Under which king were the serfs freed? Manifesto for the liberation of the peasants. Preparations for the abolition of serfdom

Abolition of serfdom. IN 1861 In Russia, a reform was carried out that abolished serfdom. The main reason for this reform was the crisis of the serfdom system. In addition, historians consider the inefficiency of the labor of serfs as a reason. Economic reasons also include the urgent revolutionary situation as an opportunity for a transition from the everyday discontent of the peasant class to a peasant war. In the context of peasant unrest, which especially intensified during Crimean War, the government led by Alexander II, went towards the abolition of serfdom

January 3 1857 a new Secret Committee on Peasant Affairs was established, consisting of 11 people 26 July Minister of the Interior and Committee Member S. S. Lansky An official reform project was presented. It was proposed to create noble committees in each province that would have the right to make their own amendments to the draft.

The government program provided for the destruction of the personal dependence of peasants while maintaining all land ownership landowners; providing peasants with a certain amount of land for which they will be required to pay quitrent or serve corvee, and over time - the right to buy out peasant estates (residential buildings and outbuildings). Legal dependence was not eliminated immediately, but only after a transition period (12 years).

IN 1858 To prepare peasant reforms, provincial committees were formed, within which a struggle began for measures and forms of concessions between liberal and reactionary landowners. The committees were subordinate to the Main Committee for Peasant Affairs (transformed from the Secret Committee). The fear of an all-Russian peasant revolt forced the government to change the government program of peasant reform, the projects of which were repeatedly changed in connection with the rise or decline of the peasant movement.

December 4 1858 A new peasant reform program was adopted: providing peasants with the opportunity to buy out land and creating peasant public administration bodies. The main provisions of the new program were as follows:

peasants gaining personal freedom

providing peasants with plots of land (for permanent use) with the right of redemption (especially for this purpose, the government allocates a special credit)

approval of a transitional (“urgently obligated”) state

February 19 ( March, 3rd) 1861 in St. Petersburg, Emperor Alexander II signed the Manifesto " About the All-Merciful granting to serfs of the rights of free rural inhabitants" And , consisting of 17 legislative acts.

The manifesto was published in Moscow on March 5, 1861, in Forgiveness Sunday V Assumption Cathedral Kremlin after liturgy; at the same time it was published in St. Petersburg and some other cities ; in other places - during March of the same year.

February 19 ( March, 3rd) 1861 in St. Petersburg, Alexander II signed Manifesto on the abolition of serfdom And Regulations on peasants emerging from serfdom, consisting of 17 legislative acts. The manifesto “On the Most Gracious Granting of the Rights of Free Rural Citizens to Serfs” dated February 19, 1861 was accompanied by a number of legislative acts (22 documents in total) concerning the issues of the emancipation of peasants, the conditions for their purchase of landowners’ land and the size of the purchased plots in certain regions of Russia.

Peasant reform of 1861 On February 19, 1861, the Emperor approved a number of legislative acts on specific provisions of the peasant reform. Were accepted central And local regulations, which regulated the procedure and conditions for the liberation of peasants and the transfer of land plots to them. Their main ideas were: the peasants received personal freedom and, before the redemption deal was concluded with the landowner, the land was transferred to the use of the peasants.

The allocation of land was carried out by voluntary agreement between the landowner and the peasant: the first could not give a land allotment less than the lower norm established by local regulations, the second could not demand an allotment larger than the maximum norm provided for in the same regulation. All land in thirty-four provinces was divided into three categories: non-chernozem, chernozem and steppe.

The soul's allotment consisted of a manor and arable land, pastures and wastelands. Only males were allocated land.

Disputed issues were resolved through a mediator. The landowner could demand the forced exchange of peasant plots if mineral resources were discovered on their territory or the landowner intended to build canals, piers, and irrigation structures. It was possible to move peasant estates and houses if they were located in unacceptable proximity to landowner buildings.

Ownership of the land remained with the landowner until the redemption transaction was completed; during this period, the peasants were only users and " temporarily obliged " . During this transitional period, peasants were freed from personal dependence, taxes in kind were abolished for them, and the norms of corvee labor (thirty to forty days a year) and cash rent were reduced.

The temporarily obligated state could be terminated after the expiration of a nine-year period from the date of issue of the manifesto, when the peasant refused the allotment. For the rest of the peasants, this position lost force only in 1883, when they were transferred to owners.

The redemption agreement between the landowner and the peasant community was approved by the mediator. The estate could be purchased at any time, the field plot - with the consent of the landowner and the entire community. After the agreement was approved, all relations (landowner-peasant) ceased and the peasants became owners.

The subject of property in most regions became the community, in some areas - the peasant household. In the latter case, peasants received the right of hereditary disposal of land. Movable property (and real estate previously acquired by the peasant in the name of the landowner) became the property of the peasant. Peasants received the right to enter into obligations and contracts by acquiring movable and immovable property. The lands provided for use could not serve as security for contracts.

Peasants received the right to engage in trade, open enterprises, join guilds, go to court on an equal basis with representatives of other classes, enter service, and leave their place of residence.

In 1863 and 1866 the provisions of the reform were extended to appanage and state peasants.

Peasants paid a ransom for estate and field land. The redemption amount was based not on the actual value of the land, but on the amount of quitrent that the landowner received before the reform. An annual six percent capitalized quitrent was established, equal to the pre-reform annual income ( quitrent ) of the landowner. Thus, the basis for the redemption operation was not the capitalist, but the former feudal criterion.

The peasants paid twenty-five percent of the redemption amount in cash upon completion of the redemption transaction, the landowners received the remaining amount from the treasury (in money and securities), which the peasants had to pay, along with interest, for forty-nine years.

The police fiscal apparatus of the government had to ensure the timeliness of these payments. To finance the reform, the Peasant and Noble Banks were formed.

During the period of "temporary duty" the peasants remained a legally separate class. The peasant community bound its members with a mutual guarantee: it was possible to leave it only by paying half of the remaining debt and with the guarantee that the other half would be paid by the community. It was possible to leave “society” by finding a deputy. The community could decide on a mandatory purchase of the land. The gathering allowed family divisions of land.

Volost gathering decided by a qualified majority issues: on replacing communal land use with precinct land use, on dividing land into permanently inherited plots, on redistributions, on removing its members from the community.

Headman was the actual assistant of the landowner (during the period of temporary existence), could impose fines on the guilty or subject them to arrest.

Volost court elected for a year and resolved minor property disputes or tried for minor offenses.

A wide range of measures were provided for for arrears: confiscation of income from real estate, placement in work or guardianship, forced sale of the debtor's movable and immovable property, confiscation of part or all of the allotment.

The noble character of the reform was manifested in many features: in the order of calculating redemption payments, in the procedure for the redemption operation, in privileges in the exchange of land plots, etc. During the redemption in the black earth regions, there was a clear tendency to turn peasants into tenants of their own plots (the land there was expensive), and in non-chernozem ones - a fantastic increase in prices for the purchased estate.

During the redemption, a certain picture emerged: the smaller the plot of land being redeemed, the more one had to pay for it. Here a hidden form of redemption not of land, but of the peasant’s personality, was clearly revealed. The landowner wanted to get him for his freedom. At the same time, the introduction of the principle of compulsory redemption was a victory of state interest over the interest of the landowner.

The unfavorable consequences of the reform were the following: a) peasants' allotments decreased compared to pre-reform, and payments increased in comparison with the old quitrent; c) the community actually lost its rights to use forests, meadows and water bodies; c) peasants remained a separate class.

In 1858, the Main Committee for Peasant Affairs was formed.

The first to respond to the sovereign's call to the nobility to improve the situation of the peasants were the nobles of the western provinces, who, through Governor General Nazimov, presented an all-submissive address expressing their readiness to set the peasants free, but without giving them land. The emperor responded to this address with a rescript dated November 20, 1857, which laid the foundation for all further reform. It proposed opening committees to develop the issue of emancipating serfs and indicated that peasants should be freed with land, for which the landowners would receive a fair reward. The rescript was distributed to all provinces, and soon proposals began to come from many places to give freedom to the peasants and projects for liberation. All these materials were submitted to the Main Committee for consideration and development of general provisions for the reform. In October 1860, the project for the liberation of the peasants was already ready and submitted to the State Council, the meeting of which the emperor himself opened with a speech: “I have the right to demand,” the sovereign said to the members of the Council, “from you alone, so that you, putting aside all personal interests, acted as state dignitaries, invested with my trust... I hope that God will not abandon us and will bless us to finish this matter for the future prosperity of our dear fatherland...”

Disagreements arose in the Council, but the sovereign took the side of the minority of members, whose opinions coincided with his predictions, and this put an end to the disagreements. The issue was resolved irrevocably.

On February 19, 1861, on the day of his accession to the throne, Secretary of State Butkov delivered to the Winter Palace the “Regulations” on the liberation of the peasants and a manifesto about it, written by Moscow Metropolitan Philaret. After fervent prayer, the sovereign signed both documents, and 23 million people received their long-desired freedom.

Having completed the greatest act of state in Russian history, the emperor felt great joy. - “Today is the best day of my life!” - he said, kissing his youngest daughter, Grand Duchess Maria Alexandrovna.

On March 5, the manifesto was published. The general rejoicing was boundless, and when the sovereign appeared on the streets of the capital, the people greeted him with long-lasting shouts. Throughout the empire, the manifesto was greeted as the greatest good that the people had dreamed of for many years. Listening to his words: “Across yourself with the sign of the cross, Orthodox people, and call upon Us God’s blessing on your free labor, the guarantee of your home well-being and public good,” crowds of peasants in rural churches cried with tenderness and joy.

Soon after the promulgation of the act on February 19, the emperor began to travel around Russia, and everywhere the grateful people greeted the Tsar-Liberator with manifestations of boundless delight.

Personal exemption

The manifesto provided peasants with personal freedom and general civil rights. From now on, the peasant could own movable and immovable property, enter into transactions, and act as a legal entity. He was freed from the personal guardianship of the landowner, could, without his permission, get married, enter the service and educational institutions, change his place of residence, and join the class of burghers and merchants. The government began to create local self-government bodies for the liberated peasants.

At the same time, the personal freedom of the peasant was limited. First of all, this concerned the preservation of the community. Communal ownership of land, redistribution of plots, mutual responsibility (especially for paying taxes and performing state duties) slowed down the bourgeois evolution of the countryside.

The peasants remained the only class that paid a poll tax, carried out conscription duties and could be subjected to corporal punishment.

Allotments

“Regulations” regulated the allocation of land to peasants. The size of the plots depended on the fertility of the soil. The territory of Russia was conditionally divided into three stripes: black earth, non-black earth and steppe. In each of them, the highest and lowest sizes of the peasant field allotment were established (the highest - more than which the peasant could not demand from the landowner, the lowest - less than which the landowner should not offer the peasant). Within these limits, a voluntary transaction between the peasant community and the landowner was concluded. Their relationship was finally consolidated by statutory charters. If the landowner and the peasants did not come to an agreement, then amicable mediators were brought in to resolve the dispute. Among them were mainly defenders of the interests of the nobles, but some progressive public figures (writer L.N. Tolstoy, physiologist I.M. Sechenov, biologist K.A. Timiryazev, etc.), becoming world mediators, reflected the interests of the peasantry.

When resolving the land issue, peasant plots were significantly reduced. If before the reform the peasant used an allotment that exceeded the highest norm in each zone, then this “surplus” was alienated in favor of the landowner. In the black soil zone, from 26 to 40% of the land was cut off, in the non-chernozem zone - 10%. In the country as a whole, peasants received 20% less land than they cultivated before the reform. This is how sections were formed, taken by the landowners from the peasants. Traditionally considering this land theirs, the peasants fought for its return until 1917.

When delimiting arable land, landowners sought to ensure that their land was wedged into peasant plots. This is how stripes appeared, forcing the peasant to rent the landowner's land, paying its value either in money or in field work.

Ransom

When receiving land, peasants were obliged to pay its cost. The market price of the land transferred to the peasants actually amounted to 544 million rubles. However, the formula for calculating the cost of land developed by the government increased its price to 867 million rubles, that is, 1.5 times. Consequently, both the allocation of land and the redemption transaction were carried out exclusively in the interests of the nobility.

The peasants did not have the money needed to buy the land. In order for the landowners to receive the redemption amounts in a lump sum, the state provided the peasants with a loan in the amount of 80% of the value of the plots. The remaining 20% was paid to the landowner by the peasant community itself. For 49 years, peasants had to repay the loan to the state in the form of redemption payments with an accrual of 6% per annum. By 1906, when the peasants through a stubborn struggle achieved the abolition of redemption payments, they
have already paid the state about 2 billion rubles, i.e. almost 4 times more
real market value of land in 1861 ^4^1

The payment by the peasants to the landowner lasted for 20 years. it gave rise to a specific temporarily obligatory state of peasants who had to pay quitrents and perform some duties until they completely bought out their allotment, i.e. 20% of the value of the land. Only in 1881 was a law issued to eliminate the temporarily obliged position of peasants.

So, the agrarian reform of 1861 can be considered to have taken place only on paper, because it did not make life easier for peasants and did not provide them with civil rights. Nevertheless, the reform made it possible for Russia to embark on the path of capitalist development.

A natural continuation of the abolition of serfdom in Russia were zemstvo, city, judicial, military and other reforms. Their main goal is to bring the state system and administration into line with the new social structure, in which the multimillion-dollar peasantry received personal freedom. They became the product of the desire of the “liberal bureaucracy” to continue the political modernization of the country. This required adapting the autocracy to the development of capitalist relations and using the bourgeoisie in the interests of the ruling class.

The reign of Alexander the Second (1856-1881) went down in history as a period of “great reforms”. Largely thanks to the emperor, serfdom was abolished in Russia in 1861 - an event that, of course, is his main achievement, which played a large role in the future development of the state.

Prerequisites for the abolition of serfdom

In 1856-1857, a number of southern provinces were rocked by peasant unrest, which, however, subsided very quickly. But, nevertheless, they served as a reminder to the ruling authorities that the situation in which the common people find themselves could ultimately result in dire consequences for them.

In addition, the current serfdom significantly slowed down the progress of the country's development. The axiom that free labor is more effective than forced labor was fully demonstrated: Russia lagged significantly behind Western states both in the economy and in the socio-political sphere. This threatened that the previously created image of a powerful power could simply dissolve, and the country would become secondary. Not to mention that serfdom was very similar to slavery.

By the end of the 50s, more than a third of the country's 62 million population lived completely dependent on their owners. Russia urgently needed peasant reform. 1861 was supposed to be a year of serious changes, which had to be carried out so that they could not shake the established foundations of the autocracy, and the nobility retained its dominant position. Therefore, the process of abolishing serfdom required careful analysis and elaboration, and this was already problematic due to the imperfect state apparatus.

Necessary steps for the coming changes

The abolition of serfdom in Russia in 1861 was supposed to seriously affect the foundations of life of the huge country.

However, if in states living according to the constitution, before carrying out any reforms, they are worked out in the ministries and discussed in the government, after which the finished reform projects are submitted to parliament, which makes the final verdict, then in Russia there are no ministries or a representative body existed. And serfdom was legalized at the state level. Alexander II could not abolish it single-handedly, since this would violate the rights of the nobility, which is the basis of the autocracy.

Therefore, in order to promote the reform in the country, it was necessary to deliberately create an entire apparatus specifically dedicated to the abolition of serfdom. It was intended to consist of locally organized institutions whose proposals were to be submitted and processed by a central committee, which in turn would be controlled by the monarch.

Since in the light of the upcoming changes it was the landowners who lost the most, the best solution for Alexander II would have been if the initiative to free the peasants had come from the nobles. Soon such a moment came up.

"Rescript to Nazimov"

In the mid-autumn of 1857, General Vladimir Ivanovich Nazimov, the governor from Lithuania, arrived in St. Petersburg, who brought with him a petition to grant him and the governors of the Kovno and Grodno provinces the right to free their serfs, but without giving them land.

In response, Alexander II sent a rescript (personal imperial letter) to Nazimov, in which he instructed local landowners to organize provincial committees. Their task was to develop their own options for future peasant reform. At the same time, in the message the king gave his recommendations:

Granting complete freedom to serfs.
All land plots must remain with the landowners, with ownership rights retained.
Providing the opportunity for freed peasants to receive land plots subject to payment of quitrent or working off corvee.
Give peasants the opportunity to buy back their estates.

Soon the rescript appeared in print, which gave impetus to a general discussion of the issue of serfdom.

Creation of committees

At the very beginning of 1857, the emperor, following his plan, created a secret committee on the peasant question, which secretly worked on developing a reform to abolish serfdom. But only after the “rescript to Nazimov” became public knowledge did the institution become fully operational. In February 1958, all secrecy was removed from it, renaming it the Main Committee for Peasant Affairs, headed by Prince A.F. Orlov.

Under him, Editorial Commissions were created, which reviewed projects submitted by provincial committees, and on the basis of the collected data, an all-Russian version of the future reform was created.

Member of the State Council, General Ya.I., was appointed chairman of these commissions. Rostovtsev, who fully supported the idea of abolishing serfdom.

Controversies and work done

During the work on the project, there were serious contradictions between the Main Committee and the majority of provincial landowners. Thus, the landowners insisted that the emancipation of the peasants should be limited only to the provision of freedom, and the land could be assigned to them only on a lease basis without redemption. The Committee wanted to give former serfs the opportunity to purchase land, becoming full owners.

In 1860, Rostovtsev died, and therefore Alexander II appointed Count V.N. as head of the Editorial Commissions. Panin, who, by the way, was considered an opponent of the abolition of serfdom. Being an unquestioning executor of the royal will, he was forced to complete the reform project.

In October, the work of the Editorial Commissions was completed. In total, provincial committees submitted for consideration 82 projects for the abolition of serfdom, occupying 32 printed volumes. The result was submitted for consideration to the State Council, and after its acceptance was presented to the Tsar for certification. After familiarization, he signed the corresponding Manifesto and Regulations. February 19, 1861 became the official day of the abolition of serfdom.

The main provisions of the manifesto of February 19, 1861

The main provisions of the document were as follows:

The serf peasants of the empire received complete personal independence; they were now called “free rural inhabitants.”
From now on (that is, from February 19, 1861), serfs were considered full citizens of the country with the appropriate rights.
All movable peasant property, as well as houses and buildings, were recognized as their property.
The landowners retained the rights to their lands, but at the same time they had to provide the peasants with household plots as well as field plots.
For the use of land plots, peasants had to pay a ransom both directly to the owner of the territory and to the state.

Necessary compromise of reform

The new changes could not satisfy the wishes of all concerned. The peasants themselves were dissatisfied. First of all, the conditions under which they were provided with land, which, in fact, was the main means of subsistence. Therefore, the reforms of Alexander II, or rather, some of their provisions, are ambiguous.

Thus, according to the Manifesto, the largest and smallest sizes of land plots per capita were established throughout Russia, depending on the natural and economic characteristics of the regions.

It was assumed that if the peasant plot was smaller in size than established by the document, then this obliged the landowner to add the missing area. If they are large, then, on the contrary, cut off the excess and, as a rule, the best part of the allotment.

Norms of allotments provided

The manifesto of February 19, 1861 divided the European part of the country into three parts: steppe, black earth and non-black earth.

The norm of land plots for the steppe part is from six and a half to twelve dessiatines.
The norm for the black earth strip was from three to four and a half dessiatines.
For the non-chernozem zone - from three and a quarter to eight dessiatines.

In the whole country, the allotment area became smaller than it was before the changes, thus, the peasant reform of 1861 deprived the “liberated” of more than 20% of the area of cultivated land.

Conditions for transferring land ownership

According to the reform of 1861, land was provided to peasants not for ownership, but only for use. But they had the opportunity to buy it from the owner, that is, to conclude a so-called buyout deal. Until that moment, they were considered temporarily obligated, and for the use of land they had to work corvée, which amounted to no more than 40 days a year for men and 30 for women. Or pay a quitrent, the amount of which for the highest allotment ranged from 8-12 rubles, and when assigning a tax, the fertility of the land was necessarily taken into account. At the same time, those temporarily obliged did not have the right to simply refuse the allotment provided, that is, they would still have to work off the corvee.

After completing the redemption transaction, the peasant became the full owner of the land plot.

And the state did not lose out

Since February 19, 1861, thanks to the Manifesto, the state had the opportunity to replenish the treasury. This income item was opened due to the formula by which the amount of the redemption payment was calculated.

The amount that the peasant had to pay for the land was equal to the so-called conditional capital, which was deposited in the State Bank at 6% per annum. And these percentages were equal to the income that the landowner previously received from quitrent.

That is, if a landowner had 10 rubles in quitrent per soul per year, then the calculation was made according to the formula: 10 rubles divided by 6 (interest on capital), and then multiplied by 100 (total interest) - (10/6) x 100 = 166.7.

Thus, the total amount of the quitrent was 166 rubles 70 kopecks - money “unaffordable” for a former serf. But here the state entered into a deal: the peasant had to pay the landowner at a time only 20% of the calculated price. The remaining 80% was contributed by the state, but not just like that, but by providing a long-term loan with a repayment period of 49 years and 5 months.

Now the peasant had to pay the State Bank annually 6% of the redemption payment. It turned out that the amount that the former serf had to contribute to the treasury was three times the loan. In fact, February 19, 1861 became the date when a former serf, having escaped from one bondage, fell into another. And this despite the fact that the size of the ransom amount itself exceeded the market value of the plot.

Results of changes

The reform adopted on February 19, 1861 (the abolition of serfdom), despite its shortcomings, gave a fundamental impetus to the development of the country. 23 million people received freedom, which led to a serious transformation in the social structure of Russian society, and subsequently revealed the need to transform the entire political system of the country.

The timely release of the Manifesto on February 19, 1861, the preconditions of which could lead to serious regression, became a stimulating factor for the development of capitalism in the Russian state. Thus, the eradication of serfdom is undoubtedly one of the central events in the history of the country.

Serfdom turned into a brake on technological progress, which was actively developing in Europe after the Industrial Revolution. The Crimean War clearly demonstrated this. There was a danger of Russia turning into a third-rate power. It was by the second half of the 19th century that it became clear that maintaining the power and political influence of Russia was impossible without strengthening finances, developing industry and railway construction, and transforming the entire political system. Under the conditions of the dominance of serfdom, which itself could have existed for an indefinite period of time, despite the fact that the landed nobility itself was unable and not ready to modernize its own estates, this turned out to be practically impossible. That is why the reign of Alexander II became a period of radical transformations of Russian society. The Emperor, distinguished by his sound mind and a certain political flexibility, managed to surround himself with professionally competent people who understood the need for Russia's progressive movement. Among them, the tsar's brother, Grand Duke Konstantin Nikolaevich, brothers N.A. stood out. and D.A. Milyutin, Ya.I. Rostovtsev, P.A. Valuev and others.

By the second quarter of the 19th century, it had already become obvious that the economic capabilities of the landlord economy in meeting the increased needs for grain exports had been completely exhausted. It was increasingly drawn into commodity-money relations, gradually losing its natural character. Closely related to this was a change in the forms of rent. If in the central provinces, where industrial production was developed, more than half of the peasants had already been transferred to quitrent, then in the agricultural Central Black Earth and Lower Volga provinces, where commercial grain was produced, corvée continued to expand. This was due to the natural increase in the production of bread for sale on the landowners' farm.

On the other hand, the productivity of corvee labor has dropped noticeably. The peasant sabotaged the corvée with all his might and was burdened by it, which is explained by the growth of the peasant economy, its transformation into a small-scale producer. Corvee labor slowed down this process, and the peasant fought with all his might for favorable conditions for his farming.

Landowners sought ways to increase the profitability of their estates within the framework of serfdom, for example, transferring peasants to monthly labor: landless peasants, who were obliged to spend all their working hours in corvée, were given payment in kind in the form of a monthly food ration, as well as clothes, shoes, and necessary household utensils , while the landowner's field was cultivated with the master's equipment. However, all these measures could not compensate for the ever-increasing losses from ineffective corvee labor.

The quitrent farms also experienced a serious crisis. Previously, peasant crafts, from which quitrents were mainly paid, were profitable, giving the landowner a stable income. However, the development of crafts gave rise to competition, which led to a drop in peasant earnings. Since the 20s of the 19th century, arrears in quitrent payments began to grow rapidly. An indicator of the crisis of the landlord economy was the growth of estate debt. By 1861, about 65% of landowners' estates were pledged to various credit institutions.

In an effort to increase the profitability of their estates, some landowners began to use new methods of farming: they ordered expensive equipment from abroad, invited foreign specialists, introduced multi-field crop rotation, etc. But such expenses were only affordable for wealthy landowners, and under the conditions of serfdom, these innovations did not pay off, often ruining such landowners.

It should be especially emphasized that we are talking specifically about the crisis of the landlord economy, based on serf labor, and not the economy in general, which continued to develop on a completely different, capitalist basis. It is clear that serfdom hampered its development and prevented the formation of a wage labor market, without which the capitalist development of the country is impossible.

Preparations for the abolition of serfdom began in January 1857 with the creation of the next Secret Committee. In November 1857, Alexander II sent a rescript throughout the country addressed to the Vilna Governor-General Nazimov, which spoke of the beginning of the gradual liberation of the peasants and ordered the creation of noble committees in three Lithuanian provinces (Vilna, Kovno and Grodno) to make proposals for the reform project. On February 21, 1858, the Secret Committee was renamed the Main Committee for Peasant Affairs. A wide discussion of the upcoming reform began. Provincial noble committees drew up their projects for the liberation of peasants and sent them to the main committee, which, on their basis, began to develop a general reform project.

To revise the submitted projects, editorial commissions were established in 1859, the work of which was led by Comrade Minister of Internal Affairs Ya.I. Rostovtsev.

During the preparation of the reform, there were lively debates among landowners about the mechanism of liberation. The landowners of the non-black earth provinces, where the peasants were mainly on quitrent, proposed to allocate land to the peasants with complete liberation from the landowners' power, but with the payment of a large ransom for the land. Their opinion was most fully expressed in his project by the leader of the Tver nobility A.M. Unkovsky.

Landowners of the black earth regions, whose opinion was expressed in the project of the Poltava landowner M.P. Posen, they proposed to give only small plots to the peasants for ransom, with the goal of making the peasants economically dependent on the landowner - forcing them to rent land on unfavorable terms or work as farm laborers.

By the beginning of October 1860, the editorial commissions completed their activities and the project was submitted for discussion to the Main Committee for Peasant Affairs, where it was subject to additions and changes. On January 28, 1861, a meeting of the State Council opened and ended on February 16, 1861. The signing of the manifesto on the emancipation of the peasants was scheduled for February 19, 1861 - the 6th anniversary of the accession to the throne of Alexander II, when the emperor signed the manifesto “On the All-Merciful granting to serfs of the rights of free rural inhabitants and on the organization of their life,” as well as “Regulations on peasants emerging from serfdom,” which included 17 legislative acts. On the same day, the Main Committee “on the structure of the rural state” was established, chaired by Grand Duke Konstantin Nikolaevich, which replaced the Main Committee “on peasant affairs” and was called upon to carry out supreme supervision over the implementation of the “Regulations” of February 19.

According to the manifesto, peasants received personal freedom. From now on, the former serf peasant received the opportunity to freely dispose of his personality, he was granted some civil rights: the opportunity to move to other classes, enter into property and civil transactions in his own name, and open commercial and industrial enterprises.

If serfdom was abolished immediately, then the settlement of economic relations between peasants and landowners lasted for several decades. The specific economic conditions for the liberation of peasants were recorded in the “Charter Charters”, which were concluded between the landowner and the peasant with the participation of world intermediaries. However, according to the law, peasants were required to serve virtually the same duties as under serfdom for another two years. This state of the peasant was called temporarily obliged. In fact, this situation lasted for twenty years, and only by the law of 1881 were the last temporarily obliged peasants transferred to redemption.

An important place was given to the provision of land to the peasant. The law was based on the recognition of the landowner's right to all the land on his estate, including peasant plots. The peasants received the allotment not for ownership, but only for use. To become the owner of land, the peasant was obliged to buy it from the landowner. The state took on this task. The redemption was based not on the market value of the land, but on the amount of duties. The treasury immediately paid the landowners 80% of the redemption amount, and the remaining 20% had to be paid to the landowner by the peasants by mutual agreement (immediately or in installments, in money or in labor). The redemption amount paid by the state was treated as a loan to the peasants, which was then collected from them annually, for 49 years, in the form of "redemption payments" of 6% of this loan. It is not difficult to determine that in this way the peasant had to pay for the land several times more not only its real market value, but also the amount of duties that he bore in favor of the landowner. That is why the “temporarily obliged state” existed for more than 20 years.

When determining the norms for peasant plots, the peculiarities of local natural and economic conditions were taken into account. The entire territory of the Russian Empire was divided into three parts: non-chernozem, chernozem and steppe. In the chernozem and non-chernozem parts, two norms of allotments were established: the highest and the lowest, and in the steppe there was only one - the “decreed” norm. The law provided for a reduction of the peasant allotment in favor of the landowner if its pre-reform size exceeded the “higher” or “decree” norm, and an increase if the allotment did not reach the “higher” norm. In practice, this has led to the fact that cutting off land has become the rule, and trimming the exception. The burden of the “cuts” for the peasants was not only their size. The best lands often fell into this category, without which normal farming became impossible. Thus, the “cuts” turned into an effective means of economic enslavement of the peasants by the landowner.

Land was provided not to an individual peasant household, but to the community. This form of land use excluded the possibility of a peasant selling his plot, and its rental was limited to the community. But, despite all its shortcomings, the abolition of serfdom was an important historical event. It not only created conditions for the further economic development of Russia, but also led to a change in the social structure of Russian society and created the need for further reform of the political system of the state, which was forced to adapt to new economic conditions. After 1861, a number of important political reforms were carried out: zemstvo, judicial, city, military reforms, which radically changed Russian reality. It is no coincidence that domestic historians consider this event a turning point, the line between feudal Russia and modern Russia.

ACCORDING TO THE “SHOWER REVISION” OF 1858

Landowner serfs - 20,173,000

Appanage peasants - 2,019,000

State peasants -18,308,000

Workers of factories and mines, equated to state peasants - 616,000

State peasants assigned to private factories - 518,000

Peasants released after military service - 1,093,000

HISTORIAN S.M. SOLOVIEV

“Liberal speeches began; but it would be strange if the first, main content of these speeches were not the liberation of the peasants. What other liberation could one think of without remembering that in Russia a huge number of people are the property of other people, and slaves are of the same origin as their masters, and sometimes of higher origin: peasants of Slavic origin, and masters of Tatar, Cheremis, Mordovian origin, not to mention Germans? What kind of liberal speech could be made without remembering this stain, the shame that lay on Russia, excluding it from the society of European civilized peoples?

A.I. HERZEN

“Many more years will pass before Europe understands the course of development of Russian serfdom. Its origin and development are a phenomenon so exceptional and unlike anything else that it is difficult to believe in it. How, in fact, can one believe that half the population of the same nationality, gifted with rare physical and mental abilities, was enslaved not by war, not by conquest, not by a coup, but only by a series of decrees, immoral concessions, vile claims?

K.S. AKSAKOV

“The yoke of the state was formed over the land, and the Russian land became, as it were, conquered... The Russian monarch received the meaning of a despot, and the people - the meaning of a slave-slave in their land”...

“IT’S MUCH BETTER FOR THIS TO HAPPEN ABOVE”

When Emperor Alexander II came to Moscow for the coronation, the Moscow Governor-General Count Zakrevsky asked him to calm the local nobility, excited by rumors about the upcoming liberation of the peasants. The Tsar, receiving the Moscow provincial leader of the nobility, Prince Shcherbatov, with district representatives, told them: “There are rumors that I want to announce the liberation of serfdom. This is unfair, and as a result there were several cases of peasants disobeying the landowners. I won't tell you that I'm completely against it; We live in such an age that this must happen over time. I think that you are of the same opinion as me: therefore, it is much better for this to happen from above than from below.”

The matter of the liberation of the peasants, which came before the State Council, in its importance I consider a vital issue for Russia, on which the development of its strength and power will depend. I am sure that all of you, gentlemen, are just as convinced as I am of the benefits and necessity of this measure. I also have another conviction, namely, that this matter cannot be postponed, which is why I demand from the State Council that it be completed in the first half of February and can be announced by the beginning of field work; I entrust this to the direct responsibility of the chairman of the State Council. I repeat, and it is my absolute will that this matter be ended now. (...)

You know the origin of serfdom. It did not exist with us before: this right was established by autocratic power and only autocratic power can destroy it, and this is my direct will.

My predecessors felt all the evils of serfdom and constantly strived, if not for its direct destruction, then for a gradual limitation of the arbitrariness of landowner power. (...)

Following the rescript given to Governor General Nazimov, requests began to arrive from the nobility of other provinces, which were answered with rescripts addressed to governors general and governors of similar content with the first. These rescripts contained the same main principles and foundations and allowed us to proceed to the matter on the same principles I indicated. As a result, provincial committees were established, which were given a special program to facilitate their work. When, after the given period of time, the work of the committees began to arrive here, I allowed the formation of special Editorial Commissions, which were supposed to consider the projects of the provincial committees and do the general work in a systematic manner. The Chairman of these Commissions was first Adjutant General Rostovtsev, and after his death Count Panin. The editorial commissions worked for a year and seven months, and, despite the criticisms, perhaps partly fair, to which the commissions were subjected, they completed their work in good faith and presented it to the Main Committee. The main committee, chaired by my brother, worked with tireless activity and zeal. I consider it my duty to thank all the members of the committee, and my brother in particular, for their conscientious efforts in this matter.

Views on the work presented may vary. That’s why I listen to all different opinions willingly; but I have the right to demand one thing from you, that you, putting aside all personal interests, act as state dignitaries invested with my trust. When starting this important task, I did not hide from myself all the difficulties that awaited us, and I do not hide them now, but, firmly trusting in the mercy of God, I hope that God will not leave us and will bless us to complete it for future prosperity dear Fatherland to us. Now, with God’s help, let’s get down to business.

MANIFESTO FEBRUARY 19, 1861

BY GOD'S GRACE

WE, ALEXANDER THE SECOND,

EMPEROR AND AUTOCRET

ALL-RUSSIAN

KING OF POLISH, GRAND DUKE OF FINNISH

and so on, and so on, and so on

We announce to all our loyal subjects.

By God's providence and the sacred law of succession to the throne, having been called to the ancestral all-Russian throne, in accordance with this calling we have made a vow in our hearts to embrace with our royal love and care all our loyal subjects of every rank and status, from those who nobly wield a sword in defense of the Fatherland to those who modestly work with a craft tool, from those undergoing the highest government service to those plowing a furrow in the field with a plow or plow.

Delving into the position of ranks and conditions within the state, we saw that state legislation, while actively improving the upper and middle classes, defining their duties, rights and benefits, did not achieve uniform activity in relation to serfs, so called because they were partly old by laws, partly by custom, they are hereditarily strengthened under the power of landowners, who at the same time have the responsibility to organize their well-being. The rights of landowners were until now extensive and not precisely defined by law, the place of which was taken by tradition, custom and the good will of the landowner. In the best cases, from this came good patriarchal relations of sincere, truthful trusteeship and charity of the landowner and good-natured obedience of the peasants. But with a decrease in the simplicity of morals, with an increase in the variety of relationships, with a decrease in the direct paternal relations of landowners to peasants, with landowner rights sometimes falling into the hands of people seeking only their own benefit, good relations weakened and the way opened to arbitrariness, burdensome for the peasants and unfavorable for them. well-being, which was reflected in the peasants by their immobility towards improvements in their own life.

Our ever-memorable predecessors saw this and took measures to change the situation of the peasants for the better; but these were measures, partly indecisive, proposed to the voluntary, freedom-loving action of landowners, partly decisive only for some areas, at the request of special circumstances or in the form of experience. Thus, Emperor Alexander I issued a decree on free cultivators, and our late father Nicholas I issued a decree on obligated peasants. In Western provinces, inventory rules determine the allocation of land to peasants and their duties. But the regulations on free cultivators and obliged peasants were put into effect on a very small scale.

Thus, we are convinced that the matter of changing the situation of serfs for the better is for us the testament of our predecessors and the lot given to us through the course of events by the hand of providence.

We began this matter with an act of our trust in the Russian nobility, in its devotion to its throne, proven by great experiences, and its readiness to make donations for the benefit of the Fatherland. We left it to the nobility itself, at their own invitation, to make assumptions about the new structure of life of the peasants, and the nobles were to limit their rights to the peasants and raise the difficulties of transformation, not without reducing their benefits. And our trust was justified. In the provincial committees, represented by their members, invested with the trust of the entire noble society of each province, the nobility voluntarily renounced the right to personality of serfs. In these committees, after collecting the necessary information, assumptions were made about the new structure of life for people in a state of serfdom and about their relationship to the landowners.

These assumptions, which turned out to be varied, as could be expected from the nature of the matter, were compared, agreed upon, put into the correct composition, corrected and supplemented in the Main Committee for this matter; and the new regulations on landowner peasants and courtyard people drawn up in this way were considered in the State Council.

Having called on God for help, we decided to give this matter executive movement.

By virtue of these new provisions, serfs will in due course receive the full rights of free rural inhabitants.

The landowners, retaining the right of ownership of all the lands belonging to them, provide the peasants, for established duties, for the permanent use of their settled estates and, moreover, to ensure their life and fulfill their duties to the government, a certain amount of field land and other lands determined in the regulations.

Using this land allotment, the peasants are obliged to fulfill the duties specified in the regulations in favor of the landowners. In this state, which is transitional, the peasants are called temporarily obliged.

At the same time, they are given the right to buy out their estates, and with the consent of the landowners, they can acquire ownership of field lands and other lands allocated to them for permanent use. With such acquisition of ownership of a certain amount of land, the peasants will be freed from their obligations to the landowners on the purchased land and will enter into a decisive state of free peasant owners.

A special provision for domestic servants defines for them a transitional state, adapted to their occupations and needs; upon expiration of a two-year period from the date of publication of this regulation, they will receive full exemption and immediate benefits.

On these main principles, the provisions drawn up determine the future structure of peasants and courtyard people, establish the order of public peasant governance and indicate in detail the rights granted to peasants and courtyard people and the responsibilities assigned to them in relation to the government and to the landowners.

Although these provisions, general, local and special additional rules for some special areas, for the estates of small landowners and for peasants working in landowner factories and factories, are, if possible, adapted to local economic needs and customs, however, in order to preserve the usual order there, where it represents mutual benefits, we allow the landowners to make voluntary agreements with the peasants and conclude conditions on the size of the peasants’ land allotment and the following duties in compliance with the rules established to protect the inviolability of such agreements.

As a new device, due to the inevitable complexity of the changes required by it, cannot be carried out suddenly, but will require time, approximately at least two years, then during this time, in aversion to confusion and to respect public and private benefit, existing to this day in the landowners On estates, order must be preserved until, after proper preparations have been made, a new order will be opened.

To achieve this correctly, we considered it good to command:

1. To open in each province a provincial presence for peasant affairs, which is entrusted with the highest management of the affairs of peasant societies established on landowners' lands.

2. To resolve locally misunderstandings and disputes that may arise during the implementation of the new provisions, appoint peace mediators in the counties and form county peace congresses from them.

3. Then create secular administrations on the landowners' estates, for which, leaving rural societies in their current composition, open volost administrations in significant villages, and unite small rural societies under one volost administration.

4. Draw up, verify and approve a statutory charter for each rural society or estate, which will calculate, on the basis of local situation, the amount of land provided to peasants for permanent use, and the amount of duties due from them in favor of the landowner both for the land and and for other benefits from it.

5. These statutory charters shall be carried out as they are approved for each estate, and finally put into effect for all estates within two years from the date of publication of this manifesto.

6. Until the expiration of this period, peasants and courtyard people remain in the same obedience to the landowners and unquestioningly fulfill their previous duties.

Paying attention to the inevitable difficulties of an acceptable transformation, we first of all place our hope in the all-good providence of God protecting Russia.

Therefore, we rely on the valiant zeal of the noble class for the common good, to whom we cannot fail to express from us and from the entire Fatherland well-deserved gratitude for their selfless action towards the implementation of our plans. Russia will not forget that it voluntarily, prompted only by respect for human dignity and Christian love for one’s neighbors, renounced serfdom, which is now being abolished, and laid the foundation for a new economic future for the peasants. We undoubtedly expect that it will also nobly use further diligence to implement the new provisions in good order, in the spirit of peace and goodwill, and that each owner will complete within the boundaries of his estate the great civil feat of the entire class, arranging the life of the peasants and his servants settled on his land people on terms beneficial to both parties, and thereby give the rural population a good example and encouragement to accurately and conscientiously fulfill state duties.

The examples in mind of the generous care of the owners for the welfare of the peasants and the gratitude of the peasants to the beneficent care of the owners confirm our hope that mutual voluntary agreements will resolve most of the difficulties inevitable in some cases of applying general rules to the various circumstances of individual estates, and that in this way the transition from the old order to the new and in the future mutual trust, good agreement and unanimous desire for common benefit will be strengthened.

For the most convenient implementation of those agreements between owners and peasants, according to which they will acquire ownership of field lands along with their estates, the government will provide benefits, on the basis of special rules, by issuing loans and transferring debts lying on the estates.

We rely on the common sense of our people. When the government's idea of abolishing serfdom spread among peasants who were not prepared for it, private misunderstandings arose. Some thought about freedom and forgot about responsibilities. But general common sense has not wavered in the conviction that, according to natural reasoning, one who freely enjoys the benefits of society must mutually serve the good of society by fulfilling certain duties, and according to Christian law, every soul must obey the powers that be (Rom. XIII, 1), give everyone their due, and especially to whom it is due, lesson, tribute, fear, honor; that rights legally acquired by landowners cannot be taken from them without decent compensation or voluntary concession; that it would be contrary to all justice to use land from the landowners and not bear the corresponding duties for it.

And now we expect with hope that the serfs, with the new future opening up for them, will understand and gratefully accept the important donation made by the noble nobility to improve their life.

They will understand that, having received for themselves a more solid foundation of property and greater freedom to dispose of their household, they become obligated to society and to themselves to supplement the beneficialness of the new law with the faithful, well-intentioned and diligent use of the rights granted to them. The most beneficial law cannot make people prosperous if they do not take the trouble to arrange their own well-being under the protection of the law. Contentment is acquired and increased only by unremitting labor, prudent use of strength and means, strict frugality and, in general, an honest life in the fear of God.

Those who carry out preparatory actions for the new structure of peasant life and the very introduction to this structure will use vigilant care to ensure that this is done with a correct, calm movement, observing the convenience of the time, so that the attention of farmers is not diverted from their necessary agricultural activities. Let them carefully cultivate the land and collect its fruits, so that later from a well-filled granary they can take seeds for sowing on land for permanent use or on land acquired as property.

Sign yourself with the sign of the cross, Orthodox people, and call upon us God’s blessing on your free labor, the guarantee of your home well-being and public good. Given in St. Petersburg, on the nineteenth day of February, in the year from the birth of Christ one thousand eight hundred and sixty-one, the seventh of our reign.

Enslavement of people in Rus' existed back in the eleventh century. Even then, Kievan Rus and the Novgorod Republic widely used the labor of unfree peasants, who were called smerds, serfs and purchases.

At the dawn of the development of feudal relations, peasants were enslaved by being attracted to work on land that belonged to the landowner. For this the feudal lord demanded a certain payment.

In contact with

Classmates

The origins of serfdom in Rus'

"Russian Truth"

Historians are inclined to think that the dependence of the peasants on the feudal lords arose during the reign of Yaroslav the Wise, when the main set of laws was “Russian Truth,” which clearly delineated social relations between segments of the population.

During the Mongol-Tatar yoke, feudal dependence weakened somewhat due to the split of Rus'. In the 16th century, peasants had some freedom, but they were forbidden to move from place to place until payment for the use of the land was paid. The rights and obligations of the peasant were prescribed in the agreement between him and the owner of the land.

Here's to you, grandma, and St. George's Day!

With the reign of Ivan III, the situation of the peasants worsened sharply, as he began to limit their rights at the legislative level. At first, peasants were forbidden to move from one feudal lord to another except for the week before and the week after St. George’s Day, then they were allowed to leave him only in certain years. Often the peasant became an unpaid debtor, continuing to borrow bread, money, and agricultural tools from the landowner and falling into bondage to his creditor. The only way out of this situation was to escape.

Serf means attached

Existed decree, according to which fugitive peasants who had not paid payment for the use of land were to be look for And to return to their previous place of residence and work. At first, the period for searching for fugitives was five years, then, with the accession of the Romanovs and the coming to power of Tsar Alexei Mikhailovich, it increased to fifteen, and the dependence of the peasants was finally secured by the “Cathedral Code” of 1649, which ordered the peasant to remain for life in the locality to which it was attached based on the results of the population census, that is, it became “strong”. If a peasant “on the run” gave his daughter in marriage, the found family was returned in its entirety to the former landowner.

At the turn of the XVII-XVIII centuries. ekov, transactions of purchase and sale of serfs between landowners became commonplace. Serfs lost their legal and civil rights and found themselves enslaved.

Souls - living and dead

Most serfdom tightened during the times of Peter I and Catherine I. I. Relations between the peasant and the landowner were no longer built on the basis of an agreement, they were enshrined in a government act. Both slaves and purchases moved into the category of serfs, or souls. Estates began to be inherited along with souls. They had no rights - they were allowed to marry, sell, separate parents from children, and use corporal punishment.

Interesting to know: on the Ugra River under Prince Ivan III.

Attempts to alleviate the plight of the serfs

The first attempt to limit and subsequently abolish slavery was made by Russian Emperor Paul I in 1797.

In his “Manifesto on the Three-Day Corvee,” the sovereign introduced legal restrictions on the use of serf labor: for the benefit of the royal court and masters, one had to work three days a week with a mandatory Sunday day off. The peasants had three more days to work for themselves. On Sunday it was prescribed to attend an Orthodox church.

Taking advantage of the illiteracy and ignorance of the serfs, many landowners ignored the tsarist legislation and forced the peasants to work for weeks, often depriving them of a day off.

Serfdom was not widespread throughout the state: it did not exist in the Caucasus, in the Cossack regions, in a number of Asian provinces, in the Far East, Alaska and Finland. Many progressive nobles began to think about its abolition. In enlightened Europe, slavery did not exist; Russia lagged behind European countries in terms of socio-economic development, because the lack of labor of civilian workers slowed down industrial progress. Feudal farms fell into decay, and discontent grew among the serf peasants themselves, turning into riots. These were the prerequisites for the abolition of serfdom.

In 1803 Alexander I issued the “Decree on Free Plowmen”. According to the decree, peasants were allowed to enter into an agreement with the landowner for a ransom, according to which they could receive freedom and a plot of land in addition. If the obligations given by the peasant were not fulfilled, he could be forcibly returned to the master. At the same time, the landowner could release the serf free of charge. They began to prohibit the sale of serfs at fairs, and later, when selling peasants, it was not allowed to separate families. However, Alexander I succeeded in completely abolishing serfdom only in the Baltic states - the Baltic provinces of Estland, Livonia and Courland.

The peasants increasingly hoped that their dependence was temporary, and they endured it with Christian fortitude. During the Patriotic War of 1812, when he hoped to enter Russia in triumph and see the serfs greeting him as a liberator, it was they who gave him a powerful rebuff, uniting in the ranks of the militia.

Emperor Nicholas I also tried to abolish serfdom, for which, on his instructions, special commissions were created and the law “On Obligated Peasants” was issued, according to which peasants had the opportunity to be freed by the landowner, the latter had to allocate a plot of land. For the use of the allotment, the peasant was obliged to bear duties in favor of the landowner. However, this law was not recognized by the bulk of the nobles who did not want to part with their slaves.

Historians explain Nicholas I’s indecisiveness on this issue by the fact that after the Decembrist uprising, he feared the rise of the masses, which, in his opinion, could happen if they were given the long-awaited freedom.

The situation became increasingly worse: the economic situation in Russia after the Napoleonic War was precarious, the labor of the serfs was unproductive, and in the years of famine the landowners also had to support them. The abolition of serfdom was just around the corner.

"Destroy from Above"

With accession to the throne in 1855 Alexander I. I., son of Nicholas I, significant changes took place. The new sovereign, distinguished by his political foresight and flexibility, immediately began to talk about the need to resolve the peasant issue and carry out reforms: “It is better to destroy serfdom from above than for it to begin to be destroyed from below.”

Understanding the need for the progressive movement of Russia, the development of the capitalist system in the state, the formation of a labor market for hired workers and at the same time maintaining a stable position of the autocratic system, Alexander I. I. in January 1857 created the Secret Committee, later renamed the Main Committee for Peasant Affairs, which began preparations for the gradual emancipation of the serfs.

Causes:

crisis of the serfdom system;
lost, after which popular unrest especially intensified;
the need for the formation of the bourgeoisie as a new class.

The moral side of the issue played a significant role: many nobles with progressive views were outraged by a relic of the past - legalized slavery in a European state.

There was a wide discussion in the country about the planned peasant reform, the main idea of which was to provide peasants with personal freedom.

The land was still supposed to remain in the possession of the landowners, but they were obliged to provide it for the use of former serfs for serving corvee or paying quitrent, until they could finally redeem it. The country's agricultural economy was to consist of large landowners and small peasant farms.

The year of the abolition of serfdom was 1861. It was this year, on February 19, on Forgiveness Sunday, on the sixth anniversary of the accession to the throne of Alexander I. I., that the document “On the most merciful granting to serfs of the rights of free rural inhabitants” - the Manifesto on the abolition of serfdom - was signed.

Main provisions of the document:

Alexander II personally proclaimed the Manifesto to the people at the Mikhailovsky Manege in St. Petersburg. The Emperor began to be called the Liberator. Yesterday's serfs, freed from the tutelage of the landowner, were allowed by the peasant reform of 1861 to move to a new place of residence, marry of their own free will, study, get a job, and even move into the bourgeois and merchant classes. From that moment on, scientists believe, peasants began to have surnames.

Consequences of the reform

However, the enthusiasm with which the manifesto was greeted quickly faded. The peasants expected complete liberation and were disappointed that they had to bear the label of “temporarily obliged”, demanding that land plots be allocated to them.

Feeling deceived, people began to organize riots, which the king sent troops to suppress. Within six months, more than a thousand uprisings broke out in different parts of the country.

The plots of land allocated to peasants were not large enough to feed themselves and generate income from them. On average, one farm accounted for three dessiatines of land, and for its profitability five or six were required.

Landowners, deprived of free labor, were forced to mechanize agricultural production, but not everyone was ready for this and many simply went bankrupt.

The so-called courtyard people, who had no property and were not allocated land, were also released. At that time they made up about 6 percent of the total number of serfs. Such people found themselves practically on the street, without a means of subsistence. Some went to the cities and got a job, while others took the path of crime, engaging in robbery and robbery, and engaging in terrorism. It is known that two decades after the proclamation of the Manifesto, members of the People's Will, from among the descendants of former serfs, killed the sovereign liberator Alexander I. I.

But in general the reform of 1861 was of great historical significance:

Market relations characteristic of a capitalist state began to develop.
New social strata of the population were formed - the bourgeoisie and the proletariat.
Russia took the path of transformation into a bourgeois monarchy, which was facilitated by the adoption by the government of other important reforms, including the Constitution.
Plants, factories, and industrial enterprises began to be rapidly built in order to stop people's dissatisfaction with their jobs. In this regard, there has been an increase in industrial production, which puts Russia on a par with the leading world powers.