§3. The crisis of the slave system

In ancient states it was impossible to obtain a sufficiently large surplus product in favor of the ruling group of society, to take it away from the direct producers. There was no need for irrigation facilities here, so there was no public labor service through which one could
would be to subjugate the free farmers. It was also impossible to force the peasants to give up their surplus product by force of arms: the weapons were still quite simple and accessible to the peasants themselves. Therefore, it was possible to exploit the labor of others only by capturing prisoners and turning them into slaves.
But a necessary condition for the development of the slave economy was constant victorious wars. To wage such wars, it was necessary to arm the entire population. Every man was a warrior and studied the art of war. And this, in turn, required a democratic system: when every citizen is armed, he can stand up for his rights. True, the order under some Roman emperors is not very associated with democracy. However, these emperors usually acted on behalf of the people.
And one more important circumstance: the classical slave system, such as in ancient states, could not exist among all peoples at once. In fact, the peoples defeated and subjugated by Rome were either at the stage of pre-class society or belonged to the Asian mode of production.
But in the 2nd-3rd centuries. n. e. The crisis of the slave system began: slave-owning production relations began to hamper the development of productive forces. This was reflected in the degradation of agriculture. There was a return from intensive industries to grain farming, and many lands were abandoned or turned into pastures. The wars of conquest were ending - Rome had already captured so much that it could not firmly keep the provinces under control. The influx of slaves decreased. Slaves became expensive, but an expensive slave cannot be exploited by direct coercion. The dear slave had to be protected and the productivity of his labor had to be increased using methods not of coercion, but of material interest.
Changes in the methods of exploitation of slaves can be traced in the writings of Roman agronomists.
Agronomist Cato (2nd century BC) considered the slave as a “talking instrument” - traditional for the slave-owning method of production. He recommended making sure that the slave did not find himself without work, so that he continuously brought income to the owner; reduce the cost of maintaining slaves to a minimum (feed them with the cheapest food, give them clothes once a year, and take away the old ones to make blankets for the same slaves), etc.
Completely different methods were proposed by the agronomist Varro (1st century BC). He said that in order to tie a slave to the estate, he must be allowed to marry and have children and have property. It is necessary to create conditions so that the slave can accumulate some property, then he will work better.
The agronomist Columella (1st century AD) went even further in this direction. He prohibited corporal punishment on his estate, believed that slaves should be consulted on all economic issues, etc.
As we see, these changes began even before the crisis of the slave system, before the beginning of the degradation of the economy. Then new forms of exploitation arose. In order to financially interest the slave, he was now increasingly allocated a peculium - an independent household. It could be a craft workshop, a plot of land. A slave in a peculium managed the household independently, only having to give a certain part of the income to the owner and pay him a quitrent.
A slave was now allowed to own property, which was not limited in size, so he could become rich and buy his own slaves. New laws appeared according to which it was not only impossible to kill a slave or destroy his family (i.e., sell family members to different hands), but it was also impossible to even take away the peculium from a slave. Large landowners began to rent out plots of their land to peasants. A peasant tenant was called a colon. Thus, in the depths of the slave system, feudal relations began to be born, because peculium and colonate were already forms corresponding to feudal relations.
But this could no longer save the Roman Empire. For the victory of feudal relations, peasants were needed, and the Roman peasants were ruined, and their ruin began during the transition to large slaveholding farms. Ruined peasants went to the cities, but not to find work there. Slave-owning relations fostered the idea that a free person was ashamed to work, that work was an activity for slaves. And in the cities the number of lumpen proletarians, people who did not work and lived on handouts from the nobility, grew. Only in Rome alone, already in the 1st century. BC e., there were about half a million of them.
Along with the peasantry, the victorious Roman army disappeared. Now the soldiers were recruited mainly from the same provincial barbarians against whom they were supposed to fight. They had nothing to protect.
Rome was falling into desolation. And when new barbarians began to approach from the north, Rome could not resist and fell under their blows. This happened in the 5th century. n. e.

The increase in labor productivity and the emergence of surplus product led to the birth of the state, classes, and civilization.
The states of the Ancient East differed significantly from the ancient slave states.
These were states with a special, Asian method of production, with a centralized state economic system:
In the East, slaves were not the main productive force of society, i.e. the production of material goods, agriculture and crafts was mainly carried out by people who were considered free.
Land in the East was in state or state-community ownership.
The state in the East had the form of “eastern despotism”, i.e. complete lack of rights for residents in the face of the state.
The combination of state ownership of land and state management of public works resulted in state ownership of the entire economy of the country. In other words, a centralized state economic system emerged.
In states such as “eastern despotism,” personal interests were subordinated to the public interests of the community, caste, and state. Community-state ownership of land hindered the development of personal entrepreneurship.
The classic example of an Asian-type state was ancient Egypt.
In ancient slave states, it was impossible to obtain a sufficiently large surplus product in favor of the ruling classes, to take it away from the direct producers. There was no need for irrigation systems here, so there was no public labor service and state ownership of land through which free farmers could be subjugated.
In ancient states, it was impossible to force peasants to give up their surplus product by force of arms, because...
Every free citizen of an ancient slave state was a warrior so that the state could wage wars and capture slaves.
The weapons were simple and accessible to the peasants themselves.
It was possible to exploit the labor of others only by capturing prisoners in war and turning them into slaves. Therefore, the slave system, which existed in ancient states, could not exist among all peoples at the same time.
All slaves brought to Rome from conquered lands belonged to peoples who were at the stage of pre-class society or belonged to the Asian mode of production.
BII - III centuries. AD The crisis of the slave system began - slave-owning production relations began to hamper the development of productive forces. This led to the emergence of new forms of exploitation.
In order to financially interest a slave, he was allocated a peculium. A slave in a peculium managed the household independently, only having to give a certain part of the income to the owner and pay him a quitrent.
The slave was now allowed to have property, and this property of the slave sometimes took such proportions that he bought his own slaves and gave money to his master. Thus, feudal relations began to emerge in the depths of the slave system.
If the socio-economic system of some peoples has come to a logical end, the previously lagging peoples do not repeat it in their development. Rome brought slavery to the point of absurdity, and subsequent states followed a different path of development.

More on the topic §3. The crisis of the slave system:

2.4. ANCIENT ECONOMIC SYSTEM. FORMATION OF A SLAVE ECONOMY
17. Classification of economic crises. Structural crises. Regional (country) and industry crises. Financial crises. Global financial crisis.

It was possible to exploit the labor of others in ancient states only by capturing prisoners in war and turning them into slaves. A captured person, finding himself in an alien, hostile environment, lost the ability to resist.

This method of exploitation had important consequences. Since the main condition for the development of the slave economy was constant victorious wars, in order to wage them the entire population had to be armed. Therefore, every man was a warrior and studied the art of war. The classic slave-owning system that existed in ancient states could not exist among all peoples at once: they could not all wage victorious wars. In fact, the countries defeated and subjugated by Rome were either at the stage of pre-class society, or belonged to the “Asiatic mode of production.”

In the 2nd–3rd centuries. AD The crisis of the slave system began - slave-owning production relations began to hamper the development of productive forces. This was reflected in the degradation of agriculture. There was a return from intensive industries to grain farming, and many lands were abandoned or turned into pastures. The wars of conquest were ending - Rome had already captured so much that it could not firmly keep the provinces under control. The influx of slaves decreased and they became expensive.

Entirely new forms of exploitation began to emerge. To interest a slave financially, he was allocated peculium – independent farming. It could be a craft workshop, a plot of land. The slave had to give a certain part of his income to the owner and pay him a quitrent.

The slave was allowed to have property, and this property sometimes became so large that the slave bought his own slaves and loaned money to his master. New laws appeared according to which it was not only impossible to kill a slave or destroy the slave’s family, i.e. sell family members into different hands, but it was impossible even to take peculium from a slave. In addition, large landowners began to rent out plots of their land to peasants. The peasant tenant was called column

Thus, in the depths of the slave system, feudal relations began to be born, because peculium and colonate were already forms corresponding to feudal relations.

But all this could no longer save the Roman Empire. For the victory of feudal relations, peasants were required, but the Roman peasants were ruined and their ruin began during the transition to large slaveholding farms. Ruined peasants went to the cities, but not to find work there. Slave-owning relations fostered the idea that it was shameful for a free person to work, that work was an activity for slaves. And in the cities the number of people who did not work and lived on handouts from the nobility grew.

Along with the peasantry, the victorious Roman army disappeared. Now the soldiers were recruited mainly from the same provincial barbarians against whom they were supposed to fight. They had nothing to protect.

Rome was falling into desolation. And when the barbarians began to approach from the north, Rome could not resist and fell under their blows. This happened in the 5th century. AD

The transition to feudalism took place differently in different societies. For some peoples it followed slavery and preceded capitalism. The Germans, Slavs, Arabs, Celts, and the peoples of tropical Africa passed the slaveholding stage of development, and their feudalism followed the primitive communal system.

The feudal system was formed on the following principles:

The dominance of large land ownership and the monopoly of feudal lords on it;

The direct producer - the peasant - conducts an independent individual farm on land received from the feudal lord for temporary or hereditary use (holding);

Non-economic coercion, which is a form of dependence of the direct commodity producer on the feudal lord;

Rental relations. The peasant paid the feudal lord rent for the use of the land; rent payments were collected in kind (corvée, quitrent) or in cash;

Class inferiority of peasants (from judicial and land to personal dependence);

The dominance of subsistence farming and small-scale production;

The predominance of the agricultural sector of the economy;

The primitive level of technology used in production (individual production skills are of particular importance);

The class character of society;

Hierarchical structure of the feudal class;

Corporate relations.

Feudal systems developed unevenly in different regions of Europe, Asia, and Africa. The process of the genesis of feudalism, uniform in its essence, had significant local and regional features in each country. As the main criterion for identifying the main models (types) of this process, we can take the intensity of the maturation of the elements of feudalism in the depths of the slaveholding or primitive communal system.

It was possible to exploit the labor of others in ancient states only by capturing prisoners in war and turning them into slaves.

A captured person, finding himself in an alien, hostile environment, lost the ability to resist.

This method of operation had important features. A necessary condition for the development of the slave economy was constant victorious wars. To wage such wars, arming the entire population was essential. Let us note that each man was a warrior and studied the art of war. And this, and in turn, demanded a democratic system: when every citizen is armed, he can stand up for his rights. True, the order under some Roman emperors is not very associated with democracy. Moreover, these emperors usually acted on behalf of the people. And one more important circumstance: the classic slave-owning system that existed in ancient states could not have existed among all peoples at once: they could not all wage victorious wars. In fact, those defeated and subjugated by Rome were either at the stage of a pre-class society, or belonged to the Asian mode of production. In the II-III centuries. AD The crisis of the slave system began—slave production relations began to hamper the development of the productive forces. This was reflected in the degradation of agriculture. There was a return from intensive industries to grain farming, many lands were abandoned or turned into pastures. The wars of conquest were ending - Rome had already captured so much that it could not firmly keep the provinces under control. The influx of slaves decreased. Slaves became expensive, but an expensive slave cannot be exploited by methods of direct coercion, sticks. The dear slave had to be protected and the productivity of his labor had to be increased using methods not of coercion, but of material interest.

Changes in the methods of exploitation of slaves can be traced in the writings of Roman agronomists. Agronomist of the 2nd century BC. Kato treated the slave as " talking weapon"traditionally for the slave-owning method of production. It is worth noting that he recommended ensuring that the slave would not find himself without work, and that he would continuously bring income to the owner. It is worth noting that he forced the costs of maintaining slaves to be reduced to a minimum: feeding them with the cheapest food, providing clothing once a year, and take away the old ones in order to make new clothes out of them for the same slaves. The agronomist proposed completely different methods Do not forget that Varro, who lived in the 1st century. BC. To tie a slave to the estate, he believed a slave should be allowed to marry, have children, have property. It is necessary to create conditions so that a slave can accumulate some property. It is worth noting that he prohibited punishment, believed that slaves should be consulted on all economic issues, etc.

Thus, these changes began even before the crisis of the slave system, before the beginning of the degradation of the economy. And then completely new forms of exploitation arose. To interest a slave financially, he is given peculium - independent farming. It could be a craft workshop, a plot of land. It is appropriate to note that the slave had to give a certain part of his income to the owner, pay him quitrent.

A slave was allowed to own property, and this property of the slave sometimes became such that the slave bought his own slaves and lent money to his master. New laws appeared, according to which it was not only impossible to kill a slave or destroy the slave’s family, i.e. sell family members into different hands, but it was impossible even to take peculia from a slave. Large landowners began to rent out plots of their land to peasants. A peasant tenant was called a colon.

Thus, in the depths of the slave system, feudal relations began to be born, because peculium and colonate were already forms that corresponded to feudal relations. But everything could no longer save the Roman Empire. It is worth saying that peasants were needed for the victory of feudal relations, but the Roman peasants were ruined and their ruin began even during the transition to large slaveholding farms. Ruined peasants went to the cities, but not in order to find work there. Slave relations fostered the idea that it is shameful for a free person to work, that work is an occupation for slaves. And in the cities the number of people who did not work and lived on handouts from the nobility grew.

Only in Rome alone already in the 1st century. BC. there were about half a million of them.

And with the peasantry, the victorious Roman army disappeared. Let us note that now the soldiers were recruited mainly from the same provincial barbarians against whom they had to fight. They had nothing to protect.

Rome was falling into desolation. In the Roman Forum, where the fate of nations had recently been decided, thick grass now grew and pigs grazed. And when new barbarians began to approach from the north, Rome could not resist and fell under their blows. This happened in the 5th century. AD

Like all peoples, the ancestors of the Eastern Slavs went through a primitive communal system that lasted a long time (IV millennium BC - 8th century AD). This was due to the following factors:

1) the dependence of primitive man on heat and water in the East Slavic lands had a special character with an abundance of water and a lack of heat, which required additional resources;

2) risky farming zones also increased labor costs even for simple reproduction;

3) the vastness of the territories, which created opportunities for the natural spread of the traditional way of life in new territories and simple means of escape from raids, led to physical isolation and the preservation of extensive development;

4) the abundance of forests led to the lack of the necessary technology for processing stone and metal, and fires easily destroyed the results of labor.

In the middle of the 1st millennium AD. among the Eastern Slavs there was a transition to a neighboring community. In the VI-VIII centuries. it was carried out by the southern tribes, who formed special associations - the Verv. The formation of a neighboring community - the world - among the northern tribes took place in the 7th-9th centuries. The level of economy of individual East Slavic tribes was different and was characterized by both the preservation of elements of appropriation and the formation of a producing economy (agricultural and pastoral crops). The evolution of agriculture from hoeing (homestead) to arable (field), due to the use of metal tools, contributed to the cultivation of a larger area and an increase in labor productivity. However, regional differences in farming systems remain. In the forest-steppe zone there is a fallow (fallow) farming system. In the forest zone, a slashing (burning) system was used. Both of them contributed to active land colonization. The Eastern Slavs were also engaged in settled cattle breeding. However, this type of activity was limited, so the supply of organic fertilizers was minimal and the yield was low.

In the VI-VIII centuries. Crafts among the Slavs begin to separate from agriculture. Cities and churchyards appeared - the centers of small districts and prototypes of future cities. Conditions are being created for the development of regular exchange not only between tribes, but also on the borders of the territory inhabited by the Eastern Slavs. Initially, the functions of money were performed by cattle, furs, amber, and foreign (Roman, Arab and Byzantine) coins.

The development of material production led to the formation of the prerequisites for a class system among the Eastern Slavs. The disintegration of tribal families and the emergence of a neighboring community contributed to freedom of exit and the acceptance of new members into the community. This made possible the existence of elements of patriarchal slavery. It was more strongly expressed among the Slavic tribes living in the south, that is, on the borders with the Greek city-states.

Slavery was temporary. Roman historians write about the possibility of ransom and return to their homeland or remaining free with the Slavs. The main sources of slavery are captivity and legal proceedings (debt, self-sale, birth from a slave). The Slavs did not have such a massive source as the purchase of slaves. At the same time, slaves were not so much a labor force as an export commodity.

The spread of slavery was hampered by the community and unfavorable natural, climatic and geographical conditions. Low labor productivity with an extensive type of economic growth, the seasonal nature of agricultural production, as well as the abundance of undeveloped territories, creating opportunities for escape, meant that a large concentration of slaves was inappropriate. Social inequality arising in the community acquired the character of a feudal class society, which at that time was established among many peoples of Europe and Asia.

But a necessary condition for the development of the slave economy was constant victorious wars. To wage such wars, it was necessary to arm the entire population. Every man was a warrior and studied the art of war. And this, in turn, required a democratic system: when every citizen is armed, he can stand up for his rights. True, the order under some Roman emperors is not very associated with democracy. However, these emperors usually acted on behalf of the people.

And one more important circumstance: the classical slave system, such as in ancient states, could not exist among all peoples at once. In fact, the peoples defeated and subjugated by Rome were either at the stage of pre-class society or belonged to the Asian mode of production.

But in the II-III centuries. AD, a crisis of the slave system began: slave-owning production relations began to hamper the development of productive forces. This was reflected in the degradation of agriculture. There was a return from intensive industries to grain farming, and many lands were abandoned or turned into pastures. The wars of conquest were ending - Rome had already captured so much that it could not firmly keep the provinces under control. The influx of slaves decreased. Slaves became expensive, but an expensive slave cannot be exploited by direct coercion. The dear slave had to be protected and the productivity of his labor had to be increased not by coercion, but by methods of material interest.

Changes in the methods of exploitation of slaves can be traced in the writings of Roman agronomists.

Agronomist Cato (2nd century BC) considered the slave as a “talking instrument” - traditional for the slave-owning method of production. He recommended making sure that the slave did not find himself without work, so that he continuously brought income to the owner; reduce the cost of maintaining slaves to a minimum (feed them with the cheapest food, give them clothes once a year, and take away the old ones to make blankets for the same slaves), etc.

Completely different methods were proposed by the agronomist Varro (1st century BC). He said that in order to tie a slave to the estate, he must be allowed to marry and have children and have property. It is necessary to create conditions so that the slave can accumulate some property, then he will work better,

As we see, these changes began even before the crisis of the slave system, before the beginning of the degradation of the economy. Then new forms of exploitation arose. In order to financially interest the slave, he was now increasingly allocated a peculium - an independent household. It could be a craft workshop, a plot of land. A slave in a peculium managed the household independently, only having to give a certain part of the income to the owner and pay him a quitrent.

A slave was now allowed to own property, which was not limited in size, so he could become rich and buy his own slaves. New laws have appeared

According to which it was not only impossible to kill a slave or destroy his family (that is, to sell family members to different hands), but it was also impossible to even take away the peculium from the slave. Large landowners began to rent out plots of their land to peasants. A peasant tenant was called a colon. Thus, in the depths of the slave system, feudal relations began to be born, because peculium and colonate were already forms corresponding to feudal relations.

But this could no longer save the Roman Empire. For the victory of feudal relations, peasants were needed, and the Roman peasants were ruined, and their ruin began during the transition to large slaveholding farms. Ruined peasants went to the cities, but not to find work there. Slave-owning relations fostered the idea that a free person was ashamed to work, that work was an activity for slaves. And in the cities the number of lumpen proletarians, people who did not work and lived on handouts from the nobility, grew. Only in Rome alone, already in the 1st century. BC e., there were about half a million of them.

Rome was falling into desolation. And when new barbarians began to approach from the north, Rome could not resist and fell under their blows. This happened in the 5th century. n. e.

The increase in labor productivity and the emergence of surplus product led to the birth of the state, classes, and civilization.

The states of the Ancient East differed significantly from the ancient slave states. These were states with a special, Asian method of production, with a centralized state economic system.

1. In the East, slaves were not the main productive force of society, i.e., the production of material goods, agriculture and crafts were mainly carried out by people who were considered free.

2. Land in the East was in state or state-community ownership.

3. The state in the East had the form of “eastern despotism,” that is, the complete lack of rights of residents in the face of the state.

The combination of state ownership of land and state management of public works resulted in state ownership of the entire economy of the country. In other words, a centralized state economic system emerged.

In states such as “eastern despotism,” the interests of the individual were subordinated to the public—the interests of the community, caste, and state. Community-state ownership of land hindered the development of personal entrepreneurship.

Ancient Egypt was a classic example of an Asian type of state.

In ancient slave states, it was impossible to obtain a sufficiently large surplus product in favor of the ruling classes, to take it away from the direct producers. There was no need for irrigation systems here, so there was no public labor service and state ownership of land through which free farmers could be subjugated.

In ancient states, it was impossible to force peasants to give up surplus product by force of arms, because:

1) every free citizen of the ancient slave state was a warrior so that the state could wage wars and capture slaves;

2) the weapons were simple and accessible to the peasants themselves.

It was possible to exploit the labor of others only by capturing prisoners in war and turning them into slaves. Therefore, the slave system, which existed in ancient states, could not exist among all peoples at the same time.

All slaves brought to Rome from conquered lands belonged to peoples who were at the stage of pre-class society or belonged to the Asian mode of production.

In the II-III centuries. n. e. The crisis of the slave system began - slave-owning production relations began to hamper the development of productive forces. This led to the emergence of new forms of exploitation.

In order to financially interest a slave, he was allocated a peculium. A slave in a peculium managed the household independently, only having to give a certain part of the income to the owner and pay him a quitrent.

The slave was now allowed to have property, and this property of the slave sometimes took such proportions that he bought his own slaves and gave money to his master. Thus, feudal relations began to emerge in the depths of the slave system.

If the socio-economic system of some peoples has come to a logical end, the previously lagging peoples do not repeat it in their development. Rome brought slavery to the point of absurdity, and subsequent states followed a different path of development