In the absolute monarchy of the new time. In the XIV and XV centuries. kings shared their rights with meetings of government officials composed of representatives of certain classes. These institutions had different names (cortes in Spain and Portugal, parliaments in England and Scotland, states general in France, landtags in individual principalities in Germany, diets in the Czech Republic and Poland, etc.) and had a different structure, but their essence was one is the joint rule of kings with class-representative assemblies. For the issuance of new laws and the abolition of old ones, as well as for the introduction of new taxes, the consent of state officials was required. In some countries the very introduction of the Reformation was carried out with the consent of these class assemblies. Mutual relations between kings and class-representative institutions were also not the same. In France, the Estates General never attained the importance that belonged to the English Parliament, but, on the contrary, the Polish Sejm became even the most main force in the state, completely weakening the royal power; but all these were just different manifestations of the same state form - the estate monarchy with its deviations towards a pure monarchy (France) or towards a republic (Poland). In some states, even the most royalty was selective, at least, basically; so it was even in modern times in the Scandinavian states, in the Slavic Czech Republic and Poland, in Hungary.
126. Establishment of absolutism
This class monarchy began to give way to an absolute monarchy. The earliest absolutism developed in Italy, where it took the form of unlimited princely power, which had the same origin as tyranny in ancient greece; this form is reflected in the famous work of Machiavelli. In the XVI and XVII centuries. almost everywhere government offices fell into disrepair. In some places they disappeared, in others they survived, but lost their former meaning. Spain already under Charles V was a completely absolute monarchy. France in the 16th century the estates general played a role only during religious wars, and after 1614 they were no longer going to. In the lands of the Austrian Habsburgs, absolutism was also established, especially after the suppression of the Czech Sejm in the era of the Thirty Years' War (1620) and the suppression of the uprising of the Hungarians at the end of the 17th century. (1687). In Germany, the Thirty Years' War dealt a blow to the Landtags, and the princes became absolute sovereigns. In Denmark, absolutism was established by a coup d'état in 1660. The same thing happened somewhat later (1682 and 1693) in Sweden under Charles XI; but later, in the 18th century, oligarchic rule was established in this country. The reasons for the fall of estate-representative institutions were, firstly, that the masses of the people did not value them at all and therefore did not defend them, since in general were not represented and secondly, that the estates that sent their representatives quarreled among themselves and thus only weakened themselves. However, the matter was not without a struggle, which was especially strong during the reformation.
Only a few countries have retained and even strengthened their significance of state ranks. The states-general were ruled by the Republic of the United Provinces (Holland), liberated from Spain. Poland, in essence, also turned into a republic and was even officially called so: "The Commonwealth", which means in Polish a republic. Finally, the English parliament also retained its importance, but only after a long and stubborn struggle with the kings from the Stuart dynasty, which clearly aspired to absolutism. (The states still exist in Belgium and the parliament in Scotland).
127. General features of absolutism
The features more or less common to all states in which absolutism was established were the following phenomena.
First, complete subjugation of the church to royalty in Protestant and alliance with religious reaction in the Catholic states. (However, Catholic reaction began to dominate in Poland as well). Secondly, by depriving the estates of their political rights, the kings left behind them in all inviolability of their social privileges and by the way did not touch the feudal rights that gave power to the nobles over the peasants. Thirdly, the kings of this era sought to weaken the local significance of the nobility and urban freedom, developing a system of provincial government from the center with the help of bureaucracy(centralization and bureaucracy). Fourthly, everywhere are installed standing armies. Between the era of the feudal army and the era of standing troops, Europe experienced an era of mercenaries. Mercenary troops began to be used at the end of the Middle Ages in Italy, where they were formed by the so-called condottieri (leaders), sometimes made princes through the forcible seizure of power. During the Thirty Years' War, Wallenstein was also a condottiere, but military mercenarism ended with him. Fifthly, in order to govern the country with the help of officials, to maintain armies and for international wars, the state of modern times needed to have a lot of money. The medieval incomes of sovereigns were insignificant, and in any case they would not have been enough for new expenses. It was necessary to find new sources of income, and this entailed a well-known economic policy, which is also more or less common to all states.
128. Mercantilism
This policy is called mercantilism, because it was based on concern for the development of trade (mercantile - trade). In the XVI century. the most powerful state was Spain, which owned new countries, from where a lot of gold and silver were brought. And other governments then began especially to fuss about importing as many precious metals as possible, in which they even began to see the main wealth of the country. At the same time, attention was paid not so much to the welfare of the inhabitants, but to the enrichment of the treasury. The best means for achieving the latter goal was then recognized as increasing the export of goods and reducing their import, because in this case the country receives more money than it pays itself. And in order to sell more, and to buy less, you need to patronize the local industry; the system of mercantilism was at the same time patronage system for industry (protectionism). Governments sought to free their states from the import of foreign goods, so that everything would be their own. Of course, it was impossible to completely stop the importation of foreign products, but if they turned out to be better or cheaper than native ones, then they were subjected to high import duties. The state treasury also benefited from this. In addition, other measures hampered other people's trade in favor of their own. While providing patronage to domestic trade and industry, governments at the same time took them under their guardianship and interfered with their orders in the conduct of commercial and industrial enterprises than directly expand the activities of the state. In connection with this policy there were concerns about the fleet and the acquisition of colonies. The political rivalry of states began to be accompanied by trade and colonial rivalry, and this greatly contributed to the weakening of religious influences on politics.
129. Birth of money economy
Mercantilism only reinforce the value of money. In the Middle Ages, trade was little developed, money was rare. With the development of trade at the end of the Middle Ages, individual merchants began to enrich themselves, and the first capitalists appeared. Even in those days, trade greatly enriched some cities: in Italy especially Genoa and Venice, in France Marseille and Lyon, in Germany the imperial cities along the Rhine and Danube and the so-called Hanseatic League in the north, as well as the Netherlands. The discovery of America and the sea route to India revived trade even more, because it was accompanied by a huge influx of gold and silver, the appearance of new products on the market, the development of navigation, the establishment of colonies and trading posts (trading agencies), etc. Thus, mercantilism was not generated only by the desire of sovereigns to have as much as possible more money; it was also generated by the new conditions of economic life that created the money economy. This money economy first developed certain forms in Italy, which, both culturally and politically, at the end of the Middle Ages was ahead of other countries. Venice and Genoa were real republics of rich merchants. Florence in the 15th century. rich merchant family Medici thanks to her bank, she took such a position that she later acquired ducal power in Tuscany, saw three of her members (Leo X and Clement VII and VIII) on the papal throne and entered into family relations with sovereigns, giving France two queens (Catherine and Maria Medici) . In Italy, in particular, enterprises with cash turnover began to develop and became a special type of trade. In the Middle Ages, the church forbade the return of money in interest. This rule was first violated on a large scale by Italian merchants, who became known abroad under the name of pawnshops (hence the name of a pawnshop where things can be pawned); only Jews competed with them, who before could not be afraid of church prohibitions. In Italy, they first appeared bills and emerged banks(banco - the bench on which the money changer sat). Here we also meet the institutions from which we later developed exchanges. Some banks and exchanges (in Genoa, in Florence, in Lyon, in Frankfurt am Main, in Antwerp, in Amsterdam) became famous throughout Europe. From rich merchant families in the XVI century. especially advanced in Augsburg Fuggers, possessing colossal wealth. They took at the mercy of anything, including indulgences, and traded in a wide variety of items, not excluding the works of Italian artists. European sovereigns often needed such "kings of the exchange" and borrowed money from them. It would have been impossible for Charles V, for example, to pursue his broad policy if he had not taken credit from the Fuggers. In general, from this era they originate government debts. At the same time, governments began to imitate private capitalists in the conduct of the state economy. Mercantilism was, strictly speaking, a system of state economy built on the basis of merchant enterprises. Finally, in the field of trade, this was the era of education big trading companies.
130. Guardianship system
The patronage that the state began to provide to trade (mainly in France in the 17th century under the minister Colbert) was also reflected in manufacturing industry. In the Middle Ages, it was in the hands of small entrepreneurs (craftsmen), who united in workshops. Masters usually worked for the local market, and not for export. With regard to the provision of goods for export trade, it was necessary to expand production, and the governments also began to take great care of this, patronizing the organization of large manufactories with cash subsidies, interest-free loans, various privileges and the elimination of rivalry from foreign goods. The most prominent representatives of mercantilism were in mid-seventeenth in. Cromwell in England and Colbert in France. The system itself (colbertism) was even named after him.
The state of modern times sought to subjugate not only industry and trade, but also all other aspects of social life. In the 17th and 18th centuries the system of government guardianship has reached its greatest development. In Germany, there was even a special designation of this system with the word "police state" (Polizeistaat).
131. Political literature of the era
The struggle between individual political parties in the era of the transformation of the estate monarchy into an absolute one was accompanied by development of various political doctrines in literature. Since this struggle took place during the religious reformation and Catholic reaction, the corresponding literature also assumed a theological character. In the second half of the XVI century. Calvinists in France (Lange), in Scotland (Buchanan), in the Netherlands (Marnix de St. Aldegonde) They argued in their writings that after God, the supreme power belongs to the people, which entrusts the sovereign to govern itself only under certain conditions and can take this right back from him if he fails to fulfill the contract. On the basis of this teaching, the deposition of Philip II took place in the Netherlands. The same doctrine was adopted in the 17th century. English writers during the struggle of Parliament with the Stuarts (Milton). Jesuit politicians of the second half of the 16th and early 17th centuries. also became point of view of democracy; but when absolutism triumphed, and the kings began to obey the pope, the Jesuits changed their mind. In general, in Catholicism in the 17th century. dominated the doctrine of the direct divine origin of royalty. One of the most prominent representatives of the latter view was the French bishop Bossuet(1627-1704), author of Politics Extracted from the Own Words of Scripture.
132. Development of court life
Absolute monarchy of the 16th-18th centuries. Finally, it is characterized development of court life. Again, the courts of the Italian rulers of the Renaissance served as a model for her, when even at the papal court secular entertainments were arranged and ladies appeared. Italian sovereigns of the 15th century. were patrons of literature and the arts. In the XVI century. Italy became a trendsetter, and the Italian language came into general use, as did French later. One of the most ardent imitators of the Italians was the French king Francis I.
Dear guests! If you like our project, you can support it with a small amount of money through the form below. Your donation will allow us to transfer the site to a better server and attract one or two employees to more quickly host the mass of historical, philosophical and literary materials we have. It is better to make transfers through a card, and not with Yandex money.
Introduction
The essence of absolutism and the features of its formation in Russia
The establishment and development of autocracy in the XVIII-XIX centuries.
2 Post-Petrine period in the development of absolutism (until the 19th century)
3 The development of absolutism in the nineteenth century.
The overthrow of the absolute monarchy in Russia
1 The crisis of autocracy in Russia towards the end of the 19th - beginning of the 20th centuries.
2 The fall of the monarchy in Russia and the fate of Nicholas II and members of his family
Conclusion
Introduction
History, like no other science, testifies that it is impossible to create a new world bypassing the past. Comprehensive study historical process, especially significant, critical periods, allows you to explain the present day, understand the present more clearly and accumulate material for predicting the future. The 18th century was such a turning point in the history of Russia. It was then that a new form of state power was established in Russia - an absolute monarchy, that is, an unlimited monarchy, in which all legislative, executive and judicial power belongs to the ruler.
Late XVII- XVIII centuries. - a time of rapid changes in Russian society, which still cause ambiguous assessments. The main subject of controversy is precisely the problem of absolutism: the time of its occurrence, essence, social nature, periods of development. Therefore, in my opinion, this topic is relevant even today. The century in the history of Russia has become truly fateful. It was a time of fundamental changes caused by Peter's reforms. With his transformations, Peter I turned Russia sharply to the West. This turn and its consequences for the development of Russia and Russian culture became the subject of a heated debate between scientists and thinkers, which flared up with particular force in the 19th century and continues to this day.
Noble historians stood on the positions of the original autocracy in Russia. V.N. Tatishchev and N.M. Karamzin saw him already in the Kievan state, and, of course, since the formation of the Muscovite state. IN. Klyuchevsky found autocracy in the Muscovite state under Ivan the Terrible and even under his grandfather Ivan III.
In Soviet historiography, the transition to autocracy is associated with various periods. Some authors attribute its beginning to the time of Ivan III, who called himself an autocrat. Others associate the establishment of autocracy with the name of Ivan the Terrible. Some researchers lead absolutism from the reforms of Peter I, from the beginning of the 18th century.
Based on the relevance, it is necessary to determine the goals and objectives of the work.
So, the purpose of this term paper is a comprehensive study of the institution of absolutism in Russia: the time of its occurrence and its characteristic features.
The following tasks follow from this goal:
reveal the essence of absolutism, identify the causes and prerequisites for its formation in Russia;
characterize the period of its approval and subsequent development and strengthening in the 18th - 19th centuries;
determine the reasons for its overthrow in the twentieth century.
In writing this work, a wide range of literature was reviewed and studied. In particular, the monographs of Ageeva O. G. “The Imperial Court of Russia, 1700-1796.” and Anokhin S. L. “Reforms in Russia XVIII- XX centuries. They characterize the main reforms carried out by the Russian monarchs, and pay special attention to the reforms of Peter the Great, which contributed to the establishment of absolutism in Russia.
In the course of writing the term paper, the works of Henschel N. “The myth of absolutism. Changes and continuity in the development of the Western European monarchy of the early modern period” and Kareeva N.I. "Western European absolute monarchy of the 16th - 18th centuries", which analyzes the Western European absolute monarchies, gives their inherent features, which subsequently helped to determine the differences between Russian absolutism and Western European absolutism, to identify its features.
When writing the work, the materials characterizing the establishment and development of autocracy in the era of palace coups were also studied. These include: " Palace coups» Eremenko M.A. and an article by Petrukhintsev N.V. "Invisible Age" The article provides a fairly complete assessment of the activities of the rulers of that time.
The works of historians devoted to the personalities of the period under review were studied. For example, Obolensky G.'s monograph “The Age of Catherine the Great. The Time of Heroes and Heroic Deeds”, which analyzes the activities of Empress Catherine, nicknamed the Great, and characterizes the absolutism of the Catherine period, that is, enlightened absolutism. The work of Skorobogatov A.V. "Tsesarevich Pavel Petrovich" is dedicated to the ideology of Russian absolutism in the second half of the 18th century. On the specific example the ideological construct is explored from its origins to its implementation. Based on the analysis of a wide range of diverse sources, the author examines the problem of the formation of the political doctrine of Emperor Paul I and its development before accession to the throne, reveals the influence on this process of education and training of Paul as the heir to the throne, his teachers, those around him, the circle of reading and other factors. Particular attention is paid to the theoretical development in the doctrine of the pressing problems of the era, its close connection with the needs of Russia in the second half of the 18th century. The author traces how the approbation of Pavel Petrovich's ideas was consistently carried out, despite the limited degree of his participation in the political life of the country. Here it is necessary to note "Alexander I" Sakharov A.N. In this book, the author seeks to show Alexander I as one of the first reformers on the throne of modern times in Russia, as a liberal autocrat who, like some of his associates, in particular M.M. Speransky, was ahead of the Russian time, which, along with participation in the murder of his father, Paul I, became his personal and social drama. The most famous historian A.N. Bokhanov in his work “Nicholas I” restores the historical truth about the personality and reign of Nikolai Pavlovich, whose reign fell on the most difficult years for Russia in the 19th century.
In the course of writing this work, an article by Lavrov V. M. “God rest with the saints ...” was also considered, in which one can trace the fate of the ruling dynasty after the February Revolution of 1917. About what caused the overthrow of the monarchy in Russia, about the crisis of autocracy in early 20th century narrated in the "Book for reading on the history of the Fatherland, the beginning of the 20th century." Shatsillo K.F. "100 great events of the XX century" Nepomnyashchiy N.N.
In used when writing the term paper “History of Russia. 1861-1917" Fedorova V. A. and "History of Russia, XX century: 1894 - 1939" Zubov A. B. traces the development of Russian absolutism after the "great" reforms of Alexander the Liberator.
The source base for writing the term paper was such documents and collections as the Cathedral Code of 1649 and the collection of documents edited by Lebedev. The collection of documents on Peter the Great's reforms, edited by Lebedev, contains the main documents characterizing the policy of Peter I and the state of Russian Empire at the beginning of the 18th century, the collection also used legislative material, journalism of the Petrine era and notes of a number of Petrine figures. The Cathedral Code of 1649 is the fundamental legislative act of pre-Petrine Russia.
The memoir of A.N. Bokhanov was studied. Nicholas II. This is a story about the Russian tsar and the royal house in the last decades of its existence. The diary of Nicholas II, studied by me, served as a source for writing a term paper. Also, in the course of writing the term paper, volume 2 of the Great Russian Encyclopedia was considered, which contains information about the Russian Empire during the First World War, the encyclopedia gives a complete description of Russia of that time and its subsequent development.
The course work consists of an introduction, which indicates the relevance of the research topic, sets the goal and objectives of the work, three chapters, a conclusion and a list of sources and literature used. The first chapter reveals the essence of absolutism, and examines the reasons and prerequisites for its establishment in Russia. The second chapter is devoted to the study of the formation of an absolute monarchy in Russia, its development in the era of palace coups and in the nineteenth century. Particular attention in this part of the course work is given to the reforms of Peter I, which contributed to the establishment of absolutism in Russia. The third chapter is the final one, and it explores issues related to the fall of the monarchy in Russia. And finally, in the conclusion, the main conclusions obtained as a result of studying this topic are given.
1. The essence of absolutism and the features of its formation in Russia
The concept of absolutism and its place in the system of public authorities Western Europe and Russia
Absolutism is a form of government in which the supreme power in the state belongs completely and undividedly to the monarch. Power reaches the highest degree centralization. The absolute monarch rules, relying on the bureaucratic apparatus, the standing army and the police, and the church as an ideological force also obeys him. The heyday of absolutism in the countries of Western Europe falls on the XVII-XVIII centuries. Absolutism existed in Russia in the 18th and early 20th centuries. From a formal legal point of view, under absolutism, all the fullness of legislative and executive power is concentrated in the hands of the head of state - the monarch, he independently establishes taxes and manages state finances. The social support of absolutism is the nobility. The rationale for absolutism was the thesis of the divine origin of supreme power. The exaltation of the person of the sovereign was served by magnificent and sophisticated palace etiquette.
At the first stage, absolutism was progressive in nature: it fought against the separatism of the feudal nobility, subordinated the church to the state, eliminated the remnants of feudal fragmentation, and introduced uniform laws. The absolute monarchy is characterized by a policy of protectionism and mercantilism, which contributed to the development of the national economy, the commercial and industrial bourgeoisie. New economic resources were used by absolutism to strengthen military power states and waging wars of conquest.
To one degree or another, the features of absolute monarchy, or the desire for it, manifested themselves in all the states of Europe, but they found the most complete embodiment in France, where absolutism manifested itself already at the beginning of the 16th century, and experienced its heyday during the reign of kings Louis XIII and Louis XIV Bourbons (1610-1715).
In England, the peak of absolutism fell on the reign of Elizabeth I Tudor (1558-1603), but in the British Isles it never reached its classical form: the parliament was preserved, there was no standing army, there was no powerful local bureaucracy.
A strong royal power was established in Spain, but the weak development of the local economy did not allow the formation of an entrepreneurial class, and Spanish absolutism degenerated into despotism. In Germany, absolute monarchies did not take shape on a national scale, but within the framework of individual principalities.
The characteristics of absolutism in various countries were determined by the balance of power between the nobility and the bourgeoisie. In France, and especially in England, the influence of bourgeois elements on politics was much greater than in Germany, Austria and Russia. A characteristic phenomenon for Europe in the second half of the 18th century was enlightened absolutism, closely associated with the ideas and practices of the Enlightenment. In general, the absolutist system of government strengthened the feeling of a state community among representatives of various classes and social groups thus contributing to the formation of the nation.
With the development and strengthening of capitalism in European countries the principles of the existence of an absolute monarchy, which conserved archaic feudal orders and estate partitions, began to come into conflict with the needs of a changed society. The rigid framework of protectionism and mercantilism limited economic freedom entrepreneurs forced to produce only goods that are beneficial to the royal treasury. Dramatic changes are taking place within the estates. An economically powerful, educated, entrepreneurial class of capitalists is growing out of the depths of the third estate, having its own idea of the role and tasks of state power. In the Netherlands, England and France, these contradictions were resolved in a revolutionary way, in other countries there was a gradual transformation of the absolute monarchy into a limited, constitutional one.
In Russia, the absolute monarchy developed in the course of Peter the Great's reforms and had its own characteristics. The formation of an absolute monarchy was associated with the policy of mercantilism in the economy and trade, which was pursued by Peter I, with the formation of a new ideology and culture, with the expansion of the ethno-territorial limits of the Russian state, with the strengthening and expansion of serfdom. All this required the concentration of all power in the hands of the monarch.
It should be noted that the process of formation of an absolute monarchy in Russia differed significantly from similar processes in European states. If the social support of Western European absolutism was the bourgeoisie (“third estate”) and part of the feudal lords, then the absolute monarchy in Russia mainly reflected the interests of the nobility. Therefore, it is not accidental that, having received absolute power, the Russian monarchs not only did not abolish the most archaic feudal institutions, but, on the contrary, significantly increased the enslavement of the bulk of the population. Also, the establishment of an absolute monarchy in Russia was accompanied by the formation of a police state, which sought to control and regulate in detail all manifestations of public and private life.
Thus, the transition to an absolute monarchy was largely due to the need to concentrate all forces and resources to ensure economic and military security. But as its power strengthened, the absolutist state itself turned into a real threat to neighboring peoples, demonstrating aspirations to expand its territory. The Russian rulers sought in each case to find their own approach to integrating new subjects into Russian society.
Causes and prerequisites for the emergence of Russian absolutism
Throughout the 17th century Great changes have taken place in the history of Russia. They touched every aspect of her life. By this time, the territory of the Russian state had noticeably expanded. Lost at the beginning of the 17th century. as a result of the intervention and seizure of the territory, they were almost completely returned, with the exception of the Baltic and Karelian lands, which remained under the rule of Sweden. Russia included Left-Bank Ukraine with Kyiv and the Zaporozhye region, there was an advance to Siberia, where the Russians reached the coast Pacific Ocean. In general, in the XVII century. the borders of Russia came close to the Crimean Khanate, the North Caucasus and Kazakhstan. Due to the movement to the north, where there was no landownership, and there were "black" volost peasant "worlds", there was an increase in the population in Primorye and along the basins of the northern rivers. Along the banks of the Don River back in the 16th century. settlements of free people who left the center appeared - the Cossacks. The century in the history of Russia was marked by the further development of the feudal-serf system, a significant strengthening of feudal land ownership. As a result of the mass distribution of land by the Russian government, the landownership of the nobility increased. The new feudal nobility concentrated vast patrimonial wealth in their hands. The noble lands increased especially significantly under the rule of the first Romanovs, and mainly at the expense of peasant communities.
In the 17th century in Russia, the feudal-serf system is being strengthened, and a nation-wide system of serfdom is essentially taking shape. The Council Code of 1649, which formalized the system of serfdom and completed the development of the serf legislation of the Russian state, assigned privately owned peasants to landowners, boyars, monasteries, and increased local dependence of peasants on feudal lords and on the state. According to the same Council Code, the inheritance of serfdom and the right of the landowner to dispose of the property of a serf were established. Granting extensive serf rights to landowners, the tsarist government at the same time made them responsible for the performance of state duties by their peasants. By creating a state system of serfdom, the government sought to mobilize the people's forces to strengthen the state, raise its economy, strengthen the military forces and solve other internal and external problems.
Under these conditions, the development of trade in the broadest sense of the word is of particular importance. In Russia, several large shopping centers were formed, among which Moscow stood out. Merchants were the leaders and masters of this process. But the development of the merchant class in Russia was greatly hampered by the lack of access to the seas, the dominance of foreign capital in the country: English, French, Dutch merchant capital in these years sought to capture Russia's domestic markets.
Meanwhile, in the same years, uprisings broke out in the country every now and then, in particular, the rather powerful Moscow uprising of 1662. The largest uprising was the uprising of Stepan Razin. After this peasant war, a number of important state measures were carried out in Russia, including the transition to a system of household taxation, transformation in the army, etc. As a result of a long process of state centralization, which took a long period of time in the history of Russia, the country reached in the 17th century. such a stage of development that made it possible to move to absolutism.
The unlimited power of the autocracy was legalized by the Council Code of 1649. The same Code secured the victory of the autocracy over the church, which had previously claimed an independent political role. Serf relations continue to dominate in all spheres of the socio-political and economic life of society. At the same time, the changes that took place in all areas of the country's life outgrew in the first quarter of the 18th century. into a new quality form.
From the second half of the XVII century. the political system of the country evolved to absolutism, which was expressed in the fall of the role of institutions characteristic of a class-representative monarchy. Absolutism in Russia was formed on the basis of the undivided domination of the feudal-serf system. The autocracy had to maneuver between the groupings of the ruling class. During the years of exacerbation of social contradictions between antagonistic classes feudal society all strata of the ruling class rallied around the king, which contributed to the strengthening of autocracy and the centralization of government. The foreign policy of the government was carried out in the same direction.
The most striking evidence of the strengthening of autocracy was the decline in the significance of Zemsky Sobors. The Zemsky Sobor of 1653, which adopted a resolution on the reunification of Ukraine with Russia, is considered the last cathedral assembled in full force. This was due to the fact that the strengthened autocracy no longer needed the support of the class-representative body. He was pushed back by government agencies - orders, as well as the Boyar Duma. Several orders obeyed one person.
Changes were also made to the local management system. In order to centralize power, neighboring counties were united into "ranks" - a kind of prototype of the Petrine provinces. Governors were sent to the places, vested with full power. In 1682, localism was abolished (occupation of positions depending on the nobility of origin and the official position of the ancestors). "Bit books", which recorded the genealogy and appointments, were solemnly burned; the principle of service compliance began to be put forward.
In the second half of the XVII century. scattered attempts were made to reorganize the army. The so-called regiments of the “new system” were created from free, “eager” people: soldiers (infantry), reiters (cavalry) and dragoons (mixed system). They also recruited "subject" people. One hundred peasant households gave one soldier for lifelong service. These regiments were assembled only for the duration of the war, and after it ended, they disbanded. Foreign officers began to be invited into the army.
A serious obstacle to the transition to absolutism was created by the church, which still claimed great power. The actions of Patriarch Nikon in many ways ran counter to the emerging absolutism. Moscow Patriarch Nikon put forward and fiercely defended the idea of independence and the leading role of the church in the state. He argued that the "priesthood" (church) is higher than the "kingdom" and that the king receives the crown from the hands of the patriarch - the representative of God on earth. Having a huge personal influence on the tsar, Nikon managed to achieve the title of "great sovereign", which put him almost on an equal footing with Tsar Alexei Mikhailovich. The court of the Moscow patriarch was not much inferior in luxury and splendor to the royal chambers. secular power it took 8 years to formalize the deposition of Nikon. The church council of 1666 issued a decision pleasing to the tsar: Patriarch Nikon was exiled as a simple monk to a monastery.
Thus, the processes that took place in the socio-political development of Russia in the second half of the 17th century testify that attempts at transformation took place before the reforms of Peter the Great, and they contributed to the further formation of absolutism. Despite the aggravation of socio-political, economic relations in the country, the turn of the XVII-XVIII centuries. was a turning point in the history of feudal Russia.
2. The establishment and development of autocracy in the XVIII-XIX centuries.
.1 Formation of absolutism under Peter I
century in the history of Russia is considered to be the last century of the Muscovite kingdom, the century of transition to the Russian Empire. It was in the second half of the 17th century. absolute monarchy begins to take shape in Russia, but its final approval and formalization dates back to the first quarter of the 18th century.
The transformations that have taken place in Russia have covered almost all aspects of the country's life: economy, politics, science, life, foreign policy, political system. They affected the position of the working masses, church affairs, and so on. In many ways, these transformations are associated with the activities of Peter I (1689-1725). His merit consisted in the fact that he correctly understood and realized the complexity of the tasks that faced the country, and purposefully began to implement them. The reforms carried out by Peter I played a big role in the history of Russia and contributed to the formation of absolutism in Russia.
Of all the transformations of Peter, the central place was occupied by the reform of public administration, the reorganization of all its links. This is understandable, since the old clerk's apparatus, inherited by Peter, was not able to cope with the increasingly complex management tasks. Therefore, new orders and offices began to be created.
A regional reform was carried out, with the help of which Peter hoped to provide the army with everything necessary. The reform, while meeting the most pressing needs of autocratic power, was at the same time a consequence of the development of the bureaucratic trend. It was with the help of strengthening the bureaucratic element in management that Peter intended to solve all state issues. The reform led not only to the concentration of financial and administrative powers in the hands of several governors - representatives of the central government, but also to the creation of an extensive hierarchical network of bureaucratic institutions with a large staff of officials on the ground. The former system "order - county" was doubled: "order (or office) - province - province - county". A similar scheme was laid down in the idea of organizing the Senate. Autocracy, which sharply increased in the second half of the 17th century, did not need institutions of representation and self-government. At the beginning of the XVIII century. the activities of the Boyar Duma are actually terminated, the control of the central and local apparatus is transferred to the so-called "consilium of ministers" - a temporary council of heads of the most important government departments.
The creation and functioning of the Senate was the next level of bureaucratization of the top management. The permanent composition of senators, elements of collegiality, personal oath, a program of work for a long period, a strict hierarchy of management - all this testified to the increasing importance of bureaucratic principles, without which Peter could not imagine either effective government or autocracy as a political regime of personal power.
Peter I attached great importance to the adopted legislation. He believed that a "government" law, issued on time and consistently enforced, could do almost anything. That is why the legislation of the Petrine era was distinguished by pronounced tendencies towards comprehensive regulation, unceremonious interference in the sphere of private and personal life.
The formulation of the idea of reforming the state apparatus and its implementation date back to the end of 1710-1720. During this period, Peter I in many areas of domestic policy begins to move away from the principles of direct violence to the regulation of social phenomena with the help of a bureaucratic machine. As a model for the state reform he conceived, Peter chose state structure Sweden. Summarizing the experience of the Swedes, taking into account some specific aspects of Russian reality, he created the so-called General Regulations of 1719-1724, which had no analogues in Europe at that time, containing the most general principles operation of the device.
In this way, new system central institutions was established along with a system of higher authorities and local government. Particularly important was the reform of the Senate, which occupied a key position in the state system of Peter. The Senate was entrusted with judicial, administrative and legislative functions. He was also in charge of the collegiums and provinces, the appointment and approval of officials.
Under Peter I, the Russian army and navy became one of the strongest in Europe. Peter I even tried to introduce military principles into the civil sphere. This was manifested in the extension of military legislation to the system of state institutions, as well as in giving the laws governing the work of institutions the significance and force of military regulations.
In 1716, the basic military law - the Military Regulations - was adopted by Peter's direct decree as a fundamental legislative act, mandatory in institutions of all levels. The extension of military law to the civil sphere led to the application of the same penalties to civil servants that were subject to war crimes against the oath. Neither before nor after Peter in the history of Russia was such a huge number of decrees issued promising the death penalty for crimes in office.
The regular army nurtured by Peter I, in all the diversity of its institutions and uniformity of principles, took a large place in the life of Russian society, becoming its most important element. Many believe that the army was not attached to the state, but, on the contrary, the state was attached to the army. It is no coincidence that the 18th century became the "century of palace coups" largely due to the exaggerated importance of the military element, primarily the guards, in the public life of the empire. Peter's state reform, as well as the transformation of the army, undoubtedly led to a fairly clear separation of military and civil services.
And another measure related to the use of the military in general civil affairs was carried out by Peter I. During the per capita census, a new procedure for the maintenance and deployment of troops was established. The regiments were settled on the lands of those peasants, from the "capita number" of which was collected to pay for the needs of this regiment. The laws on the settlement of regiments issued in 1724 were supposed to regulate the relationship of the population with the troops. The military command not only monitored the collection of the poll tax in the area where the regiment was deployed, but also performed the functions of the "zemstvo police": they stopped the escapes of peasants, suppressed resistance, and also carried out, according to the passport system introduced at the same time, general political supervision over the movement of the population.
In the era of Peter there was a disintegration of the once single class of "service people". The top of the service class - the servants "in the fatherland", that is, by origin, became nobles, and the lower classes of the service class "in the fatherland" - the so-called "odnodvortsy". The formation of an estate of nobles, who enjoyed exclusive rights, was the result not only of the ongoing process of differentiation of the service class, deepening the differences between its upper and lower classes, but also the result of the conscious activity of the authorities. The essence of the changes in the position of the top of the service class was the introduction of a new criterion for evaluating their service. Instead of the principle according to which noble servicemen immediately occupied a high position in society, the army and in the service as a result of their origin, the principle of personal service was introduced, the conditions of which were determined by law.
The new principle, reflected in the Table of Ranks of 1722, strengthened the nobility due to the influx of people from other classes. But this was not the ultimate goal of this transformation. With the help of the principle of personal service, strictly stipulated conditions for promotion through the ranks, Peter turned the mass of servicemen into a military-bureaucratic corps, completely subordinate to him and dependent only on him. At the same time, Peter sought to connect the very concept of "nobleman" as closely as possible with a mandatory permanent service that required knowledge and practical skills. The property of the nobles, as well as the service, was regulated by law: in 1714, in order to force the nobles to think about the service as the main source of well-being, they introduced primacy - it was forbidden to sell and mortgage land holdings, including tribal ones. Noble estates could be confiscated at any time in case of violation of laws, which was often carried out in practice.
The reform was also significant in relation to the inhabitants of cities, Peter decided to unify the social structure of the city by introducing Western European institutions into it: magistrates, workshops and guilds. These institutions, which had deep roots in the history of the development of a Western European medieval city, were brought into Russian reality by force, by administrative means. The posad population was divided into two guilds: the first guild was made up of the "primary" guild, which included the tops of the posad, rich merchants, artisans, citizens of intelligent professions, and the second guild included small shopkeepers and artisans, who, in addition, were united in workshops according to professional sign. All other townspeople who were not included in the guilds were subject to verification in order to identify runaway peasants among them and return them to their former places of residence.
Peter left unchanged the former system of distribution of taxes according to the "belly", when the wealthiest citizens were forced to pay for tens and hundreds of their poor fellow citizens. This fixed the medieval social structures and institutions, which, in turn, sharply hampered the maturation and development of capitalist relations in the cities.
The system of city government became just as formal, at the head of which Peter put the Chief Magistrate, who led the magistrates of other cities subordinate to him. But these magistrates, whose main rights were only legal proceedings, collecting taxes and maintaining order in the city, neither in essence nor in a number of formal signs had anything in common with the magistrates of Western European cities - effective self-government bodies. As a result of the city reform, a bureaucratic management mechanism was created, and the representatives of the township, who were part of the magistrates, were considered as officials of the centralized city management system, and their positions were even included in the Table of Ranks.
The social transformations carried out by Peter I also affected the serfs: the serfs and serfs merged into a single estate. Serfdom is an institution similar in its features to domestic slavery, which had a thousand-year history and developed law. The general trend in the development of serfdom was towards the spread of many norms of servile law to the serfs, which was a common platform for their subsequent merger.
Serfdom was established in Russia long before the birth of Peter. It has permeated all the foundations of the life of the country, the consciousness of the people. Unlike Western Europe, serfdom in Russia played a special, comprehensive role. The destruction of the legal structures of serfdom would undermine the basis of autocratic power. Peter I understood all this well, and therefore strengthened this system with all the means available to him. By the beginning of the 20s. an important social event was held: the fight against the escapes of the peasants, who were returned to their former owners, was intensified.
The legislation introduced by Peter I was characterized by a more precise regulation of the rights and obligations of each class and, accordingly, a more stringent system of prohibitions. Tax reform was of great importance in this process. The introduction of the poll tax, which was preceded by a census of male souls, meant the establishment of a procedure for the rigid attachment of each payer to the tax in the place of residence where he was registered for the payment of the poll tax.
The time of Peter the Great was characterized by large-scale police actions of a long-term nature. The most serious of them should be recognized as the placement in 1724-1725. army regiments to permanent apartments in places, counties, provinces, where the poll tax was collected for them, and the police functions of army commanders associated with this.
Another police action carried out under Peter was the introduction of the passport system. Without a passport established by law, not a single peasant or city dweller had the right to leave his place of residence. Violation of the passport regime automatically meant the transformation of a person into a criminal, subject to arrest and sent to his former place of residence.
Significant changes also affected the church. Peter I carried out a reform, expressed in the creation of a collegial (synodal) administration of the Russian Church. The destruction of the patriarchate reflected the aspirations of Peter. I liquidate the "princely" system of church power, unthinkable under the then autocracy. By declaring himself the de facto head of the church, Peter destroyed its autonomy. Moreover, he made extensive use of the institutions of the church to carry out his policies. Citizens, under pain of large fines, were obliged to attend church and repent of their sins at confession to the priest, the same, according to the law, was obliged to report everything illegal that became known at confession to the authorities.
Thus, the reforms carried out by Peter I were of great importance for the historical fate of Russia. The institutions of power he created lasted for hundreds of years. For example, the Senate operated from 1711 to December 1917, i.e. 206 years, synodal structure Orthodox Church remained unchanged from 1721 to 1918, i.e., a little less than 200 years; the poll tax system was abolished only in 1887, that is, 163 years after its introduction in 1724. An equally long fate was prepared for many other reforms of Peter the Great. In the history of Russia, there are few such or other institutions of state power, created either before or after Peter I, that would have existed for so long and would have had such a strong impact on all aspects of public life. Peter's reforms led to the formation of a military-bureaucratic state with a strong centralized autocratic power based on a feudal economy and a strong army.
2.2 Post-Petrine period in the development of absolutism (until the 19th century)
The reforms of Peter I had a serious impact on the socio-economic development of the country. In the XVIII century. in Russia there is observed (albeit in the initial stage) the process of disintegration of serfdom and the formation of capitalist relations. The socio-economic development of Russia was extremely difficult and contradictory. Serf relations, which entered the stage of their decomposition, not only remained dominant, but also spread to new territories. The country is forming big industry, in which capitalist, semi-serf and serf relations are intricately intertwined. The development of commodity-money relations draws into its orbit a significant part of the landowners and a certain part of the peasant farms. Destroying natural character Agriculture, this process gradually created the prerequisites for the penetration of capitalist relations into it. However, in the XVIII century. these prerequisites could not be fully realized. The emerging Russian bourgeoisie in the 18th century. not yet turned into an independent class, but remained a medieval class of merchants. The bourgeoisie was closely connected with the serfdom and all the attributes that flowed from it. This largely explains the complexity and inconsistency of the socio-economic and political development Russia XVIII century.
January 1725, after a long illness, Peter I died without having time to appoint a successor. The dispute over the successor was decided by the Guards regiments. Noble in their composition, they have since become the main instrument of the struggle for power between rival factions.
Representatives of the new nobility, who advanced under Peter I, enlisted the support of the guards regiments, enthroned Catherine I, but in practice the power was in the hands of Prince A. D. Menshikov, an associate of Peter I. In 1726, the Supreme Privy Council was created - a new supreme authority , which pushed the Senate to second positions. Under these conditions, the continuation of major reforms became impossible. After the death in 1727 of Catherine I, according to her will, the grandson of Peter I, Peter II, was proclaimed emperor, and the functions of regent were transferred to the Supreme Privy Council, in fact, to Menshikov. Menshikov's policy caused discontent even among his recent allies. In September 1727, Menshikov was arrested and exiled to distant Berezov, where he soon died.
In January 1730, the young emperor caught a cold during another hunt and died suddenly. During the discussion of possible candidates for the throne, the choice fell on the Duchess of Courland Anna Ioannovna, the daughter of Peter I's brother, Ivan Alekseevich. AT deep secret conditions were drawn up, that is, the conditions for Anna Ioannovna's accession to the throne.
Conditions limited the autocracy, but not in the interests of the entire nobility, but in favor of its aristocratic elite, which sat in the Supreme Privy Council. According to the convention, the right to conclude peace, establish new taxes, promote promotion, command the army, choose the successor of the sovereign, and much more passed into the hands of the Supreme Privy Council.
Anna Ioannovna, who signed the terms, turned into an uncomplaining puppet. However, these plans did not find support from either the nobles or the guards. Taking advantage of this, Anna Ioannovna proclaimed herself an autocratic empress, abolished the Supreme Privy Council, and sent its most active members to Siberia.
In the reign of Anna Ioannovna, the influence of foreigners reached unprecedented proportions. The tone at court was set by the favorite of the Empress, the Duke of Courland, Biron, who enjoyed her boundless confidence and occupied a dominant position at court. During the years of the Bironovshchina, it was mostly foreigners who were nominated for lucrative positions. This provoked a protest from the Russian nobility. Instead of the Supreme Privy Council, the Senate was restored, which a year later was pushed into the background by the Cabinet, composed by the queen. In the context of general dissatisfaction with Biron, Field Marshal Munnich easily managed to carry out another palace coup, which in November 1740 deprived Biron of the rights of regent. The mother of the young Ivan VI, Anna Leopoldovna, was proclaimed regent.
The coup could not satisfy the interests of broad circles of the Russian nobility, since the leading position in the state was still retained by the Germans. During the next coup, committed on November 25, 1741 in favor of the daughter of Peter I, Elizabeth, who reigned for 20 years (1741-1761), the representatives of the Brunswick family who reigned on the throne were arrested. The participants in the coup received generous rewards, and those who did not have a noble rank were elevated to the nobility.
Speaking of palace coups in the second quarter of the 18th century, it should be noted that they took place relatively easily, without any special complications. Their success was largely due to the open dissatisfaction of the Russian nobility, the detrimental effect on various aspects of Russian life of foreign dominance.
In addition, the open dissatisfaction of the nobles was caused by compulsory service, established at one time by Peter I. Satisfying the requirements of the nobility, the government in 1732 established a corps of cadets. Noble children after the end of this educational institution received officer ranks. Somewhat later, in 1736, the demands of the nobles for the abolition of indefinite service were satisfied. One of the sons of a noble family was released from service to manage the estate.
Elizabeth Petrovna was replaced by her nephew Peter III (1761-1762), poorly educated, unable to lead the state. Peter III in July 1762 was replaced on the throne by his wife Catherine II, who reigned for 34 years (1762-1796). Unlike her predecessors, she was an intelligent statesman, a cunning and clever politician, a subtle diplomat who left a noticeable mark on the history of Russia.
The second half of the eighteenth century in Russian historiography is called the period of enlightened absolutism. Enlightened absolutism is a period in the history of an autocratic state when tendencies towards bourgeois development are clearly manifested in its policy, when it is characterized by the acceptance and open proclamation by the ruling circles of the principles of French education, the ideas set forth in the works of Voltaire, Diderot, Montesquieu, Rousseau and others. . Enlightened absolutism was characteristic of a number of European countries: Austria, Prussia, Spain, Denmark, Sweden. In Russia, this period is inextricably linked with the name of Catherine II.
The main idea of the entire reign of Catherine II was to strengthen the authority of the supreme power, improve the state apparatus, aimed at making it more flexible, obedient, and centralized. Having become empress as a result of the coup in 1762, Catherine declared in her manifesto that autocratic power not based on good philanthropic principles is evil. Laws were solemnly promised that would indicate to all state institutions the limits of their activities.
Attempts to correct the Code of 1649 were made throughout the century, commissions for this work were convened, for example, in 1754 and 1761. On December 14, 1766, Catherine issued a manifesto on the convocation of deputies to the Commission to draft a new code. Deputies were elected from estates: nobles, townspeople, peasants, and from higher institutions: colleges, Senate, Synod. An important new moment was the orders that the voters were supposed to provide the deputies with. The main order was written by Catherine herself, it spoke about laws, court, trade, education, criminal and civil laws.
During the reign of Catherine II, a number of major events were carried out, both in domestic and foreign policy, but they were carried out largely by feudal methods. Catherine II began her reign with the fact that she confirmed the position of the Manifesto on the freedom of the nobility and generously endowed the participants in the palace coup. In February 1764, secularization was carried out (the conversion by the state of church property, mainly land, into secular property) of church land ownership. As a result, more than a million souls of peasants were taken away from the church, and a special collegium, the Collegium of Economics, was created to manage them. The corvee for the peasants was replaced by a cash quitrent. Most of the land passed to them, on which they carried the corvée in favor of the monasteries. At the same time, in 1765, a decree was issued in favor of the feudal lords, providing for the assignment to the nobles of all the lands they seized from various categories of peasants. In August 1767, Catherine II issued the most cruel decree in the history of serfdom. By this decree, any complaint of a peasant against a landowner was declared the gravest state crime.
At the same time, it is no coincidence that the period of Catherine's reign went down in history as the age of "enlightened absolutism." The Empress makes extensive use of the tacking policy. To disguise her pro-nobility policy, she uses the political, economic and philosophical concepts of the Western European enlighteners, widely publicizing her correspondence with the most prominent enlightenment scientists of that time. This created an opinion about her as an enlightened and humane monarch.
A series of decrees of the 60s. crowned by feudal legislation, which turned the serfs into people who were completely unprotected from the arbitrariness of the landowners and were obliged to meekly obey their will. By decree of January 17, 1765, the landowner could send the peasant not only into exile, but also to hard labor. Legally, the landlords were deprived of only one right - the right to deprive their serfs of life.
In the "enlightened age" of Catherine, peasant trade reached enormous proportions. The decrees adopted in these years testified to the development of serfdom in depth. But serfdom also developed in breadth, including new categories of the population in its sphere of influence. The decree of the tsarist government of May 3, 1783 forbade the peasants of the Left-Bank Ukraine from transferring from one owner to another. Thus, serfdom was legally formalized in the Left-bank and Sloboda Ukraine.
Second half of the 18th century distinguishes a sharp increase in the socio-political activity of the population: the owner, monastic and ascribed peasants, working people of manufactories, the peoples of the Volga region, the Yaik Cossacks. This activity reached its apogee in the peasant war under the leadership of E. I. Pugachev in 1773-1775. Meanwhile, the tsarist government continues to carry out reforms begun before the Pugachev uprising. In 1775, the government embarked on reforms that marked the beginning of the socio-economic and political development of the country in the aspect of enlightened absolutism. An extensive network of provincial and district authorities was created, which made it possible to strengthen supervision over the population. The exercise of this supervision was transferred to the hands of the nobility. Thus, the old dream of the nobles to create their own corporations and class institutions was realized.
The practical implementation of the reform of local authorities has significantly increased the staff of officials. The urban population, especially the top merchants, also gained certain benefits from the reform. Citizens received their elected bodies of power in the form of city dumas. In parallel with them, the city was ruled by a mayor appointed by the government. The government also carried out a number of measures in favor of the merchants. Thus, the Manifesto of 1775 declared freedom of enterprise.
The process of registration of the privileges of nobles and merchants is completed by two letters: "A letter on the rights, liberties and advantages of the noble Russian nobility" and "Charter to cities". Their simultaneous publication (April 21, 1785) testifies to the desire of the autocracy to consolidate the forces on which it relied - the nobility and the elite of the urban population, mainly merchant merchants. Both letters brought together the privileges granted to nobles and merchants at different times, and at the same time expanded their rights.
History of Russia at the end of the 18th century. significantly different from the previous period. In the actions of Paul I (1796-1801), who succeeded Catherine on the throne, in many cases there was no continuity. The government measures of that time corresponded to the personality of the emperor, a capricious, despotic man, changeable in his decisions, easily succumbing to unbridled anger and just as easily changing anger to mercy. Some historians call the period of his reign "unenlightened absolutism", others - "military-police dictatorship", others consider Paul "Russian Hamlet", others - "romantic emperor". However, even those historians who find positive traits in Paul's reign admit that he equated autocracy with personal despotism.
The stubbornly introduced barracks way of life, which in the eyes of Paul was ideal, did not correspond noble liberties, and he demanded the return of the nobles from long-term holidays to the regiments. Those who did not appear were dismissed from the army. The peasants did not go unnoticed either. By decree of April 5, 1797, the peasant had to work for himself for three days, and for the master for three. The decree did not establish a norm, but a recommendation. Under Paul I, decrees were also issued, to some extent taking into account the interests of the peasants. Since 1797, it was forbidden to sell house serfs and landless peasants under the hammer, and a year later a ban was established on the sale of Ukrainian peasants without land.
The reign of Paul I, and especially his domestic politics, caused acute discontent of various circles of the nobility: officer corps irritated and kept at bay the emperor's outbursts of anger, which gave rise to uncertainty about the future; the nobles, who were under the constant threat of disgrace, felt just as insecure; wide circles of the nobility, whose economy was connected with the market, were not delighted with the break with England: after all, English merchants were the traditional buyers of agricultural surpluses. Finally, members of his own family were hostile to the emperor, especially his wife and eldest son Alexander, whom he suspected of intending to take the crown from him. It is not surprising that as early as 1800 a conspiracy arose. At first, it was headed by Vice-Chancellor N.P. Panin, and after his exile, the leadership passed to the St. Petersburg military governor Palen. On the night of March 12, 1800, the conspirators entered the Mikhailovsky Castle and killed Pavel.
Thus ended the XVIII century, which became a turning point in the history of Russia. At the beginning of this century, a new form of government, absolutism, was established in Russia, our country became the Russian Empire and became one of the leading countries in the world.
2.3 Development of absolutism in the 19th century
century occupies a special place in Russian history. Russia confidently declared itself as a world power, experienced the rise of the victory over Napoleon and the defeat in the Crimean War, an unprecedented expansion of its borders and the inclusion of peoples whose level of development of civil society after joining the Russian Empire could not but suffer from the arbitrariness of unlimited Russian autocracy. Russia retained its traditional way of life, different from Western Europe. Absolutism and social system serfdom hindered the development of the economy and hindered the modernization of the country.
Early XIX century is associated with the accession to the throne on March 12, 1801, Alexander I, whose reign was marked by the spread of liberal ideas in Russia. His tutor in childhood was the famous Swiss politician, an adherent of the ideas of the Enlightenment, F. S. La Harpe. It was he who tried to bring liberal ideas to the consciousness of the future monarch. The ideas of constitutionalism laid down by La Harpe played their role.
Even before his accession to the throne, in 1796, a friendly circle of young aristocrats formed around Alexander. Since 1801, the main work on the preparation of reforms in the liberal direction took place in the Private Committee they created, a kind of advisory body under the emperor. Their main result was to be the restriction of autocracy, with which the monarch himself seemed to agree.
In 1802, the reform of the highest bodies of state power begins: the Senate acquires the character of the highest judicial authority and the body of supervision over the administration, ministries are created instead of collegiums. A Committee of Ministers is also approved to discuss general issues of governing the country.
During the reign of Alexander I, the undertakings of Mikhail Mikhailovich Speransky played an important role. At the end of 1808, the emperor instructed Speransky<#"justify">3. The overthrow of the absolute monarchy in Russia
.1 The crisis of autocracy in Russia by the end of the 19th - beginning of the 20th centuries.
absolutism monarchy autocracy
At the turn of the XIX - XX centuries. Russia continued to be an absolute monarchy, in which all power belonged to the emperor and was not limited by any laws. Moreover, the law itself stated that "the Emperor of All Russia is an autocratic and unlimited monarch." The greater or lesser costs of such a system of power depended solely on who exactly was the emperor.
In the autumn of 1894 Emperor Nicholas II ascended the Russian throne. Nicholas II considered autocratic power to be a purely family affair and was sincerely convinced that he should pass it on to his son in its entirety. Already in January 1895, speaking to deputies from the nobility, zemstvos and cities, the young emperor, having made a reservation, called "meaningless dreams" the hopes that had spread in society for the liberalization of the regime.
The monarchical form of government ceased to satisfy the needs of public administration of that time. In most European countries, the development of the political system has long gone along the line of folding the parliamentary system on the basis of elections.
By the beginning of the 20th century, the attitude towards the monarch had changed, and his authority was falling. Enormous harm was done to the authority of the monarchy by the "activities" at the royal court of numerous holy fools, seers and blessed ones. But the most destructive was the influence of the "holy old man" Grigory Rasputin (G.E. Novykh), who became a symbol of the decay of the Russian autocracy in last years reign of Nicholas II. Having first appeared at court in 1905, the former horse thief gradually began to enjoy the unlimited confidence of the royal couple.
Early 20th century for Russia it was stormy and difficult. In the context of the impending revolution, the government sought to preserve the existing system without any significant political changes. The main socio-political support of the autocracy remained the nobility, the army, the Cossacks, the police, an extensive bureaucratic apparatus, the Church. As before, the government used the age-old illusions of the masses of the people about the king, their religiosity, political obscurity. But there were also innovations. The government camp was heterogeneous: the rightists sought to block all attempts at reform, defended unlimited autocracy, advocated the suppression of revolutionary uprisings, and the liberal democrats understood the need to expand and strengthen the socio-political base of the monarchy, the alliance of the nobility with the top commercial and industrial bourgeoisie.
At the beginning of the XX century. formed the liberal camp. Its formation proceeded slowly, since the representatives of the bourgeoisie firmly stood on loyal positions, defiantly evading political activity. 1905 was a turning point, but even at that time the Russian bourgeoisie was not particularly radical. The liberals stepped up their activities on the eve of the revolution of 1905. They saw their goal in replacing the autocracy with a legal bourgeois state in the form of a constitutional monarchy based on the division of power between the nobles, the bourgeoisie and the masses, and they relied on non-violent methods of struggle.
However, both the labor and peasant movements were gaining strength. At the same time, the scale of the labor movement and its direction from economic strikes to anti-government demonstrations, from economic demands to political actions, as well as the struggle of the peasants against landlessness, landownership, and tax oppression, were clearly visible. In 1900-1904. for the first time in history, the political actions of the proletariat and the peasantry coincided in time.
In turn, the revolutionary movement (Social Democrats, Socialist-Revolutionaries) put forward a demand for the overthrow of the autocracy, the creation of a republic, the introduction of democratic freedoms, and the convening of a Constituent Assembly. Socio-political tension in society grew rapidly under the influence of the Russo-Japanese War (1904-1905). The most far-sighted representatives of the Russian bureaucracy (S.Yu. Witte, P.D. Svyatopolk-Mirsky) understood the need and inevitability of change, but could not convince the tsar to take a course on reforms that could prevent the revolution.
The confrontation between the authorities and the people intensified. The critical point that opened the way for the revolution was the events in St. Petersburg on January 9, 1905, which entered the history of Russia under the name Bloody Sunday , that is, the execution by tsarism of a peaceful procession of the masses with a petition to the king.
Revolution 1905-1907 was indeed universal. It solved the problems of the bourgeois-democratic revolution and proceeded under the slogans of the realization of bourgeois freedoms. In its development, the revolution brought the autocracy to a critical point three times: the all-Russian October strike of 1905; Moscow armed uprising in December 1905 as the culminating point of the revolution; the June political crisis of 1906. These events were a serious shock to tsarism, putting it before a choice: either to follow the path of terror for the sake of preserving autocracy, or to make concessions towards the constitution and thereby stop the growing strength of the revolution.
The Manifesto of October 17, 1905 "On the Improvement of the State Order", which allowed the creation of the State Duma, became an important constitutional document that had a great influence on the political life of the country. But he did not solve the problem of transforming an autocratic monarchy into a constitutional bourgeois monarchy. The Duma, as the first representative legislative institution in Russia, similar to the European Parliament, began its activity in 1906. In total, it lasted 12 years and had four convocations.
Sharply aggravated the situation in the country First World War. The war, during which there was a broad mobilization of the able-bodied male population, horses and a massive requisition of livestock and agricultural products, had a detrimental effect on the economy, especially in the countryside. In the environment of the politicized Petrograd society, the government was discredited by scandals (in particular, those related to the influence of G. E. Rasputin<#"justify">Conclusion
The end of the 17th - the first half of the 18th centuries is a time that is an important facet in the history of feudal Russia. During this period, various transformations were carried out, which left a deep mark, primarily by the fact that they covered the most diverse areas of the country's life: the economy and science, life and foreign policy, the political system and the position of the working masses, church affairs and art. The implementation of the transformations is connected with the activities of Peter I. He carried out a number of reforms that touched literally all aspects of the life of the Russian state and the Russian people.
The main result of the reforms of Peter I was the establishment of absolutism in Russia. The reform of the state apparatus in the first quarter of the 18th century completed the process of the formation of absolutism, which began in the 17th century - the unlimited power of the tsar, based on the nobility and the growing class of the trading and manufacturing bourgeoisie, with the people completely disenfranchised.
In this period, the multinationality of Russia is increasing. In general, relations of unitarism are developing in the Russian Empire, fixed by the reforms of the administrative-territorial structure carried out under Peter I and Catherine II.
The transition to absolutism is characterized by noticeable changes in the state mechanism. Class-representative bodies die off and are abolished, a complex, ramified, expensive system of bodies filled with officials-nobles is created. Also, the transition to an absolute monarchy was largely due to the need to concentrate all forces and resources to ensure economic and military security.
move Russian history in this period testifies that it was the absolute monarchy at a certain historical stage that helped to defend the independence and sovereignty of the country. But as its power strengthened, the absolutist state itself turned into a real threat to neighboring peoples, demonstrating aspirations to expand its territory. The Russian rulers sought in each case to find their own approach for integrating new subjects into Russian society. On the whole, however, it must be admitted that the tsarist government in its policy failed to adequately take into account the multinational character of the state. Therefore, national contradictions were added to deep social contradictions, which became a characteristic feature of Russian absolutism.
But the February Revolution of 1917 overthrew the more than 300-year-old monarchy in Russia, marking the beginning of a new stage in the development of our country. At the same time, it should be emphasized that the process of formation of an absolute monarchy in Russia differed significantly from similar processes in European states.
Thus, the following features of absolutism in Russia can be distinguished:
If in Europe the absolute monarchy took shape under the conditions of capitalist relations and the abolition of obsolete feudal institutions, then in Russia it coincided with the flourishing of feudalism, with the strengthening of serfdom.
The establishment of absolutism in Russia was accompanied by the desire of the leaders of the state to further expand the borders of the empire, to win back access to the seas.
Absolutism penetrated into all aspects of the life of the country, strove for regulation, control of everyone and everything. Characterized by the maximum concentration of power in the hands of one person, both secular and spiritual. The establishment of an absolute monarchy in Russia was accompanied by the formation of a police state, which sought to control and regulate in detail all manifestations of public and private life.
List of used sources and literature
1.Cathedral Code 1649 / ed. Epifanova P.P., Tikhomirova M.N. - M.: Publishing House of Moscow. un-ta, 1961. - 678 p.
.Lebedev V.I. Reforms of Peter I. Collection of documents. - M.: Nauka, 1997. - 378 p.
.Great Russian Encyclopedia, Vol. 2 / otv. ed. Kravts S.L. - M.: Nauka, 2005. - 766 p.
.Diary of Nicholas II [electronic resource] // Library.ru: information and reference portal. M., 2005-2007. URL: #"justify">5. Ageeva O.G. Imperial Court of Russia, 1700-1796 M.: Nauka, 2008. - 380 p.
.Alshits D.N. The Beginning of Autocracy in Russia: The State of Ivan the Terrible. - St. Petersburg: Nauka, 2006. - 244 p.
.Alshits D.N. From legends to facts: research and research of new sources on the history of pre-Petrine Russia: [sat. tr. D.N. Alshits on the occasion of his 90th birthday]. - St. Petersburg: Nauka, 2009. - 498 p.
.Anokhina S.L. Reforms in Russia in the 18th - 20th centuries. - M.: Nauka, 2009. - 494 p.
.Bokhanov A.N. Nicholas I. - M.: Veche, 2008. - 464 p.
.Bokhanov A.N. Nicholas II. - M.: AST - Press, 2002. - 208 p.
.Bokhanov A.N. Heart secrets of the Romanov dynasty. - M.: Veche, 2008. - 413 p.
.Zubov A.B. History of Russia, XX century: 1894-1939. - M., Astrel-AST, 2010. - 1022 p.
.Eremenko M.A. Palace revolutions. - M.: Mir knigi, 2007. - 256 p.
.Kareev N.I. Western European absolute monarchy of the 16th-18th centuries. - M.: State Public Historical Library of Russia, 2009. - 464 p.
.Kafengauz B.B., Cherepnin L.V. Absolutism in Russia: Sat. - M.: uchpedgiz, 1964. - 520 p.
.Klyuchevsky, V.O. Works. T. II. / V.O. Klyuchevsky. - M.: Nauka, 1988.
17. Lavrov V.M. Rest in peace with the saints... // Ogonyok
Marasinova E.N. Power and Personality: Essays on a Russian history XVIII century. - M.: Nauka, 2008. - 460 p.
Nepomniachtchi N.N. 100 great events of the XX century. - M.: Veche, 2010. - 480 p.
Obolensky G.N. Age of Catherine the Great. The time of heroes and heroic deeds. - M.: Russian word, 2001. - 346 p.
Omelchenko O.A. The formation of an absolute monarchy in Russia. - M.: TK Velby. Prospect Publishing House, 2008. - 464 p.
Petrukhintsev N.V. Invisible epoch // Motherland / 2009. No. 2. - 66 p.
Sakharov A.N. Alexander I. - M.: Nauka, 2008. - 288 p.
Skorobogatov A.V. Tsesarevich Pavel Petrovich. Political discourse and social practice. - M.: RGTU, 2005. - 348 p.
Fedorov V.A. Russian history. 1861-1917. - M.: graduate School, 2002. - 346 p.
Cherkasov P.P., Chernyshevsky D.V. History of Imperial Russia from Peter I to Nicholas II. - M.: International relationships, 2004.-768 p.
Shatsillo K.F. A book for reading on the History of the Fatherland, the beginning of the 20th century. - M.: Enlightenment, 2003. - 256 p.
Job order
Need an original work?
Our experts will help you write a paper with a mandatory check for uniqueness in the Anti-plagiarism system
Submit an application with the requirements right now to find out the cost and possibility of writing.
French absolutism (main features French absolutism) is a concept implying the domination of an absolute monarchy, established in France over the last two centuries of the existence of the Old Order. Absolutism had to change the estate monarchy, as a result, it was destroyed by the Great French Revolution. The attempt made by the States-General in the era of wars on the basis of religion, to limit the royal power failed. This was prevented by the desire of the nobility to return to feudal fragmentation, and even the desire experienced by the cities to restore their former independence, while the states general had the ability to play only the role of central power.
On the other hand, there was enmity between the upper classes and the townspeople. The people were burdened by the willfulness of the nobles and civil strife. Therefore, he expressed his readiness to maintain the power that saved him from anarchy. Henry IV did not convene states general at all; and after that they were collected only once. As a task for his own government, he set the goal of improving the economic well-being of the country, as well as strengthening the state financial leverage. He was assisted by Minister Sully, a stern Huguenot. They showed concern for raising agriculture, the level of industrial production, they wanted to ease the tax burden, to bring order to financial management, but they did not manage to do anything significant.
In 1614, when Louis XIII was still a minor, the states general were called to put an end to the unrest during the administration. The third estate managed to come up with a program of transformations. According to the content of the document, the convocation of state officials should be carried out within a certain time frame, the privileges of the nobility and clergy had to be abolished and taxes should be distributed evenly to everyone. At the same time, the government had to stop buying the obedience of the nobles with cash distributions, and stop arbitrary arrests. The higher clergy and nobility were dissatisfied with such statements and protest against the statements of the orator of the third estate, who dared to compare the three estates with the three sons of one father. The privileged spoke of their unwillingness to recognize as brothers those of the people who should rather be called their servants. The states, having done nothing, were dissolved, after which they did not convene for 175 years.
Richelieu
The Bishop of Luzon (Cardinal) Richelieu acted as a deputy representing the clergy. And a few years later he was made chief adviser to Louis XIII and an all-powerful minister, he almost ruled France for twenty years. Richelieu approved the system of absolutism in the monarchy of France. The goal of all the thoughts and aspirations of the cardinal was the strength and power of the state; in order to achieve this goal, he was ready to sacrifice everything else. They did not allow the fact of the intervention of the Roman Curia in the state affairs of France. In order to protect the interests of the French monarchy, he participated in the Thirty Years' War (although he tried to delay France's entry into it as long as possible, until that time, until they were predetermined with internal problems state), in it stood a cardinal on the side of the Protestants.
The internal policy of Richelieu was not characterized by the presence of a religious character. He ended his struggle with the Protestants with the "Peace of Grace", which made it possible to preserve the freedom of religion for the Huguenots, but depriving them of fortresses and garrisons, destroying in fact the Huguenot "state that was in the state." By his own origin, Richelieu is a nobleman, but his cherished dream was to force the nobles to serve the state for the privileges and lands that were given to them in possession.
For a long time, there has been a discussion about the conditions and time of the emergence of absolute monarchy in the West, its relationship to social classes, in particular to the bourgeoisie, about the different stages of its development, about the similarities and differences between Russian autocracy and Western absolutism, as well as about its historical significance.
Absolutism (from the Latin word "absolutus" - "unlimited", "independent"), or absolute monarchy - the last form of the feudal state that arose during the period of the birth of capitalism and the decomposition of feudal relations.
The features of absolutism can be distinguished as follows. The head of state is considered the main source of legislative and executive power (the latter is exercised by the apparatus subordinate to him). The monarch manages the state treasury, establishes taxes.
Other main features of the policy of absolutism are the greatest degree of centralization of the state under feudalism, a developed bureaucracy (tax, judicial, etc.). The latter also includes the police and a large active army. A characteristic feature of absolutism is this: the activity of the proper organs under its conditions loses its significance and ceases.
Absolute monarchs, in contrast to the feudal landowners, considered the service nobility to be their main social support. However, in order to ensure independence from this class as a whole, they did not neglect the support of the bourgeoisie, which was still emerging at that time, did not claim power, but was economically strong and capable of opposing the interests of the feudal lords with their own.
The meaning of absolutism
The role of absolutism in history is not easy to assess. At a certain stage, the kings began to fight the separatism of the feudal nobility, destroyed the remnants of the former political fragmentation, subordinated the church to the state, contributed to the development of capitalist relations and the country's unity in the economic sphere, the process of formation of national states and nations. The policy of mercantilism was carried out, trade wars were waged, a new class, the bourgeoisie, was supported.
However, according to some researchers, absolutism acted for the benefit of the bourgeoisie only as long as it was in the interests of the nobility, which received income from the economic development of the state in the form of taxes (feudal rent), which increased greatly, as well as from the revival of economic life in general. . But the increase in resources and economic opportunities was mainly used to strengthen the military power of countries. This was necessary in order to suppress the large-scale that arose at that time, as well as for external military expansion.
Features of absolutism in France
The features of absolutism, characteristic of most European countries (with various modifications), were most clearly embodied in France. Here in the late XV - early XVI centuries. the first elements of this form of state appeared. During the time of Richelieu (between 1624 and 1642), former first Minister of the King and especially Louis XIV (1643-1715), absolute monarchy reached its peak. King Louis XIV expressed the essence of this form of government with the following simple definition: "The State is me!".
Absolutism in other countries
The specific features of absolutism in England (in its classical period, that is, during the reign of Elizabeth Tudor, 1558-1603) are the preservation of a functioning parliament, the absence of a standing army, and the weakness of the local bureaucracy.
In Spain, where elements of bourgeois relations failed to develop in the 16th century, the main features gradually degenerated into despotism.
In Germany, which was fragmented at that time, it took shape not on the scale of the state, but within the specific territories of various principalities (princely absolutism).
The main features of enlightened absolutism, characteristic of some European countries in the second half of the 18th century, are discussed below. This form of government as a whole was not homogeneous. The features and traits of absolutism in Europe depended largely on the correlation of forces between the bourgeoisie and the nobility, on the degree of influence on politics by bourgeois elements. Thus, in Russia, the Austrian monarchy, and Germany, the position of the bourgeois elements was substantially lower than in France and England.
Absolutism in our country
The formation of absolutism in Russia was very interesting. Some researchers believe that the constitution adopted in 1993 endowed the president with powers that can be compared with the power of an absolute monarch, and call the current form of government democratic autocracy. Name the main features of absolutism, and you will see that such thoughts are not unfounded. Although, perhaps, there is some exaggeration here.
Russian absolutism did not arise on the same social basis as in Western Europe. Since at the turn of the 17th and 18th centuries (when the signs of absolute monarchy were finally strengthened) bourgeois relations were undeveloped in Russia, there was no balance between the nobility and the bourgeoisie.
The formation began largely due to the foreign policy factor, and therefore only one nobility was its support. This is an important characteristic feature of absolutism in our country. The external danger constantly looming over Russia required a strong centralized authority and the rapid adoption of important decisions. However, there was also a restrictive trend. The boyars (land aristocracy), having strong economic positions, sought to exert their influence on the adoption of certain political decisions, and also, if possible, participate in this process itself.
It is necessary to note one more feature of absolutism in Russia. The preserved veche traditions (that is, democracy) continued to operate in the country, the roots of which can be found even during the existence of the Novgorod Republic and Old Russian state. They found their expression in the activities of Zemsky Sobors (from 1549 to 1653).
The period from the second half of the 16th to the first half of the 17th century passed under the sign of the struggle between these two tendencies that existed in our country. For a long time, the result of this confrontation was unclear, since the victory was alternately won by one side, then the other. Under Tsar Ivan the Terrible, as well as during the reign of Boris Godunov, it would seem that it was won by an absolutist tendency, according to which the maximum power prerogatives were in the hands of the monarch. But during the Time of Troubles and the reign of Mikhail Romanov (1613-1645), the restrictive trend prevailed, the influence of the Zemsky Sobors and the Boyar Duma increased, without the support of which Mikhail Romanov did not issue a single law.
Serfdom and absolutism
The establishment of serfdom, which finally took shape in 1649, was a turning point, thanks to which the absolutist tendency won. After it was finally legally fixed, the nobility became completely dependent on the central authority, which was represented by the monarch. She alone was able to ensure the dominance of the nobles over the peasants, to keep the latter in obedience.
But in exchange for this, the nobility was forced to renounce their claims to personal participation in government and recognized themselves as a servant of the monarch. This was the payment for services from the authorities. The nobles received permanent income and power over the peasants in exchange for renunciation of claims in state administration. Therefore, it is not surprising that almost immediately after the legal registration of serfdom, the convocations of Zemsky Sobors ceased. In full force, the last of them took place in 1653.
Thus, the choice was made, and for the sake of economic interests, the nobles sacrificed political ones. The absolutist tendency won. The registration of serfdom led to another important consequence: since there were no conditions for development (for example, the market for free labor force disappeared), the formation of bourgeois relations was sharply slowed down. Therefore, for a long time the bourgeoisie in the country did not develop into a separate social class, and, consequently, the social support of absolutism could only be of the nobility.
Attitude towards law and law in Russia
Another striking feature of the absolute monarchy in the state was the attitude towards law and law. The choice in the ratio of non-legal and legal means was made unambiguously in favor of the former. The personal arbitrariness of the monarch and his inner circle became the main method of government. This began as early as the reign of Ivan the Terrible, and in the 17th century, after the final transition to an absolute monarchy, little has changed.
One can, of course, object that there was a code of laws - the Cathedral Code. However, in practice, the monarch (Peter I, Alexei Mikhailovich and others) and senior government officials were not guided in their actions by the requirements of laws, did not consider themselves bound by them.
The main method of governing the country is military force and brute coercion. It is impossible to deny the fact that during the reign of Peter I, quite a lot of laws were adopted relating to almost all areas of government of the country (Table of Ranks, Military Article, regulations of the colleges, General Regulations). But they were nevertheless intended exclusively for subjects, the sovereign himself did not consider himself bound by these laws. In fact, the practice of decision-making under this tsar was not much different from that under the reign of Ivan the Terrible. The only source of power was still the will of the monarch.
Attitude towards law and law in other countries
It cannot be said that in this Russia differed so much from Western countries (name the features of absolutism, and you will be convinced of this). Louis XIV of France (he is considered a classic absolute monarch) also used voluntarism and arbitrariness.
But with all the contradictions, absolutism in Western Europe nevertheless took the path of actively involving legal means in regulating various social relations. Between the law and personal arbitrariness, the ratio gradually began to shift in favor of the first. This was facilitated by a number of factors, the most important of which was the realization by the kings that it is much easier to govern the country when as many areas as possible are regulated by legal norms.
In addition, the use of voluntarism in governing the state implies that the monarch has high personal qualities: intellectual level, vigor, willpower, purposefulness. However, most of the rulers of that time had little in their qualities to resemble Peter I, Frederick II or Louis XIV. That is, they could not successfully use personal arbitrariness in governing the country.
Having passed along the path of ever greater application of the law as the main instrument of government, the absolutism of Western Europe entered the path of a protracted crisis, and then completely ceased to exist. Indeed, in its essence, it assumed the legally unlimited power of the sovereign, and the use of legal means of control led to the emergence of the idea (which was formulated by the Enlightenment) about the rule of law and law, and not the will of the king.
Enlightened absolutism
The features of enlightened absolutism in our country were embodied in the policy of Catherine II. In many European countries in the second half of the 18th century, the idea of an "alliance of sovereigns and philosophers", expressed by French philosophers of the Enlightenment, became popular. At this time, abstract categories are transferred to the sphere of concrete politics. The rule of the "wise man on the throne", the benefactor of the nation, the patron of the arts was supposed to rule. The Prussian King Frederick II and the Swedish Gustav III, the Austrian Emperor Joseph II, and the Russian Empress Catherine II acted as enlightened monarchs.
The main features of enlightened absolutism
The main signs of enlightened absolutism in the policy of these rulers were expressed in the implementation of reforms in the spirit of various ideas of the Enlightenment. The head of state, the monarch, must be capable of transforming public life in the country.
The main features of enlightened absolutism were common in various states. At the time under consideration, reforms were carried out that did not affect the foundations of the existing feudal-absolutist system, it was a time when governments flirted liberally with writers and philosophers. in France destroyed this form of state and the features of French absolutism, put an end to it throughout Europe.
The hard way of absolute monarchy
The fate of absolutism was different. Since the main task of this form of state is to preserve the existing foundations of the feudal system, it inevitably lost the progressive features of absolutism and was a brake on the development of capitalist relations.
During the first bourgeois revolutions of the 17th and 18th centuries, absolute monarchy was swept away in France and England. In countries with slower capitalist development, the feudal-absolutist monarchy was transformed into a bourgeois-landlord monarchy. The semi-absolutist system in Germany, for example, lasted until the November bourgeois-democratic revolution of 1918. The February Revolution of 1917 put an end to absolutism in Russia.
History and SID
In France, absolutism was favored by theologians who attributed divine origin to the supreme power and by lawyers who recognized sovereigns as the absolute power of the ancient Roman emperors. Throughout the nineteenth century, after the French Revolution, there was a process of gradual democratization and limitation of the power of the monarch. The monarchs found the legal justification for their power in the restoration of the norm of Roman law, which was recorded in the VI century in the Code of the Byzantine emperor Justinian: The will of the emperor has ...
European absolutism and its features
H and throughout almost the entire stories many states were monarchies, although during middle ages the monarch often had to reckon with the class-representative bodies ( Zemsky Sobors in Russia, Cortes in Spain, states general in France ). Starting from the Renaissance, the role of class-representative bodies gradually decreases, and by the end of the seventeenth century in many states Europe an absolute, that is, unlimited monarchy is established.
In France, absolutism was favored by theologians, who attributed divine origins to the supreme power, and by lawyers, who recognized sovereigns as the absolute power of the ancient Roman emperors. This state form reached its apogee under King Louis XIV , who systematically implemented his famous principle “The state is me” ( fr. "L'etat c'est moi").
Throughout the nineteenth century, afterGreat French Revolutionthere is a process of gradual democratization and limitation of the power of the monarch. However, this process was uneven, for example, in Russia, the absolute monarchy lasted until the twentieth century.
Since the end of the 15th century in Europe, there has been a transition to an absolute monarchy from a class-representative, a form of government in which the supreme state power by law belongs to the monarch - the king, emperor, tsar. The monarchs found the legal justification for their power in the restoration of the norm of Roman law, which was recorded in the VI century in the Code of the Byzantine emperor Justinian: "The will of the emperor has the force of law."State interestbecomes for the monarch the highest criterion in politics, in contrast to the Middle Ages, where the criterion was seignioral-vassal dynastic interests.
Absolutism has the following features: the formation of institutions of public power is its own bureaucratic apparatus created in the yard and in the field, a permanent mercenary army, a tax and fiscal system, an apparatus of violence-the police, a judicial system, a unified state law, the evolution of the bodies of a class-representative monarchy is taking place, in which the liquidation of the privileges of the feudal aristocracy takes place, and in which the estates evolve into structures of public power - these are the States General in France, the Parliament in England, the Cortes in Spain, the Landtags and the Reichstag in Germany, the Rigsdag in Sweden, the diets in the Commonwealth, Zemsky Sobors in Russia; there is also a change in the relationship between the state and the church - the state arbitrarily subjugates the church. There is also a personification of the power of the monarch in the period of the so-called. early absolutism, in which the monarchs personified power, and then there is a transition to bureaucratic absolutism. The idea of absolute power was sung in PR campaigns, in which Roman lawyers, humanists, and philosophers enlightened society in this topical idea.
There are national centralized states, polyethnic empires, territorial principalities; that is, there were regional and universalist types of absolutism. The social base of absolutism is as follows: the feudal aristocracy passes into the court, chivalry into the nobility (80% of medieval chivalry went bankrupt, millions of vagabond beggars appeared![ source unspecified 962 days] listen)) clergy to officials[ source unspecified 962 days] , peasants and burghers in the tax classes: this is the period social regulation. There is a territorial consolidation and formation of the territory of nation-states. Separatism fought against centralization, these were civil and all-European wars, and in 1648 for the first time a new system of European ties took shape in the Peace of Westphalia. Absolutism has developed in the conditions of the New Age, in which the economy is moving from an agrarian-individual character to an industrial-social one; the international factor appears due to the emergence of the world market, and the medieval society collapses, a new one appears, in which the new nobility turns into a bureaucracy. The patriciate and the plebs also evolved in the new absolutist conditions of existence, market-capitalist relations replaced feudalism.
Absolutism in Europe in the 16th century is a form of government in which the supreme power belongs to the monarch.
Peculiarities
Under absolutism, the state reaches the highest degree of centralization, an extensive bureaucratic apparatus, a standing army and police are created; the activities of the estate representation bodies, as a rule, continue. The heyday of absolutism in the countries of Western Europe falls on the XVII-XVIII centuries. In Russia, absolutism existed in the 18th and early 20th centuries. From a formal legal point of view, under absolutism, all legislative and executive power is concentrated in the hands of the head of state - the monarch, he independently establishes taxes and manages state finances.
The social support of absolutism is the nobility. The rationale for absolutism was the thesis of the divine origin of supreme power. The exaltation of the person of the sovereign was served by magnificent and sophisticated palace etiquette.
At the first stage, absolutism was progressive in nature: it fought against the separatism of the feudal nobility, subordinated the church to the state, eliminated the remnants of feudal fragmentation, and introduced uniform laws. The absolute monarchy is characterized by a policy of protectionism and mercantilism, which contributed to the development of the national economy, the commercial and industrial bourgeoisie. The new economic resources were used by absolutism to strengthen the military power of the state and wage wars of conquest.
To one degree or another, the features of absolute monarchy, or the desire for it, manifested themselves in all the states of Europe, but they found the most complete embodiment in France, where absolutism manifested itself already at the beginning of the 16th century, and experienced its heyday during the reign of kings Louis XIII and Louis XIV Bourbons (1610-1715).
In England, the peak of absolutism fell on the reign of Elizabeth I Tudor (1558-1603), but in the British Isles it never reached its classical form: the parliament was preserved, there was no standing army, there was no powerful local bureaucracy.
A strong royal power was established in Spain, but the weak development of the local economy did not allow the formation of an entrepreneurial class, and Spanish absolutism degenerated into despotism.
In Germany, absolute monarchies did not take shape on a national scale, but within the framework of individual principalities.
The characteristics of absolutism in various countries were determined by the balance of power between the nobility and the bourgeoisie. In France, and especially in England, the influence of bourgeois elements on politics was much greater than in Germany, Austria and Russia. A characteristic phenomenon for Europe in the second half of the 18th century was enlightened absolutism, closely associated with the ideas and practices of the Enlightenment. In general, the absolutist system of government strengthened the feeling of a state community among representatives of various estates and social groups, thereby contributing to the formation of a nation.
With the development and strengthening of capitalism in European countries, the principles of the existence of an absolute monarchy, which conserved archaic feudal orders and class partitions, began to come into conflict with the needs of a changed society. The rigid framework of protectionism and mercantilism limited the economic freedom of entrepreneurs, who were forced to produce only goods that were beneficial to the royal treasury. Dramatic changes are taking place within the estates. An economically powerful, educated, entrepreneurial class of capitalists is growing out of the depths of the third estate, having its own idea of the role and tasks of state power. In the Netherlands, England and France, these contradictions were resolved in a revolutionary way, in other countries there was a gradual transformation of the absolute monarchy into a limited, constitutional one.
As well as other works that may interest you |
|||
| 34297. | Reparative regeneration, its significance. Methods of reparative regeneration. Typical and atypical regeneration. Peculiarities of recovery processes in mammals. Significance of regeneration for biology and medicine | 18.51KB | |
| Morphallaxis entails a rearrangement of the remainder of the organism. It is often associated with further significant destruction of the remaining part and ends with the formation of a whole organism or organ from this material. If the conditions change, then the body reacts. As a result of changes: maintaining the constancy of the internal environment maintaining the integrity of the body. | |||
| 34298. | Regeneration | 43KB | |
| To a greater extent, regeneration is inherent in plants and invertebrates to a lesser extent in vertebrates. Regeneration in medicine complete restoration of lost parts. Regeneration in animals and humans, the formation of new structures to replace those removed or those that died as a result of damage; reparative regeneration or those lost in the course of normal life; physiological regeneration; secondary development caused by the loss of a previously developed organ. | |||
| 34299. | REGENERATION | 34KB | |
| Sometimes during regeneration, instead of the normal number of fingers, more of them are formed, or instead of one tail, two or three grow. Often the ability to regenerate is associated with the protective ability to throw away organs at the moment of danger due to strong muscle contraction, for example, a pinched leg, a pinched tail, etc. Due to physiological regeneration, structural homeostasis is maintained and the organs are able to constantly perform their functions. In many tissues there are special cambial cells and their foci ... | |||
| 34300. | Death as a biological phenomenon | 114KB | |
| Intensity of male mortality depending on their age Sweden On the invariability of the rate of aging in a particular population of people during the 20th century. despite a significant increase in living standards, for example, data on the absolute age-related increase in the intensity of mortality of men in Sweden from 1900 to 1980 indicate. Sweden: 1 intensity of mortality in men at the age of 40 years 2 the same at the age of 30 years 3 rate of aging of men in the age range of 30-40 years The conclusion made is in good agreement with the changes that ... | |||
| 34302. | Analyzing the dynamics of the costs of living and past labor as the rationalistic development of technological | 29.5KB | |
| Analyzing the dynamics of the costs of living and past labor with the rationalistic development of the technological process, it has been established that the decrease in the amount of living and past labor occurs only up to a certain limit. A further increase in the cost of past labor will not actually provide an increase in labor productivity, but will only increase the cost of manufactured products and become economically inexpedient. How to determine this limit, this border, the transition to which will actually mean marking time even with ... | |||
| 34303. | The dynamics of the development of a real technological process | 34KB | |
| The dynamics of the development of a real technological process is a curved broken line It describes the real dynamics of the development of productivity from armament. Point 37 has undergone a change in the development of the technological process and has passed the stage of heuristic development Y increases Y1 to Y2. Lack of perfect development 24 further 45 a sharp increase in labor productivity. | |||
| 34304. | Evolutionary way of development of technological processes | 22.5KB | |
| Evolutionary path of development of technological processes The use in production of rationalistic solutions that improve the auxiliary steps of the technological process is an evolutionary path of its development. The essence of technical solutions that provide an evolutionary path for the development of technological processes is to replace human movements with similar movements of mechanisms on auxiliary elements of the process. At the present stage of development of technology, almost any kind of movement can be carried out by known mechanisms.... | |||
| 34305. | Revolutionary way of development of technological processes | 29KB | |
| Revolutionary way of development of technological processes The use in production of heuristic technical solutions that improve the working steps of the technological process is a revolutionary way of its development. In the 2nd variant, after the transition to technology with more high level there is no simultaneous decrease in the costs of living and past labor per unit of output, and even a temporary increase in them is possible, which would seem to allow us to conclude that there is no development, but if we follow the further evolutionary ... | |||
- In contact with 0
- Google+ 0
- OK 0
- Facebook 0
