Economic results of Alexander's reign 2. Reasons for the reforms of Alexander II. The main provisions of the peasant reform

The reforms of Alexander II were an attempt by the Russian authorities to bring the order of the Russian Empire in line with the realities of the 19th century. Indeed, at a time when Russia remained a semi-feudal power, the industrial revolution was in full swing in Europe: railways were built, electricity and steam power were introduced everywhere in everyday life and industry. Social relations developed in the direction of liberalism

By the middle of the 19th century, Russia moved to eighth place in metal smelting. England outnumbered it 12 times.
By the middle of the century, Russia had 1.5 thousand km. railway tracks, while in England there were 15 thousand km.
The average harvest in Russia is 4.63 quarters per tithe, in France - 7.36 quarters, in Austria - 6.6
In 1861, there were about 2 million mechanical spindles and about 15 thousand mechanical looms in the Russian cotton industry. In England, by 1834, over 8 million mechanical spindles, 110 thousand mechanical looms and 250 thousand hand looms were working in the cotton industry.

Brief biography of Alexander II

1818, April 17 - birth
1825, December 12 - declared heir to the throne.
1826 - V. A. Zhukovsky was appointed mentor to the heir, who in the same year developed a 10-year plan for the education of Alexander Nikolaevich.
1834, April 17 - Alexander, on the day of his majority, took the oath of allegiance to the emperor
1837, May 2-December 10 - Alexander Nikolaevich traveled around Russia, during which he visited 29 provinces of the empire
1838-1839, May 2-June 23 - travel abroad, summing up Alexander's training
1841, April 16 - wedding of Alexander Nikolaevich and Princess Maria Alexandrovna of Hesse-Darmstadt
1842, August 18 - birth of daughter Alexandra (died in 1849)
1839-1842 - Alexander became a member of the State Council and the Committee of Ministers
1843, September 8 - birth of son Nicholas (died 1865)
1845, February 26 - birth of the son Alexander, the future emperor (died in 1894)
1847, April 10 - birth of son Vladimir (died 1909)
1850, January 2 - son Alexey was born (died in 1908)
1852 - appointed commander-in-chief of the Guards and Grenadier Corps
1853, October 17 - daughter Maria was born, died in 1920
1855, February 18 - death
1855, February 19 - accession to the Russian throne of Emperor Alexander II
1856, August 26 - coronation of Alexander II in Moscow
1857, April 29 - son Sergei was born, died in 1905
1860, September 21 - son Pavel was born, died in 1919
1861, February 19 - Alexander II signed the Manifesto and Regulations on the liberation of peasants from serfdom
1865, April 12 - death of the heir to the throne, Grand Duke Nikolai Alexandrovich and proclamation of Grand Duke Alexander Alexandrovich as heir
1866, April 4 - attempt by D. Karakozov on the life of Alexander II
1867, May 25 - attempt by A. Berezovsky on the life of Alexander II
1879, April 2 - attempt by A. Solovyov on the life of Alexander II
1879, November 19 - explosion of the royal train near Moscow
1880, February 12 - explosion of the royal dining room in the Winter Palace
1880, February 19 - celebration of the 25th anniversary of the accession to the throne of Alexander II.
1880, May 22 - death of Empress Maria Alexandrovna.
1880, July 6 - marriage of Alexander II to E. M. Dolgorukaya-Yuryevskaya.
1881 March 1 - death of Alexander II at the hands of terrorists from the organization

On February 18, 1855, Emperor Nicholas I died. The Russian throne was taken by his son Alexander (II). The Crimean War was still ongoing, but its unsuccessful course increasingly confirmed Russian society in the idea that the country was lagging behind the West in its development and that radical reforms of the entire structure of Russian life were required. The initiator of the reforms was Emperor Alexander II

Reasons for the reforms of Alexander II

The existence of serfdom, which hampered the economic development of Russia
Defeat in
Lack of opportunities for the classes of the Empire to influence the activities of the state

Reforms of Alexander II

Peasant reform. Abolition of serfdom (1861)
Financial reforms (since 1863)
Educational reform (1863)
Zemstvo reform
Urban reform (1864)
Judicial reform (1864)
Military reform (1874)

Peasant reform

Declaring serfs personally free without ransom
The landowners retained a third of the estate in the Non-Black Earth Region and half of the estate in the Black Earth Region.
Land was provided to the peasant community
The peasant received the allotment on the right of use and could not refuse it
According to certain preferential rules, the peasant paid the landowner a ransom for the full allotment
(a peasant could receive 2.5 dessiatines of land without ransom.)
Before the land was redeemed, the peasant was considered “temporarily obligated” to the landowner and was obliged to fulfill the previous duties - corvee and quitrent (abolished in 1882–1887)
The location of peasant plots was determined by the landowner
The peasant received
- personal freedom,
- independence from the landowner;
- the right to move to other classes;
- the right to marry independently;
- freedom of choice of occupation;
- the right to defend one's cases in court.
- make transactions independently
- acquire and dispose of property;
- engage in trade and crafts
- participate in local government elections

Having abolished serfdom, Alexander remained in the history of Russia under the name of the Liberator

Financial reform

It was aimed at streamlining the work of the state’s financial apparatus

The state budget was compiled by the Ministry of Finance, approved by the State Council, and then by the Emperor
The budget began to be published for public review
All ministries were required to prepare annual budgets indicating all expenditure items
State financial control bodies were created - control chambers
Wine taxation was replaced by excise stamps and local excise departments were created to issue excise taxes.
Taxation was divided into indirect taxes and direct taxes

Education reform

A new university charter was adopted, which provided universities with broad autonomy
Regulations on primary schools were adopted
The Charter on secondary educational institutions dividing them into 2 types: classical gymnasiums, their graduates had the right to enter the university without exams; and real schools
A system of women's education has been created: the law on women's schools
A new press law was adopted, which reduced censorship activities

Zemstvo reform. Briefly

Its goal is to replace the bureaucratic management of the territory from the Center with a local government body consisting of residents of a given area, better than anyone familiar with the local realities of life
Elected provincial and district zemstvo assemblies and zemstvo councils were created. They were in charge of local economic affairs: the maintenance of communication routes; construction and maintenance of schools and hospitals; hiring doctors and paramedics; arrangement of courses for training the population; development of local trade and industry; arrangement of grain warehouses; taking care of livestock and poultry farming; levying taxes for local needs, etc.

Urban reform

Pursued the same goals as the zemstvo. In provincial and district cities, city public administrations were organized, which were in charge of economic issues: external improvement of the city, food supply, fire safety, construction of piers, exchanges and credit institutions, etc. The institutions of city self-government meant the city electoral assembly, duma and city council. government

Judicial reform. Briefly

The judicial system under Nicholas the First was irrational and complex. Judges were dependent on the authorities. There was no competition. The right of the parties and defendants to defense was limited. Often judges did not see the defendants at all, but decided the case based on documents drawn up by the court office. The basis for the legal reform of Alexander II was the following provisions:

Independence of the Judiciary
Single court for all classes
Publicity of proceedings
Adversarial proceedings
The right of parties and defendants to defense in court
Openness of all evidence brought against the defendants
The right of the parties and convicted persons to file a cassation appeal;
Abolition of review of cases by a higher authority without complaints from the parties and protest from the prosecutor
Educational and professional qualifications for all judicial officers
Irremovability of judges
Separation of the prosecutor's office from the court
Jury trial for those accused of crimes of medium and great gravity

· Economic development of the country · Foreign policy · Growing public discontent · Awards · Results of the reign · Ancestors · Family · In the eyes of historians and contemporaries · Some monuments to Alexander II · On coins and in philately · In faleristics · Names of geographical objects · Facts · Related articles · Notes · Literature · Official website ·

From the beginning of the 1860s, an economic crisis began in the country, which a number of economic historians associate with Alexander II’s refusal of industrial protectionism and the transition to a liberal policy in foreign trade (while the historian P. Bayrokh sees one of the reasons for the transition to this policy in the defeat of Russia in the Crimean War). Thus, within several years after the introduction of the liberal customs tariff in 1857 (by 1862), cotton processing in Russia fell by 3.5 times, and iron smelting decreased by 25%. But at the same time, the first signs of an economic crisis appeared already in 1859, when a financial crisis began, accompanied by a deterioration in the country’s trade and payments balance.

The liberal policy in foreign trade continued after the introduction of a new customs tariff in 1868. Thus, it was calculated that, compared to 1841, import duties in 1868 decreased on average by more than 10 times, and for some types of imports - even by 20-40 times. According to M. Pokrovsky, “customs tariffs of 1857-1868. were the most preferential that Russia enjoyed in the 19th century...” At the same time, the situation in the country’s economy did not improve: modern economic historians characterize the entire period until the end of the reign of Alexander II and even until the second half of the 1880s. as a period of economic depression.

Evidence of slow industrial growth during this period can be seen in the production of pig iron, the increase of which was only slightly faster than population growth and noticeably lagged behind that of other countries. Thus, over 20 years (from 1855-59 to 1875-79), iron smelting in Russia increased by only 67%, while in Germany it grew by 319% during this time, despite the fact that the population of Russia grew at record highs pace (the increase over the mentioned period was almost 40%). For comparison: over the 20 years that passed after the death of Alexander II (from 1880-1884 to 1900-1904), with the same rate of population growth, pig iron production in Russia increased by 487%, that is, it grew by 7-7. 5 times faster than in the era of Alexander II.

Contrary to the goals declared by the peasant reform of 1861, agricultural productivity in the country did not increase until the 1880s, despite rapid progress in other countries (USA, Western Europe), and the situation in this most important sector of the Russian economy also only worsened. During the reign of Alexander II, famine periodically began, which had not happened in Russia since the time of Catherine II and which took on the character of a real disaster (for example, mass famine in the Volga region in 1873).

As stated in the document released at the end of the 19th century. the work of M. M. Kovalevsky, the liberalization of foreign trade created difficulties for increasing domestic production and led to a sharp increase in imports: from 1851-1856. to 1869-1876 imports increased almost 4 times. If previously Russia's trade balance was always positive, then during the reign of Alexander II it worsened. Beginning in 1871, for several years it was reduced to a deficit, which by 1875 reached a record level of 162 million rubles or 35% of export volume. The trade deficit threatened to cause gold to flow out of the country and depreciate the ruble. At the same time, this deficit could not be explained by the unfavorable situation in foreign markets: for the basic product of Russian exports - grain - prices on foreign markets from 1861 to 1880. increased almost 2 times. During 1877-1881 The government, in order to combat the sharp increase in imports, was forced to resort to a series of increases in import duties, which prevented further growth of imports and improved the country's foreign trade balance.

The only industry that developed rapidly was railway transport: the country's railway network was growing rapidly, which also stimulated its own locomotive and carriage building. However, the development of railways was accompanied by many abuses and a deterioration in the financial situation of the state. Thus, the state guaranteed the newly created private railway companies full coverage of their expenses and also the maintenance of a guaranteed rate of profit through subsidies. The result was huge budget expenditures to support private companies, while the latter artificially inflated their costs in order to receive government subsidies. The government's unpaid obligations to private railway companies in 1871 amounted to 174 million rubles, and a few years later grew to 580 million rubles.

As S. Yu. Witte, who later became Minister of Railways, wrote, the transfer of the railway business under Alexander II into the hands of companies that were private “only in name and not in reality” led to a “completely impossible” situation when the entire loss from the activities of these private companies (more than 40 million rubles per year) “fell on the state treasury, in other words, on the Russian people.” In addition, by the end of his reign, most of these companies were divided between several “railway kings”, which posed a big problem for his successor: “of course, Emperor Alexander III could not help but be shocked by this state of affairs that a kind of special kingdoms, railway ones, in which small railway kings reigned like: Polyakov, Bliokh, Kronenberg, Gubonin, etc., etc.”

To cover budget expenses, the state for the first time began to quickly resort to external loans (under Nicholas I there were almost none). Loans were attracted on extremely unfavorable conditions: bank commissions amounted to up to 10% of the borrowed amount, in addition, loans were placed, as a rule, at a price of 63-67% of their face value. Thus, the treasury received only a little more than half of the loan amount, but the debt arose for the full amount, and annual interest was calculated from the full amount of the loan (7-8% per annum). As a result, the volume of public external debt reached 2.2 billion rubles by 1862, and by the beginning of the 1880s - 5.9 billion rubles.

Until 1858, a fixed exchange rate of the ruble to gold was maintained, following the principles of monetary policy pursued during the reign of Nicholas I. But starting in 1859, credit money was introduced into circulation, which did not have a fixed exchange rate to gold. As indicated in the work of M. Kovalevsky, during the entire period of the 1860-1870s, the state was forced to resort to issuing credit money to cover the budget deficit, which caused its depreciation and the disappearance of metal money from circulation. Thus, by January 1, 1879, the exchange rate of the credit ruble to the gold ruble fell to 0.617. Attempts to reintroduce a fixed exchange rate between the paper ruble and gold did not yield results, and the government abandoned these attempts until the end of the reign of Alexander II.

In 1881, Minister of Internal Affairs N.P. Ignatiev characterized the economic situation of the country as follows: “Industry is in a deplorable state, craft knowledge is not being improved, the factory business is placed in the wrong conditions and suffers a lot from the dominance of the theory of free trade and random patronage of individual enterprises.” " The disappointment in liberal economic policies by the end of the reign of Alexander II was so strong that the list of books banned by his successor (by decree of January 5, 1884), along with the works of Marx, Lassalle and Chernyshevsky, also included the works of Adam Smith.

In general, characterizing the economic policy of Alexander II, M. N. Pokrovsky wrote that it was “a waste of funds and effort, completely fruitless and harmful for the national economy... They simply forgot about the country.” Russian economic reality of the 1860s and 1870s, wrote N. A. Rozhkov, “was distinguished by its crudely predatory character, the waste of living and generally productive forces for the sake of the most basic profit”; The state during this period “essentially served as a tool for the enrichment of the Gründers, speculators, and, in general, the predatory bourgeoisie.”

The problem of corruption

There are a number of opinions of historians and contemporaries and the facts they cite that indicate the growth of corruption during the reign of Alexander II. Thus, the historian P. A. Zayonchkovsky wrote about “massive abuses and thefts” that contributed to “the fall of the authority of the emperor and the entire reigning house.” Corresponding accusations against the government of Alexander II were heard both before and, especially, after his assassination. Thus, in the first days of March 1881, an editorial was published in the official newspaper S-Petersburg Vedomosti, which (according to the government) contained “a sweeping and inadmissibly harsh accusation against our entire administration that it “didn’t deal” with the nothing other than colossal embezzlement." General N.P. Ignatiev, in a note to Alexander III dated March 12, 1881, wrote about the “developed embezzlement of the treasury,” and after his appointment as Minister of Internal Affairs, he prepared a program to combat the “theft of government property,” which “no doubt ... exists in many departments " The Manifesto of Alexander III of April 29, 1881, which was accompanied by the resignation of the previous government (Abaza, Loris-Melikov and Milyutin), spoke of the need to “exterminate untruth and theft, - to introduce order and truth into the actions of institutions.”

One of the areas of abuse was the placement of government loans (More above), a significant part of which was appropriated by various financial intermediaries.

But there are especially many examples of theft and abuse in the railway industry. Thus, the private railway companies created here received government subsidies on preferential terms, the size of which was quite significant and contributed to the growth of public debt (More above), and, in addition, constituted a significant part of the income of the companies themselves. For example, the annual revenue of the Ural Railway in the early 1880s was only 300 thousand rubles, and its expenses and profits guaranteed to shareholders were 4 million rubles, thus, the state only had to maintain this one private railway company annually to pay an additional 3.7 million rubles from his own pocket, which was 12 times higher than the income of the company itself. As it was later established, due to the lack of effective control over the expenses of these companies, the latter deliberately inflated their expenses and received government subsidies for them.

Most of the known examples of corruption were associated with the activities of private railway companies. As P. A. Zayonchkovsky points out, a number of major officials of Alexander II participated in the establishment of these companies, and, as a rule, they did not contribute money, but used their administrative resources as a “contribution” to the company. Thus, the chairman of the State Bank, E.I. Lamansky, entered as a founder into the railway company, to which he himself issued a loan on behalf of the State Bank. And this was not the only case of his such participation. As the official of the Committee of Ministers A.I. Kulomzin wrote about this, “Obviously, Lamansky does not have the money needed for the railway, why is he invited to all the companies, it is clear from his position as the manager of the State Bank.”

Senator M. B. Veselovsky, who served in the State Chancellery, also wrote that participation in the establishment of joint-stock companies under Alexander II became widespread among the upper layers of the bureaucracy. “It was precisely this circumstance,” writes P. A. Zayonchkovsky, “that was the reason that forced Alexander III to raise in the Committee of Ministers the problem of prohibiting senior dignitaries from participating in the boards of various kinds of joint-stock enterprises.”

According to the historian’s conclusion, “the participation of certain representatives of the bureaucracy in the activities of capitalist enterprises in most cases took the form of direct bribery... [or] manifested itself in various forms of corruption (use of official position).” It is interesting that the “appetites” of major officials for this type of “activity” grew despite the fact that their salaries and their salaries increased very significantly, by 2-3 times, in the era of Alexander II, which did not happen in other periods.

Historian A.D. Riber writes about the personal interests of certain groups of officials at the highest levels in the era of Alexander II. In particular, one of these groups, formed around the Minister of Finance M. H. Reitern (including V. A. Bobrinsky, A. Abaza and others), first carried out successful transactions for the sale of Alaska and the Nikolaev railway, and then developed a grandiose plan for the construction of a network of 18 new railways. These officials, writes the historian, “skillfully manipulated flexible concession rules to award contracts to their business favorites...persuaded the Tsar to sell all remaining state railways to private companies.” S. Yu. Witte wrote about one of these favorites, Derviz, who, being a school friend of Reitern, received from him three concessions on extremely favorable terms - for the construction of the Moscow-Ryazan, Ryazan-Kozlov and Kursk-Kiev railways, on with which he made a huge fortune, after which he quit his service in Russia, went to Italy, built a palace there, led a riotous life and “got completely crazy from this luxury.”

War Minister D. A. Milyutin, writes A. D. Riber, considered entrepreneurs who built railways “swindlers and scoundrels who lined their pockets with hundreds of thousands of rubles stolen from the state treasury. He accused them of placing an unbearable burden on Russia’s shoulders - poorly constructed, non-profitable and insufficiently capable railways, which need repairs from the very beginning, and in addition require payment of interest on the invested capital.”

There are also examples of large bribes that these entrepreneurs paid to officials for certain permits in their favor, which was a very common practice. One such case, confirmed by eyewitness accounts, even happened to the brother of Alexander II, Grand Duke Nikolai Nikolaevich, who received a bribe in the amount of 200 thousand rubles so that the concession would go to a certain person.

And finally, there are examples relating to Alexander II himself. As P. A. Zayonchkovsky wrote, he had “a very unique idea of honesty,” for which there are “numerous and very authoritative testimonies from contemporaries.” In particular, as Minister D. A. Milyutin wrote in 1874, “One can only marvel at how an autocratic ruler of 80 million people can be so alien to the most elementary principles of honesty and selflessness. While, on the one hand, they are concerned about establishing the strictest control over every penny, when they indignantly point to some poor official accused or suspected of converting several hundred or tens of government or other people’s rubles in his favor, on the other hand, with the knowledge of the highest authorities and even at the highest will, railroad concessions are distributed to favorites and favorites directly to improve their financial situation, precisely so that several million will go to one or another individual in the form of profits.” As one example, he cited the following: the tsar ordered the minister of railways to place a large order for rolling stock at Maltsev’s factories “so that the latter would undertake by subscription to give annually so many thousands of rubles to his wife, a friend of the empress, inseparable from her and not living with her.” with husband". As A.I. Delvig from the Ministry of Railways summed up in 1871, describing the same abuses of the emperor, “Until this year, I believed that in Russia there was at least one person who, due to his position, could not be a bribe-taker, and it’s sad I was disappointed."

The same examples were given by S. Yu. Witte in his memoirs: “At this time, Emperor Alexander II had already fallen in love and lived intimately with his future morganatic wife, Princess Yuryevskaya, née Princess Dolgoruka. This princess Dolgorukaya did not disdain various large donations, and so she, through Emperor Alexander II, insisted that they give a concession for the construction of the Rostov-Vladikavkaz road - I don’t remember who: either engineer Felkerzam, or some other railway concessionaire - almost Polyakov.” This “activity” of Princess Yuryevskaya is confirmed by other evidence: according to historians R. Sh. Ganelin and B. V. Ananich, “In such conditions, when the government guarantee ensured profits and guaranteed against losses, when the favor of those in power could replace the concessionaire’s millions in capital, favoritism and corruption flourished.”

The tsar also had an extremely lenient attitude toward the participation of major officials in the establishment of joint-stock companies. Thus, in view of the widespread abuses, on November 7, 1868, the “wish” of Alexander II was accepted that senior officials should not participate in the establishment of railway partnerships. “However, this ‘highest wish’,” writes P. A. Zayonchkovsky, “was violated by the emperor himself.” According to A.I. Kulomzin, in the early 1870s. The government was discussing the composition of the next railway company being created, and the Chairman of the Committee of Ministers, Prince Gagarin, with the permission of Alexander II, raised the question of whether this company should be rejected, since 5 senior officials of the Ministry of Finance (which was headed by the Minister of Finance M.H. Reitern) were involved in it. Prince Gagarin “relyed on the highest command,” but at the same time, the tsar, influenced by the opinion of the majority of those present, approved this company. “The above statement,” the historian concludes, “first, shows the complete inconsistency of the actions of the emperor, who supported Gagarin, and then sanctioned the violation of his own decision, and the second, is interesting as the fact of the “merging” of the highest ranks of the Ministry of Finance with representatives of the financial world.”

There are examples of corruption in the army. So, according to the memoirs of S. Yu. Witte, during the Russian-Turkish war of 1878-1879. a huge commissariat contract was received by the company Greger, Varshavsky, Horvitz and Cohen, thanks to the patronage of Nepokoichitsky, the chief of staff of the active army, who before his appointment had close relations with this company, and Nepokoychitsky allegedly received an appropriate remuneration for this contract. This story received a great public response and became the talk of the town. When, after the war, the government refused to pay this company another sum of several million, she turned to Princess Yuryevskaya and “thanks to her, this company received a significant part of the amounts that it claimed and which it was denied by both the government commission and court... of course, in this case, if not Princess Yuryevskaya herself, then those very close to her received the corresponding jackpot.”

There are other examples of “favoritism” on the part of Alexander II. As N.A. Rozhkov wrote, he “handled the state chest unceremoniously... gave his brothers a number of luxurious estates from state lands, built them magnificent palaces at public expense.”

Plus, during his reign, efforts were made to create a more effective system of control over budget expenditures. For these purposes, a reform of the State Audit Office was carried out: its local bodies - control chambers - were established, the right of sudden inspection of cash registers was introduced, to increase the efficiency of audits.

Reducing the duty by 3 times. A duty (up to 40%) is introduced on imports. Since 1718, soldiers' uniforms have been sewn only from Russian cloth; since 1723, all office work has been ordered to be carried out only on Russian-made paper.

The 18th century was characterized by problems with the development of industry due to the attachment of the peasantry to the land: in a country where in most provinces the bulk of the population were serfs, there was simply no one to work in the factories. At first, this problem was solved by assigning serfs to the factories. Since 1741, a 14-hour working day has been established. Elizaveta Petrovna abolishes customs duties, but cultivates monopolies, as a result of which the quality of products decreases. Catherine II abolishes monopolies, dissolves the Manufactory Collegium with its separate jurisdiction. Factories with possessional serfs are prohibited from changing or reducing production, transferring workers to other factories, etc.

Second half of the 18th century

State regulation of prices for salt was introduced, which was one of the vital goods in the country. The Senate legislatively set the price of salt at 30 kopecks per pood (instead of 50 kopecks) and 10 kopecks per pood in regions where fish are mass-salted. Without introducing a state monopoly on the salt trade, Catherine hoped for increased competition and, ultimately, an improvement in the quality of the product. However, soon the price of salt was raised again. At the beginning of the reign, some monopolies were abolished: the state monopoly on trade with China, the private monopoly of the merchant Shemyakin on the import of silk, and others.

Russian merchant ships began to sail in the Mediterranean Sea. However, their number was insignificant in comparison with foreign ones - only 7% of the total number of ships serving Russian foreign trade in the late 18th - early 19th centuries; the number of foreign merchant ships entering Russian ports annually during her reign increased from 1340 to 2430.

As the economic historian N.A. Rozhkov pointed out, in the structure of exports in the era of Catherine there were no finished products at all, only raw materials and semi-finished products, and 80-90% of imports were foreign industrial products, the volume of imports of which was several times higher than domestic production. Thus, the volume of domestic manufacturing production in 1773 was 2.9 million rubles, the same as in 1765, and the volume of imports in these years was about 10 million rubles. . Industry developed poorly, there were practically no technical improvements and serf labor dominated. Thus, from year to year, cloth factories could not even satisfy the needs of the army, despite the ban on selling cloth “outside”; in addition, the cloth was of poor quality, and it had to be purchased abroad. Catherine herself did not understand the significance of the Industrial Revolution taking place in the West and argued that machines (or, as she called them, “machines”) harm the state because they reduce the number of workers. Only two export industries developed rapidly - the production of cast iron and linen, but both were based on “patriarchal” methods, without the use of new technologies that were actively being introduced in the West at that time - which predetermined a severe crisis in both industries, which began shortly after the death of Catherine II .

In the field of foreign trade, Catherine’s policy consisted of a gradual transition from protectionism, characteristic of Elizabeth Petrovna, to complete liberalization of exports and imports, which, according to a number of economic historians, was a consequence of the influence of the ideas of the physiocrats. Already in the first years of the reign, a number of foreign trade monopolies and a ban on grain exports were abolished, which from that time began to grow rapidly. In 1765, the Free Economic Society was founded, which promoted the ideas of free trade and published its own magazine. In 1766, a new customs tariff was introduced, which significantly reduced tariff barriers compared to the protectionist tariff of 1757 (which established protective duties of 60 to 100% or more); they were reduced even more in the customs tariff of 1782. Thus, in the “moderate protectionist” tariff of 1766, protective duties averaged 30%, and in the liberal tariff of 1782 - 10%, only for some goods rising to 20- thirty % .

Agriculture, like industry, developed mainly through extensive methods (increasing the amount of arable land); The promotion of intensive agricultural methods by the Free Economic Society created under Catherine did not have much result. From the first years of Catherine's reign, famine began to arise periodically in the countryside, which some contemporaries explained by chronic crop failures, but the historian M.N. Pokrovsky associated it with the beginning of mass grain exports, which had previously been prohibited under Elizaveta Petrovna, and by the end of Catherine's reign amounted to 1 .3 million rub. in year. Cases of mass ruin of peasants have become more frequent. The famines became especially widespread in the 1780s, when they affected large regions of the country. Bread prices have increased significantly: for example, in the center of Russia (Moscow, Smolensk, Kaluga) they increased from 86 kopecks. in 1760 to 2.19 rubles. in 1773 and up to 7 rubles. in 1788, that is, more than 8 times.

Introduced into circulation in 1769, paper money - banknotes - in the first decade of its existence accounted for only a few percent of the metal (silver and copper) money supply, and played a positive role, allowing the state to reduce its costs of moving money within the empire. However, due to the lack of money in the treasury, which became a constant phenomenon, from the beginning of the 1780s, an increasing number of banknotes were issued, the volume of which reached 156 million rubles by 1796, and their value depreciated by 1.5 times. In addition, the state borrowed money abroad in the amount of 33 million rubles. and had various unpaid internal obligations (bills, salaries, etc.) in the amount of RUB 15.5 million. That. the total amount of government debts amounted to 205 million rubles, the treasury was empty, and budget expenses significantly exceeded income, which was stated by Paul I upon his accession to the throne. All this gave rise to the historian N.D. Chechulin, in his economic research, to conclude about a “severe economic crisis” in the country (in the second half of the reign of Catherine II) and about the “complete collapse of the financial system of Catherine’s reign.”

First half of the 19th century

In the first third of the 19th century, the economy of the Russian Empire began to lag further and further behind the leading powers in its development. The state of affairs in industry at the beginning of the reign of Nicholas I (1825-1855) was the worst in the entire history of the Russian Empire. There was virtually no industry capable of competing with the West, where the Industrial Revolution was already coming to an end at that time (for more details, see Industrialization in the Russian Empire). Russia's exports included only raw materials; almost all types of industrial products needed by the country were purchased abroad.

By the beginning of the 19th century, the number of civilian peasants and serfs in factories was almost equal. Since 1824, the transition of sessional workers to other classes has been allowed (at the request of the owner approved by the government), and since 1835, owners have been allowed to release them. By 1840, serf labor in factories came to a crisis due to the poor quality of products and the mass dissolution of sessional workers began.

By the end of the reign of Nicholas I the situation had changed greatly. For the first time in the history of the Russian Empire, a technically advanced and competitive industry began to form in the country, in particular textiles and sugar, the production of metal products, clothing, wood, glass, porcelain, leather and other products began to develop, its own machines, tools and even steam locomotives began to be produced . According to economic historians, this was facilitated by the protectionist policy pursued throughout the reign of Nicholas I. As I. Wallerstein points out, it was precisely as a result of the protectionist industrial policy pursued by Nicholas I that the further development of Russia followed a path different from most countries in Asia, Africa and Latin America, namely, along the path of industrial development.

Serf labor in industry was quickly replaced by free labor, to which the government made considerable efforts. In 1840, a decision was made by the State Council, approved by Nicholas I, to close all possession factories that used serf labor, after which only in the period 1840-1850, on the initiative of the government, more than 100 such factories were closed. By 1851, the number of possession peasants had decreased to 12-13 thousand, while at the end of the 18th - beginning of the 19th centuries. their number exceeded 300 thousand.

For the first time in the history of Russia, under Nicholas I, intensive construction of paved roads began: the routes Moscow - St. Petersburg, Moscow - Irkutsk, Moscow - Warsaw were built. Of the 7,700 miles of highways built in Russia by 1893, 5,300 miles (about 70%) were built in the period 1825-1860. The construction of railways was also started and about 1000 miles of railway track was built, which gave impetus to the development of our own mechanical engineering.

The rapid development of industry led to a sharp increase in urban population and urban growth. The share of the urban population during the reign of Nicholas I more than doubled - from 4.5% in 1825 to 9.2% in 1858.

Third quarter of the 19th century

From the beginning of the 1860s, an economic crisis began in the country, which a number of economic historians associate with Alexander II’s refusal of industrial protectionism and the transition to a liberal policy in foreign trade (at the same time, the historian P. Bayrokh sees one of the reasons for the transition to this policy in the defeat of Russia in the Crimean War). Thus, within several years after the introduction of the liberal customs tariff in 1857 (by 1862), cotton processing in Russia fell by 3.5 times, and iron smelting decreased by 25%. However, the first signs of an economic crisis appeared already in 1859, when a financial crisis began, accompanied by a deterioration in the country's trade and payments balance.

The liberal policy in foreign trade continued further, after the introduction of a new customs tariff in 1868. Thus, it was calculated that, compared to 1841, import duties in 1868 decreased on average by more than 10 times, and for some types of imports - even by 20-40 times. According to M. Pokrovsky, “customs tariffs of 1857-1868. were the most preferential that Russia enjoyed in the 19th century...” At the same time, the situation in the country’s economy did not improve: modern economic historians characterize the entire period until the end of the reign of Alexander II and even until the second half of the 1880s. as a period of economic depression.

Evidence of slow industrial growth during this period can be seen in the production of pig iron, the increase of which was only slightly faster than population growth and noticeably lagged behind that of other countries. Thus, over 20 years (from 1855-59 to 1875-79), iron smelting in Russia increased by only 67%, while in Germany it grew by 319% during this time, despite the fact that the population of Russia grew at record highs pace (the increase over the specified period was almost 40%). For comparison: over the 20 years that passed after the death of Alexander II (from 1880-1884 to 1900-1904), with the same rate of population growth, pig iron production in Russia increased by 487%, that is, it grew by 7-7. 5 times faster than in the era of Alexander II.

As stated in the document released at the end of the 19th century. work of M. M. Kovalevsky, liberalization of foreign trade created difficulties for increasing domestic production and led to a sharp increase in imports: from 1851-1856. to 1869-1876 imports increased almost 4 times. If previously Russia's trade balance was always positive, then during the reign of Alexander II it worsened. Beginning in 1871, for several years it was reduced to a deficit, which by 1875 reached a record level of 162 million rubles or 35% of export volume. The trade deficit threatened to cause gold to flow out of the country and depreciate the ruble. At the same time, this deficit could not be explained by the unfavorable conditions of foreign markets: the main product of Russian exports - grain - prices on foreign markets from 1861 to 1880. increased almost 2 times. During 1877-1881 The government, in order to combat the sharp increase in imports, was forced to resort to a series of increases in import duties, which prevented further growth of imports and improved the country's foreign trade balance.

The only industry that developed rapidly was railway transport: the country's railway network was growing rapidly, which also stimulated its own steam locomotive and carriage building. However, the development of railways was accompanied by many abuses and a deterioration in the financial situation of the state. Thus, the state guaranteed the newly created private railway companies full coverage of their expenses and also the maintenance of a guaranteed rate of profit through subsidies. The result was huge budget expenditures to support private companies, while the latter artificially inflated their costs in order to receive government subsidies. The government's unpaid obligations to private railway companies in 1871 amounted to 174 million rubles, and a few years later grew to 580 million rubles. .

To cover budget expenses, the state for the first time began to actively resort to external loans (under Nicholas I there were almost none). Loans were attracted on extremely unfavorable conditions: bank commissions amounted to up to 10% of the borrowed amount, in addition, loans were placed, as a rule, at a price of 63-67% of their face value. Thus, the treasury received only a little more than half of the loan amount, but the debt arose for the full amount, and annual interest was calculated from the full amount of the loan (7-8% per annum). As a result, the volume of public external debt reached 2.2 billion rubles by 1862, and by the beginning of the 1880s - 5.9 billion rubles. .

Last quarter of the 19th century

Great successes were achieved in the development of industry during the reign of Alexander III (1881-1894). Thus, the real technical revolution began in metallurgy. The production of iron, steel, oil, and coal in the period from the mid-1880s to the end of the 1890s increased at a record pace in the entire history of pre-revolutionary industry (for more details, see Industrialization in the Russian Empire). According to a number of authors, this was the result of the government's protectionist policy, which began shortly after the start of the reign of Alexander III: 141: 289. During the 1880s there were several increases in import duties, and starting in 1891, the country began to operate a new system of customs tariffs, the highest in the previous 35-40 years (1891 tariff). For most types of imports, duties of about 25-30% were established, and for some product groups - up to 70% or more: 546-553. This contributed not only to industrial growth, but also to an improvement in the foreign trade balance and strengthening of state finances.

A number of measures were aimed at eradicating the shortcomings that developed on the railways. Unified railway tariffs were introduced, developed by S. Yu. Witte, which replaced the tariff anarchy that reigned under the previous government. They abandoned the practice of private concessions for the operation of railways, which had spread during the previous reign and led to the fact (as Witte wrote about it) that, despite the insignificant total length of roads and poor quality, more than 40 million rubles were paid annually from the treasury to private companies for their maintenance alone ., which was a “completely impossible situation”:183. The construction of new roads was also now carried out primarily by the state, in order to avoid abuse: 256, 305. Partial nationalization of the industry was carried out, as a result of which the number of private railway companies was reduced from 44 to just 6 by the end of the 19th century, and the state share in the railways increased to 23.5% in 1889 and to 60.5% in 1900 . As a result of these measures, the railways ceased to be unprofitable for the treasury and began to generate profits that reached 111 million rubles. in 1892:145, the construction of new lines proceeded at a record pace.

Thanks to these and other measures (conversion of government loans with a reduction in the interest paid on them, the introduction of a state monopoly on the trade in alcoholic beverages, etc.), it was possible to significantly improve the state of public finances. The share of the state budget spent on servicing the public debt has decreased significantly, and the further increase in the debt itself has slowed down. The stabilization of public finances made it possible to begin preparations for the introduction of the gold ruble, which was carried out by the Minister of Finance S. Yu. Witte after the death of Alexander III.

Financial stabilization and rapid industrial growth were achieved largely thanks to competent and responsible officials appointed by the emperor to the post of Minister of Finance: N. H. Bunge (1881-1886), I. A. Vyshnegradsky (1887-1892), S. Yu. Witte (since 1892), and also thanks to Alexander III himself. In particular, as Witte wrote, the doctrine of free trade was dominant at the turn of the 70s and 80s, which did not allow alternative views: “everyone stood for free trade and believed that this law on free trade was as immutable as the law of the universe, the system customs protectionism was considered death for the state.” Therefore, supporters of protectionism were subjected to persecution, as happened, for example, with D. I. Mendeleev, who advocated protectionism and was accused of almost being bribed by industrialists, and then was not chosen to the academy, was deprived of his chair, and was attacked in the press, etc. Therefore, the transition to protectionism, which met such strong resistance, according to Witte, “could have been made by one Emperor and, moreover, an Emperor as firm ... as Emperor Alexander III was.” He also wrote that “it was thanks to Emperor Alexander III, Vyshnegradsky, and then, in the end, me, that we managed to put our finances in order; for, of course, neither I nor Vyshnegradsky could have restrained all the impulses to throw in vain right and left money obtained by the blood and sweat of the Russian people, if not for the mighty word of Emperor Alexander III, who restrained all pressure on the state treasury": 373, 132, 260, 369.

Significant changes have occurred in the field of taxation. The poll tax was abolished and a housing tax was introduced; increased expansion and increase in indirect taxation began. However, the financial successes of this period were not based on a corresponding increase in the economic well-being of the mass of the population. One of the main sources of government revenue were indirect taxes, the increase of which, both in the sense of increasing taxable items (new taxes on kerosene, matches) and in the sense of increasing tax rates (raising the excise tax on drinks, sugar, tobacco), was almost exclusively fiscal in nature. The main burden of these taxes fell on the “lower classes,” while at the same time, attempts by Finance Minister Bunge to introduce taxes on the “highest” aroused opposition from the Council of State, which rejected his bill. On the second attempt, he managed to introduce only very low taxes (3-5%) on the profits of joint-stock companies, inheritances and interest income: 140.

The negative consequences of the peasant reform of 1861 (landowner cuts, unreasonably high redemption payments), which led to the impoverishment of a significant part of the peasantry, were not eliminated. And new government measures, in particular, loans from the Peasant Bank, were not effective and could not help improve the situation of poor peasants. Discrimination in the taxation of peasant lands, which arose during the previous reign, remained. Thus, zemstvo taxes and fees for peasants on tithes of land were 2-4 times higher than for landowners. In total, taking into account redemption payments, peasants had to pay 7-8 times more taxes and fees to the state from tithes of land than they had to pay from tithes of landowners' land: 224, 251, 274.

The decline in the level of people's well-being was expressed both in the unstoppable growth of arrears and in the terrible misfortunes of the peasant population during the years of crop failure. The famine of 1891-1892 was especially severe, called by contemporaries “all-Russian ruin”:434. At the same time, the economic situation of factory workers improved during his reign:261.

Industrial Revolution

In the 1890s. Railway construction continues to grow, and along with it industry (on average 7.6% per year), not only due to the demand for raw materials for construction needs, but due to increasing exports. Between 1906 and 1914, industry grew at an average rate of 6% per year. In general, for the period 1887-1913. industrial production in Russia increased by 4.6 times, the country ranked 4th–5th in the world in terms of absolute production of iron ore, coal and steel smelting. The share in world industrial production was 2.6% in . In terms of total industrial production, it ranks 5th-6th in the world.

The social agitation of the left parties had the greatest success among the proletariat with a low standard of living and high literacy (almost all workers fit the definition). The percentage of political strikes increases from 20% to 50%. Since 1897, there have been demands to declare May 1 a holiday. The “St. Petersburg industrial war” is taking place. May 7, 1901 “Obukhov Defense” (strike with armed clash with the police). In November 1902, the Cossacks dispersed the strike in Rostov-on-Don; on March 13, 1903, the strike in Zlatoust was shot. In July–August 1903 there was a general strike with 200 thousand workers. By 1905, up to one and a half million workers were on strike, 75% of them political. The village, the army, and the navy became infected with unrest (the battleship Prince Potemkin mutinied on June 14, 1905, and the cruiser Ochakov mutinied on November 11). 1912 - “Lena execution”, dissatisfied with living conditions.

Early 20th century

At the beginning of the 20th century, the Russian Empire, along with the United States, occupied a leading position in world agriculture. This is especially evident in the example of grain crops: over the first 14 years of the 20th century, the area under crops increased by 15%, grain yield by 10%, and grain harvest per capita by more than 20%. Gross grain harvest - 5637 million poods (92.5 million tons) - 1st place in the world (half of the world's rye harvest, second place in wheat harvest), as well as 1st place in grain exports - 647.8 million poods (10,610 tons) exported ) grains. The total volume of grain exports amounted to 651 million rubles. Russia ranked 1st in the production and export of butter (77,576 tons of butter were exported).

On the eve of the revolution, the country's national income was 16.4 billion rubles (7.4% of the world total). According to this indicator, the Russian Empire ranked fourth after the USA, Germany and the British Empire. In terms of growth rates of national income, the Russian Empire was ahead of many countries, and in certain periods, for example, from they were among the highest in that period, over 7% in some years. The latest estimates of the growth rate of Russia's national income are more modest; the American researcher P. Gregory estimates the average growth for the period 1885-1913 at 3.25% per year (with an increase to 4.7% per year during the period of greatest growth (1889-1904) )), which is estimated as a growth level slightly above developed European countries, but below the United States.

At the same time, in terms of GDP per capita, the Russian Empire was not one of the world leaders. GDP per capita, calculated in 1990 Geary-Khamis international dollars, in the Russian Empire in 1913 was $1,488 per person, with a world average of $1,524, which was below the level of all European countries except Portugal, and approximately equal to the level of Japan and the average level of Latin America. GDP per capita was 3.5 times lower than in the USA, 3.3 times lower than in England, 1.7 times lower than in Italy.

The volume of industrial production in Russia in 1913 amounted to 6938.9 million rubles. Russia's share in world industry in 1913 was, according to various estimates, from 5.3% (fifth place in the world) to 12.73% (third place in the world). According to the famous economist P. Bayroch, Russia's share in world industrial production in 1913 was 8.2% and it ranked 4th after the USA, Germany and Great Britain. However, in 1910, per capita coal consumption was 4% of US consumption, and steel was 6.25%.

Certain industries of the Russian Empire were characterized by extremely rapid growth. From 1894 to 1914 in the Russian Empire, coal production increased by 306%, oil - by 65% (growth stopped in 1901, since then there has been no increase), gold - by 43%, copper - by 375%; cast iron - by 250%; iron and steel - by 224%. Russia supplied 50% of the world's egg exports; it owned 80% of the world's flax production.

State budget with 1031 million rubles. in 1894 it increased, in 1916 it almost quadrupled - 4 billion. And this despite the fact that railway tariffs were lowered, redemption payments and many taxes were abolished, and in 1914 government sales of alcohol were closed.

Annual per capita income was 126.20 rubles per year, while in France it was 343 rubles, in Germany 287.50 rubles, in Great Britain 310.50 rubles. Wages in total production costs exceeded 60%. In 1912, the average wage of workers was 25 rubles. per month: from 44 rub. (at power plants), and 42 rubles (mechanical engineering) to 18 rubles. (flax mills) and 15 rubles. (food factory worker). In 1914, with prices falling, the average worker’s earnings were already 47 rubles. per month - from 51 rub. in mechanical engineering up to 43 rubles. in the manufacturing industry. The technician received 150 rubles. per month, and an engineer 240 rubles. per month. .

Taxes in the empire were significantly lower than in other countries. Direct taxes per inhabitant in the Russian Empire amounted to 3 rubles. 11 kopecks, and indirect - 5 rubles. 98 kopecks (7.2% of annual income). In France they were 12.25 and 10 rubles respectively (6.5%); in Germany - 12.97 and 9.64 rubles (7.7%); in the UK - 26.75 and 15.86 rubles (13.7%). In 1913, Russia's most important trading partners were Germany (29.8% of Russian exports and 47.5% of imports) and Great Britain (17.6 and 12.6%, respectively). In Asia in 1913, Russia's largest trading partners were China (2.1% of Russian exports and 6.1% of imports) and Iran (3.8 and 3.3%, respectively).

Financial policy

Peter I founded a regular army and spent a lot on building a fleet, which forced him to constantly look for sources of taxation. The state monopoly on coinage, salt, tobacco, tar, bristles, lard, etc. is being exploited. New taxes have been introduced: stamp duty, dragoon duty, and for the construction of ships. As a result of growing arrears, the capitation salary rises. The total collection of direct taxes eventually increased from 1.8 million rubles. up to 4.6 million rubles. The most characteristic features of the created system were that the main burden fell on the peasants, and two-thirds of all expenses were military. In 1705, military expenditures consumed even 96% of the budget. To manage public finances, Peter established, following the Swedish model, three boards - the chamber board was in charge of income, the state office board was in charge of expenses, and the audit board was in charge of inspections.

A feature of the financial system of the pre-reform Russian Empire was the secrecy of the state budget (state list of income and expenses). Until 1862, the state budget was approved personally by the emperor and was not published anywhere. It was characteristic that in 1850 Nicholas I ordered to hide the budget deficit of 33.5 million rubles. from the State Council, and directed the Ministry of Finance to record 38 million less in expenses. Thus, in 1850, two state budgets existed in parallel - a real one and a falsified one. One of the sources of emergency financing were state-owned credit institutions, which, in fact, by order of the government, issued any amounts to it.

In the last years of the 19th century, the policy of protectionism and grain exports, together with an increase in revenues from state railways and the final establishment of a state alcohol (drinking) monopoly, led to a noticeable increase in gold reserves. Metal circulation is being restored in the empire with a fixed rate of 1.5 rubles. paper notes = 1 rub. gold. As of 1897, payments on the national debt accounted for 19.9% of government expenditures.

At the same time, the country knew almost no anti-corruption processes before the reign of Nicholas I. The maximum that threatened an unscrupulous official was resignation from office. Under Nicholas I, the development of anti-corruption legislation began, but the number of officials prosecuted under articles of “bribery” and “extortion” has never been large.

With the beginning of the development of capitalism, abuses began to take new forms: the old nepotism and bribery were replaced by the merging of higher officials with business, the interpenetration of public administration and entrepreneurship. Especially many corruption schemes were associated with railway construction, which could bring fabulous profits.

Notes

Korolenko S. A. “Wage labor in owner-occupied farms and the movement of workers in connection with a statistical and economic review of European Russia in agricultural and industrial relations.” - St. Petersburg: printing house of V. Kirshbaum, 1892.
Folke H. Industrialization and Foreign Trade. Geneva, 1945. H. 13; Rather S., Soltow J.H., Sylla R. The Evolution of the American Economy. New York, 1979. R. 385.
Klyuchevsky V. Course of Russian history. Lecture LXXVII
Pavlenko N. I. Catherine the Great. Moscow, 2006, p. 94
Berdyshev S. N. Catherine the Great. - M.: World of Books, 2007. - 240 p.
Rozhkov N. Russian history in comparative historical light (fundamentals of social dynamics) Leningrad - Moscow, 1928, vol. 7, p. 41
Pavlenko N. I. Catherine the Great. Moscow, 2006, p. 304-305
Russie a la fin du 19e siècle, sous dir. de M.Kowalevsky. Paris, 1900, pp. 687, 691
Rozhkov N.A. Russian history in comparative historical light (fundamentals of social dynamics) Leningrad - Moscow, 1928, vol. 7, p. 41
Chechulin N.D. Essays on the history of Russian finance during the reign of Catherine II. St. Petersburg, 1906, p. 222
Strumilin S. G. Essays on the economic history of Russia. M. 1960, p. 399-400
Tugan-Baranovsky M. Russian factory. M.-L., 1934, p. 60-62
Tugan-Baranovsky M. Russian factory. M.-L., 1934, p. 59
Wallerstein I. The Modern World-System III. The Second Era of Great Expansion of the Capitalist World-Economy, 1730-1840s. San Diego, 1989, p.142
Tugan-Baranovsky M. Russian factory. M.-L., 1934, p. 37
Chechulin N.D. Essays on the history of Russian finance during the reign of Catherine II. St. Petersburg, 1906, p. 208, 211, 215
Pavlenko N. I. Catherine the Great. Moscow, 2006, p. 295
Pokrovsky M. N. Russian history from ancient times. With the participation of N. Nikolsky and V. Storozhev. Moscow, 1911, t. 4, p. 91-92, 106-113
Chechulin N.D. Essays on the history of Russian finance during the reign of Catherine II. St. Petersburg, 1906, p. 323, 373, 364, 87
Chechulin N.D. Essays on the history of Russian finance during the reign of Catherine II. St. Petersburg, 1906, p. 374.

Prerequisites and conditions for economic development

In world history, the second half of the 19th century. marked by powerful modernization processes that strengthened capitalism and established industrial society in the developed countries of Europe and the USA. Technical inventions and scientific discoveries of the last third of the 19th century. led to the creation of new industries.

In the political sphere, important factors of modernization were: the development of European statehood and the formation of national ideology and national movements; formation of the German Empire, the Kingdom of Italy; end of the civil war of 1861-1865. in the USA, a celebration of the country's unity. In the second half of the 19th century. The process of creating political parties was completed, and many public organizations took shape.

By the end of the 19th century. in a number of developed countries (Great Britain, the USA, partly France, Belgium, Sweden), elements of civil society established themselves and political modernization began to bear fruit.

Against this background in Russia in the second half of the 19th century. The process of political modernization was just beginning. The liberal reforms of the 60s and 70s occupied an important place in this process. Large-scale in nature and consequences, the reforms marked significant changes in all aspects of the life of Russian society.

The era of reforms of the 60-70s of the 19th century was truly great, because the autocracy for the first time took a step towards society, and society supported the government. This is one of the reasons for the success of Alexander II's reforms.

Another reason is the complex nature of the reforms, which affected all aspects of the life of Russian society. Particularly significant was the reform to free peasants from serfdom. The reform of 1861 satisfied the most important economic interests of the landowners and freed the Russian peasantry from slavery. Subsequent liberal reforms of the 1860s - 1870s. in the social and economic sphere were closely connected with peasant reform.

The main provisions of the reforms of Alexander II

The basic principles and conditions for the abolition of serfdom were formulated in the Manifesto and Regulations, which Alexander II approved on February 19, 1861.

They had the right to property.

Agriculture

Economic development of agriculture accelerated after agrarian reform.

Quantitative growth. In the 60-90s. XIX century production of all types of agricultural products increased. Grain harvest increased 1.7 times; potatoes - 2.5 times, sugar beets - almost 20 times. Cultivated areas increased by 40%. Due to the development of industry and increased demand for raw materials, the production of industrial crops increased (sugar beets (almost 20 times), tobacco, flax; cotton cultivation began in Central Asia and the Caucasus)

Transport

Industry

Trade

Bread finally became the main item of export; its exports grew 3 times faster than the increase in grain collection. Both traditional agricultural raw materials were exported: flax, hemp, timber, and new types of agricultural products, primarily sugar. With the development of sheep farming, wool took an important place in exports. Industrial products accounted for less than a quarter of Russian exports, but its absolute volume and relative share grew rapidly. First of all, the export of sugar and oil developed, and the export of textiles increased dynamically. At the same time, complex mechanical engineering products were not exported. The leading places in imports were occupied by machinery and equipment, as well as cotton for Russian factories. A significant place was occupied by tea, which by the middle of the last century had become a “Russian national” drink, an essential commodity.

Social movements

The first underground populist organizations arose in the late 1850s and early 1860s. A student circle arose at Kharkov University (1856-1858), then a circle of propagandists in Moscow led by P.E Argyropulo and P.G. Zaichnevsky (1861)

"Land and Freedom" (1861-1864) was the first large organization of populists, numbering several hundred members. Its leaders were A.A. Sleptsov, N.A. Serno-Solovyevich, N.N. Obruchev, V.S. Kurochkin, N.I. Utin. The main goal of the organization was considered to be the creation of conditions for the revolution, which was expected in 1863, when the signing of charter documents was to be completed. For this purpose, legal and illegal propaganda was used, and proclamations were issued. The St. Petersburg circle maintained close ties with the editorial office of Kolokol.

N.A.’s bookstore became a kind of center for the semi-legal activities of “Land and Freedom”. Serno-Solovyevich and the Chess Club in St. Petersburg.

In 1864, during the period of repression associated with the suppression of the Polish uprising, and as a result of the absence of the much-anticipated peasant uprisings, the organization dissolved itself.

"Ishutintsy". In 1863-1866, a revolutionary organization headed by N.A. operated. Ishutin (“Ishutintsy”). In 1866, a member of the organization D.V. Karakozov made an unsuccessful attempt on the life of Alexander II.

"People's Retribution" was created in the late 60s. revolutionary fanatic S.G. Nechaev. Nechaev denied any ethics, believing that the end justifies the means. For the sake of the interests of the revolutionary cause, he even went to the extent of organizing a criminal crime.

The “Big Propaganda Society” (“Tchaikovtsy”) existed in 1869-1874. It was headed by M.A. Nathanson, N.V. Tchaikovsky, S.L. Perovskaya, S.M. Kravchinsky, P.A. Kropotkin. The society was engaged in the study of socialist literature.

In 1874, the Chaikovites participated in the preparation of a mass action - the so-called. “going to the people,” when hundreds of students, high school students, and young intellectuals went to the village, some for agitation, and some for propaganda of the peasants. But, in the end, it was not possible to rouse them either to revolt or to propagate them in a socialist spirit.

"Land and Freedom" (1876-1879). The organization was led by M.A. Nathanson, A.D. Mikhailov, G.V. Plekhanov, L.A. Tikhomirov. In an effort to rouse the people to revolution, they considered it necessary:

Campaigning in word and deed;

Actions to disorganize the state (i.e. recruiting officers, officials, killing the most “harmful” government officials);

The landowners moved from flying agitation to settled propaganda and began to create populist settlements in the countryside. But the new “going to the people” also did not produce results, and in 1879 the party split into supporters of propaganda and the continuation of the struggle for socialist ideals (“villagers”), united under G.V. Plekhanov into the "Black Redistribution" party, and supporters of political struggle and the achievement of political freedom, as a necessary condition for socialist propaganda, as well as the tactics of individual terror ("politicians") who formed the "People's Will".

The People's Will party (1879-1882) was headed by the Executive Committee, which included A.I. Zhelyabov, A.D. Mikhailov, S.L. Perovskaya, V.N. Figner, N.A. Morozov and others.

The Narodnaya Volya set their goal:

Revolutionary seizure of power;

Convening the Constituent Assembly;

Affirmation of political freedoms;

Building, in the long term, communal socialism.

The main means was recognized as a political revolution with the help of the army and with the support of the people.

To disorganize power, individual terror was also used, which gradually involved all the forces of the party and became the main means of political struggle. Several attempts at regicide were made, in particular, prepared by S.N. Khalturin exploded the Winter Palace in February 1880. On March 1, 1881, Alexander II was killed, but the revolution or the mass uprisings of the people expected by the Narodnaya Volya did not happen, and the organization was eventually crushed by the police.

"Black redistribution" (1879-1882). Its leaders are G.V. Plekhanov, P.B. Axelrod, L.G. Deitch, V.I. Zasulich considered the goal of his activities to be the preparation of a peasant revolution - a revolt with the help of propaganda in the countryside.

In 1883, disillusioned with populism and finding themselves in exile, the Black Peredelites, led by Plekhanov, switched to the position of Marxism and created the Liberation of Labor group in Geneva - the first Russian social democratic organization.

Liberal (reform) populism

Main representatives. In the 80-90s. as a result of the acute organizational and ideological crisis of revolutionary populism, the ideas of reformist populism became widespread among the intelligentsia (V.P. Vorontsov, I.I. Kablitz, N.K. Mikhailovsky, etc.)

The most important provisions. Theorists of liberal populism:

Condemning capitalism, they tried to justify the advantage of small-scale production based on communal or artel principles;

They proved the possibility of a peaceful transition to socialism as a result of reforms carried out by the government. They believed that Marxism was not applicable in peasant Russia, and attempts to establish it would lead to the establishment of a dictatorship of a minority over the majority of the population;

They considered the ideal of social order to be a harmonious combination of individual freedom and community solidarity, which, in their opinion, provides the necessary conditions for the comprehensive development of man.

As a result, they opposed both reaction and revolution and condemned violent methods of change. During the years of “counter-reforms,” the liberal-populist theory and practice of “small deeds” became widespread, calling on the intelligentsia, first of all, to honestly fulfill their professional duties for the benefit of the people.

The Birth of Russian Social Democracy

The disappointment of part of the intelligentsia in the ideology of populism, which, having tried, in fact, all means, failed not only to rouse the people to fight for the ideals of socialism, but also to understand it, to overcome the gap that existed between the intelligentsia and the people.

There has been an increase in worker protests since the late 70s, which testified to the emergence of a new popular force in the public life of the country. In addition, the experience of the propaganda work of the populists of the seventies indicated that the workers were more active, ready to organize their own forces, and receptive to the ideas of socialism.

The successes of social democracy and the labor movement in the West, familiarity with the ideas of Marxism.

The "Emancipation of Labor" group was created in 1883 by G.V. Plekhanov, P.B. Axelrodom, V.I. Zasulich, L.G. Deychem in Geneva. Its goal was to prepare a socialist proletarian revolution.

The group was mainly engaged in translations of the works of Marx and Engels into Russian, and analyzed political processes in Russia from the perspective of Marxism. Simultaneously with the criticism of populism, the development of program documents for Russian Social Democracy began. Plekhanov wrote the first Russian Marxist works - “Socialism and Political Struggle”, “Our Disagreements”, in which the inevitability of the disintegration of the peasant community and the establishment of capitalism was proved, the role of the proletariat was determined for the future of Russia, and the task of creating a social democratic party was put forward. Since the late 80s. The Liberation of Labor group began to take part in the activities of the 11th International.

The first Marxist circles in Russia arose in the 1880s. Individual circles and their associations were led by D.I. Blagoev, M.I. Brusnev, N.E. Fedoseev.

The work of the circles was limited to the study of Marxist literature. But in the mid-90s. the number of circles increased, there was a desire to unite them into an underground party and organize propaganda among the proletarians

Political crisis at the turn of the 70-80s.

In Soviet historiography, the events of the late 70s and early 80s. characterized as a second revolutionary situation caused by the aggravation of socio-economic contradictions growing as capitalist relations were established in Russia. Its peculiarity was seen in the fact that the discontent of the lower classes was manifested not so much in their activity as in the activity of the revolutionary party "People's Will".

Causes of the crisis.

The slowdown in the pace of reforms in the 70s, the manifestation of protective tendencies in domestic policy after the assassination attempt on Alexander 11 in 1866.

Lack of minimum political freedoms in the country.

The Russian-Turkish War of 1877-1878, which depleted the economy, but did not satisfy the public with its results.

Manifestations of the crisis.

The people's organization "People's Will" launched individual terror, murdered police officers and officials, organized a "hunt for the Tsar" and carried out the "execution" of Alexander II on March 1, 1881

The liberal movement intensified, critical materials were increasingly published in the liberal periodicals (Vestnik Evropy, Russkie Vedomosti), opposition elements in the zemstvos became more active, petitions and addresses with actual demands for reforms were submitted to the authorities.

The number of peasant and worker protests increased.

The authorities switched to emergency methods of government: repressions were launched against peasant uprisings; in 1880, the Supreme Administrative Commission was created, headed by General M.T. Loris-Melikov, who received almost unlimited powers.

At the same time, a group of liberal reformers formed among senior dignitaries (ministers Loris-Melikov, D.A. Milyutin, A.A. Abaza, etc.).

Loris-Melikov put forward a project to create an elected legislative body under the tsar from representatives of zemstvos and cities. A number of reactionary ministers were fired.

End of the crisis.

After the assassination of Alexander II on March 1, 1881, who before his death agreed with the need to introduce limited public representation in Russia under the State Council, Alexander III ascended the throne, abandoning the Loris-Melikov project and forcing liberal-minded ministers to resign.

Slavophile N.P. Ignatiev was appointed Minister of Internal Affairs. He was replaced in 1882 by the conservative D.A., who had previously been removed from the Cabinet of Ministers. Tolstoy, who was supported by the Chief Prosecutor of the Synod K.P. Pobedonostsev and editor of Moskovskie Vedomosti M.N. Katkov.

Serfdom was abolished. Peasants received personal freedom, the status of “rural inhabitants” and basic economic and civil rights:

They had the right to property.

They could defend their rights in court.

Peasants were allowed to trade freely, establish factories, trade and craft establishments.

It was allowed to join merchant guilds and craft guilds.

Peasants could marry without the consent of the landowner.

Judicial reform began with the introduction of new judicial statutes in 1864.

Basic principles of the new judicial system:

Lack of class, i.e. cases of representatives of all classes were considered in the same courts, which meant equality of all before the law;

Independence of the court, i.e. the court was not subordinate to the executive branch and made independent decisions;

irremovability of judges, i.e. the government could not by its own power remove a judge from office;

Publicity meant the right to be present to the public at court hearings and the right to publish journalists' reports on trials in newspapers and magazines;

Competitiveness, i.e. participation in the process of a prosecutor and a lawyer (a jury and a private attorney), the first of whom brought charges, and the second defended the defendant;

The institution of elected jurors was introduced to determine whether the accused was guilty.

Zemstvo reform began in 1864. The main provisions of the reform. All-class, elected, representative bodies of local self-government were created in districts and provinces.

Zemstvo institutions were in charge of local economic and social issues: the construction and operation of roads, the establishment of medical and charitable institutions, public education, food supply, fire protection, statistical service, care of local trade and industry, as well as the distribution of taxes.

Political activity of zemstvos was not allowed.

Elections to zemstvo bodies were held every three years in three curiae. According to the first curia, large landowners “without distinction of class” and owners of large real estate in rural areas elected electors to their district congress. According to the second, representatives of large city commercial and industrial establishments and city real estate were elected. Elections for the third - peasant curia - had even more steps: village assembly - volost assembly - district congress of electors for the curia.

Meaning. Zemstvos contributed to the development of the economy and the activation of local public life.

Zemstvos became cells of civil society, some of them tried to influence government policy.

The city reform, which began later than the zemstvo reform, in 1870, created a new system of city government.

Elections were held based not on class, but on property qualifications. Voting rights were granted only to males who had reached the age of 25 and paid taxes and fees to the city, which significantly limited the number of voters.

Voters, who made up a small part of the urban population, were divided into three curia: large, medium and small taxpayers.

Structure and functions. Each curia elected 1/3 of the members of the City Duma, which was the administrative body. She, in turn, elected the City Council - an executive body headed by the city mayor. The city government was involved in the improvement of the city (lighting, water supply, cleaning, transport, etc.), education, health care, and the care of trade and industry; had its own budget, part of which went to the maintenance of the fire department, police, and prisons.

Meaning. The competence of city self-government did not go beyond economic issues, its rights were even more limited than the rights of zemstvos, but, in general, the reform contributed to the formation of elements of civil society and the development of cities.

Reform of the education system carried out from 1863-1864. occupied an important place in the transformations of Alexander II. She contributed to the development of science in Russia, the growth of the ranks of the intelligentsia, democratized higher, secondary (classical gymnasiums, real schools) and primary education ("ministerial", zemstvo, parish schools), expanded the network of schools, and attracted new pedagogical forces to schools.

The Press Reform (1865) abolished advance censorship of books and magazines, but retained it for newspapers.

Military reforms began immediately after the Crimean War in the late 1850s. and were carried out in several stages.

Reduction in army size by 40%;

Creation of a network of military and cadet schools, which accepted representatives of all classes;

Improving the military command system, introducing military districts, creating the General Staff;

Creation of transparent and adversarial military courts, military prosecutor's office;

Abolition of corporal punishment (with the exception of canings for those specially “fined”) in the army;

Re-equipment of the army and navy (adoption of rifled steel guns, new rifles, etc.), reconstruction of state-owned military factories;

The introduction in 1874 of universal conscription instead of conscription and the reduction of service periods to 6 years in the army and 7 in the navy. Many benefits were established. In particular, those with primary education served only 3 years, those with secondary education - 1.5 years, and those with higher education - several months.

A feature of the military reforms carried out under the leadership of Minister of War D.A. Milyutin, became their consistent progressive character. Here there was much less half-heartedness and inconsistency than in other transformations of that era.

The significance of liberal reforms is that they contributed to the development of capitalist relations in Russia. The process of capitalization of the domestic economy took on a rapid character, especially in the 1880s. In the Russian village, a struggle unfolded between two methods of developing capitalism in it: Prussian and American. This struggle determined the life of the Russian village until 1917. The country's industry developed much more actively; This process was especially successful in light industry. Significant changes have occurred in trade and financial areas.

As a result of transformations in the 1860s - 1880s. The Russian economy has made a noticeable leap, trying to catch up with the developed countries of the world that have moved ahead. By the end of the 80s. XIX century The industrial revolution ended in Russia. However, the remnants of serfdom and the country's lag in the first half of the 19th century. they did not allow it to stand on a par with England, France, and Germany.

The liberation of the peasants played a huge role in the release of workers and the outflow of a significant part of the population from agriculture. At the same time, the preservation of the community, which “tied” the peasants to the land and restrained the outflow of labor, restrained the growth of social mobility.

The socio-political reforms of the 1860-1870s, which began with the peasant reform, played a huge role, creating legal, social, cultural and other conditions for the socio-economic development of the country. But the impact of the reforms was not clear-cut. The incompleteness and contradictory nature of the transformations deformed capitalist development.

The economic policy of the government carried out in the second half of the 19th century had a great influence. During this period, the economy (with the exception of the agricultural economy) was led by finance ministers.

Program of activities of M.Kh. Reiterna (1862-1878) formed the basis of the official economic policy pursued until the beginning of the twentieth century. In accordance with the principles of this program in Russia, in the conditions of the slow evolution of backward agriculture, where a significant part of the commodity sector was made up of landowners' farms, active support was provided for the accelerated creation of a railway network, new branches of heavy industry and a credit system with the participation of commercial banks.

The state issued preferential government orders, loans, concessions, bonuses for some manufactured products, and directly participated in the creation of new enterprises and banks. The capital necessary for this was attracted with the help of government loans placed abroad. Foreign creditors, at the same time, did not have the opportunity to influence the development of Russian industry, much less control it, but the interest on the debt was high.

In the second half of the 19th century. In this way, 9/10 of all foreign capital invested in Russian industry was received.

N.H. Bunge (1881-1886), considered a “liberal bureaucrat,” and I.A. Vyshnegradsky (1882-1892) continued Reitern’s line, stimulating the import of foreign capital rather than goods, preparing monetary reform, accumulating gold reserves and reorganizing external debt. At this time, government loans continued to be used for loans and investments in large-scale railway construction that took place throughout the country.

Under Vyshnegradsky, the policy of customs protectionism pursued by the state in relation to those industrial products that began to be produced in Russia intensified.

The sociocultural prerequisites necessary for the process of economic modernization had not matured in the country, the “ethics of capitalism” had not developed, egalitarian, communal sentiments prevailed in the mass consciousness.

Agriculture

Economic development of agriculture accelerated after agrarian reform. Quantitative growth. In the 60-90s. XIX century production of all types of agricultural products increased. Grain harvest increased 1.7 times; potatoes - 2.5 times, sugar beets - almost 20 times. Cultivated areas increased by 40%. Due to the development of industry and increased demand for raw materials, the production of industrial crops increased (sugar beets (almost 20 times), tobacco, flax; cotton cultivation began in Central Asia and the Caucasus)

Quality development. But the increase in grain harvest was achieved not only through extensive means - productivity increased by more than 20%.

Labor productivity has increased, and the use of fertilizers and agricultural machinery (hay mowers, winnowers, seeders, reapers, horse-drawn rakes) has become more frequent. Marketability increased (grain export increased 5 times). By the 1890s The formation of the all-Russian agricultural market - the market for agricultural products - was completed.

The specialization of regions in the production of agricultural crops deepened:

Commercial grain growing developed in the Central Chernozem region, the Volga region, Novorossia, Ukraine and the North Caucasus;

Flax growing - in the Central Industrial Region;

Commercial cattle breeding - in the North and North-West, including the Baltic states;

Beet growing - in some regions of Ukraine;

Tobacco growing, fruit growing and viticulture - in Transcaucasia and Bessarabia.

The structure of land ownership gradually changed.

As a result of the agrarian reform of 1861, peasants received ownership of their plots, but did not become full owners of the land - for this they had to buy out their plots. Formally, the owners of the allotment land were the community, and in the West of the empire, where there was no land community, the courtyard, which, however, also could not sell or mortgage their “possessions.”

In the 1880s. the state tried to strengthen the attachment of peasants to the community and prevent stratification in the village. The right of a peasant to leave the community with a one-time payment of a huge amount of redemption payments was limited, and in 1893 it was abolished.

Noble land ownership in the second half of the 19th century. decreased from 73 million des. in the 1870s up to 53 million - at the beginning of the twentieth century, landowners-nobles lost 27% of their land. Beyond the Urals, landowner farming practically did not exist.

Peasant land ownership. Small peasants began to buy somewhat more, individually and in communities. In 1882, the Peasant Land Bank was created specifically for the sale of state and landowner land to “persons of the peasant class.” In general, peasant privately owned land increased from 5 to 15% of the area of private land, and the area of allotment land property also increased slightly (139 million dessiatines - 1/3 of the land fund of European Russia).

Economic stratification (differentiation) of the peasantry. Despite the efforts of the state, the peasants of the post-reform era were gradually stratified by material wealth. But, if before the reform of 1861 the bulk of the peasants were middle peasants, then in the second half of the last century most of the peasants became poor. Only a small number of rural owners successfully increased their income. Some of them (0.5-2%) even bought the land of bankrupt landowners. Here we must also take into account the fact that not all peasants who used large plots were wealthy - many of them had large families, such owners did not differ in per capita income from other fellow villagers.

The process of property stratification was slow due to the preservation of the community and communal ownership of land, the low technical level of agriculture, and the remnants of serfdom.

Transport

Railway construction, unlike the advanced countries of Western Europe, did not complete the industrial revolution in the country, it did not just accompany it, but was to a large extent its stimulator. The transport network that was being created not only made it possible to move huge amounts of raw materials, products, labor, and to develop new areas, without which industry could not develop. "Railway fever", which ensured the demand for building materials, metal and equipment, became the impetus for the creation of modern heavy industry.

As a result of the combined efforts of the state and society, a large network of railways was created (in 1861 - 1.5 thousand versts, in 1900 - 48 thousand), transport support for commodity flows was achieved, a modern heavy industry base emerged, which also provided for the needs of the army .

And yet there were not enough railways. Many areas were not covered by this type of transport. At the turn of the century, in terms of track length per square kilometer and per capita, Russia lagged behind not only the advanced countries of Europe and the United States, but even Japan and Mexico.

Water transport continued to play a huge role in the development of national trade and industry. River vessels, the number of which increased 4 times, transported a significant portion of raw materials and finished products. It is important that the number of river ships has increased 6 times.

Maritime trade transport was seriously lagging behind. Although its creation began, almost all export and import goods transported by sea were transported on chartered foreign ships or by foreign companies.

In conditions of shortage of railways, horse-drawn transport remained of great importance.

Industry

Development of industrial production in the 60-90s of the 19th century. was impressive.

Quantitative growth was faster in heavy industry, but in light industry, especially textiles, progress was significant. In 1860-1900 Iron smelting increased 4.4 times, coal production - 55 times. By the beginning of the twentieth century, Russia produced a twentieth of the world's iron, oil, and cotton fabrics. But in terms of production per capita, Russia lagged far behind the developed countries of the West, being in 34-35 place. Labor productivity in industry increased by more than 1.5 times. The power supply of enterprises has increased.

Small industry developed enormously during this period and accounted for over a third of Russia's total industrial production. Handicrafts developed rapidly and did not disappear even in industries dominated by large and large enterprises, for example in textile production. In such industries as leather, flour-grinding, clothing, footwear, woodworking and others, small enterprises predominated or were the only form. Construction was still carried out by teams hired by contractors.

Large industry. In the 80-90s, the industrial revolution was generally completed in the main branches of large domestic industry. The main operations at large enterprises were carried out on the basis not of manual, but of machine labor, and a domestic machine-building complex was formed. In factories and factories (where at least 50 people were employed) most of the products of leading industries were produced - metallurgy and metalworking, mechanical engineering, chemical, textile production. What was new in large-scale industry was its organization in the form of joint-stock companies and share partnerships, to at the beginning of the twentieth century, accounting for over half of all large enterprises.

Social development. Simultaneously with the industrial revolution, a layer of entrepreneurs (bourgeoisie) and a working class (proletariat) were formed.

Formation of the bourgeoisie. By the end of the 19th century. there were 1.5 million people classified as large and small entrepreneurs.

Large business dynasties have formed in some branches of industry and trade. In particular, in textile production, the Morozovs, Ryabushinskys, Prokhorovs, Khludovs and others successfully developed their business. In the “new” industries - metallurgy and mechanical engineering - by the end of the century, the core of leaders consisted of people from the technical intelligentsia, nobility and bureaucracy - A.I. Vyshnegradsky, N.S. Avdakov, A.I. Putilov and others.

In the multinational composition of the Russian bourgeoisie, a significant place was occupied by a layer of foreign entrepreneurs and immigrants from abroad - the Knops, von Mecks, Vogau, Gunzburgs, etc.

The peculiarities of Russian entrepreneurs, in contrast to developed countries, were the lack of political weight, political organization, and direct access to power corresponding to economic opportunities.

Formation of the working class. The number of hired workers at the end of the 19th century. was 10 million people. In general, the factory proletariat grew 4 times over half a century, but in the 1890s it was not numerous - there were less than 1.5 million workers in large enterprises and railways.

Trade

Domestic trade in the 60-90s. has increased many times over. The most significant was the grain market, which supplied the population of cities that had tripled, as well as hundreds of factory settlements. The emerging industrial system was itself a consumer of industrial products - metal, fuel, machines. Light industry products were intended not only for city residents, but also, to a greater extent than before, for the Russian countryside. New commodity exchanges emerged and retail store networks developed.

But small trade developed most dynamically - if large trade increased 3 times, then taking into account small trade - trade turnover increased 17 times! Not only city dwellers were engaged in trade; peasant trades continued to flourish.

Foreign trade also increased almost 3 times.

The leading places in imports were occupied by machinery and equipment, as well as cotton for Russian factories. A significant place was occupied by tea, which by the middle of the last century had become a “Russian national” drink, an essential commodity.

The import of some goods was limited by high customs tariffs. The system of customs protectionism was designed to protect nascent production in Russia.

Features of the social movement of the 60-90s.

During this period, the ideological formation of the main directions of the socio-political movement in Russia was completed: conservative, liberal and radical (populist). A new movement has emerged - the social democratic movement.

They did not allow the organizational formation of socio-political movements, both pro-government and oppositional in nature. Radicals who have gone underground create secret militant parties;

Contributed to the alienation of the intelligentsia from the state;

Caused the weakness of the liberal reformist movement;

They gave birth to extreme, radical forms of movement, underground activities and calls for revolution and terror;

For a number of reasons, the intelligentsia became the main participants in the social movement.

The Russian social movement not only borrowed the ideas of Western thinkers and adapted them to Russian conditions, but also created its own original concepts. Populism tried to test them in practice, not stopping at violence and human sacrifices for this.

The confrontation between the authorities and the underground influenced the social atmosphere, the development of culture, and led to fluctuations in the internal political course.

Social movements

The ideology of populism. The founders of populism were A.I. Herzen and N.G. Chernyshevsky, who in the 1850s. developed its main theoretical principles. Herzen and Chernyshevsky sharply criticized the existing serfdom and autocratic system; they were radical democrats, but sought to avoid violence. However, many adherents of the classics of populism interpreted their theory as a call for a popular revolution. The main ideological principles of populism were:

Denial of the historical significance of capitalism and the desire to prevent its development in Russia;

The desire to create a socialist society as a system of social relations based on justice and collectivism;

Only in a solidary and fair society do conditions exist that ensure the comprehensive development of the individual;

Idealization of the peasant community and hopes through it to reach socialism;

The idea of the Russian peasant as a man of the future, a “socialist by nature”;

Criticism or even denial of statehood as a form of public administration, denial until the end of the 1870s. the significance of the political struggle for freedom and individual rights.

The main theoretical directions of revolutionary populism. In populism, various trends emerged and developed that had a common goal of struggle - socialism, and recognized the need for revolution to achieve this goal. Each of them had its own ideological characteristics.

The leading theoretician of the propaganda direction of revolutionary populism was P.L. Lavrov. His views contained the following ideas:

The intelligentsia was able to develop mentally, because was freed from physical labor, which was performed by downtrodden and uneducated people. The intelligentsia must return this debt to the people;

The people, the peasantry, are not ready for a social revolution. Therefore, the main task of the intelligentsia is long-term propaganda of the idea of socialism among the people, because without it, the actions of the masses will take extremely violent, rebellious forms and can only lead to changes in the forms of ownership and power, and not to the establishment of humane socialist relations;

Introducing socialist consciousness to the masses should ensure the socialist character of the coming revolution and minimize its inevitable violent forms;

To promote and organize the popular forces, it is necessary to create a party that unites in its ranks the intelligentsia and the most developed representatives of the people, which will continue to lead the construction of socialism after the revolution;

After the victory of the people, it is necessary to preserve the “state element”, the role of which will decrease as socialist relations are established;

A socialist society can develop only by ensuring individual freedom and the synthesis of its interests with the interests of the collective.

The leading theorist of the rebellious (anarchist) direction of revolutionary populism was M.A. Bakunin. He believed that:

The main injustice is social inequality, and the main carrier and guarantor of injustice is the state;

Therefore, the goal of the struggle is not only to eliminate the existing state, but also to prevent the creation of a new one. The proletarian state, Bakunin believed, is the worst form of state, in which the proletarians are degenerated, and cannot be created;

The main means of struggle is the revolutionary revolt of the people. At the same time, the peasantry is constantly ready to revolt and what is required is not lengthy propaganda or explanation, but agitation, a call to revolt;

After the revolutionary liquidation of statehood and inequality, the people self-organize into federations of communities of districts, provinces of Russia, and the Slavic world. Eventually an anarchist United States of Europe and the world will be created.

The main theorist of the conspiratorial (Blanquist) trend P.N. Tkachev assumed that:

The peasantry is not ready either for the revolution or for the independent construction of a socialist society;

Therefore, there is no point in either propaganda of socialism, or agitation, a call for rebellion;

Autocracy has no social support in any class of Russian society. It "hangs in the air";

Therefore, the intelligentsia must create a secret party that will seize power and lead the socialist reconstruction of society;

To achieve this goal, it is necessary to use all means, including illegal and immoral ones.

Populist organizations and their activities

N. Lavrov "Russian Emperor Alexander II"

“He did not want to seem better than he was, and was often better than he seemed” (V.O. Klyuchevsky).

All-Russian Emperor, Tsar of Poland and Grand Duke of Finland Alexander Nikolaevich Romanov - the first son of Nicholas I from his marriage to Alexandra Feodorovna, daughter of the Prussian king Frederick William III, was born in the Kremlin, baptized in the Miracle Monastery and at baptism awarded the highest Russian Order of St. Andrew the First-Called.

Upbringing

His birth is a long-awaited event in the royal family, because... Nikolai's older brothers had no sons. In this regard, he was raised as the future heir to the throne.

According to tradition, he was immediately appointed chief of the Life Guards Hussar Regiment. At the age of 7 he was promoted to cornet, and at the age of 11 he already commanded a company. Alexander liked both military service and war games, but as the heir to the throne, the idea of his special purpose was constantly instilled in him - “to live for others.”

His systematic home education began at the age of 6. His father chose his mentors himself. The poet V.A. was appointed teacher. Zhukovsky, who compiled the “Teaching Plan” for 12 years. The basis of this plan was comprehensive education combined with morality. Zhukovsky was also a teacher of the Russian language. The teacher of the Law of God and Sacred History was Archpriest G. Pavsky, the military instructor was Captain K. Merder, a simple officer awarded for bravery at Austerlitz. He was an intelligent and noble man who worked in a cadet school and had experience working with children. Legislation was taught by M.M. Speransky, statistics and history - K.I. Arsenyev, economics – E.F. Kankrin, foreign policy - F.I. Brunnov, arithmetic - Academician Collins, natural history - K.B. Trinius, famous German and Russian botanist, academician of the St. Petersburg Academy of Sciences.

F. Kruger "Tsarevich Alexander Nikolaevich"

As a result, the prince received a good education, was fluent in French, German and English, and from childhood he was distinguished by his responsiveness and impressionability, alertness of mind, good manners and sociability.

But at the same time, the teachers noted that he was hot-tempered and unrestrained; gives in to difficulties, not having a strong will, unlike his father. K. Merder noted that sometimes he acted not out of inner need, but out of vanity or the desire to please his father and receive praise.

Nicholas I personally supervised his son’s education, organized exams twice a year and attended them himself. From the age of 16, he began to involve Alexander in state affairs: the prince was supposed to participate in meetings of the Senate, then he was introduced to the Synod, and in 1836 he was promoted to major general and was included in the tsar’s retinue.

The process of education of the crown prince ended with travels around Russia (May-December 1837) and abroad (May 1838 - June 1839). Before his trip to Russia, Nicholas I prepared a special “instruction” for his son, which said: “Your first duty will be to see everything with the indispensable goal of becoming thoroughly familiar with the state over which sooner or later you are destined to reign. Therefore, your attention should be equally directed to everything... in order to gain an understanding of the present state of affairs.”

Grand Duke Alexander Nikolaevich

During this trip, Alexander visited 28 provinces, seeing with his own eyes the ugliness of Russian reality. He was the first of the Romanov family to visit Siberia, where he met with the Decembrists, as a result of which he addressed his father in several letters “for the forgiveness of some unfortunates” and achieved a mitigation of their fate. On the journey, the Tsarevich was accompanied by Adjutant General Kavelin, the poet Zhukovsky, teacher of history and geography of Russia Arsenyev, physician Enokhin and young officers.

Later he even visited the Caucasus, where he distinguished himself in battle during an attack by highlanders, for which he was awarded the Order of St. George, 4th degree.

Before leaving abroad, Nicholas I admonished his son: “Many things will tempt you, but upon closer examination you will be convinced that not everything deserves imitation; ... we must always preserve our nationality, our imprint, and woe to us if we fall behind it; in it is our strength, our salvation, our uniqueness.”

During his trip abroad, Alexander visited the countries of Central Europe, Scandinavia, Italy and England. In Germany, he met his future wife, Maria Alexandrovna, daughter of Grand Duke Ludwig of Hesse-Darmstadt, with whom they married two years later.

I. Makarov "Empress Maria Alexandrovna"

Maria Alexandrovna loved music and was well versed in it, and knew the latest European literature well. The breadth of her interests and spiritual qualities amazed many with whom she happened to meet. “With her intelligence, she surpasses not only other women, but also most men. This is an unprecedented combination of intelligence with purely feminine charm and... a charming character,” wrote the poet A.K. Tolstoy. In Russia, Maria Alexandrovna soon became known for her widespread charity - Mariinsky hospitals, gymnasiums and orphanages were in her field of vision and spread, earning high praise from her contemporaries.

In 1841, Nicholas I appointed the heir to the State Council, which was actually the beginning of his state activities.

And since 1842, Alexander already performed the duties of the emperor during his absence in the capital. At this stage of his activity, he shared the conservative views of his father: in 1848 he supported preventive measures to tighten censorship in connection with revolutionary events in Europe, concerning the protection of educational institutions from the “revolutionary infection.”

Beginning of the reign

Monogram of Alexander II

The sudden death of Nicholas I, accelerated by the tragic events of the Crimean War, naturally led Alexander to the throne. Russia was faced with a number of acute problems that Nicholas I could not solve: the peasant problem, the eastern, Polish and other problems, state financial problems upset by the Crimean War, the international isolation of Russia, etc. Nicholas in the last hours of his life said to his son: “I surrender my command to you, but, unfortunately, not in the order you wanted, leaving you with a lot of work and worries.”

Alexander's first decisive step was the conclusion of the Paris Peace in 1856 with conditions that were not the worst for Russia. He then visited Finland and Poland, where he called on the local nobility to “give up their dreams,” which strengthened his position as a decisive emperor. In Germany, he secured a “dual alliance” with the Prussian king (his mother’s brother) Frederick William IV, thereby weakening the foreign policy blockade of Russia.

But, having begun his reign with effective support for the conservative views of his father, under the pressure of circumstances he was forced to switch to a policy of reform.

N. Lavrov "Portrait of Emperor Alexander II"

Alexander's reformsII

In December 1855, the Supreme Censorship Committee was closed and the free issuance of foreign passports was allowed. By Coronation Day (August 1856), an amnesty was declared for political prisoners, and police supervision was weakened.

But Alexander understood that serfdom hampered the development of the state, and this was the basis for returning again to the peasant issue, which was the main one at that moment. Speaking to the nobles in March 1856, he said: “There are rumors that I want to declare the liberation of serfdom. This is not fair... But I won’t tell you that I am completely against it. We live in such an age that in time this must happen... It is much better for it to happen from above than from below.”

In 1857, to consider this issue, a Secret Committee was formed of the emperor's proxies, which began developing regulations in individual regions, in order to then unite them for all of Russia into the “Regulations” on the abolition of serfdom. Commission members N. Milyutin, Y. Rostovtsev and others tried to prepare compromise solutions, but the constant pressure of the nobility on the authorities led to the fact that the project protected primarily the interests of the landowners. On February 19, 1861, the Manifesto for the Emancipation of the Peasants was signed, and thus conditions were created for capitalist production (23 million landowner peasants received personal freedom and civil rights), but many points of the “Regulations” limited the peasants to economic and legal dependence on the rural community controlled by the authorities. In relation to the landowner, the peasants remained “temporarily obligated” until the debt was paid (within 49 years) for the allocated land plots and had to carry out the previous duties - corvée, quitrent. The landowners received the best plots and huge redemption sums.

But, despite the limitations of the peasant reform, Alexander II went down in history as the Tsar-Liberator.

January 1, 1864 was held Zemstvo reform. Issues of local economy, collection of taxes, approval of the budget, primary education, medical and veterinary services were entrusted to elected institutions - district and provincial zemstvo councils. The election of representatives was of two degrees, but with a predominance of the nobility. They were elected for a term of 4 years.

V. Timm "Coronation"

Zemstvos dealt with issues of local government. At the same time, in everything that concerned the interests of the peasants, the zemstvos were guided by the interests of the landowners who controlled their activities. That is, self-government was simply a fiction, and elected positions were filled at the direction of the landowner. Local zemstvo institutions were subordinate to the tsarist administration (primarily governors). The zemstvo consisted of: zemstvo provincial assemblies (legislative power), zemstvo councils (executive power).

City government reform. It ensured the participation of various segments of the population in local government, but at the same time, the autocracy still remained both the highest legislative and executive body, which nullified these reforms, since the lack of sufficient material resources increased the dependence of local government on the government.

Judicial reform of 1864 was a major step in the history of Russia towards the development of civilized norms of legality; they were based on the principles of modern law:

independence of the court from the administration;
irremovability of judges;
publicity;
competitiveness (in criminal courts, the institution of jurors elected from the population was introduced; for legal assistance to the population, the institution of sworn attorneys was introduced).

But as soon as the new courts demonstrated their work in a new capacity, the authorities immediately began to subordinate them to the regime. For example, legal proceedings in political cases were carried out not by juries, but by military courts; special courts were retained for peasants, clergy, etc.

Military reform. Taking into account the lessons of the Crimean War, serious changes were carried out in the army in 1861-1874. The conditions for soldier's service were eased, combat training was improved, and the military command system was streamlined: Russia was divided into 15 military districts. In 1874, the Charter on universal military service was approved, replacing conscription.

In addition to these reforms, transformations affected the sphere of finance, education, the media, and the church. They received the name “great” and contributed to the strengthening of the country’s economy and the formation of the rule of law.

Historians note, however, that all the reforms of Alexander II were carried out not because of his convictions, but because of the necessity he recognized, so his contemporaries felt their instability and incompleteness. In connection with this, a conflict began to grow between him and the thinking part of society, who feared that everything that had been done “risks being lost if Alexander II remains on the throne, that Russia is in danger of returning to all the horrors of the Nikolaev region,” as P. Kropotkin wrote.

Since the mid-60s, contemporaries have noted fatigue and some apathy in the emperor’s behavior, which led to a weakening of his transformative activities. This is due both to misfortunes and troubles in the family, and to multiple (7 in total) attempts by “grateful” subjects on the life of the emperor. In 1865, his eldest son Nicholas, heir to the throne, died of a serious illness in Nice. His death undermined the empress's health, which was already weak. Doctors’ recommendations to abstain “from marital relations” strengthened the long-standing alienation in the family: in a short time, Alexander changed several mistresses until he met 18-year-old E. Dolgorukaya. This connection also led to disapproval from society.

Attempts on Alexander's lifeII

On April 4, 1886, the first attempt on the life of the emperor occurred. The shooter was D. Karakozov, a member of the secret society “Hell”, adjacent to “Earth and Freedom”, when Alexander II was heading to his carriage, leaving the gates of the Summer Garden. The bullet flew past the emperor - the shooter was pushed by the peasant O. Komissarov.

On May 25, 1879, during a visit to the World Exhibition in Paris, Pole A. Berezovsky shot at him. The bullet hit the horse.

On April 2, 1879, a member of the “Narodnaya Volya” A. Solovyov fired 5 shots at the gates of the Winter Palace, but the emperor remained unharmed - the shooter missed.

On November 18 and 19, 1879, members of the “People's Will” A. Zhelyabov, A. Yakimova, S. Perovskaya and L. Hartmann unsuccessfully tried to blow up the royal train traveling from Crimea to St. Petersburg.

On February 5, 1880, Narodnaya Volya member S. Khalturin prepared an explosion in the Winter Palace, the guard soldiers on the first floor were killed, but none of the royal family, who were on the third floor, were injured.

The assassination attempt occurred when the emperor was returning from a military divorce at the Mikhailovsky Manege. During the explosion of the first bomb, he was not injured and could have left the embankment of the Catherine Canal, where the assassination attempt took place, but he got out of the carriage to the wounded - and at that time Grinevitsky threw the second bomb, from which he himself died and the emperor was mortally wounded.

Alexander II with his wife. Photo by Levitsky

Result of the reign

Alexander II went down in history as a reformer and liberator. During his reign

Serfdom was abolished;
universal conscription was introduced;
zemstvos were established;
judicial reform was carried out;
censorship is limited;
a number of other reforms were carried out;
the empire expanded significantly by conquering and incorporating the Central Asian possessions, the North Caucasus, the Far East and other territories.

But M. Paleolog writes: “At times he was overcome by severe melancholy, reaching the point of deep despair. Power no longer interested him; everything he tried to accomplish ended in failure. None of the other monarchs wished more happiness for their people: he abolished slavery, abolished corporal punishment, and carried out wise and liberal reforms in all areas of government. Unlike other kings, he never sought bloody laurels of glory. How much effort did he spend to avoid the Turkish war... And after its end, he prevented a new military clash... What did he receive as a reward for all this? From all over Russia, he received reports from governors that the people, deceived in their aspirations, blamed the tsar for everything. And police reports reported an alarming increase in revolutionary ferment.”

Alexander II found the only consolation and meaning of life in his love for E. Dolgoruky - “a person who thought about his happiness and surrounded him with signs of passionate adoration.” On July 6, 1880, a month and a half after the death of the Emperor's wife Maria Alexandrovna, they entered into a morganatic marriage. E. Dolgorukaya received the title of Most Serene Princess Yuryevskaya. This marriage also increased discord in the royal family and at court. There is even a version that Alexander II intended to carry out the planned transformations and abdicate the throne in favor of his son Alexander and go with a new family to live in Nice.

Thus, “the first of March tragically stopped both state reforms and the emperor’s romantic dreams of personal happiness... He had the courage and wisdom to abolish serfdom and begin to build a rule of law state, but at the same time he remained virtually a prisoner of the system, the foundation of which he began to abolish with his reforms,” - writes L. Zakharova.

Emperor Alexander II with children. Photo from 1860

Children of Alexander II from his first marriage:

Alexandra (1842-1849);
Nicholas (1843-1865);
Alexander III (1845-1894);
Vladimir (1847-1909);
Alexey (1850-1908);
Maria (1853-1920);
Sergei (1857-1905);
Pavel (1860-1919).

From marriage with Princess Dolgoruka (legalized after the wedding):

His Serene Highness Prince Georgy Alexandrovich Yuryevsky (1872-1913);
Your Serene Highness Princess Olga Alexandrovna Yuryevskaya (1873-1925);
Boris (1876-1876), posthumously legitimized with the surname “Yuryevsky”;
Your Serene Highness Princess Ekaterina Alexandrovna Yuryevskaya (1878-1959).
- In addition to the children from Ekaterina Dolgoruky, he had several other illegitimate children.

At the insistence of Alexander III, Dolgorukaya-Yuryevskaya soon left St. Petersburg with her children, born before marriage. She died in Nice in 1922.

In memory of the martyrdom of Emperor Alexander II, a temple was built at the site of his murder.

The temple was erected by order of Emperor Alexander III in 1883-1907 according to the joint project of the architect Alfred Parland and Archimandrite Ignatius (Malyshev). The temple is made in the “Russian style” and is somewhat reminiscent of Moscow’s St. Basil’s Cathedral. It took 24 years to build. On August 6, 1907, on the day of Transfiguration, the cathedral was consecrated as the Church of the Savior on Spilled Blood.

Church of the Savior on Spilled Blood