Abolition of serfdom. The epochal reform of Alexander II

Coin for the 150th anniversary of the abolition of serfdom

“The most surprising thing is that such an important and fundamental phenomenon as serfdom, which determined the entire life of the Russian Empire for centuries, actually had no legislative basis and, until the Manifesto of 1861, relied on contradictory decrees and instructions that were not consolidated into a single system . Moreover, even the use of the term “serfdom” itself was carefully avoided in legislative acts. (I.E. Engelman “History of serfdom in Russia”)

On February 19, 1861, Alexander II signed the Manifesto on the abolition of serfdom; he changed the fate of 23 million serfs: they received personal freedom and civil rights.

Let's briefly talk about the essence of the peasant reform of Alexander II.

The peasants received personal freedom and the right to dispose of their property. The landowners retained ownership of their lands, but were obliged to provide the peasants with an estate with a personal plot, as well as a field plot, for permanent use. For this use, peasants were obliged to serve corvee or pay quitrent. By law, they could not refuse the field allotment at least in the first nine years (and in the subsequent period, the refusal of land was limited by a number of conditions that made it difficult to exercise this right).

This indicated the landowner nature of the reform: under the terms of “liberation” it was unprofitable for the peasant to take land. In turn, refusal of it deprived the landowners of both labor and the income that they would receive in the form of rent.

Was there slavery in Russia?

The issue of size of field plot. Duties and sizes of plots had to be recorded in charters, which were drawn up within 2 years. But these charters were drawn up by the landowners themselves, and checked by peace intermediaries from among the landowners. It turned out that between the peasants and the landowners the intermediaries were, again, the landowners.

Conditional charters were concluded with the “peace” (a rural community of peasants belonging to the landowner), i.e. the duty was collected from the “world”. Thus, the peasants were freed from the serfdom of the landowners, but fell into the same dependence on the “peace”. The peasant did not have the right to leave the community or receive a passport - this issue was decided by the “peace”. Peasants could buy back their plots and were then called peasant owners, but again the buyout could only be made by the entire community, and not by an individual peasant.

The conditions of the reform fully met the interests of the landowners. Peasants became temporarily obliged for an indefinite period. In essence, the feudal system of exploitation of the peasants was evident.

Abolition of serfdom. Reading of the Manifesto in the village

The peasants continued to carry duties for the use of land. Duties were divided into monetary ( quitrent ) and sharecropping ( corvée ). The main form of duties was monetary rent, its size approximately corresponded to the pre-reform one. This clearly showed that the quitrent was established not based on the value of the land, but on the income received by the landowner from the personality of the serf.

quitrent was paid to the landowner from the entire society “with the mutual guarantee of each other” of the peasants. In addition, the landowner received the right to demand it six months in advance.

Corvee. Work on the landowner's land was divided into horse and foot days. The ratio of horse and foot days was determined by the landowner.

Ransom the field allotment depended exclusively on the landowner. Not all peasants could immediately contribute the entire amount for the ransom, which was what the landowners were interested in. The peasants received a redemption amount from the government, but they had to repay it annually for 49 years at 6%. Therefore, peasants were often forced to give up the land that they had the right to receive under the terms of the reform.

As a result, the peasants remained somewhat dependent on the local nobility and temporarily indebted to their former owners.

Consequences of the peasant reform

"Manifesto" on the abolition of serfdom

Such results of the reform could not satisfy the peasants; they considered themselves deceived. Therefore, the abolition of serfdom did not cause rejoicing, but an explosion of peasant protest. Peasant unrest began: in the first 5 months of 1861, 1340 mass unrest occurred, and in a year -1859 unrest. Most of them were pacified by military force. There was not a single province in which the protest of the peasants against the unfavorable conditions of the granted “will” did not manifest itself. Trusting in the “good” tsar, the peasants could not believe that it was from him that the laws came, as a result of which for 2 years they actually remained under the same subordination to the landowner, were forced to perform corvée and pay quitrent, were deprived of part of their previous allotments, and the lands provided to them declared the property of the nobility. Some even considered the “Regulations” to be fake, drawn up by landowners and officials who agreed with them, hiding the “royal will.”

Bread and salt to the Tsar Father

The peasant protest movement took on particular scope in the black earth provinces, the Volga region and Ukraine, where peasants were mainly in corvee labor. In the spring and summer of 1861, the peak of peasant unrest was noted, and in the fall of 1861, the struggle took on other forms: mass cutting down of the landowner's forest by peasants, refusal to pay quitrent, but especially peasant sabotage of corvee work: in a number of provinces, even up to half of the landowner's land remained at that time year unprocessed.

A new wave of peasant protest began in 1862, it was associated with the introduction of statutory charters. The peasants refused to sign these charters, as a result they began to impose them by force, which resulted in new outbreaks of protests. Rumors were persistently spread that the tsar would soon grant “real” freedom. Emperor Alexander II had to speak to representatives of the peasantry to dispel these misconceptions. In the fall of 1862 in Crimea, he declared that “there will be no other will than the one that is given.” On November 25, 1862, in a speech to the assembled volost elders and village elders of the Moscow province, he said: “After February 19 of next year, do not expect any new will and no new benefits... Do not listen to the rumors that circulate among you, and do not believe those that They will convince you of something else, but believe only my words.” But it was difficult to dissuade the peasants. Even 20 years later, they cherished the hope of a “black redistribution” of land.

The continuing peasant revolts were suppressed by the government. But life went on, and the peasants of each estate united into rural societies. General economic issues were discussed and resolved at village meetings. The village headman, who was elected for 3 years, was obliged to carry out the decisions of the assemblies. Several adjacent rural communities made up the volost. Village elders and elected officials from rural societies participated in the volost assembly. At this meeting, the volost elder was elected. He was responsible for police and administrative duties.

The government hoped that the “temporarily obligated” relationship would soon end and the landowners and peasants would conclude a buyout deal on each estate. But at the same time, the government was afraid that the peasants would not be able or would not want to pay a lot of money for bad plots and would run away. Therefore, it introduced a number of strict restrictions: in the process of redemption payments, peasants could not abandon their allotment and leave their village forever without the consent of the village assembly.

However, the peasant reform was still a progressive event in the history of the Russian Empire. The country received the opportunity to modernize: the transition from an agricultural to an industrial society. More than 20 million people received freedom, peacefully, while in the United States, for example, slavery was abolished as a result of the Civil War. The abolition of serfdom also had great moral significance and influenced the development of culture, although the interests of the landowners were taken into account more than the peasants, and the remnants of the serfdom remained in the minds of people for a long time. The peasant reform that was carried out further strengthened the autocracy, but sooner or later it still had to happen - time demanded it.

To the master for help

But since the land problem was not finally resolved, it declared itself later, in the 20th century, when the first Russian revolution took place, peasant in the composition of the driving forces and tasks that “stretched” from 1861. This forced P. Stolypin to carry out the land revolution reform, allowing peasants to leave the community. But that is another story…

In Russian history, one of the saddest pages is the section on “serfdom,” which equated most of the empire’s population to a lower class. The peasant reform of 1861 freed dependent people from bondage, which became impetus for reconstruction the entire state into a democratic free state.

In contact with

Basic Concepts

Before talking about the process of abolition, we should briefly understand the definition of this term and understand what role it played in the history of the Russian state. In this article you will get answers to the questions: who abolished serfdom and when was serfdom abolished.

Serfdom - these are legal norms that prohibit the dependent population, that is, peasants, from leaving certain plots of land to which they were assigned.

It will not be possible to talk about this topic briefly, because many historians equate this form of dependence with slavery, although there are many differences between them.

Not a single peasant and his family could leave a certain plot of land without the permission of the aristocrat, who owned land. If a slave was attached directly to his owner, then a serf was attached to the land, and since the owner had the right to manage the allotment, then so did the peasants.

People who fled were put on the wanted list, and the relevant authorities had to bring them back. In most cases, some of the fugitives were demonstratively killed as an example for others.

Important! Similar forms of dependence were also common during the New Age in England, the Polish-Lithuanian Commonwealth, Spain, Hungary and other countries.

Reasons for the abolition of serfdom

The majority of the male and able-bodied population concentrated in villages, where they worked for landowners. The entire harvest collected by the serfs was sold abroad and brought huge profits to the landowners. The economy in the country did not develop, which is why the Russian Empire was at a much lagging stage of development than the countries of Western Europe.

Historians agree that the following reasons and preconditions were dominant, since they most acutely demonstrated the problems of the Russian Empire:

1. This form of dependence hampered the development of the capitalist system - because of this, the level of the economy in the empire was at a very low level.
2. The industry was not going through its best times - due to the lack of workers in the cities, the full functioning of factories, mines and factories was impossible.
3. When agriculture in Western European countries developed according to the principle of introducing new types of equipment, fertilizers, and methods of cultivating land, in the Russian Empire it developed according to the extensive principle - due to increasing the area under crops.
4. Peasants did not participate in the economic and political life of the empire, but they made up the majority of the country's entire population.
5. Since in Western Europe this type of dependence was considered a kind of slavery, the authority of the empire suffered greatly among the monarchs of the Western world.
6. The peasantry was dissatisfied with this state of affairs, and therefore uprisings and riots constantly occurred in the country. Dependence on the landowner also encouraged people to become Cossacks.
7. The progressive layer of the intelligentsia constantly put pressure on the tsar and insisted on profound changes in the country.

Preparations for the abolition of serfdom

The so-called peasant reform was prepared long before its implementation. At the beginning of the 19th century, the first prerequisites for the abolition of serfdom were laid.

Preparing to cancel Serfdom began during the reign, but it did not go further than projects. Under Emperor Alexander II in 1857, Editorial Commissions were created, which developed a project for liberation from dependence.

The body was faced with a difficult task: peasant reform must be carried out according to such a principle that the changes would not cause a wave of discontent among the landowners.

The commission created several reform projects, reviewing various options. Numerous peasant revolts pushed its members towards more radical changes.

Reform of 1861 and its content

The manifesto on the abolition of serfdom was signed by Tsar Alexander II March 3, 1861. This document contained 17 points that examined the main points of the transition of peasants from a dependent to a relatively free class of society.

It is important to highlight main provisions of the manifesto on the liberation of people from serfdom:

• peasants were no longer a dependent class of society;
• people could now own real estate and other types of property;
• in order to become free, the peasants had to initially buy the land from the landowners, taking out a large loan;
• quitrents were also required to be paid for the use of land;
• the creation of rural communities with an elected head was allowed;
• The size of plots that can be redeemed was clearly regulated by the state.

The 1861 reform to abolish serfdom followed the abolition of serfdom in lands subject to the Austrian Empire. The territory of Western Ukraine was in the possession of the Austrian monarch. Elimination of serfdom in the West occurred in 1849. This process only accelerated this process in the East. They had practically the same reasons for the abolition of serfdom as in the Russian Empire.

Abolition of serfdom in Russia in 1861: briefly

The manifesto was published throughout the country from March 7 to mid-April of the same year. Due to the fact that the peasants were not just freed, but forced to buy their freedom, they protested.

The government, in turn, took all security measures, redeploying troops to the hottest spots.

Information about such a path of liberation only angered the peasantry. The abolition of serfdom in Russia in 1861 led to an increase in the number of uprisings compared to the previous year.

Protests and riots almost tripled in scope and number. The government was forced to suppress them by force, causing thousands to die.

Within two years from the moment the manifesto was published, 6/10 of all peasants in the country signed the letters of advice “on liberation”. The purchase of land for most people lasted more than a decade. About a third of them still had not paid off their debts at the end of the 1880s.

The abolition of serfdom in Russia in 1861 was considered by many representatives of the landowner class the end of Russian statehood. They assumed that the peasants would now rule the country and said that it was necessary to choose a new king among the mob, thereby criticizing the actions of Alexander II.

Results of the reform

The peasant reform of 1861 led to the following transformations in the Russian Empire:

• the peasants now became a free unit of society, but had to buy back the plot for a very large sum;
• the landowners had to be guaranteed to give the peasant a small allotment, or sell the land, at the same time they were deprived of labor and income;
• “rural communities” were created, which further controlled the life of the peasant; all questions about obtaining a passport or moving to another place were again decided on the community council;
• the conditions for obtaining freedom caused discontent, which led to an increase in the number and scope of uprisings.

And although the liberation of peasants from serfdom was more beneficial to the landowners than to the dependent class, it was progressive step in development Russian Empire. It was from the moment when serfdom was abolished that the transition from an agrarian to an industrial society began.

Attention! The transition to freedom in Russia was quite peaceful, while due to the abolition of slavery in the country, the Civil War began, which became the bloodiest conflict in the history of the country.

The reform of 1861 did not completely solve the pressing problems of society. The poor remained far from governing the state and were only an instrument of tsarism.

It was the unresolved problems of peasant reform that rapidly emerged at the beginning of the next century.

In 1905, another revolution began in the country, which was brutally suppressed. Twelve years later it exploded with renewed vigor, leading to and drastic changes in society.

Serfdom for many years kept the Russian Empire at the agrarian level of social development, while in the West it had long since become industrial. Economic backwardness and peasant unrest led to the abolition of serfdom and the emancipation of the dependent layer of the population. These were the reasons for the abolition of serfdom.

1861 was a turning point in the development of the Russian Empire, since it was then that a huge step was taken, which later allowed the country to get rid of the remnants that hampered its development.

Prerequisites for the peasant reform of 1861

Abolition of serfdom, historical overview

Conclusion

In the spring of 1861, the great Almighty Alexander II signed a manifesto on the liberation of the peasants. The conditions for obtaining freedom were accepted very negatively by the lower class. And yet, twenty years later, most of the once dependent population became free and had their own land plot, house and other property.

155 years ago, on February 19 (new style - March 3), 1861, Emperor Alexander II signed the Manifesto “On the Most Merciful Granting to Serfs of the Rights of Free Rural Citizens,” which was published two days later in the Assumption Cathedral of the Kremlin. This document actually abolished serfdom, essentially slavery, which had existed in Russia for several centuries.

Social elevator

The significance of the reform is evidenced by the following fact: it created a social elevator that allowed former serfs to rise high up the social ladder and bring enormous benefit to their Fatherland. Here's a concrete example. In the Vladimir province, among the liberated peasants was the family of Grigory Stoletov. (True, the head of the family, being a serf, still had the right to engage in trading activities). The eldest son Vasily learned the construction trade and became a major contractor. He invested a considerable part of his income in the education of his younger brothers - Alexander and Nikolai.

As a result, Alexander became a prominent physicist, professor at Moscow University, who was one of the first to study the photoelectric effect. After some time, these works found wide practical application. Nicholas chose a military career, rose to the rank of lieutenant general, and participated in many campaigns. He was one of the leaders of the defense of Shipka and actually created the Bulgarian army. In Bulgaria, during his lifetime, Stoletov was elected an honorary citizen of the famous city of Gabrovo.

After the reform of 1861, capitalist relations began to develop in Russia, and some of the former serfs, endowed with energy and enterprise, took up entrepreneurship. Let's say, from the peasants of the Kaluga province came bankers and owners of an entire network of textile factories, the Ryabushinskys.

Slavery existed by...tradition

Attempts to abolish serfdom were made in Russia over the course of a century and a half. Peter the Great thought about this. But the emperor quickly realized: carrying out such a reform in a situation where many rights and privileges were already taken away from the boyars and nobles was dangerous. Because this could provoke a powerful confrontation.

By the way, the founder of the Northern capital also tried to find out

When and by what law was serfdom itself established? And then it turned out that there was no legal basis: serfdom in Russia exists and is based on tradition.

The great-grandson of Peter Alekseevich, Emperor Paul I, limited corvee service to three days a week. But many landowners did not obey the royal will, forcing the peasants to work for five, six, and seven days.

In Estland, serfdom was abolished in 1816, in Courland - in 1817, in Livonia - in 1819. That is, during the reign of Emperor Alexander I.

It can be assumed that Nicholas I was to some extent prevented from abolishing serfdom by the Decembrist uprising. The emperor feared that after what had happened, granting freedom to the peasants could have dangerous consequences for the state.

The emperor's nerves could not stand it

By the middle of the 19th century, it became completely clear that without the abolition of serfdom, further development of the country was no longer possible, says Doctor of Historical Sciences Yuri Zhukov. - The decisive actions of Alexander II and his associates were prompted by the defeat in the Crimean War and the increasing frequency of peasant uprisings. “It is better to abolish serfdom from above than to wait until it begins to abolish itself from below,” the emperor himself once said at a reception with the leader of the Moscow nobility.

While preparing for the reform, Alexander II used the developments made by his father. A few years before the release of the Manifesto of 1861, by decree of the emperor, a Secret Committee was created, which was involved in the preparation of the historical document. Why secret? Yes, it’s very simple: so that the nobles, dissatisfied with the expected reforms, do not begin to muddy the waters ahead of time.

The drafters of the Manifesto did not intend to exactly copy the Western system of social relations, as some experts claim. On behalf of the tsar, officials visited a number of countries, studied the relationship between the state and peasants, between peasants and land owners, and thought through how much this experience could be used in Russia.

And yet it was impossible to keep the historical document being prepared secret for a very long time. After all, this is tantamount to hiding in a bag not just an awl, but a whole sword. And heated discussions began.

Very influential people opposed the reform. Even many members of the government, most of whom were landowners, expressed their disagreement quite harshly. Among them is the Minister of Internal Affairs Pyotr Valuev, who, in his own words, was “the pen of the opposition,” that is, the opposition to the cause of the liberation of the peasants.”

But the sovereign still had someone to rely on. Alexander II was supported by his brother Grand Duke Konstantin Nikolaevich and the sister of the late Emperor Nicholas I, the intelligent, energetic and strong-willed Grand Duchess Elena Pavlovna.

During the discussion of the reform, the intensity of passions was such that the emperor’s nerves sometimes could not stand it, and he allowed himself to shout at his opponents. The ardent supporter of the abolition of serfdom, Governor-General of New Russia and Bessarabia, Count Alexander Stroganov, later recalled this with bitterness.

Both peasants and landowners were dissatisfied

The Manifesto of 1861 and subsequent reform are the result of a compromise between various forces. And, as always happens in such cases, they were not without serious shortcomings.

The main provisions of the reform were as follows, says historian and writer Elena Prudnikova. - The peasants were granted personal freedom, and the landowners retained all the lands that belonged to them, but were obliged to provide the peasants with land plots for use. For their use, peasants had to continue to serve corvée or pay quitrent - until they redeemed their land. And when it turned out that the peasants did not have the means to pay for the ransom, the state contributed money for them, obliging them to repay the debt within 49 years at the rate of 6 percent per annum - a high percentage for those times. In such conditions, many peasants simply abandoned the land.

Not wanting to cause strong discontent among the landowners, the area of ​​land allocated to the former serfs was made less than necessary for the profitability of peasant labor. On average, each peasant farm received three and a half dessiatines of land, and in order to have at least some profit, you need at least five to six dessiatines. That is, farms were doomed to gradual ruin. A well-known cartoon of that time is “A Little Man on One Leg,” where a peasant is depicted on a tiny piece of land.

According to the ideologists of the reform, landowners deprived of free labor will begin to think about how to increase the efficiency of agricultural production, notes Prudnikova. - In reality, it turned out differently. Not all landowners were ready to run a capitalist economy. Some went bankrupt, others simply preferred to rent out the land. And few people wanted to invest money to improve the efficiency of farms. Large, high-yielding plantations existed mainly only in the west and south of Russia.

It turns out that both landowners and peasants were not particularly happy with the reform that abolished such a shameful phenomenon as slavery in Russia. Remember Firs, the servant from “The Cherry Orchard”: they say, there used to be order, “men are with the masters, gentlemen are with the men.”

The fates of the peasants freed from serfdom developed differently. Some were able to achieve great success using the mentioned social elevator, some remained on earth, managed to adapt to new working conditions and gradually established their economy. But many went bankrupt and left for cities, where they could not always find use for their strength.

Each comparison, as we know, is lame, but the peasant reform of the mid-19th century is somewhat reminiscent of ... the privatization of state property, which was carried out in the nineties of the 20th century, says Yuri Zhukov. - In both cases, one might say, effective owners did not appear in the country, but the number of disadvantaged people increased sharply.

Reform gave rise to terrorism

...In July 1867, the newspaper St. Petersburg Vedomosti published an essay about the arrest of a whole group of robbers who robbed trains. All of them were former serfs who were unable to either work in the new conditions on the land or find employment in the city. One of these thugs, a former slave of a landowner in the Tula province, was distinguished by his extraordinary love of horses, his ability to break them and prepare them for races. The trouble was that the landowner, who had lost a significant part of his income due to the reform, sold his stud farm, and the serf found himself out of work.

But even this is not the worst thing.

Unlike Western European countries, in Russia the liberation of peasants was not accompanied by political changes, says Yuri Zhukov. - In our country there were no political parties, democratic institutions, in particular, parliament. And the only form of struggle became terror.

Let us recall that twenty years after the abolition of serfdom, on March 1, 1881, members of the People's Will organization killed Tsar-Liberator Alexander II, and at the beginning of the 20th century, Russia was completely overwhelmed by a wave of political terrorism.

Interesting Facts

In the Netherlands, serfdom was abolished in the 11th century, in Great Britain in the 12th century, in France in the 11th century. Of all the so-called civilized countries, slavery ceased to exist only in the United States later than Russia.

During the period from 1855 to 1900, the population of St. Petersburg increased almost 2.5 times: from 513,000 people to one million 248 thousand people.

At the beginning of the 20th century, most terrorists belonged to the first generation of artisans or laborers, who came from impoverished peasant families. According to statistics, at least fifty percent of all political murders carried out by the Socialist Revolutionaries were committed by terrorist workers. A somewhat similar situation is now observed in modern Russia.

By the end of the 18th century, the discontent of the masses in the Russian Empire had increased to the limit. The tsarist government could no longer ignore the immorality of serfdom against the background of a European society free from slavery. So, the prerequisites for the abolition of serfdom in Russia appeared long before the accession to the royal throne of Alexander II, who signed the long-awaited manifesto for the peasants.

Gradual improvement of conditions for serfs: what were the main reasons for the abolition of serfdom

The socio-economic development of the Russian Empire invariably lagged behind European states, the reason for which was the unproductive serf system. The lack of civilian labor hampered the development of capitalist industry. Poor peasants could not consume industrial products, which also negatively affected the development of the sector. In addition, the crisis of serfdom led to the ruin of the landowners.

Therefore, the main reasons regarding the need to abolish serfdom are clear:

• crisis of the imperial feudal-serf system:
• the backwardness of the Russian Empire in almost all spheres of life;
• growing unrest among the serfs and frequent peasant uprisings

At the beginning of the 19th century, the peasants of the Russian Empire began to feel some weakening of the serf system. According to the Decree on Free Plowmen, serfs, by agreement with the landowners, could receive freedom for ransom. The law turned out to be ineffective, but a start was made.

A compromise version of reforming serfdom was proposed by General A.A. Arakcheev. This statesman had great influence and was almost the second person in the empire after the king. Arakcheev’s project to abolish serfdom consisted in the emancipation of peasants on the basis of rent: the landowners received compensation from the treasury. This decision was mainly aimed at protecting the interests of the landowners, because the peasants would still be forced to rent land. And Arakcheev himself had many serfs, so it is obvious what views he was guided by. However, Arakcheev’s project, approved by Alexander I, never came to fruition.

Soon a law was passed prohibiting the sale of serfs at fairs, and in 1833, when selling peasants, it was forbidden to separate members of the same family. Tsar Nicholas I continued the course of liberating the peasants from the master's oppression, but he was committed to the gradual implementation of this reform. At first, the situation of state peasants, who received a number of privileges, was somewhat improved.

The tsarist government’s understanding of the need for a step-by-step struggle against the system of serfdom is evidenced by the words spoken after Nicholas I’s accession to the throne. “There is no doubt that serfdom in its current situation is an evil, tangible and obvious to everyone; but to touch it now would be an evil, of course, even more disastrous,” said the sovereign. Serfdom was also unprofitable from a productive point of view: the labor of the peasants did not generate income, and in lean years the landowners had to feed the peasants. The situation was aggravated by the economic crisis that the Russian Empire was experiencing after the war with the Napoleonic Armada.

The need for reform and its preparation: reasons for the abolition of serfdom under Alexander II

In 1855, Alexander II took the royal throne. The new tsar made it clear that the abolition of serfdom by the authorities was a necessity dictated by the realities of the time. In order to prevent a possible peasant uprising, it was impossible to delay the implementation of reforms. Alexander II expressed his attitude to this issue as follows: “It is better to begin to destroy serfdom from above than to wait for the time when it begins to be destroyed by itself from below.” It was Alexander II who is listed in history as the one who signed the manifesto on the abolition of serfdom.

At first, the preparation of reforms to eliminate the serfdom system was completely classified. But such an initiative, fateful for the Russian Empire, could not for a long time be the property of only a narrow circle of nobles close to the Tsar, and soon the Main Committee for Peasant Affairs was created.

The fundamental idea of ​​the future reform was to leave the land in the hands of the peasants. The agrarian economy of the empire was to be divided in the future into large landowners and small peasant land plots. The established editorial commissions actively took up the provisions for the abolition of serfdom.

The impending changes met with misunderstanding and resistance from the nobles: the landowners did not want to give the land to the peasants. In addition, after the reform, the management of the peasants was to be concentrated in the hands of the government, which was not part of the plans of the nobles. In turn, the government understood the need to take into account the interests of all parties in the reform project. Therefore, the project for the abolition of serfdom was based on the following provisions:

• individual approach to certain territories that have their own characteristics;
• the need for a transition period to transfer farms to market relations;
• ransom guarantee for landowners upon liberation of peasants

After the drafting commissions prepared provisions on the abolition of serfdom, the draft reform was submitted for consideration and approval by government officials included in the Main Committee.

Manifesto of 1861: the pros and cons of the abolition of serfdom

At a meeting of the State Council on peasant affairs, the tsar demanded approval of the project proposed by the drafters. February 19, 1861 is the official date of the abolition of serfdom in Russia: it was on this memorable day that Alexander II signed the fateful manifesto. Russian serfdom was ended forever, and the peasants were declared free. The land, however, remained the property of the landowners, and for the use of the plots the peasants had to either pay money or work for it.

Peasants could gain complete independence from the landowners after the complete redemption of their land plots. Before this, they were considered temporary peasants. The ransom was paid to the landowners by the treasury, and the peasants were given 49 years to repay their debt to the state.

Peasant societies were also created, uniting the lands of former serfs. Internal issues were entrusted to the village assembly, which was headed by the village headman. Peasants who did not make a living in agriculture were released without a plot of land. Subsequently they could join any society.

The agreement between landowners and former serfs was regulated by a charter, which also stipulated the size of the land allotment. In case of disagreement during the drawing up of such charters, the dispute had to be resolved by peace mediators - local nobles who approved the statutory charters.

The reaction to such a long-awaited event was mixed. The peasants, who dreamed of complete freedom, were not satisfied with the transition period. In some places there were peasant unrest, and by the end of 1861 the revolutionary movement intensified in the empire. It should be noted that Russia’s internal economic relations were not ready for such a reform.

And yet, the historical significance of the abolition of serfdom is difficult to overestimate. After more than two centuries of being owned by landowners, the peasants finally received their long-awaited freedom.

The reform opened up prospects for the development of productive forces in the empire, and the abolition of the serfdom system gave impetus to the implementation of reforms in other areas.

When serfdom was abolished in Rus', conditions were created everywhere for the growth of the economy of the Russian Empire, because now labor could be turned into goods. The epochal manifesto of 1861 opened a new capitalist page in the history of Russia and introduced the huge country into the era of capitalist development of agriculture. In answer to the question “in what century was serfdom abolished?” we can safely say: peasant reform became almost the main event in Russian history of the 19th century.

Brief answers to questions

Date of abolition of serfdom in Russia? In what century was serfdom abolished?

Who abolished serfdom in 1861 (signed the manifesto)?

Tsar Alexander II

What were the main reasons for the abolition of serfdom under Alexander 2?

Avoiding a Peasant Revolt

Prerequisites for the abolition of serfdom?

Serfdom became a brake on the development of industry and trade, which hampered the growth of capital and placed Russia in the category of secondary states;

The decline of the landowner economy due to the extremely ineffective labor of serfs, which was expressed in the obviously poor performance of the corvee.

What is the historical significance of the abolition of serfdom?

This step opened a new capitalist page in the history of Russia and introduced the huge country into the era of capitalist development of agriculture.

The legally formalized status of dependence of peasants is called serfdom. This phenomenon characterizes the development of society in the countries of Eastern and Western Europe. The formation of serfdom is associated with the evolution of feudal relations.

The origins of serfdom in Europe

The essence of the feudal dependence of peasants on the landowner was control over the personality of the serf. He could be bought, sold, prohibited from moving around the country or city, even issues of his personal life could be controlled.

Since feudal relations developed depending on the characteristics of the region, serfdom also took shape in different states at different times. In Western European countries it took hold in the Middle Ages. In England, France, and Germany, serfdom was abolished by the 17th century. The times of Enlightenment are rich in reforms concerning the liberation of peasants. Eastern and Central Europe are regions where feudal dependence lasted longer. In Poland, the Czech Republic, and Hungary, serfdom began to take shape in the 15th-16th centuries. It is interesting that the norms of feudal dependence of peasants on feudal lords did not develop.

Characteristic features and conditions for the formation of feudal dependence

The history of serfdom allows us to trace the characteristic features of the state and social system, in which relations of dependence of peasants on rich landowners are formed:

1. The presence of a strong centralized government.
2. Social differentiation based on property.
3. Low level of education.

At the early stage of the development of feudal relations, the goals of enslavement were to attach the peasant to the landowner's land plot and prevent the escape of workers. Legal norms regulated the process of paying taxes - the absence of population movements made it easier to collect tribute. During the period of developed feudalism, prohibitions became more diverse. Now the peasant not only could not independently move from place to place, but also did not have the right and opportunity to purchase real estate, land, and was obliged to pay a certain amount to the landowner for the right to work on his plots. Restrictions for the lower strata of the population varied regionally and depended on the characteristics of the development of society.

The origins of serfdom in Rus'

The process of enslavement in Russia - at the level of legal norms - began in the 15th century. The abolition of personal dependence was carried out much later than in other European countries. According to censuses, the number of serfs in different areas of the country varied. Already at the beginning of the 19th century, dependent peasants began to gradually move to other classes.

Researchers are looking for the origins and causes of serfdom in Russia in the events of the period of the Old Russian state. The formation of social relations took place in the presence of strong centralized power - at least for 100-200 years, during the reign of Vladimir the Great and Yaroslav the Wise. The main set of laws of that time was “Russian Truth”. It contained norms that regulated the relations between free and unfree peasants and landowners. The dependents were slaves, servants, purchasers, and rank and file - they fell into bondage under various circumstances. The Smerds were relatively free - they paid tribute and had the right to land.

The Tatar-Mongol invasion and feudal fragmentation became the reasons for the collapse of Rus'. The lands of the once united state became part of Poland, Lithuania, and Muscovy. New attempts at enslavement were made in the 15th century.

The beginning of the formation of feudal dependence

In the XV-XVI centuries, a local system was formed on the territory of former Rus'. The peasant used the landowner's allotments according to the terms of the agreement. Legally he was a free man. The peasant could leave the landowner for another place, but the latter could not drive him away. The only restriction was that you could not leave the site until you paid its owner.

The first attempt to limit the rights of peasants was made by Ivan III. The author of the Code of Law approved the transition to other lands during the week before and after St. George’s Day. In 1581, a decree was issued banning peasants from going out in certain years. But this did not attach them to a specific area. A decree of November 1597 approved the need to return fugitive workers to the landowner. In 1613, the Romanov dynasty came to power in the Moscow kingdom - they increased the time frame for searching and returning fugitives.

About the Council Code

In what year did serfdom become a legal norm? The officially dependent status of the peasantry was approved by the Council Code of 1649. The document differed significantly from previous acts. The main idea of ​​the Code in the field of regulating relations between the landowner and the peasant was the ban on the latter moving to other cities and villages. The place of residence was determined by the territory in which a person lived according to the results of the census of the 1620s. Another fundamental difference between the norms of the Code is the statement that the search for fugitives becomes unlimited. The rights of peasants were limited - the document practically equated them with serfs. The worker's farm belonged to the master.

The beginning of serfdom meant a number of restrictions on movement. But there were also norms that protected the landowner from the willfulness. The peasant could complain or sue, and could not be deprived of land simply by decision of the masters.

In general, such norms consolidated serfdom. It took years to complete the process of formalizing complete feudal dependence.

History of serfdom in Russia

After the Council Code, several more documents appeared that consolidated the dependent status of peasants. The tax reform of 1718-1724 finally attached it to a specific place of residence. Gradually, restrictions led to the formalization of the slave status of the peasants. In 1747, landowners received the right to sell their workers as recruits, and after another 13 years - to send them into exile in Siberia.

At first, the peasant had the opportunity to complain against the landowner, but since 1767 this was abolished. In 1783, serfdom extended to the territory. All laws confirming feudal dependence protected only the rights of landowners.

Any documents aimed at improving the situation of the peasants were virtually ignored. Paul I issued a decree about but in fact the work lasted 5-6 days. Since 1833, landowners received a legally enforceable right to manage the personal life of a serf.

The stages of serfdom make it possible to analyze all the milestones in the consolidation of peasant dependence.

On the eve of the reform

The crisis of the serf system began to make itself felt from the end of the 18th century. This state of society hampered the progress and development of capitalist relations. Serfdom became a wall that separated Russia from the civilized countries of Europe.

It is interesting that feudal dependence did not exist throughout the country. There was no serfdom in the Caucasus, the Far East, or in the Asian provinces. At the beginning of the 19th century it was abolished in Courland and Livonia. Alexander I issued a law on the purpose of which was to ease the pressure on the peasants.

Nicholas I made an attempt to create a commission that would develop a document abolishing serfdom. Landowners prevented the elimination of this kind of dependence. The emperor obliged landowners, when releasing a peasant, to give him land that he could cultivate. The consequences of this law are known - landowners stopped freeing serfs.

The complete abolition of serfdom in Rus' will be carried out by the son of Nicholas I - Alexander II.

Reasons for agrarian reform

Serfdom hampered the development of the state. The abolition of serfdom in Rus' became a historical necessity. Unlike many European countries, industry and trade developed less well in Russia. The reason for this was the lack of motivation and interest of workers in the results of their work. Serfdom became a brake on the development of market relations and the completion of the industrial revolution. In many European countries it successfully ended at the beginning of the 19th century.

Landowner farming and feudal relations have ceased to be effective - they have outlived their usefulness and do not correspond to historical realities. The labor of serfs did not justify itself. The dependent position of the peasants completely deprived them of their rights and gradually became a catalyst for rebellion. Social discontent was growing. A reform of serfdom was needed. Resolving the issue required a professional approach.

An important event, the consequence of which was the reform of 1861, is the Crimean War, in which Russia was defeated. Social problems and foreign policy failures pointed to the unproductiveness of the state's domestic and foreign policies.

Opinions on serfdom

Many writers, politicians, travelers, and thinkers expressed their views on serfdom. Plausible descriptions of peasant life were censored. Since the beginning of serfdom, there have been several opinions about it. Let us highlight two main, opposite ones. Some considered such relations to be natural for a monarchical state system. Serfdom was called a historically determined consequence of patriarchal relations, useful for educating the population and an urgent need for full and effective economic development. The second, opposite to the first, position speaks of feudal dependence as an immoral phenomenon. Serfdom, according to fans of this concept, destroys the social and economic life of the country. Supporters of the second position include A. Herzen and K. Aksakov. A. Savelyev’s publication refutes any negative aspects of serfdom. The author writes that statements about the misfortunes of peasants are far from the truth. The 1861 reform also received mixed reviews.

Development of a reform project

For the first time, Emperor Alexander II spoke about the possibility of abolishing serfdom in 1856. A year later, a committee was convened that was supposed to develop a reform project. It consisted of 11 people. The commission came to the conclusion that it was necessary to create special committees in each province. They must study the situation on the ground and make their amendments and recommendations. In 1857 this project was legalized. The main idea of ​​the original plan for the abolition of serfdom was the elimination of personal dependence while maintaining the rights of landowners to land. A transition period was envisaged for society to adapt to the reform. The possible abolition of serfdom in Rus' caused misunderstanding among landowners. In the newly formed committees there was also a struggle over the conditions for carrying out the reform. In 1858, the decision was made to ease the pressure on the peasants, rather than abolish the dependence. The most successful project was developed by Y. Rostovtsev. The program provided for the abolition of personal dependence, consolidation of the transition period, and the provision of land to peasants. Conservative politicians did not like the project - they sought to limit the rights and size of peasants' plots. In 1860, after the death of Ya. Rostovtsev, V. Panin began developing the program.

The results of several years of committee work served as the basis for the abolition of serfdom. The year 1861 became a landmark year in Russian history in all respects.

Proclamation of the "Manifesto"

The agrarian reform project formed the basis of the “Manifesto on the Abolition of Serfdom.” The text of this document was supplemented by the “Regulations on Peasants” - they described in more detail all the subtleties of social and economic changes. The abolition of serfdom in Rus' took place this year. On this day, the emperor signed the Manifesto and made it public.

The program of the document abolished serfdom. The years of unprogressive feudal relations are a thing of the past. At least that's what many thought.

Main provisions of the document:

• The peasants received personal freedom and were considered “temporarily obligated.”
• Former serfs could have property and the right to self-government.
• Peasants were given land, but they had to work it and pay for it. Obviously, the former serfs did not have money for ransom, so this clause formally renamed personal dependence.
• The size of land plots was determined by landowners.
• Landowners received a guarantee from the state for the right to buy out transactions. Thus, financial obligations fell on the peasants.

Below is the table “Serfdom: abolition of personal dependence”. Let's analyze the positive and negative results of the reform.

The year 1861 in the history of Russia became the year of a turning point in social foundations. The feudal relations that had become entrenched in society could no longer be useful. But the reform itself was not well thought out, and therefore had many negative consequences.

Russia after the reform

The consequences of serfdom, such as unpreparedness for capitalist relations and a crisis for all classes, indicate that the proposed changes were untimely and ill-considered. The peasants responded to the reform with large-scale protests. Uprisings swept many provinces. During 1861, more than 1,000 riots were recorded.

The negative consequences of the abolition of serfdom, which equally affected both landowners and peasants, affected the economic condition of Russia, which was not ready for change. The reform eliminated the existing long-standing system of social and economic relations, but did not create a basis and did not suggest ways for the further development of the country in new conditions. The impoverished peasantry was now completely destroyed both by the oppression of the landowners and the needs of the growing bourgeois class. The result was a slowdown in the capitalist development of the country.

The reform did not free the peasants from serfdom, but only took away from them their last opportunity to feed their families at the expense of the landowners, who were obliged by law to support their serfs. Their plots have decreased compared to pre-reform ones. Instead of the quitrent they earned from the landowner, huge payments of various types appeared. The rights to use forests, meadows and reservoirs were actually completely taken away from the rural community. The peasants were still a separate class with no rights. And still they were considered as existing in a special legal regime.

The landowners suffered many losses because the reform limited their economic interest. The monopoly on peasants eliminated the possibility of free use of the latter for the development of agriculture. In fact, the landowners were forced to give the peasants the allotment land as their own. The reform was characterized by contradictions and inconsistency, the absence of a solution to the further development of society and the relationship between former slaves and landowners. But, ultimately, a new historical period was opened, which had progressive significance.

The peasant reform was of great importance for the further formation and development of capitalist relations in Russia. Among the positive results are the following:

After the liberation of the peasants, an intensive trend appeared in the growth of the non-professional labor market.

The rapid development of industry and agricultural entrepreneurship was due to the provision of civil and property rights to former serfs. The class rights of the nobility to land were eliminated, and the opportunity arose to trade land plots.

The reform of 1861 became a salvation from the financial collapse of the landowners, as the state took on huge debts from the peasants.

The abolition of serfdom served as a prerequisite for the creation of a constitution designed to provide people with their freedoms, rights and responsibilities. This became the main goal on the path to the transition from an absolute monarchy to a constitutional one, that is, to a rule of law state in which citizens live according to existing laws, and everyone is given the right to reliable personal protection.

The active construction of new factories and factories led to the development of belated technical progress.

The post-reform period was distinguished by the strengthening of the positions of the bourgeoisie and the economic collapse of the weakening of the noble class, which still ruled the state and firmly held power, which contributed to the slow transition to the capitalist form of economic management.

At the same time, the emergence of the proletariat as a separate class is noted. The abolition of serfdom in Russia was followed by zemstvo (1864), city (1870), and judicial (1864), which were beneficial to the bourgeoisie. The purpose of these legislative changes was to bring the system and administration in Russia into legal compliance with the new developing social structures, where millions of liberated peasants wanted to gain the right to be called people.