Spain in the second half of the 19th century. In the second half of the 19th century In the second half of the 19th century

The 19th century for Russian literature is rightly called golden. He gave us many talented writers who opened Russian classical literature to the whole world and became a trendsetter. The romanticism of the early 19th century is replaced by the era of realism. The founder of realism is considered to be A.S. Pushkin, or rather his later works, which marked the beginning of this era.

In the 40s, the “natural school” emerged, which became the beginning of the development of the direction of realism in Russian literature. The new direction covers topics that have not been widely covered before. The object of study for the “sitters” was the life of the lower classes, their way of life and customs, problems and events.

From the second half of the 19th century, realism received the name critical. In their works, poets and writers criticize reality, trying to find an answer to the question of who is to blame and what to do. Everyone was concerned about the question of how Russia would develop further. Society is divided into Slavophiles and Westerners. Despite the difference in views, these two movements are united by hatred of serfdom and the struggle for the liberation of the peasants. Literature becomes a means of struggle for freedom, showing the impossibility of further moral development of society without social equality. During this period, works were created that later became masterpieces of world literature; they reflected the truth of life, national identity, dissatisfaction with the existing autocratic serfdom, the truth of life made the works of that time popular.

Russian realism in the second half of the 19th century had significant differences from Western European realism. Many writers of the time identified in their works the motifs that prepared the shift to revolutionary romance and social realism that occurred in the 20th century. The most popular novels and stories in Russia and abroad were those of the second half of the 19th century, which showed the social nature of society and the laws governing its development. The characters in the works talk about the imperfections of society, conscience and justice.

One of the most famous literary figures of that time is I. S. Turgenev. In his works he raises important issues of that time (“fathers and sons”, “on the eve”, etc.)

Chernyshevsky’s novel “What is to be done?” made a great contribution to the education of revolutionary youth.

The works of I. A. Goncharov show the morals of officials and landowners.

Another major figure whose work influenced the minds and consciousness of people of that time was F. M. Dostoevsky, who made an invaluable contribution to the development of world literature. In his writings, the writer reveals the versatility of the human soul; the actions of his heroes can confuse the reader and force them to show sympathy for the “humiliated and insulted.”

Saltykov-Shchedrin in his works exposes officials and embezzlers, bribe-takers and hypocrites who rob the people.

L.N. Tolstoy in his work showed all the complexity and inconsistency of human nature.

A.P. Chekhov's feelings about the fate of Russian society were reflected in his works, giving him a writer whose talent still inspires admiration to this day.

Literature of the late 19th century had a great influence on all spheres of culture; theater and music also entered the struggle for their ideals. The mood of society at that time is reflected in painting, introducing into people’s consciousness the idea of ​​equality and benefit for the whole society.

The modern world cannot do without people who have power and the right to be first. For animals, it's the same. Leo is the king of beasts, a hackneyed word, of course, but still fair

ABSTRACT

on the course “History of Russia”

on the topic: “Russia in the second half of the 19th century”

1. Russian domestic policy in the second halfXIXV.

In 1857, by decree of Alexander II, a secret committee on the peasant question began to work, the main task of which was the abolition of serfdom with the mandatory allocation of land to peasants. Then such committees were created in the provinces. As a result of their work (and the wishes and orders of both landowners and peasants were taken into account), a reform was developed to abolish serfdom for all regions of the country, taking into account local specifics. For different regions, the maximum and minimum values ​​of the allotment transferred to the peasant were determined.

The Emperor signed a number of laws on February 19, 1861. There was a Manifesto and a Regulation on the granting of freedom to peasants, documents on the entry into force of the Regulation, on the management of rural communities, etc. The abolition of serfdom was not a one-time event. First, landowner peasants were freed, then appanage peasants and those assigned to factories. The peasants received personal freedom, but the land remained the property of the landowners, and while allotments were allocated, the peasants, in the position of “temporarily obligated,” bore duties in favor of the landowners, which, in essence, did not differ from the previous serfs. The plots transferred to the peasants were on average 1/5 smaller than those they had previously cultivated. Redemption agreements were concluded for these lands, after which the “temporarily obligated” state ceased, the treasury paid for the land with the landowners, the peasants - with the treasury for 49 years at the rate of 6% per annum (redemption payments).

The use of land and relationships with authorities were built through the community. It was preserved as a guarantor of peasant payments. The peasants were attached to society (the world).

As a result of the reforms, serfdom was abolished, that “obvious and palpable evil for everyone,” which in Europe was directly called “Russian slavery.” However, the land problem was not solved, since the peasants, when dividing the land, were forced to give the landowners a fifth of their plots.

Under Alexander II, in addition to land reform and the abolition of serfdom, a number of reforms were also carried out.

The principle of the zemstvo reform carried out in 1864 was electivity and classlessness. In the provinces and districts of Central Russia and part of Ukraine, zemstvos were established as local government bodies. Elections to zemstvo assemblies were held on the basis of property, age, education and a number of other qualifications. The urban reform carried out in 1870 was close in nature to the zemstvo reform. In large cities, city councils were established on the basis of all-class elections.

New judicial statutes were approved on November 20, 1864. The judicial power was separated from the executive and legislative. A classless and public court was introduced, and the principle of irremovability of judges was established. Two types of court were introduced - general (crown) and world. The most important principle of the reform was the recognition of the equality of all subjects of the empire before the law.

After his appointment in 1861, D.A. Milyutin, Minister of War, begins the reorganization of the management of the armed forces. In 1864, 15 military districts were formed, subordinate directly to the Minister of War. In 1867, a military judicial charter was adopted. In 1874, after a long discussion, the tsar approved the Charter on universal military service. A flexible recruitment system was introduced. Recruitment was cancelled, and the entire male population over 21 years of age was subject to conscription.

In 1860, the State Bank was established, the tax-farm system was abolished, which was replaced by excise taxes (1863). Since 1862, the only responsible manager of budget revenues and expenditures was the Minister of Finance; the budget became public. An attempt was made to carry out monetary reform (free exchange of credit notes for gold and silver at the established rate).

The Regulations on Primary Public Schools of June 14, 1864 eliminated the state-church monopoly on education. Now both public institutions and private individuals were allowed to open and maintain primary schools, subject to control by district and provincial school councils and inspectors. The charter of the secondary school introduced the principle of equality of all classes and religions, but introduced tuition fees. Gymnasiums were divided into classical and real. The University Charter (1863) granted universities broad autonomy, and elections of rectors and professors were introduced. In May 1862, censorship reform began, “temporary rules” were introduced, which were replaced in 1865 by a new censorship charter.

The preparation and implementation of reforms were an important factor in the socio-economic development of the country. Administratively, the reforms were quite well prepared, but public opinion did not always keep up with the ideas of the reformer tsar. The diversity and speed of transformations gave rise to a feeling of uncertainty and confusion in thoughts. People lost their bearings, organizations professing extremist, sectarian principles appeared. On March 1, 1881, Alexander II was assassinated. New Emperor Alexander III. proclaimed a course called “counter-reforms” in historical-materialist literature, and “correction of reforms” in liberal-historical literature. He expressed himself as follows.

In 1889, to strengthen supervision over the peasants, the positions of zemstvo chiefs with broad rights were introduced. They were appointed from local noble landowners. Clerks and small traders, as well as other low-income strata of the city, lost their right to vote. Judicial reform has undergone changes. In the new regulations on zemstvos of 1890, class and noble representation was strengthened. In 1882-1884. Many publications were closed, and the autonomy of universities was abolished. Primary schools were transferred to the church department - the Synod.

These events revealed the idea of ​​the “official nationality” of the times of Nicholas I - the slogan “Orthodoxy. Autocracy. The spirit of humility" was in tune with the slogans of a bygone era. New official ideologists K.P. Pobedonostsev (Chief Prosecutor of the Synod), M.N. Katkov (editor of the Moskovskie Vedomosti), Prince V. Meshchersky (publisher of the newspaper Citizen) omitted the word “people” from the old formula “Orthodoxy, autocracy and the people” as “dangerous”; they preached the humility of his spirit before the autocracy and the church. In practice, the new policy resulted in an attempt to strengthen the state by relying on the noble class traditionally loyal to the throne. Administrative measures were supported by economic support for landowners.

2. Russian foreign policy in the second half of the 19th century.

After Russia's defeat in the Crimean War, a new balance of forces emerged, and political primacy in Europe passed to France. Russia as a Great Power lost its influence on international affairs and found itself isolated. The interests of economic development, as well as considerations of strategic security, required, first of all, the elimination of the restrictions on military navigation on the Black Sea provided for by the Paris Peace Treaty of 1856. Russia's diplomatic efforts were aimed at separating the participants in the Paris Peace - France, England, Austria.

In the late 50s - early 60s. There was a rapprochement with France, which intended to seize territories on the Apennine Peninsula, using the Italian liberation movement against Austria. But relations with France became strained due to Russia’s brutal suppression of the Polish uprising. In the 60s relations between Russia and the United States have strengthened; Pursuing its interests, the autocracy supported the Republican government of A. Lincoln in the Civil War. At the same time, an agreement was reached with Prussia on its support of Russia’s demands to abolish the Treaty of Paris; in return, the tsarist government promised not to interfere with the creation of the North German Union led by Prussia.

In 1870, France suffered a crushing defeat in the Franco-Prussian War. In October 1870, Russia announced its refusal to implement the humiliating articles of the Treaty of Paris. In 1871, the Russian Declaration was adopted and legitimized at the London Conference. The strategic task of foreign policy was solved not by war, but by diplomatic means. As a result, Russia gained the opportunity to more actively influence international affairs and, above all, in the Balkans.

In the “near abroad” the conquest and annexation of new territories continued. Now, in the 19th century, the desire to expand the area was determined primarily by motives of a socio-political nature. Russia actively participated in big politics and sought to neutralize the influence of England in Central Asia and Turkey in the Caucasus. In the 60s There was a civil war in the United States, and the import of American cotton was difficult. Its natural substitute was located nearby, in Central Asia. And, finally, the established imperial traditions pushed to seize territories.

In 1858 and 1860 China was forced to cede lands on the left bank of the Amur and the Ussuri region. In 1859, after half a century of war, the mountaineers of the Caucasus were finally “pacified”; their military and spiritual leader, Imam Shamil, was captured in the high-mountain village of Gunib. In 1864, the conquest of the Western Caucasus was completed.

The Russian emperor sought to ensure that the rulers of the states of Central Asia recognized his supreme power, and achieved this: in 1868, the Khanate of Khiva, and in 1873, the Emirate of Bukhara, recognized vassal dependence on Russia. The Muslims of the Kokand Khanate declared a “holy war”, “gazavat”, on Russia, but were defeated; in 1876 Kokand was annexed to Russia. In the early 80s. Russian troops defeated the nomadic Turkmen tribes and came close to the borders of Afghanistan.

In 1875-1876 uprisings against Turkey swept the entire Balkan Peninsula, the Slavs were waiting for Russian help.

On April 24, 1877, the Tsar signed the Manifesto declaring war on Turkey. A plan for a short campaign was developed. On July 7, troops crossed the Danube, reached the Balkans, captured the Shipkinsky Pass, but were detained near Plevna. Plevna fell only on November 28, 1877; In winter conditions, the Russian army crossed the Balkans, Sofia was taken on January 4, 1878, and Adrianople on January 8. The Porte requested peace, which was concluded on February 19, 1878 at San Stefano. Under the Treaty of San Stefano, Türkiye lost almost all of its European possessions; A new independent state appeared on the map of Europe - Bulgaria.

The Western powers refused to recognize the Treaty of San Stefano. In June 1878, the Berlin Congress opened, making decisions that were significantly less beneficial for Russia and the peoples of the Balkan Peninsula. In Russia this was greeted as an insult to national dignity, and a storm of indignation arose, including against the government. Public opinion was still captivated by the “everything at once” formula. The war, which ended in victory, turned into a diplomatic defeat, economic disorder, and an aggravation of the internal political situation.

In the first years after the war, there was a “rebalancing” of the interests of the great powers. Germany was inclined towards an alliance with Austria-Hungary, which was concluded in 1879, and in 1882 supplemented by a “triple alliance” with Italy. Under these conditions, there was a natural rapprochement between Russia and France, which ended in 1892 with the conclusion of a secret alliance, supplemented by a military convention. For the first time in world history, an economic and military-political confrontation between stable groupings of great powers began.

In the Far East, in exchange for the Kuril Islands, the southern part of Sakhalin Island was acquired from Japan. In 1867, Alaska was sold to the United States for $7 million. According to the historian

S.G. Pushkarev, many Americans believed that she was not worth it.

The Russian Empire, “one and indivisible,” stretched “from the cold Finnish rocks to the fiery Taurida,” from the Vistula to the Pacific Ocean and occupied a sixth of the earth.

3. Economic and social development of Russia in the second half of the 19th century.

The economy of post-reform Russia is characterized by the rapid development of commodity-money relations. There was an increase in acreage and agricultural production, but agricultural productivity remained low. Harvests and food consumption (except bread) were 2-4 times lower than in Western Europe. At the same time in the 80s. compared to the 50s. The average annual grain harvest increased by 38%, and its export increased by 4.6 times.

The development of commodity-money relations led to property differentiation in the countryside, middle peasant farms went bankrupt, and the number of poor people grew. On the other hand, strong kulak farms emerged, some of which used agricultural machines. All this was part of the plans of the reformers. But completely unexpectedly for them, the traditionally hostile attitude towards trade, towards all new forms of activity in the country: towards the kulak, the merchant, the buyer - towards the successful entrepreneur.

The reforms laid the foundation for a new credit system. For 1866-1875 359 joint-stock commercial banks, mutual credit societies and other financial institutions were created. Since 1866, the largest European banks began to actively participate in their work.

In Russia, large-scale industry was created and developed as a state-owned industry. The government's main concern after the failures of the Crimean War was enterprises producing military equipment. Russia's military budget in general terms was inferior to that of England, France, and Germany, but in the Russian budget it had a greater weight. Particular attention was paid to the development of heavy industry and transport. It was in these areas that the government directed funds, both Russian and foreign.

As a result of government regulation, foreign loans and investments went mainly to railway construction. Railways ensured the expansion of the economic market across the vast expanses of Russia; they were also important for the rapid transfer of military units.

The growth of entrepreneurship was controlled by the state on the basis of issuing special orders, so the big bourgeoisie was closely connected with the state. The number of industrial workers grew rapidly, but many workers retained economic and psychological ties to the countryside; they carried with them the charge of discontent among the poor who had lost their land and were forced to seek food in the city.

After the fall of serfdom, Russia quickly transformed from an agrarian country into an agrarian-industrial one. A large machine industry developed, new types of industry emerged, areas of capitalist industrial and agricultural production emerged, an extensive network of railways was created, a single capitalist market was formed, and important social changes took place in the country. The disintegration of the peasantry was an important factor in the formation of the capitalist market and the development of capitalism as a whole. The poor peasantry created a labor market, both for entrepreneurial agriculture and for large-scale capitalist industry. The wealthy elite showed increasing demand for agricultural machinery, fertilizers, etc. The village elite invested the accumulated capital in industrial entrepreneurship.

Thus, for all its progressiveness, agrarian reforms further aggravated social contradictions, which by the beginning of the 20th century resulted in a revolutionary situation.

4. Ideological struggle and social movement in Russia in the second half of the 19th century.

The year 1861 was characterized by a sharp aggravation of the situation in the village. The peasants, to whom the Regulation was announced on February 19, 1861, did not believe that this was a true royal law, demanding land. In some cases (as, for example, in the village of Bezdna), things reached meetings of ten thousand people, which ended with the use of troops and hundreds of people killed. A.I. Herzen, who initially greeted February 19 with the title of “Liberator” for Alexander II, after these executions changed his mind and declared that “the old serfdom has been replaced by a new one.” In public life as a whole, there has been a significant emancipation of the consciousness of wide circles of the population.

Three currents emerged in the public consciousness: radical, liberal and conservative. Conservatives advocated the inviolability of autocracy. The radicals are for his overthrow. Liberals tried to achieve greater civil freedom in society, but did not strive to change the political system.

Liberal movement of the late 50s - early 60s. was the widest and had many different shades. But, one way or another, liberals advocated the peaceful establishment of constitutional forms of government, political and civil liberties and the education of the people. Being supporters of legal forms, liberals acted through the press and zemstvo.

The democratization of society affected the composition of participants in the social movement. If in the first half of the 19th century representatives of the nobility predominated among opposition figures (from the Decembrists to Herzen), then in the 60s people of various “ranks” (that is, social groups) began to take an active part in public life. This allowed Soviet researchers, following Lenin, to talk about the transition from 1861 from the noble to the raznochinsky stage of the liberation movement.

In the wake of the democratic upsurge across the country, a number of underground circles emerged, which at the end of 1861 united into the organization “Land and Freedom”. The leadership of the organization was Alexander and Nikolai Serno-Solovyevich, Nikolai Obruchev, Alexander Sleptsov, Chernyshevsky took an active part in its affairs, Ogarev and Herzen helped from London. The organization united up to 400 participants in circles in central Russia and Poland.

The name of the organization reflected the main, in the opinion of its participants, demands of the people and was associated with the program: the return of sections, the forced purchase of landowners' land by the state, the creation of elected local government and central popular representation. The program, as we see, was quite moderate by modern standards, but one could not count on its implementation under the tsarist government. Therefore, the participants of “Land and Freedom” were preparing for an armed seizure of power. They associated its prospects with the spring of 1863, when, on February 19, 1863, the conclusion of redemption acts was to begin throughout the country. However, in 1862 Nikolai Serno-Solovyevich and Chernyshevsky were arrested; at the same time, the latter was exiled to Siberia on unproven charges, so he left the political arena. In addition, there were differences within the organization itself on ideological issues. As a result, by the spring of 1864, “Land and Freedom” was liquidated.

Insignificant in the early 1860s, Russia's working population increased significantly over the next two decades. Due to the inhuman living and working conditions, the labor movement also grew, becoming quite common at the end of the 70s. The number of strikes was measured in dozens per year, and from time to time there were large strikes, which were broken up by troops.

The creation of the South Russian Union of Russian Workers in Odessa dates back to 1875. Discovered by the police within a few months, the Union is notable for being the first workers' organization in Russia. Three years later, in 1878, the Northern Union of Russian Workers appeared in St. Petersburg. Its goal was quite obvious - “the overthrow of the existing political and economic system as extremely unjust.” Immediate demands are the introduction of democratic freedoms, the development of labor legislation, etc. Of particular note is the “establishment of a free people's federation of communities on the basis of Russian customary law.” Thus, the unfolding labor movement was based on a populist, peasant ideology.

However, the beginning of the 1880s revealed a crisis in the populist movement, which sought to rely on the peasants in the struggle for a change of system. Populism was replaced by Marxism, which had already been firmly established in Europe by that time. The revolutionary ideas of Karl Marx were based on his economic views, which proclaimed capitalism as an advanced stage of social development, which, however, was characterized by serious internal contradictions between capitalists and direct producers. Accordingly, Marx predicted that capitalism should be replaced by a different social system based on a more equitable distribution, and this should happen precisely with the support of the proletariat. It is natural, therefore, that the development of Marxism in Russia is connected precisely with the proletarian (labor) movement.

The penetration of Marxism into Russia was greatly facilitated by the populists who found themselves in exile in the West: Plekhanov, Zasulich, Axelrod and others. Recognizing the fallacy of their previous views, they accepted the ideas of Marx. This change is clearly characterized by the words of Plekhanov: “The historical role of the Russian proletariat is as revolutionary as the conservative role of the peasant.” The Emancipation of Labor group, which was formed on the basis of these revolutionaries, began to translate and publish Marx, which contributed to the spread of Marxist circles in Russia.

Thus, the revolutionary movement in Russia entered a new stage at the end of the 19th century.

Literature

1. Dolgiy A.M. Russian history. Tutorial. M.: INFRA-M, 2007.

2. History of Russia. Theories of learning. Book one, two / Under. ed. B.V. Lichman. Ekaterinburg: SV-96, 2006. – 304 p.

3. Kozin K.M. The history of homeland. Textbook for universities. M.: AIRO-XXI; St. Petersburg: Dmitry Bulanin, 2007. – 200 p.

4. Mironov B.A. Social history of Russia. T.1. St. Petersburg, 2006.

Tutoring

Need help studying a topic?

Our specialists will advise or provide tutoring services on topics that interest you.
Submit your application indicating the topic right now to find out about the possibility of obtaining a consultation.

Preparation peasant reforms. The modernization of the country's socio-economic and political life was prepared by the previous development of Russia. However, there were opponents of the reforms - a significant part of the nobility and bureaucrats. In the conditions of the crisis of the feudal-serf system and the growth of peasant protests, the emperor Alexander II(1818-1881), who understood the need for reforms, in a speech at a reception for a deputation of Moscow nobles, stated: “It is better to abolish serfdom from above than to wait for the time when it naturally begins to be abolished from below.” A radical restructuring of social life began, the “era of great reforms.”

At the beginning of 1857, the Secret Committee on the Peasant Issue arose, which, after working for about a year, was transformed into the Main Committee on Peasant Affairs. In 1858-1859 About 50 provincial committees were created to develop projects for the liberation of peasants. To summarize the projects of provincial committees, Editorial Committees were formed at the beginning of 1859. The Main Committee for Peasant Affairs, then the State Council, based on the materials of the Editorial Committees, developed the concept of the abolition of serfdom. The plan for the liberation of the peasants boiled down to making as few concessions as possible from the landowners to the liberated peasants.

Abolition of serfdom. On February 19, 1861, the Manifesto of Alexander II abolished serfdom. The liberation of the peasants was a response to the historical challenge of capitalist Western Europe, which by this time had significantly overtaken Russia. According to the Regulations of February 19, 1861, privately owned peasants became personally free. They received the right to dispose of their property, engage in trade, entrepreneurship, and move to other classes.

The provisions of February 19 obligated landowners to give land to peasants, and peasants to accept this land. Peasants were allocated field land according to regional norms, not for free, but for duties and ransom. The size of the redemption was determined not by the market value of the land, but by the amount of capitalized quitrent (6%). The state, which acted as an intermediary between the landowner and the peasant, paid the landowners in the form of a so-called redemption loan (80% of the value of the land given to the peasant), which the peasant then had to repay in installments with payment of the mentioned interest. Over the course of 44 years, peasants were forced to give the state about 1.5 billion rubles. instead of 500 million rubles. The peasants did not have the money to immediately pay the landowner a ransom for the land they received. The state undertook to immediately pay the ransom amount to the landowners in money or six percent bonds. In an effort to give away land within the limits established by the Regulations of February 19, the landowners cut off 1/5 of the land from the previous peasant allotment. The plots of land taken from the peasants began to be called sections, which could be leased to the same peasants.

The peasants received the land not as personal property, but to the community, which was legally the owner of the land. This meant that the traditional way of life of the village remained intact. The state and the landowners were interested in this, because mutual responsibility remained, the community was responsible for collecting taxes.

In addition to privately owned peasants, other categories of the peasantry were also freed from serfdom. Appanage peasants, who received personal freedom back in 1858, were transferred to redemption while preserving existing land plots (an average of 4.8 dessiatines). By decrees of November 18 and November 24, 1866, state peasants were assigned existing plots, and they received the perpetual right to voluntarily redeem them. Household peasants received personal freedom, but remained in feudal dependence on their owners for two years from the date of promulgation of the Regulations on February 19, 1861. Serf workers of patrimonial enterprises remained dependent on the owners until the transition to redemption. Household peasants and workers of patrimonial enterprises secured for themselves only those lands that they had before the abolition of serfdom. However, the overwhelming majority of courtyard peasants and serf workers did not own land.

Following the central provinces, serfdom was abolished in Belarus, Ukraine, the North Caucasus and Transcaucasia. In total, 22 million peasants were freed from serfdom. Of these, 4 million were released without land. The dispossession of peasants facilitated the creation of a labor market in the country.

Carrying out the reform required large financial costs. In addition, government investment in the country's economy has increased. In 1860, the State Bank of Russia was opened, which alone could issue paper money and engage in emission. The main source of state funds was the poll tax from peasants without taking into account the size of their income. In 1863, the poll tax from the townspeople was replaced by a tax on real estate.

The reform of 1861 became the most important milestone in the history of the country; it cleared the way for the intensive development of capitalism, creating a labor market. At the same time, the reform was half-hearted. The peasants, having gained freedom, remained an inferior class. Peasant land shortage (on average, privately owned peasants received 3.3 dessiatines of land per capita, with the required 67 dessiatines) served as a factor in exacerbating the contradictions between peasants and landowners. Moreover, new contradictions arose - between peasants and capitalists, which in the future should have led to a revolutionary explosion. The peasant ideal of justice and truth did not coincide with the actually carried out reform. After 1861, the peasants' struggle for land did not stop. In the Penza province, peasant unrest was brutally suppressed by troops.

In order to strengthen public finances in 1862, according to the project V.A. Tatarinova(1816-1871) a budget reform was carried out, which regulated the preparation of estimates and expenditure of public funds. In Russia, the state budget began to be published for the first time.

Land reform. After the abolition of serfdom, other reforms were required. The zemstvo reform of 1864 introduced new institutions in the central provinces and districts - zemstvos, self-government bodies. Zemstvos did not interfere in state issues; their activities were limited to economic and educational functions. Although zemstvos were called all-class zemstvos and were elected, the elections were not universal. The majority of zemstvo members were nobles. Zemstvos were under the control of the governor and the police. The governor had the power to suspend the implementation of zemstvo decisions.

Judicial reform. In 1864, judicial reform began (new courts initially began to operate only in the St. Petersburg and Moscow provinces. In other regions, new courts were founded gradually, over a long period of time). The independence of the court from the administration was proclaimed: a judge appointed by the government could be dismissed only by court order. Equal responsibility of all classes before the law was introduced. The limitations of judicial reform were manifested in the fact that holding a government official accountable was carried out not by a court decision, but by order of his superiors. The publicity of the court was declared, i.e. the public and representatives of the press could be present at court hearings. A competition between the prosecutor and the lawyer (sworn attorney) was introduced. Although the classlessness of the court was proclaimed, the volost court was preserved for the peasants, the consistory for the clergy, and the commercial court for the consideration of commercial cases and cases of merchants. The military court has also been preserved. Political cases were removed from district courts and began to be tried by special presenters, without juries. The highest court was the Senate.

Judicial reform was the most consistent; it contributed to the formation of ideas about human rights in society and the rule of law.

Urban reform. In 1870, city self-government was reorganized on the model of zemstvo institutions. The reform abolished the old Catherine's estate city duma and introduced an estateless duma, elected for four years. To govern the city, the city duma elected the city council (executive body) and the mayor. The elected bodies were in charge of issues of city improvement, health care and education. Like zemstvo institutions, the city duma could not interfere in state issues.

Military reform. Russia's defeat in the Crimean War clearly showed that the army needed a radical reorganization. The tense international situation, the rapid growth of militarism, military equipment, the increase in the number of armies in other states, new methods of warfare and, of course, the tasks of the country's foreign policy forced the government of Alexander II in 1862-1874. implement reforms in the military sphere. A major statesman, the Minister of War, made a huge contribution to the implementation of reforms YES. Milyutin (1816-1912).

The country introduced universal military service for males over the age of 21, and reduced service life for those who had an education. The period of service in the infantry was set at six years with a further enlistment for 9 years; in the navy, service life was 7 years and three years in reserve. Military reform made it possible to significantly increase the size of the army in case of war, improve the training of soldiers and the training of officers. The army began to be equipped with new types of military equipment, and a steam fleet was created.

Education reform. The education reform was quite radical for the second half of the 19th century. In 1863, a new university charter was introduced, according to which the rector, professors and associate professors were elected to vacant positions by the university council. This proclaimed the autonomy of universities, which became less dependent on the Ministry of Public Education. However, the teachers elected by the council were still approved by the ministry. Another event in the educational system was the introduction in 1864 of the principles of an all-class school, the creation of state, zemstvo and parochial schools. These three types of schools represented a system of primary, three-year education.

Secondary educational institutions were seven-year gymnasiums: classical, in which the main focus was on teaching ancient languages, and real - on teaching mathematics and natural science. Those who graduated from a classical gymnasium had the right to enter a university without exams, and from a real gymnasium to technical universities. Continuity of secondary and higher levels of education was established. Higher courses for women emerged.

Reforms in education contributed to the fact that Russian university science and education in the second half of the 19th century. rose to the level of European countries.

The meaning of reforms. The reforms of the 60-70s, despite their limitations, were of great importance in the fate of Russia and meant the country’s advancement along the path of capitalist development, along the path of transforming the feudal monarchy into a bourgeois one and the development of democracy. The reforms were a step from a landowner state to a legal one. Alienation from power for a long period of time became characteristic only of radical youth and revolutionary democrats. The reforms demonstrated that positive changes in society can be achieved not by revolutions, but by transformations from above, peacefully. A process of peaceful renewal began in Russia, but it was soon interrupted. On March 1, 1881, Alexander II, the Tsar-Liberator1, was killed by members of the “People's Will”, which set the goal of changing the political system through regicide.

Go to reaction. With accession to the throne Alexandra III(1845-1894) the liberal reforms were put to an end. The essence of his government's policy was expressed in a departure from the democratic elements that had arisen in Russian society, in the implementation of counter-reforms that lasted from 1881 to 1892. This was a period of triumph of conservative politics, a backward movement. The autocracy saw its social support only in the nobility. In the Noble Bank, founded in 1885, interest rates on loans were lower than in the Peasant Bank.

On March 8, the Council of Ministers rejected the constitution drafted by Count M.T. Loris-Melikov(1825-1888) and approved by Alexander II. On April 29, 1881, the Manifesto “On the Inviolability of Autocracy” was adopted, proclaiming faith in “the strength and truth of autocratic power.”

In 1889, the position of zemstvo chiefs was established, who controlled the activities of peasant communal self-government. The World Court was abolished.

In 1892, changes were made to city government; those who did not have real estate were deprived of the right to choose. The governor was given the right to direct the actions of city self-government bodies. Also, control over legal proceedings was established by the justice and internal affairs bodies, and publicity was curtailed. Since 1881, the omnipotence of censorship was restored, the liberal publications “Voice”, “Notes of the Fatherland”, and many works of Russian and European writers were banned.

In education, the reactionary policy of tsarism was manifested in the virtual elimination of university autonomy and the restriction of access to gymnasiums for children of the lower strata of the population (circular of the Minister of Public Education “On cooks’ children”). Women's higher education has been significantly narrowed: admission to the Higher Women's Courses has been stopped (only the Bestuzhev courses with a limited contingent have been preserved).

In national policy, the state carried out forced Russification and religious oppression. The result of the reforms was a significant weakening of the liberal movement, a growing gap between the immobile political system and the dynamically developing socio-economic relations in the country. The autocracy managed to isolate the people from the liberals. And if the peasantry in the 60-70s. generally did not follow the revolutionary populists, then at the beginning of the 20th century. The peasantry, alienated from the liberals, followed the revolutionaries.

Post-reform development of Russia. Years after the great reforms of the 60-70s. This is a period of rapid economic development, accompanied by changes in the social structure of society. By the end of the 19th century. Russia became the largest country in the world in terms of territory and population, with 126 million people living there.

Its economic development was marked by a number of features, the most important of which were:

a) uneven distribution of productive forces. New industrial regions - the South, Transcaucasia, and the Baltic states - acquired great importance. The Urals began to lag behind in its development. The remnants of serfdom led to a decline in its role in Russian industry. Regions of Siberia and Central Asia remained undeveloped;

b) a high degree of concentration of production and workers. Thus, in 1890, half of all workers in Russia were employed in enterprises employing 500 or more workers. According to the level of concentration of the working class by the end of the 19th century. Russia took first place among capitalist countries;

c) along with large-scale industry, peasant crafts also played a significant role in economic life;

d) penetration of foreign capital into the Russian economy, which was attracted by cheap labor, raw materials, as well as ample opportunities for the development of entrepreneurial activity. If by the 60s. foreign capital in Russian industry amounted to 9.7 million rubles, then by the end of the 70s. – 97.7 million rubles.

Agriculture remained the main branch of the economy, where remnants of serfdom remained. Some landowners adapted their farms to the capitalist market and increased the marketability of grain. But the majority of landowners were unable to transform their farms into a capitalist mode and went bankrupt. If by 1880 15% of landowners' lands were mortgaged, then in 1895 - already 40%.

For the 60-90s. the average grain yield increased from 29 to 39 poods per dessiatine, and the average annual grain harvest increased from 1.9 to 3.3 billion poods. However, agriculture continued to develop extensively. As noted D.F. Samarin, in In Europe, 500 people feed from one kilometer of land, but in Russia – only 40.

The peasantry suffered from land shortages; land hunger was especially acute in the European part of Russia. If in 1860 there were 4.8 acres of land per male soul, then in 1880 it was 3.6, and in 1900 it was only 2.6. Land scarcity forced peasants to rent land from the landowner for cultivation, sharecropping and sharecropping1.

By the end of the 19th century. the agrarian question became more acute. The opportunities for agricultural development provided by the reform of 1861 were exhausted. New agrarian reforms were needed, which could be carried out either peacefully or revolutionaryly.

Significant changes occurred in industry in the post-reform years. Not only old industries (textiles, food) developed, but new ones emerged - oil production, chemical, engineering.

In the 80-90s. The industrial revolution ended and the machine industry replaced manufacturing. In terms of production growth rates in industries that determine the industrialization process, by the 1980s, Russia took first place in the world, and in absolute production volumes it became one of the five largest powers in the world. From 1860 to 1895. Iron smelting increased 4.5 times, coal production - 30 times, oil - 754 times. Railway construction expanded widely. By the beginning of the 60s. the length of the railways was 1.5 thousand km, and by the beginning of the 20th century. – more than 50 thousand km.

But despite the rapid development of industry, the industrialization of the country was not completed, and Russia could not catch up with the advanced countries of Europe and America.

The development of capitalism in Russia, accelerated by bourgeois reforms, state intervention in economic life, and an increase in its capital investments, could not but affect the social and class structure of society. There was an increase in the number of the working class: by the end of the 19th century. the industrial proletariat numbered more than 5 million people; from 1865 to 1879 the number of industrial workers increased 1.5 times, and railway workers - 6 times. However, by the end of the 19th century. only 40% of industrial workers were hereditary workers.

The sources of the formation of the bourgeoisie were rich peasants, merchants and nobles. The number of bourgeoisie by the end of the 19th century. reached 1.5 million people. Although its economic power (key positions in industry, finance, penetration into agriculture) was significant, its social influence and political weight were not great enough. State support for the bourgeoisie made it conservative and loyal to the autocracy. Therefore, she began to create her own political parties only at the beginning of the 20th century.

The political dominance of the nobility was shaken during the reign of Nicholas I, and in the second half of the 19th century. it lost its dominant position in society: political power passed to the bureaucracy, and ideological power to the intelligentsia. Over 1.8 million nobles still retained economic power. Despite the reduction in noble land ownership, the value of noble lands in European Russia was 60% higher than the value of all share capital.

In general, the ruling circles did not want to see a contradiction between the fixed political structure and the socio-economic development of the country.

Ministers N.H. Bunge(1823-1895) and S.Yu. Witte(1849-1915), who defended liberal tendencies in the economy and pursued protectionist policies, carried out a number of reforms aimed at stabilizing finances, improving the tax system, industrializing the country and turning it into a first-class power. In 1894, a monopoly on vodka was introduced, which made it possible to significantly increase government revenues: if in the early 80s. state revenues amounted to 730 million rubles. then already in 1897 - about 1.5 billion rubles. The country's gold reserves tripled and reached 649 million rubles. A monetary reform was carried out (1897), according to which a gold ruble was introduced into circulation instead of a paper ruble and a free exchange of credit rubles for gold rubles was established.

Economic policy S.Yu. Witte was associated with attracting foreign capital to industry, banks and government loans. 3 billion gold rubles of foreign loans were attracted to Russia. Increased duties on imported foreign goods, indirect taxes on kerosene, matches and other items, and the introduction of a trade tax on industry also contributed to an increase in government revenue. The accumulated funds were used for the intensive development of Russian industry.

At the same time, the standard of living of the broad masses was low. There was essentially no labor legislation. By the end of the 19th century. Russia has not achieved democratization of public life. The industrial revolution did not affect agriculture; half of the peasants cultivated the land with plows, although Russia was the most important supplier of grain to Europe.

The state's anti-worker policy contributed to the fact that the labor movement was led by revolutionaries, and the peasantry, suffering from land poverty, turned out to be susceptible to socialist propaganda. Contradictions between the autocratic system and the transforming economy in Russia by the end of the 19th century. has become extremely aggravated.

Socio-political movement. Failures in reforming Russia by Alexander I and the defeat of the Decembrists led to the growth of conservative sentiments in society. In the 30s Minister of Public Education S.S. Uvarov(1786-1855) put forward the theory of “official nationality”, the essence of which was the assertion that the Russian people are by nature religious, devoted to the tsar and do not oppose serfdom. This theory was the basis for public education in educational institutions. However, in the “cruel age” of the Nikolaev reaction, the ideological and political struggle not only did not freeze, it became wider and more diverse, currents arose in it, differing in questions about the general and the particular in the historical process and the fate of Russia.

He sharply criticized the government ideology P.Ya. Chaadaev(1794-1856) in his “Philosophical Letter” (1836), in which he touched on the problems of the past, present and future of Russia. The author was declared crazy. Study by circle members N.V. Stankevich(1813-1840) the works of Hegel, Kant, Schelling and other German philosophers were recognized as dissent.

A special understanding of the paths of development of Russia was characteristic of representatives of two ideological movements Westerners And Slavophiles. The Slavophiles were: A.S. Khomyakov (1808-1856), K.S. Aksakov (1817-1860), P.V. Kireyevsky (1808-1856), I.V. Kireyevsky (1806-1856), Yu.F. Samarin(1819-1876), etc. Proving the uniqueness of Russian historical development, they denied capitalism, as well as the possibility and necessity of revolution in Russia. Slavophiles argued that Peter's reforms caused serious damage to Russian traditions and led the country astray. They saw the prosperity of Russia in Orthodoxy, the peasant community, conciliarity and autocracy, limited by the Zemsky Sobor.

The opponents of the Slavophiles were Westerners: A.I. Herzen (1812-1870), T.N. Granovsky (1813-1855), B.N. Chicherin(1828-1904), K.D. Kavelin (1818-1885), V.P. Botkin (1811/12-1869), M.N. Katkov(1818-1887), who sharply criticized the communal principles of Russian reality. They affirmed the European version of Russia's development, believing that the assimilation by the broad masses of the achievements of European culture and technological progress would ensure the well-being of the people.

At the end of the 40s. XIX century the nature of ideological searches changes and views are formed revolutionary democrats V. G. Belinsky (1811-1848), A.I. Herzen, N.P. Ogareva(1813-1877) and others. A.I. Herzen in his work reflected the specifics of the political situation in the country and the range of problems that occupied the minds of the thinking part of Russian society. Terrible, supreme despotism and inquisitorial control, according to Herzen, forced him to leave his homeland. Almanacs published by him abroad "Polar Star" and magazine "Bell" played a huge role in the enlightenment of Russia. Herzen and Belinsky believed that the socialism built in the future would become a society without the exploitation of man by man.

Members of the circle advocated a republican form of government and the liberation of peasants from serfdom M.V. Petrashevsky(1821-1866).

At the beginning of the reign of Alexander II, representatives of various ideological movements were united in their understanding of the need for socio-economic transformations. But the limitations of agrarian reform led to the rise of a movement in opposition to the autocracy and its split into a liberal and revolutionary direction. The revolutionary direction consisted of two movements: populism and Marxism. The ideology of populism, the most important position of which is Russia’s transition to socialism, bypassing the capitalist path of development. Neither “going to the people,” nor terrorist acts, nor the assassination of Alexander II led to a popular revolution and the destruction of the autocratic system.

Interest in Marxism in Russia increased in the 70s. In the 80s Illegal Marxist groups and circles appeared. The created G.V. Plekhanov(1856-1918) group "Liberation of Labor". In 1895, the scattered social democratic circles of St. Petersburg were united IN AND. Lenin(1870-1924) in "Union of Struggle for the Liberation of the Working Class." IN In 1898, the First Congress of Social Democratic organizations of Russia took place, declaring the creation of a political party of the working class, but the charter and program were not adopted.

So the first quarter of the 19th century. was marked by liberal reforms of public administration and the development of a program for the transformation of Russia by M.M. Speransky. This was a period of confrontation between bourgeois France and feudal-serf Russia.

The heroic struggle of the Russian people in the Patriotic War of 1812 resolved this confrontation in favor of Russia and established its priority in Europe.

The thirty-year Nicholas era was the time of the establishment of autocratic power, which was defeated in the Crimean War.

In the second half of the 19th century. The autocracy was forced to engage in self-improvement and carry out a whole series of liberal reforms to ensure the rapid development of capitalism.

However, the incompleteness of the reforms contributed to the formation of an illegal opposition and its social base. The resolution of acute contradictions in society was postponed until subsequent years.

Self-test questions

1. Tell us about the reforms carried out in the first decade of the reign of Alexander I.

2. What is the historical significance of the victory of the Russian people over Napoleonic France?

3. Expand the main provisions of “Russian Truth” by P. Pestel and “The Constitution” by N. Muravyov.

4. Describe the features of the industrial revolution in Russia.

5. What reforms were carried out in the 60s and 70s? Reveal their character and historical significance.

6. Name the counter-reforms of Alexander III.

7. How did capitalism develop in the post-reform years?

8. Give a description of the socio-political movement in Russia in the middle of the second half of the 19th century.

Modern times

1. Prerequisites for the abolition of serfdom

2. Implementation of the reform of 1861..........

3. The situation in agriculture after the abolition of serfdom........

4. Bourgeois reforms of the 60-70s. 19th century

5. Features of the development of capitalism in Russia

6. The activities of the populists and their results.

1. PREREQUISITES FOR THE ABOLITION OF SERfdom

Many contemporaries considered the reign of Nicholas I a period of “thirty years of stagnation.” Over these years, Russia has not only lagged behind in its economic development, but has also rolled back. The result of this was the crisis of the feudal-serf system in the late 50s.

The serfdom economy experienced stagnation and degradation. Serfdom hampered the development of productive forces in the countryside.

Serfdom also hindered the development of industry and trade. Since about 35% of the Russian population was in a state of serfdom, industry lacked free labor.

In the 19th century There was a shortage of land, which worsened the feed supply for livestock farming in conditions where the extremely economical regime of feeding livestock with hay was already a tradition. There wasn't even enough straw. “As a result, for centuries the peasant had small, weak, unproductive livestock. Its mortality rate was very high,” notes Milov (2, p. 8).

There was also a shortage of bread in the country. For example, the estimated need for food grain in the 50s of the 19th century was 15.456 thousand tons, and the actual harvest on average over ten years was 15.792. And this calculation was based on an underestimated rate of consumption of grain and cereals (278.4 kilograms per adult eater) (2, p. 8).

In addition, the calculation did not include expenses for distillation and grain exports. Both were due to a decrease in nutritional standards.

Subsistence farming, poverty, and low purchasing power of the population limited the domestic market and hindered the development of domestic and foreign trade.

Landowners increased the profitability of their estates not by introducing new agronomic techniques, but by intensifying exploitation. They reduced peasant plots, increased corvée and quitrents, and introduced additional duties. If at the end of the 18th century on the estates of European Russia, lordly plowing accounted for 17.7% of the land, then by the middle of the 19th century this percentage increased to 48.8%; in the black earth region it reached 52.8%, in the Volga region - 56.2%.

The corvee type of economy prevailed in Kursk, Voronezh, Poltava and many other provinces. Corvee took 3-6 days from the peasants. Feudal oppression in its extreme forms approached slavery.

The reason for this was that the Europeanization of Russia, carried out by imperial governments starting with Peter I, in addition to the growth of the military-political growth of the state's power, contributed to changes in the lifestyle of first the ruling bureaucratic elite, and then the entire noble class. A special “estate” culture was formed, largely focused on ostentatious luxury.

In addition, the time of Nicholas I was a time of development of bureaucracy. In addition to their salaries, for special merits, officials were given plots of government land for rent.

Particularly difficult times for peasants came when European standards of prestigious consumption spread from the capitals to the provinces. For such a lifestyle, money was needed. Therefore, the estates acquired a clearly defined commodity orientation, but not due to the transition to bourgeois-entrepreneurial methods of farming, but due to the exploitation of the peasantry.

In pursuit of money, landowners released peasants temporarily to factories, manufactories, and construction (otkhodnichestvo). The leaving peasants received from the landowner passports (for a period of six months to three years) or tickets (one to three months).

By distracting peasants from agriculture and accustoming them to commercial activities, otkhodnichestvo, firstly, weakened the bonds that attached them to the allotment; secondly, thanks to this, the peasants left the personal care of the landowner, internally freed themselves from the slave psychology, and became more independent. Thirdly, fishing waste was an important source of the formation of the labor market. Of course, this market was not capitalist, since the source of labor was not the otkhodnik himself, but the landowner.

The landowners tried with all their might to achieve the maximum result from peasant duties. For failure to comply, serfs were handed over as recruits out of turn, subjected to corporal punishment, property was taken away, and they were sent to hard labor and exile.

The inevitable result of pressure on the peasants was a reduction in income and the ruin of the nobility itself. The debts of landowners to state-owned credit institutions, which issued cash loans secured by estates, grew. Hundreds and thousands of landowners' farms were sold for debts. Thus, from 1834 to 1856 the number of serf owners decreased from 127 to 104 thousand people, that is, by 18%.

Thus, the objective need for the abolition of serfdom was dictated by the very objective development of Russia, but its immediate cause was an external circumstance - defeat in the Crimean War. Russia faced the threat of becoming a minor European power.

The Crimean War revealed the technical backwardness of the army and navy, embezzlement, and the weakness of bureaucratic structures. The village was depleted by conscription and militia recruitment, emergency taxes and in-kind duties.

According to surviving information, in 1856-57. More than 270 peasant uprisings took place in 45 provinces. The largest unrest was accompanied by an attempt to mass resettlement of peasants to Tavria and Bessarabia. In 1856, the movement spread to Southern Ukraine, mainly the Yekaterinoslav and Kherson regions.

Rumors spread among the peasants of these regions that the tsar was giving land and freedom to those who would voluntarily move to the devastated coast of Crimea. Thousands of people rose from their homes and, leaving the landowners' estates, with their wives, children and household belongings, rushed to the Perekop Isthmus. The government had to move military units to stop the ever-increasing flow of people overwhelmed by the thirst for freedom and economic independence.

Defeat in the war and loss of prestige made those who were primarily affected, i.e., the initiators of the reform. the emperor and his inner circle.

2. IMPLEMENTATION OF THE REFORM OF 1861

For the first time, Alexander II spoke openly about the possibility of abolishing serfdom in 1856 during a reception of representatives of Moscow nobles. “The existing order of ownership of souls cannot remain unchanged. It is better to begin the destruction of serfdom from above, rather than wait for the time when it begins to be destroyed by itself from below” (3, p. 82).

The Tsar wanted the abolition to come not from him, but from the nobles themselves. Fellow minister A.I. Levshin was instructed to probe the mood of the provincial leaders of the nobility and try to force them to act. Subsequently, Levshin wrote in his memoirs: “Most of the representatives of landowners were not at all ready to move on a new path, they never discussed serfdom from the point of view of liberation and therefore, at the first hint about it, they expressed surprise, and sometimes unfeigned fear” (3, p. 82).

The Tsar had no choice but to either abandon the reform or entrust the preparation to his staff. He chose the second. A Secret Committee was organized under the personal chairmanship of the Tsar, and the first meeting of the committee took place on January 3, 1857.

On February 19, 1861, Tsar Alexander II signed two main documents on the reform. Manifesto “On the most merciful granting to serfs of the rights of free rural inhabitants and on the structure of their life” and “The highest provisions approved by His Imperial Majesty regarding peasants who have emerged from serfdom.”

The “Manifesto” and “Regulations” dealt with three main issues: the personal liberation of peasants, the allocation of land to them and the procedure for completing a redemption transaction.

The manifesto proclaimed the personal freedom of every peasant and “granted” them some general civil rights. The peasant could now act as a legal entity - enter into transactions, sue, own movable and immovable property, open trade and industrial enterprises, enter the service and educational institutions, and join the class of burghers and merchants.

The change in the legal relationship of peasants to land was also of great importance.

Before the reform, peasants could not be the legal owners of not only their plots and estates, but also land purchased with money - they concluded such transactions in the name of their landowner, and many landowners after the reform of 1861 also did not give up their land.

According to the reform, former landowners, and then, in 1866, former state peasants were declared a category of peasant-owners - they became the owners of the plots allotted to them, although at first the ownership was incomplete (until the conclusion of charters and payment of ransom).

But still, the peasants remained an unequal class. They remained attached to their place of residence, were bound by mutual responsibility for paying taxes, paid duties in kind, carried out conscription duties (until 1875), and were subjected to corporal punishment. Even with the introduction of classless district courts in Russia, an class peasant volost court was formed for peasants for minor crimes.

The peasant community and communal land ownership were preserved. 4/5 of the lands were in communal land use. Many of the landowner's powers were transferred partly to state governing bodies, and mainly to the “world” (community).

The peasants of one landowner made up a rural society, so sometimes a village could have several rural societies and, conversely, several villages were part of one society.

The householders of the society formed the village assembly, which elected a headman, a tax collector and representatives to the volost assembly for a 3-year term. The volost included several rural communities (from 300 to 2000 male souls) and often coincided with a church parish.

The volost assembly elected the volost foreman and the volost court. The rights of the gatherings were limited mainly to economic and fiscal matters, and the volost foreman and village headman were entrusted with police functions, “preserving general order, tranquility and well-being.” They could arrest persons subordinate to them for 2 days, assign them to community service for 2 days, or fine them 1 ruble.

According to the reform, the institution of world mediators was placed over the peasants, who were entrusted with the issues of carrying out the reform. Peace mediators were appointed from among local hereditary nobles and had significant power over peasant self-government bodies.

In the district, peasant affairs were in charge of the district congress of peace mediators, and in the province - the provincial presence for peasant affairs. All these bodies were maintained at the expense of the peasants.

To satisfy the demands of all categories of nobility, Russia was divided into three zones: black earth, non-black earth and steppe.

In the steppe zone, a single statutory allotment per male per capita was introduced (from 6 to 12 dessiatines). In the remaining zones in each locality, the highest and lowest allotment rates were determined. Moreover, the highest allotment was three times larger than the lowest. The law was based on the fact that the peasants were given the actual allotment that they enjoyed before the reform. Therefore, if this allotment was more than the highest norm, the landowner had the right to cut off the “surplus” to this norm. If it is less, the landowner was obliged to reduce the land to this norm. On average, a peasant family received about 7 acres of land.

For the allocated plot of land, a quitrent or a corresponding amount of corvee work was assigned. According to the Regulations, the procedure for paying quitrents was as follows: for the first tithe the peasant paid half of the entire quitrent, for the second - a quarter, for all other tithes - the remaining quarter. Thus, the reduction of plots was unprofitable for the peasants.

The law on the first tithe was also in force on corvée estates: for the first tithe one had to work half the allotted days.

Before the transition to redemption, peasants remained temporarily obliged. The period of transition from duties to ransom was not firmly established by the Regulations, it was not mandatory, everything depended on the desire of the landowner. It lasted from 1863 to 1883 (the law of 1881 established the mandatory transition to redemption for all landowners' estates).

An important motive for this measure was the fact that in the 20 years that had elapsed after the reform, the peasants, with redemption payments, managed to reimburse the state for the loan spent on the redemption operation, return the landowners' debts to the state, but also gave it a profit of 80 million rubles (4, p. 314) .

The market value of all the land received by the peasants was 544 million rubles. But the peasants had to pay more - 867 million. The redemption amount was equal to the capital deposited in the bank and giving 6% income per year. Since the peasants did not have this amount, the state provided the peasants with a loan in the amount of 80% of the value of the plot. The remaining 20% ​​was paid by the peasant to the landowner himself. For 49 years, peasants had to repay the loan to the state with an interest rate of 6%.

The abolition of serfdom inevitably raised the question of the fate of other categories of the peasantry.

Along with the landowner serfs in the Russian Empire there were 2 million appanage peasants who belonged to the royal family, deprived of civil rights and subject to feudal rent ( specific peasants, the feudal-dependent rural population of the Russian Empire of the late 18th - mid-19th centuries, living on appanage lands and belonging to the imperial family. IN specific peasants were turned into palace peasants in 1797 on the basis of the “Institution on the Imperial Family”. Managed by the Department of Appanages through local appanage offices. Villages specific peasants. united into volosts. At village gatherings. Elected elders, sotskys and tens. The predominant form of duties was rent. specific peasants. enjoyed greater freedom of economic activity than the landowner peasants). Almost half of the village population were state peasants, who were nominally considered “free rural inhabitants” and paid feudal taxes for the use of state-owned land.

Already in 1858 and 1859, the government equalized the civil rights of appanage peasants with state peasants, giving them personal freedom.

Approving the "Regulations" on February 19, Alexander II signed a decree on the preparation of projects extending the main principles of the reform of 1861 to specific and state lands.

At first, the Ministry of the Household and Appanages intended to bring the position of the appanage peasants as close as possible to the rights and responsibilities of the former landowner serfs. However, the impression from the explosion of peasant protest in March-June 1861 forced the ministry to act more cautiously.

As a result of repeated revisions of the original project, the “Regulations” were approved on July 26, 1863, which provided the appanage peasants with some advantages over the landowners: the peasant allotment included not only “draft” and “spare” lands, but also “surplus” lands, so that the average allotment of each householder is equal to the highest or specified norm of temporarily obliged peasants. In terms of management, appanage peasants were equated with former landowner serfs.

The issue of state peasants was resolved only in 1866 ( state peasants, a special estate of serf Russia, formalized by the decrees of Peter 1 from the remaining non-enslaved rural population (black-mown peasants and ladles of Northern Pomerania, Siberian arable peasants, single-dvortsev, non-Russian peoples of the Volga and Urals regions). Unlike the landowners and palace peasants (later - appanage peasants), the peasants lived on state-owned lands and, using allotted plots, were subordinate to the management of state bodies and were considered personally free).

Knowing that state-owned plots were much higher than those of landowners and appanages, and that civil rights already belonged to “free rural inhabitants,” the government was in no hurry.

By the law of January 18, 1866, state peasants were subordinated to the management system introduced on landowners and appanage estates.

The law of November 24, 1866 in 36 European provinces assigned existing allotments to peasants, but not more than 8 dessiatines per allotment per capita in low-land districts and 15 dessiatines in large-land districts. Although state peasants were declared owners, plots of land remained only for their use. The size of the allotment was determined by a “ownership record”, similar to charter documents.

For the allocated land, peasants were obliged to pay into the treasury the “state quitrent tax,” which essentially remained the same feudal quitrent and in many areas increased by 5-12%.

State peasants - both rural societies and individual owners of outbuildings - were allowed to redeem the quitrent tax, capitalized from 6%.

The land purchasers did not receive any loans from the treasury, so the possibility of redemption was limited.

Thus, the feudal dependence of state peasants on the state department was not eliminated; this category of rural producers took an intermediate place between temporarily obliged peasants and peasant-owners.

Only 20 years later, in 1886, a compulsory purchase of state-owned plots was carried out and the former state peasants became the same legal owners of the land as the former landowners and appanages.

4. SITUATION IN AGRICULTURE AFTER THE ABOLITION OF SREPLOAD

Russia's path to capitalism was slow and painful for the peasants. The rapid growth of industry, and therefore the urban population in Western Europe, caused increased demand for Russian bread.

The export of grain from Russia from the time of the abolition of serfdom until the beginning of the 20th century more than quadrupled. To meet this demand and the needs of its own growing population, Russia began to increase the area under grain crops. This undermined livestock farming.

In per capita terms, in 1913 there were fewer types of livestock in European Russia than in 1864 (5, p.6). The number of sheep and goats has decreased to a greater extent because... there was no pasture left for them.

Then began the massive development of the arid regions of the east and southeast of European Russia. Already at the beginning of the 20th century, the main increase in area occurred in Siberia.

But Russia was not the only grain supplier. The grain was sold to the USA, Canada, Australia, and Argentina. In the mid-70s. It turned out that Europe did not need so much bread. Prices fell and a global agrarian crisis began, which lasted 20 years. It hit Russia especially hard. Due to poor roads and the lack of its own fleet, grain delivery to Western Europe cost Russia more than delivery from overseas.

The low level of agricultural technology and the lack of elevators led to grain contamination. Russia was forced to lower prices. But she could not refuse to export grain, because there was nothing else to ensure the balance of trade. The volume of Russian grain exports reached 500 million poods per year.

After the peasant reform of 1861, the situation of the peasants gradually worsened significantly. The country periodically experienced years of bad harvests and famines with tragic consequences. This was the case, for example, in the lean years of 1891-92, when more than 500 thousand people died from hunger and accompanying cholera.

The situation was aggravated by the fact that in the 80-90s. Russia was faced with the need to accelerate industrial development. Own heavy industry was required not only in the name of the great-power imperial ambitions of tsarism. Further lag behind European countries could place Russia, as Witte persistently emphasized, in the humiliating position of an economic tributary of more developed countries.

But the accumulation of capital within the country was slow, and what was there flowed into familiar industries that brought guaranteed profits, primarily the textile industry.

In order to create a mining and metalworking industry, foreign capital was needed. And in order to attract him to the country, it was necessary to turn the limping paper ruble into a stable gold one, and to do this, first accumulate a gold reserve. Consequently, it was necessary to sell abroad more than to buy. Sell ​​what you had - bread at any price. To make it more profitable for foreign capitalists to build factories in Russia rather than import finished goods from abroad, duties on them had to be increased. This further widened the gap between the prices of industrial and agricultural goods.

The implementation of S.Yu. Witte’s policy ruined artisans and deprived peasants of side earnings. Millions of small producers were immediately knocked out of their previous positions.

Having passed into the state of “free rural inhabitants,” the peasants were classified as tax-paying classes. Until the 80s they were subject to a poll tax, and until 1874 they bore conscription duties (6, 75).

Redemption payments placed a heavy burden on the peasants (they were abolished only in January 1907 under the influence of revolutionary events). In addition to state and zemstvo fees common to all classes, secular fees and duties, a tax on compulsory insurance of buildings, and fees for replenishing food capital were established for peasants.

Without a decision from the community, the peasant had no right to sell his plot. In order to pay taxes and redemption payments, peasants sold more and more grain, leaving themselves less than they needed for normal food and to feed livestock. Payments were collected at the time of harvest; few could hold back the grain until a more advantageous moment. The majority sold the grain immediately - for as much as they were given. And the proceeds did not cover the costs of paying taxes and purchasing the required minimum of factory goods. In addition, the rural population grew, but the plots did not become larger. Without additional income from handicrafts or outside work, the peasant farm could not exist. But the factory industry undermined the position of artisans.

Having freed themselves from serfdom, the peasants found themselves captive of communal relations. The world paid for the maintenance of rural churches and elected peasant positions. The volost government, subordinate to the district administration and police authorities, performed quite a lot of responsibilities regarding military service, horse censuses, collection of statistical information, control over the collection of taxes and in-kind duties. At the expense of secular fees, country roads were repaired, volost and rural schools, and care homes for the disabled and orphans were maintained.

One cannot speak unambiguously about the community (5, p.4). She played a huge role in the lives of peasants. It was easier for the whole world to protect itself from natural disasters and from the authorities. It was beneficial to have a common meadow and forest, common watering places for livestock. The community looked after orphans and childless old people. But it was the community that was the owner of the allotment lands.

Arable land was periodically distributed according to the number of male workers. The desire for a fair division grew into petty egalitarianism. Several tithes per yard were allocated in different places, because... soil quality was not the same. The number of such strips was sometimes measured in dozens, and their width was measured in arshins and cubits. On these strips, only general crop rotation was possible. It was necessary to sow at the same time as everyone else, and to harvest at the same time as everyone else. Otherwise, cattle released onto the harvested field will trample the strip. Due to periodic land conversions, the peasant was not interested in improving the land.

The community was responsible for paying taxes. She could take away plots from arrears and subject them to corporal punishment by the verdict of the volost court. In special cases, the higher administration resorted to collection measures: the sale of movable property, livestock and buildings belonging to arrears. If these measures turned out to be insufficient to cover the taxes owed by the community, then mutual responsibility came into force - collective responsibility for arrears. The law on its abolition began to take effect only in the spring of 1903 (6, p.75).

The existence of the community hindered progress in agriculture. She did not let him die of hunger, but also did not allow the more enterprising to develop. Of course, the process of stratification in the community was still going on, but too slowly. The community, delaying the stratification of the peasantry, slowed down the process of capital accumulation and interfered with the capitalist mobilization of the land.

Some prominent dignitaries of Alexander II understood the shortcomings of communal land use, but they were in the minority. In 1883, on their initiative, the state-owned Peasant Bank was created. The bank was supposed to lend money not to communities, but to individual, wealthier peasants. But community supporters again gained the upper hand. In 1893, the Peasant Bank began to lend only to land purchases by communities, which again allowed them to be redistributed.

S.Yu. Witte wrote that as a result of the reform of 1861, the peasantry was freed from slave owners, but remained in slavery to “their fellow villagers and the village administration.” He placed the need to review the situation of peasants directly with the interests of the state budget, and called for the creation of conditions to increase their well-being, and thereby their tax capacity. However, S.Yu. Witte’s call remained unanswered. Moreover, some representatives of government circles went to strengthen the community.

Article 165 of the Regulations of February 15, 1861 allowed peasants to leave the community either with the consent of the “peace” or with early repayment of the redemption debt.

In 1881, a law was passed limiting the right of family division among communal peasants; in 1889 - the institution of zemstvo chiefs was introduced, strengthening the control of the nobility over the bodies of peasant local self-government, and the law adopted in July 1893 limited the right of land redistribution. He established the minimum period for redistributions of 12 years and the indispensable control over them of zemstvo chiefs. On December 11, 1893, it was announced that leaving the community without the consent of the “peace” was prohibited, even with early repayment of the redemption debt, as well as the prohibition of the sale, donation or pledge of land plots. The peasants remained captives of communal land ownership until 1906, before the Stolypin agrarian reform.

Thus, basically the government stuck to the community in the countryside: firstly, because managing the peasants through the community was very convenient for the bureaucracy; secondly, the revolution of 1848 in France led the authorities and landowners to believe that the danger of communism was brewing in the depths of capitalism.

During the period 1866-1900. The differences in the economic status of different social groups of the peasantry increased. Some peasants (5% - 25%) became rich, bought tens, hundreds and even thousands of hectares of land, and hired farm laborers. In medium-sized farms it was possible to make ends meet. But these were a minority. The peasants partly worked the land, partly they went outside to look for work. Having received a meager allotment, they are forced to rent land.

According to sanitary and economic studies of two villages in the Voronezh district (7, p. 34), peasants rented out their children from a very early age.

Unprecedented population growth has made the situation extremely worse. In 45 years the number of people has almost doubled. If for five centuries the quantity of land grew faster than the population, now everything was going the opposite way. With the growth of the population, the peasant allotment decreased: if in the 60s there were 4.8 dessiatines per capita, then in 1880 the allotment decreased to 3.5, and in 1900 to 2.6 dessiatines. Later it was reduced to two dessiatines. The lack of land was not compensated by either increased productivity or increased arable land. The lack of land condemned the rural population of traditionally agrarian regions of Russia to a miserable existence.

Thus, despite the abolition of serfdom, the situation of a significant part of the peasants and the state of agriculture remained the biggest problem in Russian reality.

The passport system that existed in Russia, introduced under Peter I, limited the possibility of free movement of peasants. She pursued three goals: police, i.e. facilitated supervision of the population, taxation was a means of putting pressure on the taxable part of the population; peasants or townspeople who had arrears could not obtain a passport; and, finally, financial, because the passport was one of the sources of government revenue.

The government was aware that restricting the movement of peasants had a detrimental effect on the development of industry and the national economy as a whole, and yet the new law on passports came into force only in January 1895. Now peasants, townspeople and artisans could receive a five-year passport book, while nobles, merchants and commoners received unlimited passport books, and only in 1906, during the revolution, representatives of the former tax-paying classes received the right of absolutely free movement.

By mid-1890, the tsarist government was acutely faced with the problem of the so-called impoverishment of the center - the decline and ruin of peasant farms in the central agricultural provinces, and the unauthorized resettlement of peasants from the central provinces of Russia intensified. After the reform of 1861, the government tried to limit and complicate this process, fearing that the central provinces would find themselves without labor, and the settlement of peasants on state-owned lands would give them a reason to go to additional plots. Since 1890, the government has tried to regulate this process. Measures were taken to facilitate the resettlement of peasants to the outskirts of the empire. However, the government as a whole was unable to solve this problem. The free movement of peasants was constrained by the passport charter, the communal system of land tenure and mutual responsibility.

By the end of the 19th century, Witte and his opponents were talking about “overstraining the payment forces of the rural population.” Since 1898, Witte begins to convince Nicholas II to address the problem of “peasant disorder.” “Where it’s bad for the sheep,” he warns, “it’s bad for the sheep farmers too” (5, p. 7).

The accelerated industrialization of Russia could not be successful with the reduction of the traditional system of power and existing economic relations in the countryside, and Witte soon began to realize this. “When I was appointed Minister of Finance, I was extremely superficially familiar with the peasant question... In the first years I wandered and had some attraction to the community with a feeling akin to the feeling of the Slavophiles... But having become a mechanic of a complex machine called the finances of the Russian Empire, it was necessary "You'd be a fool not to understand that a car wouldn't run without fuel. Fuel is the economic condition of Russia, and since the main part of the population is the peasantry, it was necessary to delve into this area." (8, p.498-499)

Witte was encouraged to gradually move to the position of an enemy of the community by one of his predecessors as Minister of Finance, N.H. Bunge. Witte also began to see in the community the cause of peasant impoverishment and the object of admiration for both extreme conservatives and socialists. He demanded that the peasant be made a “person” by equalizing the rights of peasants with other classes. At the same time, we were talking about all rights, including property rights, in other words, about leaving the community.

“Communal ownership,” Witte wrote, “is a stage of only a certain moment in the life of peoples; with the development of culture and statehood, it must inevitably turn into individualism - into individual property; if this process is delayed, and especially artificially, as was the case with us, then the people and the state is withering away" (8, p.492).

In the community, Witte saw not only an obstacle to the development of agricultural production, but also one of the forms of a revolutionary threat, since it fostered disdain for property rights.

In his memoirs, Witte argued that he saw the essence of the peasant question precisely in the replacement of communal ownership of land by individual, and not in the lack of land, and therefore not in the forced alienation of landowners' possessions (8, p. 506).

According to Witte, for peasants the community was “not a source of benefits, but a source of disputes, discord and economic turmoil.” The redistribution of communal land was seen as a measure beneficial to “those who neglected the economy through ineptitude and negligence or are an obedient instrument in the hands of the kulaks,” who seek to “profit at the expense of those who are more economical by using their hired strips for redistribution.” And this, in turn, led to the fact that in general “among the peasants an apathetic and careless attitude towards their farming is developing” (8, p. 508).

By 1899, with the participation of Witte, laws abolishing mutual responsibility were developed and adopted.

The Minister of Land Ownership A.S. Ermolov also reported to Nikolai about the need to eliminate the “economic and everyday disorder of the peasants.”

The State Council believed that in general “there is no need to prove” the decisive influence on the unsatisfactory situation of the peasants, “the lack of proper certainty in the sphere of property and social relations.”

5. BOURGEOIS REFORM 60-70. 19th century

The abolition of serfdom on February 19, 1861 led to the need for changes in the government of the country: in the field of local government, courts, education, finance, and military affairs. These transformations pursued the goal of adapting the autocratic political system of Russia to the needs of capitalist development, preserving its class, noble-landowner essence. First of all, this affected local government. Elected bodies of local self-government (zemstvo assemblies, zemstvo councils) were created in districts and provinces. Basic provisions zemstvo reform were nominated by the commission N.A. Milyutin, M.E. took part in its development. Saltykov-Shchedrin. On January 1, 1864, Alexander II approved the “Regulations on provincial and district zemstvo institutions,” according to which zemstvos or zemstvo assemblies were created in counties and provinces. Zemstvo assemblies formed zemstvo councils (executive bodies).

The zemstvo reform laid the foundation for all-estate elective representation and at the same time ensured a majority for the nobility. In district zemstvo assemblies, nobles made up 42%; in provincial zemstvo councils, nobles made up 89.5%. For the first time, the peasantry received representation in local government bodies - 38%.

The scope of activity of zemstvos was limited exclusively to economic issues of local importance. The zemstvos were in charge of the construction and maintenance of roads, post offices, schools, hospitals, almshouses and shelters, care of local trade and industry, the construction of churches, the maintenance of prisons and insane asylums, veterinary services, mutual insurance, and local food supply. Within this competence, zemstvos were under the control of local and central authorities - the governor and the minister of internal affairs, who had the right to suspend any resolution of the zemstvo council (congress). And although the zemstvos did not have executive power, they played a huge role in the life of the country. This includes the organization of local credit through the formation of peasant savings and loan partnerships, the establishment of post offices, road construction, and the organization of medical care and public education in the village. By 1880, 12 thousand zemstvo schools had been created in the countryside.

Zemstvos were deprived of any political functions. Zemstvos were under the control of local and central authorities - the governor and the Minister of Internal Affairs, who had the right to suspend any resolution of the zemstvo assembly. The zemstvos themselves did not have executive power. To carry out their decisions, zemstvos were forced to seek assistance from the local police, which did not depend on the zemstvos.

The competence and activities of zemstvos were increasingly limited by legislative methods. Already in 1866, a series of circulars and “clarifications” from the Ministry of Internal Affairs and the Senate followed, which gave the governor the right to refuse approval of any official elected by the zemstvo, made zemstvo employees completely dependent on government agencies, and limited the ability of zemstvos to impose fees on commercial and industrial establishments . (which significantly undermined their financial capabilities). In 1867, there were bans on zemstvos of different provinces communicating with each other and communicating their decisions to each other. Circulars and decrees made zemstvos even more dependent on the authority of the governor, constrained freedom of debate in zemstvo assemblies, limited the openness and publicity of their meetings, and pushed zemstvos away from the management of school education.

Following the zemstvo reform came urban reform. In 1870, the “City Regulations” were published, which introduced all-class local government in cities.

In 509 cities of Russia, new bodies of self-government were introduced - city councils, elected for 4 years. The mayor and the executive body, the city government, were elected from the city duma. The mayor was simultaneously the chairman of the Duma and the city government. Holders of a certain property qualification could elect to the Duma and be elected to it. According to the amount of tax they paid to the city, they were divided into three electoral meetings: in the first, the largest taxpayers, paying a third of the total amount of city taxes, participated, in the second, medium-sized taxpayers, who also paid a third of city taxes, and in the third, small taxpayers, paying the remaining third of the total. amounts of city taxes. The activities of the Duma were limited to issues of health care, public education, and economic problems.

Despite the limitations of the reform of city self-government, it was still a big step forward, since it replaced the old, feudal, estate-bureaucratic city government bodies with new ones based on the bourgeois principle of property qualifications. The bourgeoisie received some political rights for the first time. The new bodies of city government played a significant role in the economic and cultural development of the post-reform city.

One of the most consistent bourgeois reforms was judicial reform (1864), among the authors of which were progressive lawyers - S.I. Zarudny, D.A. Rovinsky, N.A. Butskovsky. In 1861, the State Chancellery was instructed to begin developing “Basic provisions for the transformation of the judiciary in Russia.” The country's leading lawyers were involved in the preparation of judicial reform. A prominent role here was played by the famous lawyer, State Secretary of the State Council S.I. Zarudny, under whose leadership by 1862 the basic principles of a new judicial system and legal proceedings were developed. They received the approval of Alexander II, were published and sent for feedback to judicial institutions, universities, famous foreign lawyers, and formed the basis of judicial statutes.

On November 20, 1864, Alexander II approved judicial statutes. They introduced crown and magistrate courts. The Crown Court had two instances: the first was the district court, the second was the judicial chamber, which united several judicial districts. Selected jurors determined only the guilt or innocence of the defendant; The punishment was determined by the judges and two members of the court. Decisions made by the district court with the participation of jurors were considered final, and without their participation they could be appealed to the judicial chamber. Decisions of district courts and judicial chambers could be appealed only in case of violation of the legal order of legal proceedings. Appeals against these decisions were considered by the Senate, which was the highest cassation authority, which had the right to cassate (review and cancel) court decisions.

To deal with minor offenses and civil cases with a claim of up to 500 rubles, a magistrate’s court with simplified proceedings was established in counties and cities.

The judicial statutes of 1864 introduced the institution of sworn attorneys - the bar, as well as the institution of judicial investigators - special officials of the judicial department, to whom the preliminary investigation in criminal cases was transferred from the jurisdiction of the police. The chairmen and members of district courts and judicial chambers, sworn attorneys and judicial investigators were required to have a higher legal education, and the sworn attorney and his assistant had, in addition, five years of experience in judicial practice. A person who had an educational qualification of at least secondary and had served at least three years in public service could be elected as a justice of the peace.

The highest achievement of judicial reform was the introduction of jury trials. The jury rendered a verdict on the guilt or innocence of the accused, and the measure of punishment was determined by the judge and two members of the court. Thus, court sentences were now passed under public control.

Supervision over the legality of the actions of judicial institutions was carried out by the chief prosecutor of the Senate, prosecutors of the judicial chambers and district courts. They reported directly to the Minister of Justice.

Although the judicial reform was the most consistent of the bourgeois reforms, it also retained many features of the estate-feudal political system. The spiritual court (consistory) for spiritual matters and military courts for the military were preserved. The highest royal dignitaries - members of the State Council, Senators, ministers, generals - were tried by a special Supreme Criminal Court.

Subsequently 60-70 years. 19th century judicial reform was revised. In 1866, court officials were actually made dependent on the governors: they were obliged to appear before the governor upon first summons and “obey his legal demands.” In 1872, the Special Presence of the Government Senate was created specifically to consider cases of political crimes. The 1872 law limited the publicity of court hearings and their coverage in the press. In 1889 the magistrates' court was liquidated (restored in 1912).

The university reform (1863), school reform (1864) and press reform (1865) were of great importance for the life of the country. So, university reform not only expanded administrative and economic independence, approved the right of teachers and students to solve academic problems, but also contributed to the growth of social activity, provided the opportunity to unite in circles, communities, and various associations. The Council of University Professors was given the opportunity to select all officials of the university administration and professors for vacant positions.

In 1864, a new “Charter of the gymnasium” and “Regulations on public schools were approved, regulating primary and secondary education. The main thing was that all-class education was actually introduced. The school reform of 1864 contributed to the democratization of primary and secondary education. The number of educational institutions was increased: zemstvo schools and public schools were built, the number of students increased, and basic knowledge became available to the general population. Along with state schools, zemstvo, parochial, Sunday and private schools arose. Gymnasiums were divided into classical and real. They accepted children of all classes who were able to pay tuition fees, mainly the children of the nobility and the bourgeoisie. In the 70s The beginning of higher education for women was laid.

Press reform abolished preliminary censorship for a significant part of books and thick magazines and retained it for small periodicals. This was the impetus for the widespread development of the liberal press. The society was given the opportunity to discuss political and social issues on the pages of printed publications, in particular, the Sovremennik and Russkoe Slovo magazines.

Russia's defeat in the Crimean War showed that the Russian regular army, based on conscription, could not withstand the more modern European ones. It was necessary to create an army with a trained reserve of personnel, modern weapons and well-trained officers. In other words, it was necessary military reform.

The army reform that began in 1855 did not produce tangible results until the outstanding General D.A. Milyukov was appointed to the post of Minister of War in 1861. He was a patriot who understood the historical need to reorganize the military system of the Russian state. Having reduced the total number of troops, Miliukov carried out a series of military reforms. Instead of conscription, universal conscription was introduced - men who had reached 20 years of age were subject to it. The period of active service was established in the ground forces up to 6 years, in the navy - up to 7 years. The length of active service was largely reduced depending on educational qualifications. Persons with higher education served for only six months. The only son of his parents, the only breadwinner in the family, as well as the younger brother, whose older brother is serving or has served his term of service, were not subject to conscription. No more than 20-25% of people of military age were drafted into the army; those who were not eligible for benefits “drew lots” during conscription.

Russia was divided into 15 military districts, which were subordinate to the Minister of War. New types of weapons were put into service with the army. Much attention was paid to the training of military personnel, and new military schools were opened. The army abolished drill and the cane system, and the education and training of soldiers became more humane. Representatives of various classes were given the opportunity for promotion, which put an end to casteism in the officer corps. To train officers, military gymnasiums, specialized cadet schools and academies were created - the General Staff, Artillery, Engineering, etc.

In the 60s The rearmament of the army began: replacing smooth-bore weapons with rifled ones, introducing a system of steel artillery pieces, and improving the horse park. The accelerated development of the military steam fleet was of particular importance. The reform contributed to increasing the combat effectiveness of the Russian army.

In the second half of the 19th century. Russia is entering a period modernization. An industrial revolution is taking place. The social structure of society is changing. An obstacle to the development of modernization processes is the persistence of the serfdom system in the country, which was experiencing a crisis in the middle of the 19th century. a crisis.
 Domestic policy. The main tasks in domestic policy were:
- preservation of autocracy;
- preservation of the privileges of the nobility;
- ensuring social stability and strengthening the internal situation through creating conditions for economic development;
- restoration of the country’s international prestige, including through reforms aimed at overcoming Russia’s backwardness.
Domestic policy of the second half of the 19th century. can be divided into two stages: the reforms (contemporaries called them the Great Reforms) of Alexander II and the counter-reforms of Alexander III.

Great reforms of Alexander II.

The main issue that predetermined the course and content of subsequent transformations in Russia was the abolition of serfdom (peasant reform).
 Causes abolition of serfdom:
- serfdom became a brake on the economic development of the country. The low productivity of forced labor of serfs hindered the development of the landed estates. The increase in the duties of peasants in favor of landowners who sought to increase their incomes, and the powerless position of serfs did not allow the peasant economy to develop. The absence of a free labor market, low purchasing power of the population and lack of capital hampered industrial development;
- growth of peasant protests;
- the attitude of society towards serfdom changed: not only revolutionary-minded commoners, but also representatives of the liberal part of the nobility spoke out for the abolition of serfdom, realizing its economic ineffectiveness;
- attempts to overcome the negative consequences of the Crimean War encountered an attitude towards Russia from leading European states as a backward country, primarily due to the preservation of serfdom in it.
At a meeting with a deputation of the Moscow nobility in March 1856, Alexander II spoke out against the immediate abolition of serfdom. But it is better to cancel it from above than to wait until it begins to cancel itself from below. In January 1857, the Secret Committee on the Peasant Question was created. In November-December, the emperor's rescripts authorized the creation of provincial noble committees to develop projects for peasant reform. The editorial commission created in March 1859, having processed all the projects received by the Main Committee on the Peasant Question, developed the final version, which was submitted in January 1861 for discussion to the State Council, and then for signature by the emperor. On February 19, 1861, Alexander II signed the Manifesto on the abolition of serfdom and local “Regulations on peasants emerging from serfdom,” which specified the behavior of peasant reform in different provinces.
Conditions for the liberation of serfs:
- the land remains the property of the landowners;
- the landowner was obliged to provide the peasant with a field allotment and settled estate (the plot on which the house stood) for ransom;
- the highest and minimum standards for field allotment were established, the size of which depended on the fertility of the land and were specified in Local Regulations;
- the size of the buyout transaction was fixed in the charter;
- peasants, when making a redemption transaction, paid 20% of the cost of the land from their own funds. The state provided the peasant with a loan in the amount of 80% of the value of the land, which was repaid over 49 years at 6% annually (redemption payments);
- peasant plots were placed at the disposal of the community;
- mutual responsibility was introduced in the peasant community;
- peasants who did not transfer to the ransom were considered temporarily obliged and continued to pay rent and work corvée. The “Regulations” of December 28, 1881 obligated all peasants to switch to redemption before January 1, 1883.
 Consequences peasant reform:  - the high price of land redemption (one and a half times higher than the market price) and annual redemption payments (canceled only in 1906, when the peasants paid an amount almost 2 times the size of the loan) affected the financial situation of the peasantry;
- the process of landlessness of peasants is developing: landowners sought to reduce peasant plots, bringing their sizes closer to the minimum norm established for a given province (the problem of sections), which led to a reduction in peasant plots throughout the country by 20%. The growth of the peasant population in Russia, with the impossibility of most peasants increasing their plots, led to a decrease in the average size of per capita land allotment from 4 dessiatines after the reform to 2 dessiatines at the end of the 19th century;
- the reform created a problem striped;
- the preservation of the community preserved archaic forms of land use with periodic redistribution of land, which hindered the development of capitalism in the countryside;
- the introduction of mutual responsibility in the community leveled the income of peasant farms, on the one hand, saving them from ruin, on the other hand, preventing successful farms from developing.
Everyone was dissatisfied with the peasant reform. Landowners who lost their serfs and, for the most part, failed to adapt to the new economic conditions. Democrats who understood the limitations of the reform, which did not make the former serfs full subjects of the Russian Empire. Peasants who lost part of their plots and were forced to buy land from landowners. The abolition of serfdom led to an increase in the number of peasant uprisings and the intensification of the activities of revolutionary organizations in Russia.
 Zemstvo reform. On January 1, 1864, the “Regulations on provincial and district zemstvo institutions” were approved. Zemstvos were involved in solving economic issues:
- maintenance of zemstvo buildings and communications;
- implementation of measures to ensure food supply for the people;
- holding charity events;
- development of local trade and industry;
- sanitary measures;
- development of healthcare and education.
Elections to zemstvo assemblies were carried out in three curiae - landowning (district nobles, landowners), city (city-owners with a capital of at least 60 thousand rubles) and peasant (rural peasant societies). Elections were held every three years and were multi-stage. Zemstvo assemblies elected the executive body - the zemstvo government. The chairman of the district zemstvo council was approved by the governor, and the provincial council - by the minister of internal affairs.
Zemstvos were not created in Siberia, in Cossack regions and in national areas.
 Judicial reform. On November 20, 1864, new judicial statutes were approved. The new judicial system was built on the following principles:
- equality of all before the court;
- publicity (openness) of court hearings;
- adversarial nature during the trial: the presence of prosecution (prosecutor) and defense (lawyer - attorney);
- election of justices of the peace;
- independence of the court from the administration;
- introduction of the institution of jurors.
At the same time, class courts were preserved, government officials were put on trial by decision of their superiors, juries were excluded from considering political cases, and the Minister of Justice had the unlimited right to appoint judges.
The reform took 35 years. The first two judicial districts under the new charters were created in April 1866. The last - in 1899.
 Military reform. The defeat in the Crimean War forced the government to seriously engage in changes in the army. The military reform was carried out with the active participation of D. A. Milyutin, who was appointed Minister of War in 1861.
The goal of the reform was to overcome the gap in the military sphere from the armies of leading Western European states. For this it was necessary:
- improve the military command and control system;
- improve officer training;
- create trained reserves;
- rearm the army.
Main reform activities:
- division of Russia into military districts;
- expansion of the network of military educational institutions (establishment of military schools, academies, military gymnasiums);
- rearmament of the army with rifled weapons;
- reducing the service life of recruits to 15 years;
- abolition of conscription and the introduction of universal conscription in 1874;
- assignment of an officer rank only if you have a special military education.

 Attention! In the historical literature there are different dates for the military reform. Or 1862–1874, that is, from the reorganization of the army management system to the introduction of the “Charter on Military Service.” Or 1874, when the reform boils down to the adoption of the “Charter”, which abolished conscription and replaced it with universal military service.

 School reform. In 1863, with the introduction of a new University Charter, the reform of higher education began. The democratization of the public life of universities is taking place: the internal autonomy of universities has been restored, “sets” of students have been abolished (the limit on the number of students is no more than 300 people per university), and access has been opened to volunteer students. Universities were created in Odessa, Warsaw, Helsingfors (Helsinki) and several new institutes.
Begins in 1864 primary and secondary school reform: the “Regulations on Primary Public Schools” and the “Charter of Gymnasiums and Pro-Gymnasiums” were adopted. It was allowed to open primary schools to private individuals and public organizations, which destroyed the state-church monopoly on primary education. Studying at the gymnasium gave the right to enter higher educational institutions: after classical - to the university, after real - to higher technical educational institutions. Women's education developed (women's gymnasiums appeared in 1862).
 Financial reform. In the 1860s. There have been changes in the financial sector:
- the State Bank was established;
- the creation of joint-stock banks, prohibited under Nicholas I, was allowed;
- a unified procedure for drawing up estimates of income and expenses has been established;
- unity of the cash register was introduced: financial transactions of state institutions were carried out through the cash desk of the Ministry of Finance;
- the state budget was published in the open press;
- wine farming was abolished, excise tax and patent tax were introduced.
 Urban reform. In 1870, the “City Regulations” were adopted, which introduced city self-government according to the zemstvo type. City councils and councils dealt with issues of improvement and were in charge of school, medical and charitable affairs. Only taxpayer citizens participated in the city council elections. The City Duma elected the city council and the mayor, who headed both the Duma and the council.
Liberal reforms of the 1860s–1870s gave impetus to the capitalist modernization of Russia. However, the policy of Alexander II was not consistent. Pressure from the conservative part of the emperor’s entourage forced him already in April 1861 to dismiss one of the developers of the peasant reform N.A. Milyutin and the Minister of Internal Affairs S.S. Lansky. The revision of the most radical provisions of the ongoing reforms (primarily judicial) began already under Alexander II.
In addition, the reforms of the 1860–1870s. did not affect the political sphere. Russia remained an autocratic monarchy. The emperor’s reaction to the resolution of the provincial noble assembly and the meeting of peace mediators of the Tver province in February 1862 on the need to convene “elected representatives from the entire Russian land” to resolve issues “raised but not resolved by the situation on February 19” was immediate: 13 participants in the meeting of peace The intermediaries were imprisoned in the Peter and Paul Fortress. In January 1865, the Moscow nobility approached Alexander II with a proposal to convene “a general meeting of elected people from the Russian land to discuss the needs common to the entire state.”
In the context of the uprising that began in Poland in 1863, Minister of Internal Affairs P. A. Valuev proposed introducing some kind of representative body in order to make the image of Russia more attractive in the eyes of the European public. Alexander II approved the development of a project that provided for the introduction of elected representatives from zemstvos into the State Council while maintaining autocratic power. When the uprising was suppressed and the threat of foreign intervention had passed, the project was archived.
In January 1861, the Minister of Internal Affairs M. T. Loris-Melikov presented a report to Alexander II, which received the name “Loris-Melikov Constitution” in historical literature. According to the minister, “the call of society to participate in the development of measures necessary for the present time is precisely the means that is both useful and necessary for the further fight against sedition.” Loris-Melikov proposed creating a commission to develop issues related to continuing the course of reforms. A meeting of the Council of Ministers, chaired by the emperor, was scheduled for March 4 to discuss the minister's report. But on March 1, 1881, Alexander II was killed by the Narodnaya Volya member Grinevitsky.
 Counter-reforms of Alexander III. The main task of domestic policy was to strengthen the autocracy of the class state system. One of the first documents signed by Alexander III was the Manifesto “On the Inviolability of Autocracy” dated April 29, 1881, prepared by the Chief Prosecutor of the Synod K. P. Pobedonostsev and the right-wing publicist M. N. Katkov.
Alexander III considered his father's reforms a mistake. He abandoned the plan to continue reforms proposed by Loris-Melikov. A review of the liberal reforms of the reign of Alexander II is underway. The representation of the nobility in zemstvos is increasing and peasant self-government is being limited. According to the new “City Regulations” of 1892, administrative interference in the activities of city councils is increased. The “Temporary Rules on the Press” of 1882 led to tougher censorship: the Minister of Internal Affairs and the Chief Prosecutor of the Synod received the right to close any printed publication. In 1884, the autonomy of universities was eliminated. The circular “about cook's children” of 1887 by the Minister of Public Education I.D. Delyanov closed the doors of gymnasiums for children from the lower classes.
To support the nobility, the Noble Land Bank was created in 1885, which issued loans to landowners on preferential terms secured by land. The “Regulations on Hiring for Rural Work” of 1886 expanded the rights of landowners when making payments to farm laborers.
Measures are being taken to mitigate the severity of peasant and worker issues. In 1881, redemption payments were reduced and a decree was adopted on the mandatory transfer of all temporarily liable peasants to redemption before January 1, 1883. In 1882, the Peasant Land Bank was created, which provided loans to peasants to purchase land. In 1886, the poll tax was abolished. At the same time, direct taxes were increased by a third, indirect taxes by 2 times.
In 1882, a factory inspection was created and a ban on the labor of children under 12 years of age was introduced. Since 1885, night work of women and children has been prohibited. In 1886, workers' fines were limited to 20% of earnings. At the same time, a law was adopted banning strikes, in the event of which criminal punishment is provided - arrest or fine.
For economic development Russia in the second half of the 19th century. Characterized by a combination of old and new elements - the development of capitalism and the preservation of the remnants of serfdom. The economy is developing at an accelerated pace. The formation of a single all-Russian market is being completed. But the preservation of landownership, the class structure of society, and the lack of land among peasants restrain the economic development of Russia and become a factor in the growth of social tension.
The revolution in industry was completed, and at the turn of the 19th–20th centuries. the process of industrialization begins. Active railway construction is becoming a factor in economic growth and capitalist evolution of the entire country's economy. The number of industrial enterprises and the number of workers employed in them are constantly increasing. At the same time, the formation of industrial sectors in different regions proceeds differently. Active government intervention remains, which became the basis for the emergence of state capitalism in Russia. With capitalism, periodic crises of overproduction and financial crises come to the Russian economy.
In agriculture, routine equipment and old methods of cultivating the land, and the low marketability of the patriarchal peasant economy are preserved. The problem of peasants' land shortage is getting worse. The labor of peasants on landowner farms and otkhodnichestvo are becoming widespread.

Social movement.

The main directions in the Russian social movement in the second half of the 19th century. there were conservative, liberal and radical.
Conservatives (K.P. Pobedonostsev, M.N. Katkov, D.A. Tolstoy and others) advocated strengthening the autocratic monarchy, preserving landownership of land, spreading Orthodoxy as the spiritual basis of the state and increasing repression against revolutionaries.
Liberals (K.D. Kavelin, brothers N.A. and D.A. Milyutin, P.A. Valuev, N.H. Bunge, etc.) were supporters of the transition to a constitutional monarchy, expansion of the rights of zemstvo and city self-government, strengthening state power and the development of capitalism as the basis for Russia's economic success.
Radicals (V.K. Debogoriy-Mokrievich, M.P. Kovalevskaya, S.L. Perovskaya, A.I. Zhelyabov, N.A. Morozov, V.N. Figner and others) advocated the forced democratization of the political system with the destruction of autocracy, a radical solution to the agrarian question and the construction of peasant socialism in Russia.
 Populism. Social upsurge of the late 50s - early 60s. XIX century contributed to the widespread dissemination of the ideas of populism among the Russian raznochinsky environment, the theoretical foundations of which were laid by A. I. Herzen and N. G. Chernyshevsky.
 Key Ideas:
- the remnants of serfdom, primarily landownership, must be destroyed;
- capitalism in Russia is imposed from above and has no social roots;
- the Russian community is a ready-made cell of socialism;
- the future of the country lies in communal socialism;
- the penetration of capitalism leads to the destruction of the peasant community and delays the socialist prospect, therefore the ulcers of capitalism should not be allowed into Russia.
Representatives of the liberal trend of populism rejected violent methods of struggle, advocating the spread of literacy and a general rise in the cultural level of the people.
The revolutionary populists believed that changes should be carried out by violent methods.
In revolutionary populism it developed three currents.
1) Rebellious (anarchist) (M. A. Bakunin):
- the state is an instrument of violence and exploitation, it must be destroyed;
- the state will be replaced by a union of self-governing communities;
- the Russian peasant is a rebel, ready for revolution;
- The task of the intelligentsia is to go to the people, agitate and, from individual riots, ignite an all-Russian revolution.
2) Propaganda (P. L. Lavrov):
- the Russian people are not ready for an immediate revolution;
- the advanced intelligentsia (“thinking people”) must prepare the peasants for the revolution through propaganda;
- the success of propaganda will be ensured by a secret revolutionary organization.
3) Conspiratorial (P. N. Tkachev):
- a poorly educated peasant will not be able to understand the ideas of socialism;
- the peasant is not ready to revolt because of his conservatism and faith in the Tsar-Father;
- only a narrow group of professional revolutionaries can carry out a coup d’état and begin socialist reconstruction through a conspiracy.
The most famous of the populist organizations were the circles of M. A. Nathanson, N. V. Tchaikovsky, and the women’s self-education circle of A. I. Kornilova and S. L. Perovskaya. In 1861–1864, the first organization “Land and Freedom” operated. The second was created in 1876. In 1879, at the Voronezh congress, there was a split of “Land and Freedom” into “People’s Will” (supporters of terror A.I. Zhelyabov, S.L. Perovskaya, A.D. Mikhailov, N. A. Morozov, V. N. Figner) and “Black Redistribution” (who advocated the continuation of agitation among the peasants G. V. Plekhanov, V. I. Zasulich, P. B. Axelrod). On March 1, 1881, the Narodnaya Volya managed to organize the assassination of Emperor Alexander II, after which the populist organizations in Russia were actually destroyed by the government. Populist leaders who escaped arrest were forced to immigrate.
 Labor movement. The reasons for the emergence of the labor movement in Russia are difficult working conditions in production, low wages, lack of labor protection and arbitrariness of entrepreneurs. After the abolition of serfdom, the number of the working class invariably grew. But the first “labor laws” in Russia, regulating the relationship between hired workers and entrepreneurs, appeared only in the early 1880s. In the 70s XIX century The “South Russian Union of Workers” (Odessa, E. O. Zaslavsky) and the “Northern Union of Russian Workers” (St. Petersburg, V. P. Obnorsky and S. N. Khalturin) operate. In the 80s Marxism penetrates into the Russian labor movement. Unlike the populists, the Marxists considered the main driving force of the socialist revolution not the peasantry, but the proletariat (working class) and advocated the creation of a workers' party. Capitalism was recognized by Marxists as a natural and necessary period in economic development, including for Russia, during which the material and technical base of the future communist society is created. Marxists opposed political terror as a means of struggle.
The first Russian Marxist organization “Emancipation of Labor” was created in Geneva in 1883 by G. V. Plekhanov, L. G. Deych, V. I. Zasulich, P. B. Axelrod and V. N. Ignatov. In Russia there were circles of D. I. Blagoev (1883–1885), P. V. Tochissky (1885–1888), M. I. Brusnev (1889–1891) in St. Petersburg and N. E. Fedoseev (1888) in Kazan. In 1895–1898 In St. Petersburg, the “Union of Struggle for the Liberation of the Working Class” operated, in which V. I. Ulyanov (Lenin), Yu. O. Tsederbaum (Martov) and other future leaders of Russian Social Democracy took part. Members of Marxist circles studied and disseminated Marxist ideas, published newspapers and proclamations for workers, organized demonstrations, and led the strike movement.

Foreign policy.

The main task in European direction after the Crimean War, there was a way out of international isolation and a revision of the terms of the Treaty of Paris of 1856. Taking advantage of France’s defeat in the Franco-Prussian War, Foreign Minister A. M. Gorchakov sent a circular note with Russia’s refusal to comply with the obligation not to have a military fleet in the Black Sea. At the London Conference in March 1871, the leading European powers agreed with Russia's unilateral refusal to comply with the principle of neutralization of the Black Sea and confirmed the closure of the Bosporus and Dardanelles straits to military vessels of all European powers.
In 1873, the Alliance of Three Emperors was concluded - Russia, Germany and Austria-Hungary. Despite the extension of the "Union" in 1881 and 1884. and the signing of the “reinsurance treaty” in 1887, relations between Russia on the one hand and Germany and Austria-Hungary on the other, who had concluded a treaty with Italy in 1882 and created the Triple Alliance against Russia and France, continued to deteriorate.
In the early 1890s. There is a rapprochement between Russia and France. In 1891 a political agreement was concluded. In 1892 - a military convention. Ratification by the parties of the military convention in 1893 led to the formation of the Russian-French alliance, to which at the beginning of the 20th century. England joined.
Thus, two hostile blocs have emerged in Europe. A new stage in international relations begins, which led in 1914 to the outbreak of the First World War.
 Balkan direction. In the 70s XIX century The liberation struggle of the Balkan peoples against Turkish rule intensifies. In 1875, an uprising began in Bosnia and Herzegovina, in 1876 - in Bulgaria, Serbia and Montenegro declared war on Turkey. The movement in defense of the Slavic peoples is growing in Russia. The ideas of Pan-Slavism are becoming widespread. In April 1877, Alexander II declared war on Turkey.
Russo-Turkish War 1877–1878 was carried out in two directions - the Balkan and the Caucasus. Main events in the Balkan theater of operations:
- capture of the Shipka Pass by a detachment of General I.V. Gurko in July and its defense until December 1877;
- siege from July 1877 and capture of the Plevna fortress in November 1877;
- capture of Sofia on January 4, 1878 by Russian troops and Bulgarian militias;
- capture of Andrianopol on January 8, 1878 by the army of M.D. Skobelev;
- the capture in February 1878 by the Russian army of San Stefano in the immediate vicinity of Constantinople (Istanbul) and the signing of an agreement between Russia and Turkey.
In the Caucasian theater of military operations, Russian troops managed to capture the Turkish fortresses of Bayazet, Kars and Erzurum.
England and Austria-Hungary refused to recognize the terms of the Treaty of San Stefano. They were revised at the Berlin Congress in the summer of 1878.
 Central Asian direction. In the early 1860s. The annexation of Kazakh lands to Russia is completed, which leads to a conflict with the Kokand khastvo. In 1863, a special committee decided to start hostilities. The campaigns of the Russian armies under the command of M. G. Chernyaev, K. P. Kaufman and M. D. Skobelev ended with the annexation of the Kokand and Khiva Khanates and the Bukhara Emirate to Russia. In 1884–1885 The oasis of Mevres became part of Russia. Russian-English agreements of 1885 and 1898 assigned to Russia the oases of Mevre, Pendine and Pamir.
 Far Eastern direction. Russia is developing trade and diplomatic relations with China and Japan. The treaties of 1858 in Aigun and 1860 in Beijing established the border between Russia and China. The source of tension in relations with Japan was a territorial dispute over the possession of the Kuril Islands and Sakhalin Island.
Unable to control distant territories, Russia sold Alaska to the United States of America in 1867.
Under Alexander III, Russia did not wage wars, and therefore contemporaries called the emperor the Peacemaker.

Culture.

Liberal reforms of the 1860–1870s, capitalist modernization and the rise of the social movement contributed to the development of Russian culture.
IN fine arts Academicism with its inherent mythological, biblical, ancient and historical subjects is being replaced by realism. In 1863, a group of graduates of the St. Petersburg Academy of Arts refused to write theses on classical themes (“the revolt of the fourteen”) and created the “Artel of Artists” headed by I. N. Kramskoy. In 1870, 23 artists (G. Myasoedov, V. Perov, A. Savrasov, V. Sherwood, M. P. Klodt, N. Ge, I. Kramskoy, I. Repin, I. Shishkin, etc.) created “ Association of Traveling Art Exhibitions” to “provide residents of the provinces with the opportunity to get acquainted with Russian art and follow its successes”, to develop love for art in society and expand the opportunities for selling works for artists. Subsequently, the Wanderers included V. M. and A. M. Vasnetsov, A. I. Kuindzhi, I. I. Levitan, V. D. Polenov, V. A. Serov, V. I. Surikov and others.
I. N. Kramskoy (portraits of I. A. Goncharov, M. E. Saltykov-Shchedrin, N. A. Nekrasov, L. N. Tolstoy), V. A. Serov (portraits of I. E. Repin) worked in the portrait genre , K. A. Korovin, I. I. Levitan, N. S. Leskov, A. M. Gorky, A. P. Chekhov, N. A. Rimsky-Korsakov).
In the historical genre - I. E. Repin (“Ivan the Terrible and his son Ivan”, “Cossacks composing a letter to the Turkish Sultan”), V. I. Surikov (“Morning of the Streltsy Execution”, “Menshikov in Berezovo”, “Boyaryna Morozova” ").
In the everyday genre - V. G. Perov (“Tea Party in Mytishchi”, “Troika”, “The Arrival of the Police Officer”), I. E. Repin (“Barge Haulers on the Volga”, “Religious Procession in the Kursk Province”, “Refusal of confession”, “We didn’t expect”).
In the landscape genre - I. I. Shishkin (“Rye”, “Morning in a Pine Forest”, “Ship Grove”), I. I. Levitan (“After the Rain”, “Evening on the Volga”, “Golden Autumn”, “ March").
Famous sculptors:
M. O. Mikeshin - monument “Millennium of Russia” in Novgorod, Catherine II in St. Petersburg;
A. M. Opekushin - a monument to Pushkin in St. Petersburg, Alexander II in the Moscow Kremlin, Alexander III at the Cathedral of Christ the Savior;
M. M. Antokolsky - “Ivan the Terrible”, “Peter the Great”, “Nestor the Chronicler”, “Ermak”, “Christ before the People”;
V. O. Sherwood, architect and sculptor - monuments to the heroes of Plevna in Moscow, Alexander II in Samara;
In architecture, the Russian (neo-Russian) style (A. N. Pomerantsev - Upper Trading Rows (now GUM), Historical Museum, City Duma in Moscow) and eclecticism (a mixture of styles) (architects A. N. Pomerantsev, R. I. Klein, K. M. Bykovsky). At the end of the 19th - beginning of the 20th centuries. Art Nouveau style is becoming widespread.
For realism as an artistic method of Russian literature of the second half of the 19th century. characterized by high citizenship, patriotism, nationality and emotional richness.

 Representatives of the culture of the second half of the 19th century.

Playwrights	A. N. Ostrovsky	“Thunderstorm”, “Forest”, “Dowry”, “Talents and Admirers”, “Guilty Without Guilt”
	A. K. Tolstoy	"The Death of Ivan the Terrible", "Tsar Fyodor Ioannovich", "Tsar Boris"
Writers	M. E. Saltykov-Shchedrin	“Provincial Sketches”, “The History of a City”, “Gentlemen Golovlevs”, “Poshekhonsky Stories”
	I. S. Turgenev	“Rudin”, “Noble Nest”, “On the Eve”, “Fathers and Sons”
	I. A. Goncharov	"Oblomov", "Cliff"
	F. M. Dostoevsky	“Notes from the House of the Dead”, “Humiliated and Insulted”, “Crime and Punishment”, “Idiot”, “The Brothers Karamazov”
	L. N. Tolstoy	“Sevastopol Stories”, “Prisoner of the Caucasus”, “War and Peace”, “Anna Karenina”
	A. K. Tolstoy	"Prince Silver"
	G. I. Uspensky	Series of essays “Morals of Rasteryaeva Street” and “Devastation”
	V. G. Korolenko	“In Bad Society”, “Children of the Dungeon”, “The Blind Musician”
	N. S. Leskov	“Nowhere”, “On Knives”, “Lady Macbeth of Mtsensk”, “Soborians”, “The Enchanted Wanderer”
Poets	N. A. Nekrasov, A. K. Tolstoy, K. R. (Grand Prince Konstantin Konstantinovich Romanov)
Publicists	N. A. Dobrolyubov, N. K. Mikhailovsky

In the late 50s - early 60s. XIX century a creative community has formed Russian composers, known as the “Mighty Handful” (“New Russian Music School”, or Balakirevsky Circle). The “Mighty Handful” included M. A. Balakirev (head and leader), A. P. Borodin, Ts. A. Cui, M. P. Mussorgsky, N. A. Rimsky-Korsakov, for some time also N. N. Lodyzhensky, A. S. Gussakovsky, N. V. Shcherbachev. Being heirs and continuers of the traditions of M. I. Glinka and A. S. Dargomyzhsky, the composers of the “Mighty Handful” were at the same time looking for new forms to embody themes and images from Russian history and modernity. Such are the operas of Mussorgsky (Boris Godunov and Khovanshchina), Borodin (Prince Igor), Rimsky-Korsakov (Woman of Pskov). The “Mighty Handful” as a cohesive creative group ceased to exist in the mid-70s, but its ideas and creative principles influenced the further development of Russian music.
The social upsurge and development of capitalism also contributed to the development Russian science.
P. L. Chebyshev, A. M. Lyapunov, S. V. Kovalevskaya - fundamental and applied mathematical research;
A. G. Stoletov - research in the field of photoelectric phenomena;
P. N. Yablochkov - invention of the arc lamp (“Yablochkov candle”);
A. N. Lodygin - invention of the incandescent lamp;
A. S. Popov - invention of radio;
A.F. Mozhaisky - design of an aircraft powered by steam engines;
A. M. Butlerov - theory of the chemical structure of organic substances;
D. I. Mendeleev - periodic law of chemical elements, works on economics “Towards the knowledge of Russia”, “Treasured thoughts”;
V.V. Dokuchaev - works on soil science;
I. M. Sechenov - the foundations of the national physiological school;
I. I. Mechnikov - works in the field of microbiology, bacteriology and medicine;
S. M. Solovyov and V. O. Klyuchevsky - works on Russian history.
Russian researchers P. P. Semenov-Tyan-Shansky, P. A. Kropotkin, N. M. Przhevalsky, N. N. Miklukho-Maclay, E. V. Toll made a great contribution to geographical science and ethnography.

Domestic policy.

The problem of modernization became more acute in Russia at the turn of the century. Reforms of the 1860s–1870s were not completed and were largely stopped during the reign of Alexander III. Social tension grew, caused by the development of new capitalist forms of economic management, which were in conflict with the remnants of serfdom in the economic sphere and absolutism in the political sphere.
 Politic system. In Russia, autocracy and the class structure of society are preserved, which came into conflict with the changed historical conditions. The social support of the autocracy remained the nobility, which was losing its position in the economic life of the country. Representatives of other social strata, primarily the bourgeoisie, whose economic positions were strengthening every year, were not allowed to come to power. Upon his accession to the throne, the new Emperor Nicholas II declared loyalty to the internal political course of his father Alexander III and in his policies, especially after the revolution of 1905–1907, relied on the most conservative part of the nobility. The activities of political parties in Russia were prohibited until October 1905.
The beginning of the reign of Nicholas II was overshadowed by the Khodynka tragedy - the death of people during the distribution of royal gifts on the occasion of the emperor's coronation.
The Zemstvo movement is developing. Back in the 1870s, illegal meetings of participants in the Zemstvo movement began to be held with the aim of developing a common political program and coordinating speeches in Zemstvo assemblies (Zemstvo congresses). In 1879, at a major zemstvo congress in Moscow, the “Society of Zemstvo Union and Self-Government” (“Zemstvo Union”) was created. After the assassination of Alexander II, the Zemsky Union formulated its basic political principles: denial of government and revolutionary terror, decentralization of government, central popular representation (State Duma), abolition of autocracy. In 1894, to Nicholas II, on the occasion of his accession to the throne, provincial zemstvo assemblies raised the issue of expanding the rights of zemstvos. But the king called such wishes “meaningless dreams.” Since 1900, the zemstvo opposition has regularly held its congresses. In 1903–1905 5 all-Russian zemstvo congresses took place. In 1902, a group of liberal-minded Zemstvo residents founded the magazine “Osvobozhdenie” in Stuttgart, edited by P. B. Struve, and published in it a policy statement demanding political freedoms and the convening, by the “highest will,” of a representative body with legislative rights. In November 1903, the “Union of Zemstvo Constitutionalists” was created, in January 1904 - the “Union of Liberation”, which became the basis for the subsequent creation of the Cadets Party. Lacking opportunities for legal political activity, zemstvos in the fall of 1904 organized a “banquet campaign” on the occasion of the 40th anniversary of the zemstvo reform. The central event of the campaign was the congress of zemstvos on November 6–9, 1904, which developed a program of political reforms: the convening of “freely elected representatives of the people” with legislative rights vested in this body, the introduction of civil liberties and equality of classes, and the expansion of the composition and range of activities of local self-government.
Nicholas II was outraged by the decisions of the zemstvo congress, but on December 12, 1904 he was forced to issue a decree “On measures to improve the state order,” in which he promised to expand the rights of zemstvos, revise the laws on peasants, Old Believers, the press and the state of exception.
One of the ways to distract the population from internal problems could be a “small victorious war,” the need for which in January 1904, Minister of Internal Affairs V. K. Plehve spoke to General A. N. Kuropatkin. But the war with Japan, which began on January 26, 1904, was unsuccessful and further aggravated the situation in Russia.
Trying to weaken the influence of underground revolutionary parties on the workers and bring the labor movement under government control, at the beginning of the 20th century. the creation of workers' unions controlled by the police was allowed (Zubatovism, or police socialism). But this did not relieve social tension, and the shooting on January 9, 1905 of the procession to the Tsar organized by G. Gapon became the beginning of the first Russian revolution (Bloody Sunday).
 Causes of the revolution of 1905–1907:
- the need for political reforms. Autocracy became an outdated form of state power that did not meet the interests of society;
- lack of democratic freedoms (freedom of speech, press, assembly), guarantees of personal integrity and a ban on creating political parties and unions;
- unresolved agrarian issue: preservation of landownership, peasants' land shortage, redemption payments;
- deterioration of the financial situation of workers in the conditions of the global economic crisis of 1900–1903, difficult working conditions, legal vulnerability of workers to the arbitrariness of entrepreneurs;
- national question: inequality of rights of the peoples of the national borderlands.
 Objectives of the revolution of 1905–1907:
- overthrow of the autocracy, establishment of a democratic republic;
- introduction of democratic freedoms;
- liquidation of landownership, return of land plots to peasants and abolition of redemption payments;
- reduction of working hours at enterprises, creation of trade unions to protect workers' rights;
- establishing equal rights for all peoples of Russia, creating opportunities for their free development.
 The nature of the revolution of 1905–1907:
- according to tasks - bourgeois,
- according to the driving forces (participants) - democratic.
 Stages of the revolution 1905–1907:
- first stage: January-December 1905 - the beginning and strengthening of the revolutionary movement,
- second stage: January 1906 - June 3, 1907 - decline in revolutionary uprisings.
During the revolution, the authorities of the rebellious masses - the Soviets - are created. The first Council was the Council of Commissioners, organized in May 1905 by striking workers of textile and weaving enterprises in Ivanovo-Voznesensk (now Ivanovo). It was a strike committee that managed the strike struggle, following the example of factory councils in Europe. In the fall of 1905, Councils of workers', soldiers', railway, Cossacks, sailors', farmhands' and peasants' deputies were organized in many cities and towns. Having emerged as governing bodies of the revolted masses, they acted victoriously as a revolutionary power. The propagandists of the idea of ​​Soviet power as the highest form of democracy were initially A. L. Parvus and L. D. Trotsky (leaders of the St. Petersburg Council), Mensheviks, and Socialist-Revolutionary Maximalists. V.I. Lenin put forward the idea of ​​Soviets as a form of political organization of workers in the struggle for the proletarian revolution and the dictatorship of the proletariat.
During the first Russian revolution, 62 Councils of Workers', Soldiers' and Peasants' Deputies arose. 47 Soviets were headed or influenced by Bolsheviks, 10 were headed by Mensheviks.
The highest point in the development of the revolution was the October All-Russian political strike of 1905 and the December armed uprising in Moscow. During the December Uprising in Moscow, the Bolshevik-led Moscow Council of Workers' Deputies and the Soviets of the Borderlands led the workers' uprising, becoming the revolutionary authorities.
Revolutionary actions by workers, peasants and uprisings in the navy forced the emperor to make a number of concessions. The announcement in August 1905 of the convocation of the legislative advisory State Duma (“Bulygin Duma”) failed to defuse the situation. Therefore, with the manifesto “On Improving the State Order” on October 17, 1905, Nicholas II proclaimed democratic freedoms in Russia and announced the convening of the legislative State Duma (see table “Composition of the State Duma 1906-1917,” p. 213). The creation of political parties and unions is allowed (see table “Positions of the main parties in the revolution of 1905–1907,” p. 214). By decrees of November 3, 1905, redemption payments in 1906 were reduced by half, from January 1, 1907 they were completely canceled, and the Peasant Land Bank was allowed to issue loans to peasants not at 90, but at 100% of the estimated value of the acquired plot. On November 9, 1906, the Stolypin agrarian reform began.
On April 23, 1906, Nicholas II approved a set of Basic State Laws, according to which a bicameral legislative parliament was created in Russia (the State Council is the upper house, the State Duma is the lower house). Laws were subject to approval by the emperor. The executive power in the country was subordinate only to the emperor. The Duma could change the basic state laws only on the initiative of the emperor himself.
The dissolution of the Second State Duma on June 2, 1907 and the publication on June 3, 1907 by Nicholas II of a new electoral law without the approval of the Duma (“June Third Coup”) is considered the end of the first Russian revolution.
 Results of the revolution of 1905–1907:
- Russia began to transform into a constitutional monarchy with a bicameral parliament;
- freedom of speech, press, parties and unions was introduced;
- legal political parties were created;
- the position of the proletariat has been improved (reduction of working hours and increase in wages in a number of industries);
- the situation of the peasantry has been improved (redemption payments have been abolished, legal restrictions on peasants as owners have been eliminated, and during the Stolypin reform the process of destruction of the community has begun);
- the authority of the autocracy fell;
- the emperor retained the right to pass laws and full executive power;
- landownership was preserved;
- the problem of peasant land shortage has not been solved.
The government's repressive measures - persecution of revolutionary parties and democratic organizations, arrests of participants in the revolution, closure of some trade unions and democratic newspapers and magazines - had temporary success. Since 1910, a new socio-political crisis has been brewing in Russia.

Economic development.

The liberal reforms of the 1860–1870s, the completion of the industrial revolution, the strengthening of the financial system during the monetary reform of S. Yu. Witte (1897) gave impetus to the rapid economic development of Russia along the capitalist path, which was characterized not only by rapid pace, short deadlines, but also a shift in the stages of the formation of the factory production system and a different sequence of agrarian-capitalist and industrial revolutions. At the turn of the century, the process of industrialization and monopolization of the economy began in Russia.
 Features of the economic development of Russia at the end of the 19th - beginning of the 20th century:
- railway construction in Russia began before the industrial revolution and became a powerful stimulus for both industrialization and the capitalist evolution of the entire economic system;
- Russian factory production in many industries, due to the export of equipment and technology, developed without going through the previous stages - crafts and trade;
- a combination of modern capitalist industry and the financial and banking system with a backward agricultural sector, since the industrial revolution in Russia preceded both the bourgeois-democratic revolution and the agrarian-capitalist revolution begun by the Stolypin reform;
- active support and intervention of the autocratic state in economic processes;
- The Russian state was a major owner of industrial enterprises, railways, communications enterprises, and a state bank, which gave rise to the problem of bureaucratic capital and led to the formation of a system of state-monopoly capitalism;
- active import of foreign capital, due to the stability of the monetary system and the possibility of obtaining super-profits due to cheap labor and huge raw material resources.
The Russian economy is increasingly becoming involved in global economic processes, experiencing the influence of periodic economic crises characteristic of capitalism. After the industrial boom of the 1890s. Russia is experiencing a decline in production during the years of the global economic crisis of 1900–1903, and industrial stagnation in 1904–1908. and a new rise in 1909–1913.
The process of creating monopolies is underway. If in the 1880–1890s. these are cartels (“Prodparovoz”), then since 1902 - syndicates (“Prodamet”, “Prodvagon”, “Produgol”, “Nobel-Mazut”), since 1909 - trusts (mainly foreign ones operated, for example, “ Royal Dutch-Shell) and concerns (Kolomna-Sormovo, Putilovsko-Nevsky).
In the 1890s. The government is rethinking the agrarian problem as key to the country's economic growth and the political survival of the regime. A search is underway for new approaches to solving it. Ministers of Agriculture A. S. Ermolov, Finance S. Yu. Witte, and Internal Affairs V. K. Plehve considered the cause of land hunger to be the low efficiency of agricultural production caused by the insufficient level of development of market relations. The communal land use system is to blame. A special government commission chaired by S. Yu. Witte (“Special meeting on the needs of the agricultural industry”) in 1902–1905. A reform program was developed that provided for the individualization and intensification of peasant farms through the destruction of the community, the transformation of peasant farming into a system of small private property with a simultaneous increase in peasant plots by expanding the sale of noble lands to peasants, both directly and through the Peasant Bank.
The proposals of the “Special Meeting” formed the basis of the Stolypin agrarian reform:
- the right of peasants to freely leave the community;
- the right to allocate from communal lands and secure your allotment as private property (cut);
- the right to transfer your estate to the plot, creating a farm;
- state support for resettlement policy;
- expansion of civil rights of peasants.
During the Stolypin agrarian reform, the economic stability of peasant farms was strengthened, their marketability and market orientation increased. The process of economic stratification of the peasantry accelerated, and the number of rural bourgeoisies grew, organizing profitable, market-oriented farms.
However, from 1906 to 1917, 26% of the peasants left the community, securing 15% of the communal lands. To the outskirts of the empire (Siberia, Central Asia) in 1906–1914. More than 3 million people left. Of these, 1 million 133 thousand people settled, more than 1 million (27.2%) people returned, completely ruined, unable to find themselves in a new place. The arrival of Russian settlers in the national regions of the empire led to an increase in clashes on ethnic grounds.
The main task - to turn the peasant into a support of the political system - was not achieved during the Stolypin reform. The peasantry continued to demand the abolition of landownership.
Thus, the country’s economy is characterized by a situation of “overlapping eras” and multi-structure, which gave rise to a complex knot of social contradictions and conflicts, one of the ways to resolve which is revolution.

Foreign policy.

At the end of the 19th - beginning of the 20th centuries. As a result of the struggle of powers to redivide the world, a tense international situation developed. In 1898, Russia came up with a proposal for a general limitation of armaments. In 1899, the first international peace conference took place in The Hague, and in 1907, the second, laying the foundations of modern humanitarian law, which determines the procedure for the peaceful resolution of international conflicts, the laws of warfare (the ban on the use of certain types of weapons, etc.). But Russia's proposals to limit weapons were not accepted. In Europe, the process of forming military-political blocs is underway. Rearmament programs are being implemented.
 Far Eastern direction. European powers, the USA and Japan are seeking to divide the Far East into spheres of influence. At the end of the 19th century. Russia is strengthening its position in the Far East and increasing its influence in China. In 1891, construction began on the Siberian Railway from Chelyabinsk to Vladivostok (completed in 1905). In 1895, the Russian-Chinese Bank was established. In 1896, a secret agreement was concluded with China on a defensive alliance against Japan, which was preparing an invasion of Manchuria, and construction of the Chinese Eastern Railway (CER) began. In 1898, Russia entered into an agreement with China on a 25-year lease of the Liaodong Peninsula and Port Arthur, where a Russian naval base was created. In 1900, Russian troops were brought into Manchuria to suppress the Boxer Rebellion. The detachment of General N.P. Linevich liberates Beijing from the rebels. In 1896, Japan and Russia recognized the equality of their rights in Korea, but already in 1898, Japan obtained from Russia recognition of the priority of Japanese economic interests in this country. In 1902, Japan and England concluded an alliance treaty directed against Russia. Under pressure from England and the USA, Russia begins to withdraw its troops from Manchuria. In 1903, Japan offers Russia to conclude an agreement on dividing spheres of influence in China, but, preparing for war, it delays and ultimately breaks down the negotiations. January 24 (February 6, New Style) 1904 Japan breaks off diplomatic relations with Russia. On January 26 (February 8, new style) he begins military operations, and on January 28 (February 10, new style) he declares war on Russia.
Following the results of the Russo-Japanese War of 1904–1905, which was unsuccessful for Russia. In Portsmouth (USA), a peace treaty was signed, according to which Russia recognized Korea as Japan's sphere of influence, transferred to it the rights to lease the Liaodong Peninsula with Port Arthur, and lost the southern part of Sakhalin and the adjacent islands. Thanks to the efforts of the head of the Russian delegation, S. Yu. Witte, a number of Japanese demands, in particular for the payment of indemnity, were rejected. The terms of the Treaty of Portsmouth were regarded as a diplomatic success for Russia. S. Yu. Witte received the title of count. But in opposition circles he was nicknamed the “Polus-Sakhalin Count.”
 European direction. At the beginning of the reign of Nicholas II, a “calm” (as defined by Foreign Minister N.K. Girs) policy was continued in European affairs, necessary to solve the problems of modernizing the country and strengthening Russian influence in the Far East. During the Russo-Japanese War, Russia actually found itself in international isolation, since in China and Korea the interests of Russia collided with the interests of not only Japan, but also the European powers. In 1907, the conclusion of an agreement between Russia and Great Britain on the division of spheres of influence in Iran and Central Asia completed the formation of the Triple Entente (Entente) - an alliance of Russia, France and Great Britain, directed against Germany, Austria-Hungary and countries that joined the Triple Alliance (Turkey , Bulgaria, etc.). Weakened during the Russo-Japanese War and the Revolution of 1905–1907, Russia did not take active action during the Bosnian crisis of 1908–1909. and two Balkan wars of 1912–1913. But strengthening the position of Germany-backed Austria-Hungary in the Balkans was contrary to Russian interests. The need to resolve traditional Russian foreign policy issues of influence in the Balkans, control over the Black Sea straits and maintaining a pan-European balance of power pulled Russia into a complex set of European contradictions that led to the outbreak of the First World War. 38 states with a population of over 1.5 billion people took part in the First World War.
 Causes of the First World War:
- attempts to revise the results of the colonial division of the world, which ended at the beginning of the 20th century;
- in connection with the beginning of the collapse of the Ottoman Empire, the struggle for the redistribution of spheres of influence in the Balkans, the Middle East and the Straits area.
 Occasion The war was sparked by the assassination in June 1914 of the heir to the Austrian throne, Archduke Franz Ferdinand.
 Russian participation in the First World War. On July 19 (August 1), Germany declared war on Russia, on July 24 (August 6) - Austria-Hungary, on October 20 - Turkey. In 1914, neither side achieved decisive successes. Germany failed to defeat France and Russia at lightning speed and one by one. In 1915, Russia lost Poland, Galicia, part of the Baltic states, Western Belarus and Ukraine and went on the defensive. The war in Europe acquired a positional character. In May-July 1916, as a result of the offensive of Russian troops (Brusilovsky breakthrough), the troops of Austria-Hungary were defeated, but they failed to build on their success. Military operations on the Caucasian front against Turkey were more successful for Russia. At the end of 1914 - beginning of 1915, during the Sarykamysh operation, most of Transcaucasia was occupied. During the Alashkert operation of 1915, the Turkish army’s attempt to defeat the 4th Caucasian Corps and reach the Kars fortress was thwarted. The Erzurum and Trebizond operations of 1916 ended with the capture of Erzurum and Trebizond by Russian troops.
Failures at the front against Germany and the worsening domestic economic and political situation made the war unpopular in Russia. Anti-war sentiment is growing in the country. In 1917, the Russian army was completely demoralized. On November 20 (December 3, New Art.), the Bolsheviks who came to power begin peace negotiations, which ended with the signing of the separate Brest-Litovsk Peace Treaty with Germany on March 3, 1918.

Culture.

Modernization processes in the economic and socio-political spheres also influenced the development of Russian culture at the end of the 19th and beginning of the 20th centuries. This period was called the Silver Age of Russian culture.
Artistic culture is characterized by a variety of styles, trends, ideas and methods. In literature, along with the recognized classics of realism (L. N. Tolstoy, A. P. Chekhov, V. G. Korolenko), new authors (M. Gorky, A. I. Kuprin, L. Andreev) and a new artistic method are gaining popularity - modernism. Various trends of decadence develop in poetry - symbolism, acmeism, futurism.
IN painting the traditions of realism are continued by I. E. Repin, V. I. Surikov, and the Vasnetsov brothers. In 1903, the “Union of Russian Artists” was created in Moscow (K. Yuon, I. Grabar, A. Rylov), whose style combined the realistic traditions of the Itinerants and the experience of impressionism in conveying air and light. Various modern movements appear:
 - World of Art(members of the creative union “World of Art” created in 1898) A. N. Benois, K. A. Somov, L. S. Bakst, E. E. Lansere, N. K. Roerich and others.
 - avant-gardeists:
supporters symbolism M. S. Saryan and P. V. Kuznetsov (exhibition “Blue Rose”, 1907);
fans impressionism P. Cezanne and Fauvism A. Matisse P. P. Konchalovsky, M. F. Larionov, R. R. Falk (exhibition and association “Jack of Diamonds”, 1910);
  primitivists M. F. Larionov, N. S. Goncharova, K. S. Malevich, K. M. Zdanevich, A. V. Shevchenko, S. P. Bobrov, V. E. Tatlin, M. Z. Shagal (group of young artists led by M.F. Larionov separated from the “Jack of Diamonds” and organized two exhibitions and the “Donkey’s Tail” association in 1912);
  "analytical art" Pavel Filonov, which overcame the main drawback of Cubism - the immobility of geometric forms and conveyed the shapes of objects in a state of “organic growth”;
  cubofuturism(D. D. Burlyuk, N. A. Udaltsova, works by K. S. Malevich 1913–1914);
  Suprematism- a movement in avant-garde art founded in the first half of the 1910s. in Russia by K. S. Malevich. Suprematism was expressed in combinations of multi-colored planes of the simplest geometric shapes devoid of pictorial meaning (in the geometric forms of a straight line, square, circle and rectangle);
  constructivism(works by V. E. Tatlin after 1914).
In sculpture, preference was given not to careful elaboration of form, but to artistic generalization. Traits of impressionism appeared in the works of sculptors P. P. Trubetskoy (“Lion Tolstoy on a Horse,” monument to Alexander III) and A. S. Golubkina (“Old Age,” “Wave (Swimmer),” relief on the Moscow Art Theater building in Moscow). The work of S. T. Konenkov is diverse in themes and style (“Forester”, “Old Little Field Man”, “Nika”, “Dream”, busts of A. P. Chekhov, book publisher P. P. Konchalovsky).
IN architecture there is both an appeal to the traditions of classical architecture, ancient Russian architecture, to national motifs, and a search for new architectural solutions in the spirit of modernity: the use of new materials (reinforced concrete, steel, glass), the rejection of symmetry, smooth lines and rich decor.
The main styles in architecture were:
- neo-Russian (A.V. Shchusev - Church of St. Sergius of Radonezh on the Kulikovo Field, Kazansky Station in Moscow);
- neoclassicism (R. I. Klein - Museum of Fine Arts in Moscow (now - State Museum of Fine Arts named after A. S. Pushkin); I. A. Fomin - development of Goloday Island in St. Petersburg; F. I. Lidval - Hotel "Astoria" in St. Petersburg; I. V. Zholtovsky - House of the Racing Society in Moscow);
- modern (V.F. Valkot - Metropol Hotel in Moscow; F.I. Shekhtel - mansions of S.P. Ryabushinsky and Z.G. Morozova, Yaroslavsky Station, Art Theater in Moscow, V.V. Gorodetsky - House with chimeras in Kiev).
Russian realistic theater is at dawn. In 1898, through the efforts of V. I. Nemirovich-Danchenko and K. S. Stanislavsky, the Moscow Art Public Theater (MAT) was opened. The system of director K. S. Stanislavsky received worldwide recognition. The search for a new scenographic style filled the activities of the creator of the Chamber Theater in Moscow, A. Ya. Tairov. During these years, the creative activity of theater directors and reformers V. E. Meyerhold and E. B. Vakhtangov began. Actors I. M. Moskvin, V. F. Komissarzhevskaya, singers F. I. Chaliapin, L. V. Sobinov, A. V. Nezhdanova, ballet dancers A. P. Pavlova, T. P. Karsavina, V. F. Nijinsky. Choreographer M. I. Petipa, composers S. V. Rachmaninov, A. N. Scriabin, A. K. Lyadov gained fame.
An event for European culture was the “Russian Seasons” organized by S. P. Diaghilev - tours of Russian opera and ballet artists in Paris and other European cities in 1907–1913.
In 1908, the premiere of the first Russian 7-minute silent film “Ponizovaya Volnitsa” (“Stenka Razin”) took place. Already in 1911, a full-length film directed by V. M. Goncharov and A. A. Khanzhonkov “Defense of Sevastopol” was released. In 1909, director Y. A. Protazanov made his debut with the film “The Bakhchisarai Fountain”. The silent film stars were actors Ivan Mozzhukhin, Vera Kholodnaya, and Vitold Polonsky.
Significant achievements belong to Russian scientists. The laureates of the Nobel Prize, awarded since 1901, were Russian scientists I. P. Pavlov (1904) and I. I. Mechnikov (1908).

 Achievements of Russian science at the turn of the 19th – 20th centuries.

Physics	P. N. Lebedev	Justified the electromagnetic theory of light
	A. S. Popov	Invention of the radio
Chemistry	S. V. Lebedev	Synthetic rubber
Mathematics	N. E. Zhukovsky	Aircraft manufacturing
	K. E. Tsiolkovsky	The theory of jet propulsion, laid the foundations of astronautics
Biology and medicine	I. P. Pavlov	The doctrine of higher nervous activity
	I. I. Mechnikov	Phagocytic theory of immunity and fundamentals of evolutionary embryology
Story	S. F. Platonov, V. O. Klyuchevsky, A. A. Shakhmatov, L. P. Karsavin
Sociology	M. M. Kovalevsky, P. A. Sorokin
Economy	M. I. Tugan-Baranovsky
Philosophy	N. A. Berdyaev, S. N. Bulgakov, S. L. Frank, L. Shestov, S. N. Trubetskoy
	V. I. Vernadsky	Works on geochemistry, biochemistry, radiology, creation of the doctrine of the noosphere
	P. B. Struve	Works on economics, sociology, philosophy

Becoming more democratic education system. According to the 1897 census, 21.1% of the population in Russia were literate. The problem of eliminating illiteracy and introducing universal primary education was discussed in society. The project for universal education was developed by the Ministry of Public Education in 1906. Although it did not gain the force of law, state allocations for the development of the education system and the opening of new schools, especially primary ones, increased. State allocations for primary education from 1906 to 1911 increased more than 4 times: from 9.144 million to 39.65 million rubles. From 1894 to 1915 the number of primary schools increased fourfold. Sunday schools, work courses, and public universities (A.L. Shanyavsky University, etc.) run on private and public funds are opened.
Periodicals and book publishing played an important educational role. Book publishers A. F. Marx, A. S. Suvorin, I. D. Sytin, the Sabashnikov brothers and others publish a large amount of popular literature and publicly available books for the people: “Cheap Library” by A. S. Suvorin, “Self-Education Library”, “People's Encyclopedia of Scientific and Applied Knowledge”, cheap editions of collected works of Russian classics and popular prints by I. D. Sytin and others.