Secret committees temporary highest advisory bodies in Russia in the 1st half of the 19th century. Formed by Emperor Nicholas I to discuss projects for various transformations, the need for which was realized by the government under the direct influence of the Decembrist uprising in 1825 and the peasant unrest of the 20-30s. The main thing in the work of the S.K. was the peasant question, and their goal was to strengthen the feudal-autocratic system through partial reforms in the conditions of the growing crisis of the entire serfdom system. The first SK - “Committee of December 6, 1826” (existed until 1832) under the chairmanship of V. P. Kochubey (See Kochubey) and with the active participation of M. M. Speransky (See Speransky) tried to develop a general plan for government reforms and Thus, it had programmatic significance for all subsequent S. k. This committee considered projects for the personal liberation of peasants, the ban on alienating them without land, etc. Based on the activities of the S. k. in 1826, legislation on noble societies (1831) and honorary citizens (See Honorary Citizen)
(1832). Created in March 1835, the S.K. developed a plan for the gradual abolition of serfdom with the complete dispossession of the peasantry, which was not implemented. The result of the work of this S.K. is the preparation of the reform of the state peasants (See State Peasants). In 1839-42, the project of P. D. Kiselev was discussed in the North Caucasus (See Kiselev’s reform)
on the introduction of inventories (See Inventory). The result of the work of this committee was the law of 1842 on obligated peasants (See Obligated Peasants). SK in 1840 and 1844 discussed the issue of domestic peasants. By decree of 1844, landowners were allowed to set their servants free without land. Particular issues regarding the situation of the peasants were discussed in the SK in 1846, 1847, and 1848. Departmental and sectoral SKs were periodically created. Thus, in 1840-43 there were 6 financial SKs. In 1848, 2 SKs were created on issues censorship (the so-called “Menshikovsky” and the April 2 Committee, which operated until 1855). There were SKs of a punitive nature, operating in conjunction with the Synod
(S.K. about schismatics and apostates, 1825-59, S.K. of the highest church censorship, 1851-60). The activities of a number of S. k. were a kind of preparation of the autocracy for the abolition of serfdom. The last SK was convened on January 3, 1857 under the chairmanship of Emperor Alexander II and began developing measures to abolish serfdom. The growth of the revolutionary situation (See Revolutionary situation) 1859-61 forced the government to speed up the solution to the peasant question. At the end of 1857, Alexander II, by special rescripts, allowed the nobility of a number of provinces to begin drawing up projects “On the organization and improvement of the life of landowner peasants,” that is, projects for the abolition of serfdom. After the publication of these rescripts, the preparation of peasant reforms became public. At the beginning of 1858, the Committee was transformed into the Main Committee for Peasant Affairs. Lit.: Semevsky V.I., The peasant question in Russia in the 18th and first half of the 19th centuries, vol. 2, St. Petersburg, 1888; Alekseev V.P., Secret committees under Nicholas I, in the book: Great Reform, vol. 2, M., 1911; Zayonchkovsky P. A., Abolition of serfdom in Russia, 3rd ed., M., 1968, p. 55-59, 68-94. A. G. Tartakovsky.
Great Soviet Encyclopedia. - M.: Soviet Encyclopedia. 1969-1978 .
See what “Secret Committees” are in other dictionaries:
Temporary supreme advisory bodies in Russia in the first half of the 19th century. Contents 1 Creation of secret committees 2 Secret committees ... Wikipedia
In Russia in the 2nd quarter. 19th century temporary government institutions. Created to discuss projects for various reforms, in 1857 58 to discuss projects for preparing the abolition of serfdom; in 1858 renamed the Main Committee ... Big Encyclopedic Dictionary
SECRET COMMITTEES, temporary state institutions, were created in the 2nd quarter of the 19th century. during the reign of Emperor Nicholas I to discuss projects for various reforms. During the reign of Emperor Alexander II in 1857, the S. K. was created to discuss... ... Russian history
In Russia in the 2nd quarter. 19th century temporary government institutions. Created to discuss projects for various reforms, in 1857 58 to discuss projects for preparing the abolition of serfdom; in 1858 renamed the Main Committee. Political... ... Political science. Dictionary.
Temporary supreme bureaucratic. institutions created during the reign of Nicholas I to discuss reform projects. Fearing societies. fermentation, Nicholas I surrounded the activities of the S.K. with the deepest secrecy, attracting only those especially trusted to them... ... Soviet historical encyclopedia
In Russia in the second quarter of the 19th century. temporary government institutions. Created to discuss projects for various reforms; in 1857 58 the Secret Committee on Peasant Affairs operated to discuss projects for preparing the abolition of serfdom... ... encyclopedic Dictionary
SECRET COMMITTEES- temporary highest advisory bodies in Russia in the 1st half of the 19th century. They were formed by Emperor Nicholas I to discuss projects for various transformations. The main thing in the work of Ok. there was a peasant question - preparations for the abolition of serfdom. Before… … Russian statehood in terms. 9th – early 20th century
A; m. [French] comité from Lat. committere entrust] 1. An elected collegial body that governs what l. work. Executive office. Local office of the trade union. 2. A government body that performs certain functions. K. by... ... encyclopedic Dictionary
Bourgeois reform, which abolished serfdom in Russia and marked the beginning of the capitalist formation in the country. The main cause of K. r. There was a crisis in the feudal serf system. “The power of economic development that pulled Russia in... ...
In the 1st half of the 1st millennium AD. e. among the peoples of the Northern Black Sea region, the Caucasus and Central Asia, the slave system was in decline. It was replaced by a new socio-economic formation, Feudalism. Feudal relations... ... Great Soviet Encyclopedia
The Main Committee for Peasant Affairs was formed
On January 3 (15), 1857, a Secret Committee was established to develop general principles for the abolition of serfdom.
The committee was under the direct authority and chairmanship of the emperor. In the absence of the emperor, the prince presided. A.F. Orlov (January 3 (15), 1857 - September 25 (October 7), 1860), then led. book Konstantin Nikolaevich (September 25 (October 7) 1860 - February 19 (March 3) 1861). The committee included: D. N. Bludov, V. F. Adlerberg, M. A. Korf, P. P. Gagarin, K. V. Chevkin, Ya. I. Rostovtsev, lead. book Konstantin Nikolaevich, Ministers: Internal Affairs, Finance, State Property, Justice. The management of the committee's affairs was entrusted to State Secretary V.P. Butkov, and the committee's office work was carried out by the State Chancellery.
At the meetings of the committee, questions were considered about the general basis for carrying out the reform, as well as the question “about the procedure for starting work on the liberation of the serf class in the provinces of Vilna, Kovno and Grodno.”
On February 16 (28), 1858, the Secret Committee was renamed the Main Committee for Peasant Affairs, and from February 21 (March 5), 1858, its existence became public.
The committee reviewed draft rescripts to governors, according to which provincial noble committees were formed locally. On March 30 (April 11), 1859, Editorial Commissions were established to draw up a draft general regulation on the organization of life of landowner peasants. During the period of the commissions' activities, the committee had no influence on the drafting of reform projects. On October 10 (22), 1860, the editorial commissions were closed, and the projects they prepared were submitted to the committee for consideration, after which they were presented to the General Meeting of the State Council.
The last meeting of the committee took place on February 14 (26), 1861, and on February 19 (March 3), 1861, the committee was abolished due to the completion of its activities simultaneously with the approval of legislative acts on the abolition of serfdom.
Lit.: Alekseev V.P. Secret committees under Nicholas I // Great Reform. M., 1911. T. 2; Higher and central government institutions of Russia. 1801-1917 St. Petersburg, 1998. T. 1; Zayonchkovsky P. A. Abolition of serfdom in Russia. M., 1968; Semevsky V.I. The peasant question in Russia in the 18th and first half of the 19th centuries. St. Petersburg, 1888. T. 2.
See also in the Presidential Library:
Journals of the Secret and Main Committees for Peasant Affairs. [T. 2]: Supplements to the Journal of the Main Committee on Peasant Affairs for meetings: 10, 14, 15, 19, 21, 22, 24, 26, 27 and 31 Oct. ; 2, 3, 4, 7, 9, 10, 11, 12, 14, 16, 17, 18, 19, 21, 23, 24, 25, 26, 28 and 30 Nov. ; 1, 2, 3, 7, 8, 10, 14, 17, 23, 26, 29, 30 and 31 Dec. 1860 and January 7 and 14. 1861. Pg., 1915
;Meanwhile, according to the old custom, a secret committee for peasant affairs was formed, similar to those that were formed during the reign of Nicholas. This committee was opened on January 3, 1857 under the personal chairmanship of the emperor from persons especially trusted. The committee was tasked with developing a general plan for organizing and improving the situation of serfs. The work of this committee shows us that in 1857 there was no plan yet, information about the state of affairs had not yet been collected, even the basic principles of liberation had not been worked out; for example, they have not yet decided whether to free the peasants with land or without land. The committee got down to business. Meanwhile, in November, the long-awaited Vilna Governor-General Nazimov arrived in St. Petersburg with the results of his meetings with the local nobility. Nazimov appeared hanging his head; The leaders of the nobility, perhaps under the influence of festive impressions in Moscow, said too much, for which they received due instruction from their voters, the nobles of the Lithuanian provinces. Local provincial committees, formed to review Bibikov's inventories, decisively announced that they did not want [neither] the liberation of the peasants, nor a change in their situation. When Nazimov reported about this, the following rescript was drawn up in his name, marked November 20, 1857 (Please listen not to the rescript, but to the meaning.) The rescript stated that the sovereign gladly accepted Nazimov’s expressed desire of the Lithuanian nobles to improve the situation of the serfs, therefore, he allows the local nobility to form a committee from among them to develop a provision that would implement this good intention. These committees should be composed of deputies from the district nobles of the provinces, two from each district, and from experienced landowners appointed by the governor-general. These provincial noble committees, having developed their projects for a new system for the peasants, were supposed to submit them to the commission under the governor-general; having examined the project of the provincial committees, it must develop a common project for all three Lithuanian provinces. The rescript also indicated the principles on which these projects should be based. These are the three principles: peasants buy back their estates from the landowners; They use field land by agreement with the landowner. The further arrangement of the peasants should be such that it ensures the continued payment of state and zemstvo taxes by the peasants. The peasants, having received the estate and land from the landowners, settle into rural societies, but remain under the authority of the landowner as a patrimonial police observer. The local nobles greeted the rescript given to Nazimov with great surprise, having difficulty understanding what they had given the reason for.
But then another spark flashed in St. Petersburg. It was decided to send an invitation to the Lithuanian nobility to take care of organizing the situation of the peasants and to inform the nobility of the remaining provinces in case they wanted the same thing that the Lithuanian nobility wanted. They say that the idea of generalizing the case was first proposed by Grand Duke Constantine, who had previously been included in the secret committee; this idea soon received public expression. Around that time, the Voronezh governor Smirin introduced himself to the sovereign; the sovereign unexpectedly told him that he had decided to complete the work of the serfs and hoped that he would persuade his nobles to help him in this. Smirin turns to Lansky for an explanation of these words and with the question whether the Voronezh nobility will receive some kind of order on this matter. “He will,” Lanskoy answered, laughing. Around that time, someone remembered that some St. Petersburg nobles expressed a desire to determine more precisely the position of peasant duties in favor of landowners; the act was abandoned; now it was dug up, and a new rescript followed on December 5: “Since the St. Petersburg nobility has expressed a desire to improve the situation of the peasants, they are allowed to set up a committee, etc.” The nobility greeted this rescript, given in the name of the St. Petersburg Governor General, Count Ignatiev, with widened eyes. Finally, all these rescripts to Nazimov and the circulars of the Minister of Internal Affairs were sent to the governors of all provinces so that these acts were taken into account. People in St. Petersburg were waiting with great impatience to see how the nobles would react to this message.
PROVINCIAL COMMITTEES.
The Ryazan nobility was the first to speak out; they expressed a desire to set up a committee from among themselves to develop a project for a new system of serfs. Willy-nilly, one after another, other provinces followed this example, and our Moscow was among the last. By mid-July 1858, provincial committees had been opened in all provinces, formed in the same way as the Lithuanian general governorates had been ordered to form provincial committees; they were composed under the chairmanship of the provincial leader from deputies - one from the district nobility - and from those appointed especially by local governor of the landowners. These provincial committees worked for about a year, developing local regulations on the organization of life of landowner peasants. Thus, a vaguely conceived, insufficiently prepared affair was set in motion, which led to a huge legislative revolution.
In February 1859, when the first provincial committees were opened, then the secret committee for peasant affairs received a public official existence, as the main leader of the undertaking. Under him, as the projects developed by the provincial committees began to arrive, two editorial commissions were formed, which were supposed to give final development to the provincial projects. One of them was to develop general provisions on the “liberation” of the peasants, as they finally decided to talk about the matter; the other was to develop local provisions for different parts of Russia, which, by their conditions, required changes in the general provisions. The first commission of general provisions was made up of officials involved in the matter of liberation of departments (these were the Ministry of Internal Affairs, Finance, State Property and the second department of the Own E.V. Chancellery, as a codification institution); the second editorial commission was made up of representatives of the nobility, but not elected ones, but of experts appointed by the chairman of the commission from the provincial committees or generally from among the nobility. The chairman of the editorial commission was a man who enjoyed the special trust of the emperor, the head of the military educational institutions of Rostovtsev, who knew the state of affairs poorly, having never studied the economic situation of Russia, but now, having discovered a sincere desire to help the cause, inspired confidence. Rostovtsev and formed an editorial commission for local regulations, calling on experienced people from among the provincial committees; the work was predominantly concentrated in a close circle of the most thinking and working people invited to the commission; These were the new Minister of Internal Affairs, Nikolai Milyutin, and noble experts: from the Samara committee - Yuri Samarin and the Tula committee - Prince Cherkassky. They, together with the commission’s clerks Zhukovsky and Solovyov, formed the circle that, in fact, bore the brunt of the work. In the main committee they were supported by Grand Duke Constantine; The opposition to the case consisted mainly of two members invited to the editorial commission: the St. Petersburg provincial leader of the nobility, Count Shuvalov and Prince Paskevich, who were also joined by Count Bobrinsky, who belonged to the Moscow nobility.
These two drafting commissions were supposed to, having developed general and local provisions, submit them to the general commission, which was attached to the main committee, which was supposed to subject the provisions to final consideration. These works continued from 1859 to 1860, constantly developing and clarifying the foundations of the new law. The provincial committees completed their studies by the middle of 1859.
REFORM PROJECTS.
When we examined the projects of the provincial committees, we found that they, by their nature, represented three different solutions to the matter. Some projects were against any liberation, proposing only measures to improve the situation of the peasants; They were headed by the project of the Moscow provincial committee. Others allowed the liberation of the peasants, but without the purchase of land; They were headed by the project of the St. Petersburg committee. Finally, others insisted on the need to free the peasants with their land; The first provincial committee to express the idea of the need to buy out the land, which was to go into the possession of the peasants, was the Tver committee, led by its provincial leader Unkovsky. This is the environment from which came the main principles on which the Regulations of February 19 are based.
EDITORIAL COMMISSIONS.
The work of the editorial commission, that is, of the circle I mentioned, took place amid the noisy and fierce discussions of the noble society, which, I don’t know how it was caught up in the matter, was now trying to stop it. The darkness of addresses and notes submitted to the commission fiercely attacked the liberals on the editorial commissions. According to the promulgated decree, the drafting commissions were to present the draft provisions they had developed for discussion to deputies of the nobility specially summoned from the provincial committees. By the fall of 1859, the editorial commissions had processed projects for 21 provinces. Deputies were summoned from these provinces; these deputies were named deputies of the first conscription. The deputies walked with the idea that they would take an active part in the final development of the provisions, forming, so to speak, an estate representation; Instead, the Minister of the Interior met them in his morning attire in the hallway, talked to them dryly and invited them, when necessary, to give some information and explanations to the editorial commissions. The deputies, who were not even called by the name of the deputies, became indignant and appealed to the government with a request to allow them to gather for a meeting; They were allowed to do this, and they began to gather in Shuvalov’s office. There is no need to tell what they talked about there; and there they talked about many things that went beyond the question of serfs. The nature of these discussions was such that they later advised to stop these meetings. Irritated, the deputies of the first conscription went home.
By the beginning of 1860, the remaining projects were processed and new deputies were called from the provincial committees: deputies of the second conscription. Meanwhile, the strained relations between the government and the nobility had such a strong effect on the chairman of the editorial commission, the lively and active Rostovtsev, that he fell ill and died in February 1860. The entire society, expecting a successful resolution of the issue, was amazed to recognize his successor; it was the Minister of Justice Count Panin. He was a serf-owner at heart, and the appointment was interpreted by the nobility as an admission that the embarrassed government wanted to postpone the matter. But the matter was persistently carried on from above, and the editorial commissions, led by Panin, had to develop and adopt the final position. The deputies of the second draft were received cordially; however, no one, not even Shuvalov, invited them to dinner. This second appeal, already pre-disposed against the case, was expressed more conservatively than the first. The editorial commissions then finally accepted the idea of the need for the compulsory purchase of landowners' land into the possession of the peasants; the most benevolent landowners only wanted a ransom in order to quickly get rid of serfdom. The deputies of the second draft resolutely rebelled against compulsory redemption and insisted on the land arrangement of the peasants by their voluntary agreement with the landowners. This principle of voluntary agreement was therefore introduced by representatives of the conservative nobility in defiance of the commissions. After listening to comments from the deputies of the second draft, the editorial commissions continued their work. It had not yet been brought to an end when 1861 arrived; then the highest order followed to finish the matter by the day of accession to the throne. At an accelerated pace, the editorial commissions, having given the final form to the general provisions, passed them first through the general commission, to the committee of the State Council, so that it was possible to print the general and local provisions by February 19, 1861. So work went on on this law, or better yet, on this complex legislation that resolved the most difficult issue in our history.
in Russia in the second quarter of the 19th century. temporary government institutions were created to discuss projects for various reforms in 1857-1858. - to discuss projects for preparing the abolition of serfdom. In 1858 they were renamed the Main Committee.
Excellent definition
Incomplete definition ↓
SECRET COMMITTEES
temporary supreme bureaucratic institutions created during the reign of Nicholas I to discuss reform projects. Fearing societies. fermentation, Nicholas I surrounded the activities of the S.K. with the deepest secrecy, attracting only especially trusted dignitaries to them. During his reign, no less than 10 S. K. Krest were convened. the question was central to their work. The first S. k. - “December 6, 1826” (formally existed until 1832) under the prev. V. P. Kochubey and with the active participation of M. M. Speransky - to develop a general plan for the state. transformations, considered projects for the personal liberation of peasants, improving the life of the state. villages, proposals for the “cleansing” of the nobility from foreign elements, for the creation of new classes, for the streamlining of the center. and local administration. S. k. 1835-36 (the leading role belonged to Speransky, E. P. Kankrin and P. D. Kiselev) discussed the issue of gradual replacement of serfdom. contractual relations: peasants were given the right to free estate, and all land remained the property of the landowners. The general solution is cross. the problem was supposed to begin with the reform of the state-owned village; for this matter, S. k. were transferred to the 5th department of his own imp. Majesty's Office at hand. Kiseleva. S. K. 1839-42 discussed Kiselev’s project on the introduction of inventories. S. K. 1846 considered a note from the Minister of Internal Affairs. cases of L. A. Perovsky on the limitation of serfdom by regulating relations within the estate; The committees in 1840 and 1844 dealt with the issue of dismissal of servants, in 1847 and 1848 - with the redemption of peasants from estates that were subject to public. bidding. Certain SK projects were reflected in legislation in a truncated form (legislation on noble associations in 1831, on hereditary and personal “honorary citizens” in 1832, on “obligated” peasants in 1842, on the release of servants without land from 1844 and etc.). The experience of S. k. was taken into account when developing the conditions for the abolition of serfdom in 1861; The last C. k. 1857 was transformed in 1858 into the Main Committee for Peasant Affairs. Lit.: RIO, vol. 74, 90, St. Petersburg, 1891-94; Semevsky V.I., Cross. question in Russia in the 18th and first half. XIX century, vol. 2, St. Petersburg, 1888; Kiesewetter A. A., Int. politics during the reign of Nikolai Pavlovich, in the book: History of Russia in the 19th century, vol. 1, M., (1907); Alekseev V.P., Secret committees under Nicholas I, in the book: Great Reform, vol. 2, M., 1911; Polievktov M., Nicholas I. Biography and review of the reign, M., 1918; Druzhinin N. M., State. peasants and reform by P. D. Kiselev, vol. 1-2, M.-L., 1946-58; Arkhipova T. A., Secret Committee December 6 1826, Tr. MGIAI, vol. 20, M., 1965. A. G. Tartakovsky. Moscow.
transformations, the need for which was realized by the government under the direct influence of the Decembrist uprising in 1825 and the peasant unrest of the 20-30s. The main thing in the work Secret committees there was a peasant question, and their goal was to strengthen the feudal-autocratic system through partial reforms in the conditions of the growing crisis of the entire serfdom system. First Secret committees- “Committee of December 6, 1826” (existed until 1832) chaired by V.P. Kochubey and with the active participation of M.M. Speransky tried to develop a general plan for government reforms and, thus, had programmatic significance for all subsequent Secret committees This committee considered projects for the personal liberation of peasants, the ban on alienating them without land, etc. Based on the activities Secret committees 1826 laws on noble societies were approved (1831) and honorary citizens (1832). Created March 1835 Secret committees developed a plan for the gradual abolition of serfdom with the complete dispossession of the peasantry, which was not implemented. The result of this Secret committees- preparation of reform state peasants. In 1839-42 Secret committees P.D.’s project was discussed. Kiseleva about the introduction inventory. The result of the work of this committee was the law of 1842 on obligated peasants. Secret committees in 1840 and 1844 they discussed the issue of domestic peasants. By decree of 1844, landowners were allowed to set their servants free without land. Particular issues of the situation of peasants were discussed in Secret committees in 1846, 1847 and 1848. Departmental and sectoral organizations were periodically created Secret committees So, in 1840-43 there were 6 financial Secret committees In 1848 2 were created Secret committees on issues of censorship (the so-called “Menshikovsky” and the April 2 Committee, which operated until 1855). There were Secret committees punitive in nature, acting in conjunction with Synod (Secret committees about schismatics and apostates, 1825-59, Secret committees highest church censorship, 1851-60).
Activities of the series Secret committees was a kind of preparation of the autocracy for the abolition of serfdom. Last Secret committees was convened on January 3, 1857 under the chairmanship of Emperor Alexander II and began developing measures to abolish serfdom. Rise revolutionary situation 1859-61 forced the government to speed up the solution to the peasant question. At the end of 1857, Alexander II, by special rescripts, allowed the nobility of a number of provinces to begin drawing up projects “On the organization and improvement of the life of landowner peasants,” that is, projects for the abolition of serfdom. After the publication of these rescripts, the preparation of peasant reforms became public. Early 1858 Secret committees was converted into Main Committee for Peasant Affairs.
Lit.: Semevsky V.I., The peasant question in Russia in the 18th and first half of the 19th centuries, vol. 2, St. Petersburg, 1888; Alekseev V.P., Secret committees under Nicholas I, in the book: Great Reform, vol. 2, M., 1911; Zayonchkovsky P. A., Abolition of serfdom in Russia, 3rd ed., M., 1968, p. 55-59, 68-94.
A. G. Tartakovsky.
In the Great Soviet Encyclopedia next to the word “Secret Committees”
Secretin | Letter "C" | To the beginning | Letter combination “CE” | Secrets
Article about the word " Secret committees» in the Great Soviet Encyclopedia was read 3359 times
Russia under Nicholas I
Domestic policy of Nicholas I (1825 - 1855)
Nicholas I, who fundamentally rejected any fundamental changes in the management system, tried to “improve” it through even greater bureaucratization. The staff of officials in all departments was significantly expanded, and the volume of business correspondence between various authorities increased enormously. The activities of the administration acquired an increasingly formal, clerical character.
The king himself felt this. It is no coincidence that Nikolai sought to tear out those categories of cases that were of particular importance from the general management system and subordinate them to his personal control. His Imperial Majesty's Own Chancellery acquired particular importance: its II department, under the direct supervision of Nicholas, was engaged in the codification of laws, III - political investigation, V - state peasants, etc.
This system of “emergency management” did not eliminate the shortcomings of the huge bureaucratic machine, but exacerbated them even more. Nicholas I attached great importance to the fight against the revolutionary movement. For this purpose, the Minister of Education Uvarov developed the so-called. the theory of official nationality, the essence of which was clearly expressed by the formula “Orthodoxy, autocracy, nationality.” It was meant that the spiritual life of the Russian people is determined by the Orthodox Church, and the political life by the autocratic system.
This situation was considered ideal; any attempts to change it had to be suppressed mercilessly. This theory became the official ideology from the standpoint of which the bureaucracy, censorship, and Section III acted.
At the same time, Nicholas I was forced to look for a way to soften serfdom, which increasingly contradicted state interests, hindering economic development.
According to the decree on obligated peasants (1842), the landowner could grant personal freedom to the serfs, leaving the land in his own ownership. However, he had to transfer part of this land to the liberated peasants for use on the terms of their serving certain duties. Just like the decree on free cultivators (1803), this decree, not binding on landowners, did not produce any results.
An inventory reform was carried out - the only transformation that was mandatory for the landed nobility. When compiling "inventories" - inventories of landowners' estates - norms of corvée and quitrent were established, which the owner of the estate had no right to violate. "Inventory" seriously limited the exploitation of serfs.
However, this reform covered only the Kiev General Government (several provinces). In carrying out it, the government pursued primarily political goals: the landowners in these parts were mainly Poles and Catholics, who were in constant opposition to the autocratic government, which sought to find support in the Orthodox Ukrainian peasantry. The authorities did not even think about extending this reform to the Great Russian provinces.
Let us also note the reform of the second half of the 1830s, which concerned state peasants.
A partial resettlement of peasants from densely populated areas was organized, land plots were increased, taxes were reduced, and a network of medical and educational institutions was created in villages. The government saw its task not only in streamlining the state economy; it also sought to “set a good example” for the local nobility.
However, the excessive bureaucratization of all activities, the creation of an extensive staff of the administration, which, while caring for the peasantry, was supposed to exist at their expense - all this largely negated the positive aspects of this reform.
In its attempts to soften serfdom, the autocracy followed one condition: it was impossible to infringe on the interests of the landowners, it was impossible to impose its will on them. Thus, the government obviously doomed itself to failure.
It took a serious push to get her out of this vicious circle.
Foreign policy of Nicholas I
In the 1830s - 1840s. Russia's role in the fight against any manifestations of the “spirit of change” in European life has increased even more. It was during the reign of Nicholas I that Russia received the unflattering nickname of “the gendarme of Europe.”
In 1830, during the revolutions in France and Belgium, the tsarist government made a series of sharp diplomatic moves against them. Moreover, Nicholas insisted on intervention, but for a number of reasons Russia did not receive support from its allies. But in 1849, at the height of the revolution that engulfed most of Europe, Nicholas sent an army of 100,000 to Hungary, which was trying to free itself from national oppression by Austria.
Only thanks to this the Austrian Empire was saved from collapse.
A special place in Russian foreign policy was occupied by the so-called. Eastern question. It was about a long-term war with the Ottoman Empire. Here the interests of several European powers collided.
Russia sought to ensure the security of its southern borders, as well as predominant influence in the Balkans. The Russian government set another goal - to establish control over the Bosporus and Dardanelles - the Black Sea straits, which were of great economic and military-strategic importance for the country.
Through military action - during the Russian-Turkish wars of 1806 - 1812.
and 1828 - 1829 - and diplomatic maneuvers, skillfully using the liberation movement of the peoples that were part of the Ottoman Empire, as well as other foreign and domestic political difficulties of the Turks, Russia managed to significantly weaken its enemy.
In the early 1850s. Nicholas I was preparing to deal a decisive blow to the Ottoman Empire. However, Russia's military and diplomatic successes caused a negative reaction in the West.
Russia found itself in political isolation. The beginning of the next war with Turkey (1853) was marked by the brilliant victory of the Russian fleet under the command of P. S. Nakhimov, which defeated the enemy in Sinop Bay. However, in 1854, England and France entered the war on the side of the Ottoman Empire. The Austrian Empire, which had recently been saved by Nicholas I from complete collapse, took an extremely unfavorable position of hostile neutrality towards Russia.
Having preserved the country at the feudal-serf level, the autocracy doomed it to technical backwardness (lack of railways and steam fleet, outdated weapons). The Russian army was formed on the basis of recruitment from a completely illiterate population; drill dominated in it; promotion in the officer corps was ensured by patronage or, at best, diligence. Embezzlement, theft of food, uniforms, and medicines, which flourished in the army, further undermined its combat effectiveness.
Russia was unable to resist the advanced European powers.
Having preserved the country at the feudal-serf level, the autocracy doomed it to technical backwardness (lack of railways and steam fleet, outdated weapons).
The Russian army was formed on the basis of recruitment from a completely illiterate population; drill dominated in it; promotion in the officer corps was ensured by patronage or, at best, diligence.
Embezzlement, theft of food, uniforms, and medicines, which flourished in the army, further undermined its combat effectiveness.
After England and France entered the war, the main military operations took place in Crimea.
In October 1854, the Allies besieged Sevastopol, which defended itself heroically. However, the Russian army, located in Crimea, suffered a number of defeats from the allies and was unable to provide the fortress city with serious support. After an 11-month siege, in August 1856, the defenders of Sevastopol were forced to surrender the city to the enemy.
At the beginning of 1856
Negotiations began in Paris, which ended with the signing of a peace treaty summing up the results of the Crimean War. Of all its conditions, the most difficult for Russia was the neutralization of the Black Sea, i.e. prohibiting the Black Sea powers from having naval forces, arsenals and fortresses here. Thus, Russia became vulnerable to attack from the sea and was deprived of the opportunity to conduct an active foreign policy in this region.
Social movement under Nicholas I
After the defeat of the Decembrists, Russia experienced a period of political reaction.
In the 1830s. Only in a few circles of student youth is there a glimmer of independent spiritual life. Some of them - the circle of the Kritsky brothers (1827) and the Sungurov circle (1831) - tried to continue the work of the Decembrists and were mercilessly crushed by the government. The authorities consistently persecuted those organizations that adopted the new ideas of utopian socialism: the Herzen circle in Moscow (1833 - 1834) and the Petrashevsky society in St. Petersburg (1845 - 1849).
Foreign and domestic policy of Nicholas 1
The existence of Stankevich's circle (1833 - 1839), far from politics, was calmer, whose members were fond of German idealistic philosophy.
By the end of the 1830s. As a result of the intense spiritual quest of the advanced part of Russian society, several integral movements are manifesting themselves here, which offer their own concepts of the historical development of Russia and programs for its reconstruction.
Westerners (T.
N. Granovsky, V.P. Botkin, E.F. Korsh, K.D. Kavelin) believed that Russia was following the European path, having entered it belatedly, as a result of the reforms of Peter the Great. The movement “in a western direction” must inevitably lead to the replacement of serf labor with free labor and the transformation of the despotic state system into a constitutional one.
The main task of the “educated minority” in these conditions is to prepare Russian society for the idea of the need for reforms and to influence the authorities in the proper spirit. It is the government and society, in lively cooperation, that must prepare and carry out well-thought-out, consistent reforms, with the help of which the gap between Russia and Western Europe will be eliminated.
Radical-minded A. I. Herzen, N. P. Ogarev and V. G. Belinsky at the end of 1830 - beginning. 1840s shared the main ideas of the Westerners. However, the radicals criticized the bourgeois system most harshly. From their point of view, Russia in its development should not only catch up with Western European countries, but also take, together with them, a decisive revolutionary step towards a fundamentally new system - socialism.
From the point of view of the Slavophiles (A. S. Khomyakov, brothers I. V. and P. V. Kireevsky, brothers K. S. and I. S. Aksakov, Yu. M. Samarin, A. I. Koshelev), Russia has a long history time went in a completely different direction than Western Europe. The history of the latter was determined by the constant struggle of selfish individuals, classes hostile to each other, and despotism on the blood of built states.
At the heart of Russian history was a community, all members of which were connected by common interests. The Orthodox religion further strengthened the original ability of the Russian person to sacrifice his own interests for the sake of common ones. State power looked after the Russian people, protected them from external enemies, maintained the necessary order, but did not interfere in spiritual, private, local life. The government was autocratic in nature, but at the same time it listened sensitively to the opinion of the people, maintaining contact with them through Zemsky Sobors.
As a result of Peter's reforms, this harmonious structure of Rus' was destroyed. It was Peter who introduced serfdom, which divided the Russian people into masters and slaves. He also tried to instill Western European morals in the gentlemen. Under Peter, the state acquired a despotic character. Slavophiles called for the restoration of the old Russian foundations of social and state life: to revive the spiritual unity of the Russian people (for which serfdom should be abolished); to overcome the despotic nature of the autocratic system, to establish the lost relationship between the state and the people.
The Slavophiles hoped to achieve this goal by introducing widespread glasnost; They also dreamed of the revival of Zemsky Sobors.
Secret committees- in the Russian Empire, temporary supreme advisory bodies in the first half of the 19th century.
Creation of secret committees
Formed by Emperor Nicholas I to discuss projects for various transformations, the need for which was realized by the government under the direct influence of the Decembrist uprising in 1825 and the peasant unrest of the 20-30s.
The main thing in the work of the S.K. was the peasant question, and their goal was to strengthen the feudal-autocratic system through partial reforms in the conditions of the growing crisis of the entire serfdom system.
Secret committees
Committee 6 December 1826
P. Kochubey and with the active participation of M. M. Speransky tried to develop a general plan for state reforms and, thus, had programmatic significance for all subsequent S. k. This committee considered projects for the personal liberation of peasants, the ban on alienating them without land, etc. Based on the activities of the Secret Committee of 1826, laws on noble societies (1831) and honorary citizens (1832) were approved.
1835 Committee
Created in March 1835 S.
Russian Economy under Nicholas I
K. developed a plan for the gradual abolition of serfdom with the complete dispossession of the peasantry, which was not implemented. The result of the work of this S.K. is the preparation of the reform of state peasants. In 1839-42, the P. project was discussed in the North Caucasus.
D. Kiseleva on the introduction of inventory. The result of the work of this committee was the law of 1842 on obligated peasants. SK in 1840 and 1844 discussed the issue of domestic peasants. By decree of 1844, landowners were allowed to set their servants free without land. Particular issues of the situation of peasants were discussed in St.
in 1846, 1847 and 1848.
Other secret committees
Departmental and sectoral committees were created periodically. Thus, in 1840-43, 6 financial committees operated. In 1848, 2 committees on censorship were created (the so-called Menshikovsky Committee and the April 2 Committee, which operated until 1855). There were S. k. of a punitive nature, operating in conjunction with the Synod (S.
k. about schismatics and apostates, 1825-59, S. k. of the highest church censorship, 1851-60). The activities of a number of S. k. were a kind of preparation of the autocracy for the abolition of serfdom.
The last SK was convened on January 3, 1857 under the chairmanship of Emperor Alexander II and began developing measures to abolish serfdom. The growing revolutionary situation of 1859-61 forced the government to speed up the solution to the peasant question. At the end of 1857, Alexander II, with special rescripts, allowed the nobility of a number of provinces to begin drawing up projects “On the organization and improvement of the life of landowner peasants,” i.e.
e. projects for the abolition of serfdom. After the publication of these rescripts, the preparation of peasant reforms became public. At the beginning of 1858, the Committee was transformed into the Main Committee for Peasant Affairs.
Literature
- Semevsky V.I. The peasant question in Russia in the 18th and first half of the 19th centuries, vol. 2, St. Petersburg, 1888;
- Alekseev V. P. Secret committees under Nicholas I // Great Reform, vol.
- Zayonchkovsky P. A. Abolition of serfdom in Russia, 3rd ed., M., 1968, p. 55-59, 68-94.
- Mironenko S. V. Pages of the secret history of autocracy: the political history of Russia in the first half of the 19th century. M., 1990
- Secret committees // Great Russian Encyclopedia: [in 35 volumes] / ch.
ed. Yu. S. Osipov. - M.: Great Russian Encyclopedia, 2004-2017.
CC© wikiredia.ru
Home > Wiki-textbook > History > 8th grade > National policy of Nicholas I - Polish and Jewish issues
Nicholas's national policy was a very complex process: the population of the territories included in the empire had significant cultural, religious and economic differences.
The regions of Siberia and Transcaucasia were significantly inferior in their economic development to the Baltic states and Ukraine.
The population of Poland was distinguished by serious cultural differences from the majority of the peoples of Russia.
Nicholas's policy was the cultural unification of all ethnic groups, the main instruments of which were the Orthodox Church and the enhanced vector of Russification.
Conversion to Orthodoxy was predominantly of a violent nature.
Russification was also often rejected. However, according to the emperor, this was the only way to transform society into a single whole.
Nicholas's national policy in Poland
If the people of Ukraine and the Baltic states willingly accepted the new ideology of the emperor, then it was historically alien and unacceptable to the Poles, who had only recently become part of the Empire. The Polish people still could not come to terms with the loss of their own state independence.
The Orthodox Church could not gain a foothold in the Polish environment; forced Russification caused many protests.
Secret societies began to be created in Poland, the purpose of which was to organize anti-government uprisings.
A few protests provoked a harsh response from the emperor. Nicholas revoked the Constitution granted to Poland by Alexander, abolished the Polish Sejm and placed his proxies in leadership positions.
All national liberation societies were reorganized by the Third Division of the Imperial Chancellery.
Jewish question
The flourishing of domestic and foreign trade became the reason for mass settlements of Jews on the territory of the Russian Empire.
At first glance, the Jews did not pose any danger to the autocracy: they did not pursue the goal of creating their own independent state and did not take part in the uprisings.
However, the Jewish people remained the bearer of their own ancient traditions and religious beliefs, which were absolutely not identified with Russian Orthodoxy, and in some moments opposed it.
In 1835, Nicholas finally developed the Jewish Pale of Settlement.
Reign of Nicholas 1
They did not have the right to move around the country. Taxes were also raised significantly for Jewish merchants.
To encourage the people to accept Christianity, the emperor issued a decree that completely exempted Jews who were baptized from taxes.
They also acquired the right to trade freely in any city of the Empire.
After some time, Nicholas realized that such discrimination was leading to the decline of the country's economy, since half of the artisans and merchants belonged to the Jewish nation. By the end of his reign, the emperor returned to the Jews all the rights and freedoms previously taken away.
Need help with your studies?
Previous topic: Social movement in the 30-50s of the 19th century: period of decline, types
Next topic: Foreign policy of Nicholas I - reaction to revolutions, unification of monarchs
In the era of Nicholas I it was developed state ideology. State ideology is a set of ideas with the help of which the ruling elite justified its right to power and sought to raise its prestige..
The main provisions of the official ideology were formulated in December 1832
S.S. Uvarov. Uvarov, being an assistant to the Minister of Public Education (deputy), conducted an audit of Moscow University in 1832; in December 1832, he submitted a report on the audit to the Tsar. Later (1843) Uvarov recalled this report: “... it was necessary to find the principles that make up the distinctive character of Russia. Sincerely and deeply attached to the church of their fathers, the Russian people from time immemorial have looked at it as a guarantee of social and family happiness... Autocracy is the main condition for the political existence of Russia.”
Uvarov named three national origins Russia – Orthodoxy, autocracy, nationality.
In the report he wrote that The truly Russian protective principles are Orthodoxy, autocracy, and nationality. Nikolai liked the clear, concise formulation of the national specifics of Russia. The ideas of “Orthodoxy, autocracy, nationality” formed the essence of the official ideology, which later became known as theories of official nationality(in the 1870s
historian N.N.
40. Russia under Nicholas I
Pypin gave this name to Uvarov's theory).
The main element of this triad was idea of autocracy. All subjects must obey the king not out of fear, but out of conscience. Political meaning this theory was to assert inviolability of autocracy in Russia.
The authorities sought to isolate themselves ideologically from the West. The theory of official nationality was protective character. She glorified special path of development of Russia. She argued that Russia's past was wonderful; under the wise rule of the great sovereign, the Russian people prospered in peace and quiet. No changes are needed. Only one thing is required from every loyal subject: “to love Russia.” Autocracy is people's rule.
Only autocracy is capable of ensuring the power, greatness and glory of Russia. Without autocracy, Russia will perish.
Idea Orthodoxy in the context of this ideology meant the people’s unshakable faith in God. Orthodoxy determines the spiritual foundations of the life of the people, its moral foundations.
Idea nationalities as one of the elements of this theory meant the people’s love for the monarch, devotion to him, and the unity of the king with the people.
The essence The theory is revealed in the notes of Dubelt, manager of the III department of the imperial chancellery.
He called the West a “disgusting, cesspool.” Dubelt praised the Russian autocracy: “The way of government in Russia is very real, similar to nature, similar to the needs of a well-meaning person.” “Our people are smart because they are quiet, and quiet because they are not free,” and therefore in Russia there is “peace, silence, hard work and subordination.” “Enlightenment should consist of knowing and fulfilling one’s duties.” “Russia is great, strong and rich because, firstly, that it has an autocratic sovereign, secondly, that it has a landowner with power over the peasants, and thirdly, that it has a peasant who feeds everyone.”
According to Dubelt, a Russian peasant must be illiterate, uncomplaining, hardworking, obedient, and be in serfdom: “Even if our men do not know how to read and write, without knowing how to read and write, they lead a hardworking and useful life, their imagination is not ignited by reading magazines and any literature that arouses the worst passions... That is why they are quiet, kind, meek and obedient.”
Sergei Semenovich Uvarov (1786 - 1855) - ideologist of the Russian autocracy of the era of Nicholas I, Minister of Public Education (1833 - 1849).
Direction of activity: reaction policy in 1848 - 1855.
Nikolai refused from his intentions to free the peasants.
— the French were banned from entering Russia, and then all Europeans.
Travel abroad was extremely limited; Department III issued foreign passports only to persons in need of treatment.
— censorship oppression reached its apogee during these years. In 1848, an emergency censorship body was created, popularly called Buturlinsky Committee by the name of its chief.
He looked through publications that had already been cleared for publication by the censors.
— the issue of closing universities was discussed in ruling circles. In 1849, Uvarov published an article in defense of universities. Nicholas sent him into retirement.
- persecution of universities intensified, control over the teaching of professors increased.
Granovsky was required to submit lecture notes to the Ministry of Public Education.
The events of the Crimean War became a difficult test for society and Nicholas himself. Nikolai sincerely believed in what he was doing myth about the military-political power of Russia .
A.F. Tyutcheva wrote: “...the unfortunate emperor saw how under him the stage of that illusory greatness on which he imagined that he had raised Russia collapsed».
Nicholas I could not bear the shame of Russia's defeat in the Crimean War. At the beginning of February 1855
Nikolai fell ill with the flu. He was in a state of severe depression: he refused to receive ministers, sending them to the heir Alexander Nikolaevich, he prayed a lot in front of icons, he received almost no one, Nicholas was tormented by insomnia, he cried. On February 18, 1855, Nicholas I died, and on February 19, 1855, Alexander II ascended the throne.
⇐ Previous123456
Date of publication: 2015-06-12; Read: 2467 | Page copyright infringement
studopedia.org - Studopedia.Org - 2014-2018 (0.001 s)…
