter of Complaint” was not accidental, since it was really about the granting of rights and liberties by the highest authority. With their help, the empress established vassal-suzerain relations between the throne and the nobility. “The Charter for the rights, liberties and advantages of the noble Russian nobility” is a document that combined all the privileges of the nobility given to him by Catherine's predecessors and consolidated his dominant position in politics and economy. For the first time, the right to organize noble assemblies in governorates, provinces and districts was granted. The main purpose of their activities was to consolidate and defend noble privileges at the local level, resolve disputes, etc. Election to the governing structures of the noble assemblies was limited for those elected by age (not younger than 25 years old) and state (income from the villages could not be less than 100 rubles).

In accordance with this Charter, the nobility was granted special benefits in comparison with other estates - freedom from compulsory service, the right to own serfs and land within their possessions. The nobles could organize manufactories, engage in industrial production and trade, while they were exempted from paying taxes. The first article of the granted Diploma read: "The title of nobility is a consequence of the qualities and virtues acquired by ancient men, from the merits that turn the clan into dignity and acquire the title of noble for their offspring." It followed from this that a nobleman, marrying a non-noblewoman, communicates his title to her and her children. At the same time, the Letter of Complaint recognizes that a noblewoman, having married a non-nobleman, does not lose her title, but does not pass it on either to her husband or children. A nobleman, while he is such, cannot be subjected to corporal punishment or deprivation of honor without a trial, in which he must be judged by his equals. Catherine also approved for the nobles the right to serve and the opportunity to ask for resignation, they have the right to enter the service of friendly foreign sovereigns, but if the state needs it, every nobleman is obliged to return at the first request of the authorities. Then Catherine confirmed the right of the nobles to freely dispose of their acquired estates and established that hereditary estates are not subject to confiscation, but are inherited. Fulfilling the desires of the nobles, the Diploma confirmed their rights to the bowels of the earth. In addition, a number of restrictions were removed from the noble forests, which lay on them under the decrees of Peter I, who forbade cutting oaks and pines of a certain size in order to save the mast forest. In addition, the nobles through the deputies have the right to file complaints to the Senate and directly to the sovereign. The nobility of each province has the right to have its own house, archive, its own seal, its own secretary and, with its voluntary contributions, to form a special treasury. Wanting to separate the nobility from the rest of the classes, Catherine allowed the nobles to have their own genealogical book in each county, which should be kept by an elected deputy. This deputy, together with the marshal of the nobility, must take care of compiling and replenishing the noble genealogy book. It is necessary to record nobles who have real estate in the county and can prove their right to a noble title. The genealogical book was supposed to consist of 6 parts. The first part includes actual nobles, that is, those who have been granted nobles thanks to the coat of arms, seal, and whose family has existed for more than 100 years. The second part includes those nobles and their descendants who were descendants of chief officers elevated to the noble title according to the "Table of Ranks" of Peter I. The third part consists of clans that were descendants of officials who fell into the nobility according to the "Table of Ranks" » Peter the Great. The fourth part recorded foreign noble families who moved to serve in Russia. The fifth part was made up of titled noble families - princes, counts, barons. The sixth part, the most honorable, included the ancient, most noble noble families, who led their genealogical tree from the 17th and even XVI century. Thus, Catherine II satisfied the desire of the nobility to have a certain differentiation in their environment. All those entered in the genealogical book received the right to attend the meetings of the nobility.

The "Charter granted to the nobility" of 1785 was the climax that completed the consolidation and socio-political elevation of the nobility. The nobility now became a free social class, a privileged class, which had a number of guarantees in relation to the supreme power and its representatives. In the history of civil development, the Letter of Complaint was the first step towards the emancipation of the individual enslaved by the state, the recognition of human rights, the right of self-determination, regardless of the orders and discretion of the state power. From this point of view, the meaning of the “Charter to the Nobility” is much broader than its direct purpose. It was an indicator of the new direction of the Russian public, awakened the hope that after the granting of rights to one class, rights would be given to other classes of Russian society.

3. Russian nobility in con. 18th century - first floor. 19th century

3.1 1796-1861

This chapter reflects the rule of three Russian emperors: Paul I, Alexander I and Nicholas I. Three dissimilar reigns: Paul's counter-reforms, Alexander's cautious policy, the reign of Nicholas, which began with the Uprising on Senate Square.

3.2 Nobility under Paul I

In 1796, after the death of Catherine the Great, Paul I took the throne. In the very first months, a counter-reformist trend appeared, directed against the transformations of his predecessor. Because of the conflict with his mother, he considered all her reforms harmful and deserving of destruction.

Almost with the very first decrees, Paul tried to destroy the system of power created by Catherine. He restored the colleges abolished during the provincial reform, and they were supposed to have the same status as before 1775, but taking into account what was included in the letters of 1785. Decrees of 1798 - 1799, in fact, destroyed estate self-government in cities and provinces, limited the rights of county noble assemblies. The charters granted to the nobility and cities of 1785 were cancelled. Considering the nobility as an estate whose main business is to serve the monarch, Paul limited class privileges for non-serving nobles. The nobility even lost their freedom from corporal punishment.

The inconsistency of the policy towards the peasantry also manifested itself at the very beginning of the reign. “We command that all peasants belonging to the landowners, calmly remaining in their former rank, be obedient to their landowners in quitrents, work and, in a word, all kinds of peasant duties,” Paul wrote in the Manifesto of 1797. He was convinced that the landlords take better care of their peasants than the state. Therefore, there was a mass distribution of peasants into private hands. According to some reports, during his reign, about 600 thousand peasants were transferred. However, at the same time, Paul I was aware of the danger of an excessive strengthening of the feudal regime. In addition, serfs for him were not just the property of the landowners, but also subjects. This also explains the fact that for the first time in the Russian Empire, serfs took the oath to the new emperor along with freemen. This emphasized that they were, first of all, subjects not of the landowner, but of the tsar. In addition, Paul could not help but understand that the boundlessness and lack of control of the power of the landowners over the serfs lead to increased independence and independence of the nobility from the royal power, which was contrary to his convictions. Already in February 1797, Paul signed a decree banning the sale of peasants at auction without land. This year is also famous for the appearance of the Manifesto on the three-day corvee. This decree has caused a lot of controversy and controversy among historians. So, Semevsky considered it primarily from the point of view of moving towards the elimination of serfdom and therefore believed that "this was the first attempt to limit the duties of serfs." Indeed, the Manifesto was a direct intervention of the state in the relationship of landlords with serfs and an attempt to regulate them. However, in the Manifesto itself, the restriction of corvée to three days is spoken of as a desirable, more rational distribution of working time. As a non-binding wish, the Manifesto considered Klochkov.

The nature of Paul's policy towards the nobility is assessed by historians in different ways. So, Okun was inclined to consider the infringement of the rights of the nobility as insignificant and not of fundamental importance. Eidelman, on the contrary, considered such a policy the reason for Paul's overthrow. But objectively, the policy of Paul I really infringed on the nobility, limited those of its rights that it won in a difficult struggle with the state. In essence, she encroached on the status of the nobility, trying to return it to the state of the time of Peter the Great.

3.3 Nobility under Alexander I

Even before his accession to the throne, Alexander repeatedly spoke of his unwillingness to reign. He resented serfdom, dreamed of abandoning autocratic rule and creating a people's representation in Russia. However, having come to power, Alexander was forced, first of all, to justify the hopes of those Catherine's nobles who overthrew Paul. Alexander declared an amnesty for political prisoners, restored the letters of grant to the nobility and cities, canceled by Paul, thus reviving class self-government. Now again the nobles are allowed to gather every three years in provincial cities for the election of provincial marshals of the nobility. Now it is necessary to restore the compilation of genealogical books of the nobility in each province. The loss of the title of a nobleman could only occur through a court. In 1819, nobles convicted of theft were ordered to be deprived of their nobility, and those found guilty of indecency, drunkenness and gambling card game to bring to justice to deal with them for such acts on the basis of laws. Since 1820, the emperor ordered the nobles, demoted to soldiers with deprivation of the nobility, not to be promoted to officers; thus, a nobleman, deprived of the nobility by a court for a crime, could be restored to noble dignity only with the forgiveness of the emperor. At the end of 1801, a decree was issued allowing non-nobles to buy land without peasants. This meant that land ownership was no longer a noble privilege. But still it was a half-measure that had no effect on the position of the peasants. In addition, there were few uninhabited lands in European Russia. Basically, this decree affected merchants who bought land for the construction of commercial and industrial establishments. Only in 1803 was an important step taken in the peasant question: the Decree on free cultivators appeared. The landowners received the right to release their peasants into the wild, providing them with land for ransom. Each such transaction was subject to approval by the emperor. The peasants who went free formed a new estate - free cultivators. The implementation of this decree should not have caused discontent of the nobles, since the initiative in the issue of peasant liberation remained with them. At the same time, by adopting such a decree, the authorities let the nobility understand their positive attitude towards the liberation of the serfs. However, this decree did not have great practical consequences: during the entire reign of Alexander I, only 47 thousand serf souls were released into the wild, i.e. less than 0.5% of their total number. A new stage in the preparation of reforms began in 1809, when M.M. Speransky. He was a supporter of constitutional monarchy and the separation of powers. A project was developed according to which the entire population of Russia was supposed to be divided into three classes: the nobility, the middle class (merchants, petty bourgeois, state peasants) and the working people (serfs and persons working for hire: worker, servant). Only the first two estates were to receive voting rights, moreover, on the basis of a property qualification. However, civil rights were granted to all subjects of the empire, including serfs. In an effort to ease the dissatisfaction of the nobility, Speransky did not include in the project the demands for the liberation of the peasants, but the very nature of the proposed changes made the destruction of serfdom inevitable. Speransky said: “Serfdom to such an extent contradicts common sense that it can only be regarded as a temporary evil, which must inevitably have its end. The extreme dissatisfaction of the aristocracy was caused by Speransky's intention to abolish the assignment of ranks to persons with court ranks. All who were formally at the court, but did not serve, had to choose a service for themselves or lose their ranks. The high position at court no longer allowed him to hold important public positions. The officials were even more outraged by Speransky's intention to introduce an educational qualification in the civil service. All officials of rank VIII and above had to pass exams or submit a certificate of completion of a university course. In addition, in the aristocratic environment, Speransky was considered an outsider, an upstart. His projects seemed dangerous, too radical, they were seen as a threat to the abolition of serfdom. Speransky was accused of revolutionary plans and espionage. Under the threat of a noble rebellion, Alexander I sacrificed Speransky. In March 1812, Speransky was dismissed and exiled to Nizhny Novgorod. The most significant attempt in Russian history to move from autocracy to a constitutional monarchy failed.

3.3 Nobility under Nicholas I

The beginning of the reign of Nicholas I was marked by important event in social and political life Russia - the uprising of the Decembrists on Senate Square on December 14, 1825.

The main reason for this speech was that the feudal-serf system in Russia at the beginning of the 19th century was a brake on the development of productive forces and the country's historical progress. Inside the old system, a new, more progressive, capitalist one was maturing. The best people Russia, representatives of the upper class understood that the preservation of serfdom and autocracy is disastrous for further fate countries. Another reason is the intensification of government reaction, as the last means of the autocratic-feudal regime to support and preserve the decaying feudal system. The third reason was the general deterioration in the condition of the masses. Many provinces were ruined. Returning to their estates, the nobles increased oppression, trying to improve their own financial situation at the expense of the peasantry. This caused famine, the impoverishment of the village. The situation was difficult not only for private owners, but also for state peasants. Abuses of officials grew every year. The intensification of exploitation led to an increase in discontent among working people in many provinces and factories. The unrest of the peasants and working people was often suppressed with the help of military force. However, the events of the 1920s showed the government that it could not always count on the loyalty of its troops. The cruel regime led to the fact that discontent began to grow among the troops and even in the guard, the most reliable part of the army, made up of representatives of the nobility. One of the biggest unrest was the performance in 1820 of the Guards Semenovsky Regiment. Driven to despair by the arbitrariness of command, the regiment fell out of obedience. The speech was suppressed, and the regiment was reorganized. All this indicated that the government policy did not find support either among advanced educated people or among the broad masses of the people: peasants, working people and soldiers. The class struggle was another reason for the rise of the anti-serfdom ideology and the revolutionary movement.

Objectively, the movement of noble revolutionaries had an anti-feudal, bourgeois character. Their main demands - the abolition of serfdom and autocracy - were the slogans of the bourgeois revolution. Their victory would create all conditions for the development of capitalist relations. The peculiarity of this movement in Russia was that the idea of bourgeois development was expressed not by the bourgeoisie, but by representatives of the nobility, who went over to revolutionary positions and broke with their class. However, the fear of popular scale forced the nobility to act in small associations, which was the greatest drawback of the anti-feudal movement.

After the death of Alexander I, a situation of interregnum developed in Russia, caused by the refusal of the heir to accept the throne. The leaders of the Northern Society decided to take advantage of this in order to carry out a coup d'état. In a difficult political situation, they demonstrated genuine revolutionary spirit, a willingness to sacrifice everything to implement the plan state structure Russia. On December 13, 1825, the last meeting of the members of this society took place at Ryleev's apartment. They decided to withdraw the troops of the Petersburg garrison to Senate Square and force them not to swear allegiance to Nicholas, but to accept the "Manifesto to the Russian people." The Manifesto is the most important final program document of the Decembrists. It proclaimed the destruction of the autocracy, serfdom, estates, recruitment and military settlements, the introduction of broad democratic freedoms. However, by the time the rebels appeared on the square, it turned out that early in the morning the Senate had already sworn allegiance to Nicholas, after which the senators dispersed. A situation arose in which there was simply no one to present the Manifesto to. Trubetskoy, having learned about this, did not join the rebels, and the uprising was left without leadership for a while. These circumstances gave rise to vacillations in the ranks of the Decembrists and doomed them to senseless tactics of waiting. This confusion actually led to a violent suppression of this performance.

Despite the defeat, the Decembrist movement was of great historical significance. It was the first open revolutionary action in Russia against autocracy and serfdom.

The activity of noble revolutionaries was of great importance for the development of progressive Russian social and political thought. Their anti-autocratic, anti-serfdom ideas and slogans were supported by their successors. The demands of the noble revolutionaries - to abolish serfdom, abolish autocracy, and grant the people wide democratic freedoms - reflected the urgent needs of the economic and socio-political transformation of Russia.

3.4 Noble society on the eve of the abolition of serfdom

The Russian nobility was not homogeneous in composition and social status. In 1858 - 1859. In Russia, there were about one million members of the nobility. About 35% of them belonged to the personal nobility, who were forbidden to own serfs without special permission. The largest number of landowners - more than 75% - consisted of the small landed nobility, more than 20% - from the middle landowners, and only 3% of the landowners constituted the category of large landed nobility. Small local nobles had less than 20 male souls. According to Senator Ya.A. Solovyov, "there were enough such families, they and their peasants make up one family, eat at the same table and live in the same hut." It is clear that these nobles set other goals than the owners of thousands of peasants. They could not reach any government posts, and the laws were against them. Indeed, in order to qualify for a place in the state hierarchy, it was necessary to have at least 100 souls. It can be assumed that, exploiting their small peasants even to the maximum extent, the nobility did not have enough to live on. The possibility of a comfortable existence was provided only by the public service, on which the majority of the nobles depended. Such a strong heterogeneity of the nobility is connected, first of all, with the fragmentation of land allotments during inheritance, which led to the dispossession of land and the inability to buy both land and peasants. Of course, for the rich heirs of a rich father, such a problem did not exist. The figures show that 98% of the nobles either did not have serfs at all, or had so few of them that peasant labor and dues did not provide them with a comfortable standard of living. These people, unless they were supported by relatives or patrons, had to rely on the generosity of the state. If the poor, landless nobles expected posts from the monarchy, then the wealthy owners of estates expected from it the preservation of serfdom.

In order to abolish serfdom, several projects were developed. Among the proposed projects, serfdom prevailed, i.e. filed by that part of the nobility that did not want significant changes in the countryside, and if it was still impossible to do without them, then, in their opinion, it should be limited to insignificant ones. This approach was similar to simply delaying the cause of the liberation of the peasants. So, the nobles of the capital Petersburg province proposed to free the peasants without land, which would remain the property of the landowner. But such a decision clearly gave rise to many economic problems. The peasants would be left without a livelihood. Peasants without land, moreover, would not pay the poll tax. And it is not known what social explosions the landlessness of the peasants could lead to, because, according to their traditional ideas, the land on which they worked was not the landowner's, but their own - the peasant's.

The Tver nobility submitted more realistic proposals. The peasants were offered to be given land, but for a ransom. To a certain extent, cash receipts could compensate the landowners for the lost land and human resources. In order to alleviate the tension between the landlords and peasants in the sphere of financial relations, state assistance was provided, which was supposed to provide the peasants with a loan. A similar project on the transformation of peasants from private to small landowners while maintaining large landownership was drawn up by the director of the economic department of the Ministry of Internal Affairs N.A. Milyutin, but in 1856 these proposals were rejected. However, two years later, the development of the reform took exactly this path. Many landlords were simply perplexed, looking at the events taking place. If there is any order in the country, then with the abolition of serfdom it will be completely destroyed, they believed. Most of all dissatisfied landowners were on the corvee lands of the south of Russia, less - on the quitrent lands of the Russian North. However, hostility to the government's intentions was gradually replaced by constructiveness as the Russian nobles realized the irrevocable nature of the undertaking.

4. Nobility in post-reform Russia

4.1 1861-1904

The social nature of the Russian nobility in the post-reform forty years was determined by the complex processes of the country's socio-economic and political evolution, characteristic of the transitional period of the formation of bourgeois society.

On the one hand, the nobility inherited from the feudal era a significant part of its material base, class privileges, and most importantly, it retained its dominant political positions, retaining power in its hands. This allowed him to take a special place in the socio-political structure of post-reform Russia. Even after the abolition of serfdom, the autocracy tried in every way to preserve the nobility in a form as close as possible to the pre-reform. As a result of the measures taken, the nobility, if not able to fully restore partly lost positions, still formally and actually retained the status of the first estate.

However, on the other hand, a number of circumstances caused by Russia's entry into the era of capitalism could not but leave their mark on the nobility. The abolition of serfdom entailed the elimination of the legal dependence of the peasants on the landowners and the modernization of the entire system of production and legal relations. The noble land fund, by the end of this period, decreased by more than 40%. Only 30-40% of the entire class was provided with land, which was the basis for the well-being of the nobility. The source of income for most of the class is the public service and entrepreneurship. All this increased the heterogeneity of the upper class. There was an increase in the isolation of personal nobles from hereditary ones. Part of the nobles lost the opportunity to enjoy estate advantages, since this depended on the material well-being of the nobleman.

The legal status of the Russian nobleman and the nature of the upper class in the post-reform four decades have undergone significant evolution. Formally, a number of the most important provisions of the old legislation, which determined the socio-economic and political status of the ruling class, passed into the capitalist era. Thus, confirming the political significance of the nobility, the law still classified it as "the first pillar of the throne", as "one of the most reliable tools of the government." As before, it paid great attention to the service rights of the nobles. The very personality of a representative of the upper class was protected from administrative arbitrariness and various encroachments by providing certain guarantees. So, the nobleman was subject to criminal and civil prosecution only in court, was released from corporal punishment. The verdict on the deprivation of the title of nobility was considered personally by the emperor.

The abolition of serfdom and the associated exclusive privileges of landowners in land ownership and certain industries led to the drawing of noble lands into the sphere of commodity circulation, the loss of the estate's monopoly position in various industries.

Most of the "serving" nobles lose touch with land ownership, and salaries become the main source of livelihood. As a result, in socio-economic terms, they are increasingly separated from the local nobility. A special layer was represented by the "urban" nobles, who finally broke with agriculture and were drawn into various spheres of private business.

However, it would be wrong on this basis to draw a conclusion about the loss of the dominant class positions by the nobility, which the liberals did, trying to underestimate its role in the political and economic life of the country. The local nobility, remaining the core of the class, retained in their hands a huge land area, which accounted for 60% of all private land ownership. The upper class retained commanding positions in the state apparatus, as well as an influential position in the court departments and in palace circles, exerting a decisive influence on the appearance and nature of the Russian bureaucracy.

The number of the upper class in the post-reform era increased significantly. An analysis of noble genealogical books and lists shows that the majority of the estate was made up of the so-called new nobles, who owed their estate position entirely to the authorities. This circumstance had important consequences for the formation of noble psychology. The nobility to an even greater extent became, in the words of historians and publicists, "a state-regulated estate." The policy of the autocracy in this matter was rather contradictory. On the one hand, it was afraid of an excessive influx of people from other classes into the nobility. On the other hand, the expansion of the state apparatus required new personnel, a certain part of which merged with the nobility due to their position. However, in the course of this confrontation, the second tendency invariably won.

Conclusion

In the 18th century, Russia made significant progress along the path of modernization and Europeanization of its political and social structures. The main direction of the social policy of all successive monarchs and their governments was the creation of a new ruling stratum - the nobility, which absorbed the previous privileged strata, but differed from them in greater unification, the degree of connection with the public service. The basis of this process was the further strengthening of noble land ownership. In the era of Peter the Great's transformations, landownership of the nobility continued to increase due to the distribution of land with the peasants. In 1714, with the issuance of a decree on single inheritance, the legal differences between the two types of property - the estate and the patrimony - were actually abolished. Instead of these ancient concepts, a new concept was introduced - real estate. In order to avoid fragmentation of land holdings, by decree it was allowed to transfer them by inheritance to only one son, movable property was divided among the rest of the heirs. Tradition in the system of noble landownership was preserved in the form of an inseparable connection between landownership and noble rank and service. The state also retained the right to confiscate estates from the nobles in case of their bad attitude towards service, for committing a crime, etc.

Autocratic power after Peter the Great attached special importance to the nobility in domestic politics, which turned the nobility from a service class into a noble and most privileged part of the population. In 1730, in accordance with the interests of the nobility, Anna Ivanovna canceled the decree on single inheritance. In December 1736, a decree was issued limiting the compulsory service of the nobles to 25 years. The decrees of Anna Ivanovna had a beneficial effect on the strengthening of noble self-awareness, the formation of truly estate ideas of the Russian nobility about their place in society. The "golden age" of the nobility fell on the second half of the century - the Catherine's era. On April 21, 1785, Catherine II signed the Letter of Complaint to the nobility. In this document, the structure of the nobility acquired a completed form, the rights and privileges of the nobility were finally determined. The nobles were exempted from compulsory service, corporal punishment, confiscations, they could not be deprived of titles and rights without a verdict of a noble court, approved by the supreme imperial authority. In addition to county noble assemblies, the Letter of Complaint provided for the appearance of provincial noble assemblies, at which provincial marshals of the nobility should be selected. The strengthening of serfdom by the end of the century, which actually turned the peasants in the noble estates into slaves, created optimal conditions for the representatives of the noble class for administrative activities.

This situation continued into the 19th century. The first estate in Russia was still the nobility. By the middle of the 19th century, the nobility increased numerically, but a process of differentiation was outlined in it - the large landed nobility was strengthened, and the small landed nobility was ruined. The abolition of serfdom dealt a blow to noble land ownership. The autocratic government tried to support the landowners: various laws were adopted, the Noble Land Bank was established to provide financial assistance to the landowners in the new conditions of capitalist development. But, despite all the efforts of the government, the economic power gradually thawed. Following the loss of economic power, the nobility also lost its monopoly on power. But this process was slow - the nobles still enjoyed great influence in local government - provincial and district zemstvos, city dumas, were appointed heads of provinces and districts. They also preserved corporate organizations - provincial and district noble assemblies.

List of used literature

1. Anisimov E.V. Russia in the middle of the XVIII century. The struggle for the legacy of Peter I - M., 1986.

2. Kamensky A.B. From Peter I to Paul I - M .: Publishing House of the Russian State Humanitarian University, 2001.

3. Korelin A.P. The nobility in post-reform Russia 1861-1904: composition, number, corporate organization - M .: Nauka, 1979.

4. Mironenko S.V. Autocracy and reforms. Political struggle in Russia at the beginning of the XIX century - M., 1989.

5. Troitsky S.M. Russia in the 18th century - M.: Nauka, 1982.