With the coming to power of the new emperor, Nicholas II, the autocracy in Russia underwent significant changes. And most of them passed through the prism of the personal perception of the last of the Romanovs.
By the end of the 19th century, it became obvious that autocracy had outlived its usefulness, turning into an outdated form of government that hampered the development of the country. Among the most noticeable negative features of the existing form of government are the bloated bureaucratic apparatus, the lack of a flexible system of local self-government, which gave rise to the forced growth of supervisory and executive bodies, and a sharp stratification of society. In an attempt to bring changes to the existing system of government, several reforms were undertaken to limit the autocracy.
Such reforms include elections to the State Duma. Some legislative functions of the central government were transferred to this body. An agrarian reform was initiated, the purpose of which was to revise land relations.
Evolution of autocracy
Reasons for existence in Russia at the beginning of the 20th century. a huge army of bureaucrats:
| At the beginning of the 20th century. Important events took place in the life of Russia: State Duma elected agrarian reform started peace signed with Japan |
“The Russian Empire is governed on the solid foundations of positive laws, institutions and charters emanating from the Autocratic government...” This statement is typical for an absolute monarchy | |
Did there exist inside the Russian Empire at the beginning of the 20th century? national regions that had state autonomy? Grand Duchy of Finland and Kingdom of Poland |
The socio-economic situation of the Russian Empire at the turn of the 19th-20th centuries
High level | Average level | Low level |
|---|---|---|
Processes of economic monopolization | Rapid but chaotic destruction of the patriarchal structure | Education |
Centralization and concentration of production and labor. (Russia has surpassed all countries in the world) | A sharp increase in the mass of marginalized and lumpen people. | Long absence of representative government |
At the turn of the 19th and 20th centuries in the Russian economy, the government | Russian economy at the beginning of the 20th century. characterized by high | The liberation of the peasants placed on them an unbearable burden of payments and duties, depletion of productive forces, and inhibition of social progress. |
Lack of a stable middle class and a base for parliamentarism. |
||
The weakness of the Russian bourgeoisie. Only by the beginning of the First World War did Russian entrepreneurs strengthen their influence in the domestic economy. |
||
Funds for modernization were siphoned out of the village. |
||
The main feature of the Russian labor movement of 1900-1903. is: predominance of political demands participation of the proletariat only in the largest industrial centers spontaneity and disorganization spread from national outskirts to the center of the country | Agriculture in Russia at the beginning of the 20th century. (until 1905) was characterized by the predominance of landownership peasant land shortage agrarian overpopulation of the village |
99. Read an excerpt from the appeal of Moscow manufacturers in the 1840s. to the government:
"...in the conditions of replacement of manual needs by the automatic action of mechanics, the worker is required not only manual dexterity, but also mental ability, which ordinary workers do not show..."
The phenomenon in question is called the "__industrial revolution".
100. Part of the peasant land that was transferred to the landowner during the peasant reform of 1861 was called _________________segment_______________.
101. Name of the author of the theory of “official nationality”, Minister of Public Education in 1839–1844. – ________________Uvarov_____________________.
102. The period of work of the I - IV State Dumas in pre-revolutionary Russia:
D) 1906–1917
104. During the revolution of 1905–1907. happened:
B) establishment of the State Duma
105. The creation of:
B) State Duma
106. Lease is called:
C) transfer of land for independent use for a fee
107. Factor that slowed down the development of capitalism in Russian agriculture:
A) agricultural overpopulation
108. The purpose of the Stolypin agrarian reform:
109. The words that the law should be oriented towards “the intelligent and strong, and not the weak and drunken. It is impossible to put barriers to the enrichment of the strong - so that the weak share poverty with him” - belong to:
B) P.A. Stolypin
110. The monarchist party that arose during the revolution of 1905–1907:
A) "Union of the Russian People"
111. At the beginning of the 20th century, the working day for an adult worker in most factories in Russia was:
B) more than 10 hours
B) introduction of political freedoms
113. At the beginning of the 20th century, the socialist movement in Russia was represented by:
114. The Union of the Russian People, which emerged in 1905, put forward the demand:
A) maintaining autocracy
115. Phenomena that characterized the process of development of capitalism in Russia at the end of the 19th and beginning of the 20th centuries:
B) high rates of development of industrial production
D) high level of concentration of production in industry
116. At the beginning of the 20th century in Russia, a party was formed earlier than others:
B) Social Revolutionaries
117. In terms of ideological orientation, the liberal party of the early twentieth century can be considered a party:
D) cadets
118. In terms of ideological orientation, a socialist party of the early twentieth century can be considered a party:
B) Mensheviks
119. In terms of ideological orientation, the socialist party of the early twentieth century can be considered the party:
B) Social Revolutionaries
A) liberal
121. The reason for the “June Third” coup was the dissatisfaction of the tsar and the government with the position of the Second State Duma on the issue:
B) agricultural
122. The project on the agrarian question in the First Duma, which involved the purchase of part of the landowners' lands "at a fair valuation", belonged to:
B) labor group
123. The statement: “The Russian Empire is governed on the solid foundations of positive laws, institutions and statutes emanating from the Autocratic power...” is characteristic of the monarchy:
B) absolute
124. At the beginning of the twentieth century until 1905 in Russia:
A) landownership was preserved
125. At the beginning of the twentieth century, the leader of the Socialist Revolutionary Party was:
D) V.M. Chernov
126. The Zemstvo movement at the beginning of the twentieth century set the goal:
D) creation of the highest non-estate body of representative power
127. The majority of seats in the First State Duma were received by:
A) cadets
128. Most of the deputies from the peasant curia entered the First State Duma because:
A) the Social Democrats supported the peasant deputies
129. Fill in the missing words. From the memoirs of S.Yu. Witte:
“...“Herd management” of peasants through the community was the most convenient for the bureaucracy. The authorities did not have to reach out to each individual peasant, certain duties were assigned to the community... It was especially important that redemption payments were collected from the community, and not from an individual yard "All members of the community were bound by a mutual responsibility."
130. Read an excerpt from the speech and name its author: “Let everyone know that, devoting all my strength to the good of the people, I will protect the principles of autocracy as firmly and steadily as my unforgettable late parent guarded it.”
Nikolay 2
131. Set the correct match:
Why this article will be interesting to you:
The names of the participants in the conspiracy against the Tsar have been revealed. How did the conspirators deceive Nicholas II and the entire Russian people?
Lawyer A.Yu. Sorokin: “The Holy Tsar-Martyr remained the legitimate Sovereign of the Russian Empire until his martyrdom on July 17, 1918.”
What exactly were the conspirators afraid of in the Code of Basic State Laws of April 23, 1906?
According to Article 58 of the State Labor Law, “Emperor Nicholas II, at the Holy Coronation and Confirmation, accepted Autocracy from God as a “great service,” and it was not in his royal power to refuse it.”
The emperor was openly threatened with the murder of his son and the death of the entire dynasty.
Was the Provisional Government the legal authority or was Russia captured by ordinary bandits?
One of the amazing features of Russian history is that we know least about the events closest to our days. However, upon mature reflection, we can conclude that there is nothing surprising in this. It’s just that truthful information about what happened before the eyes of still-living eyewitnesses is more relevant in modern political life, and, therefore, more dangerous for today’s liberal-democratic balancing act, trying to hide the truth for the sake of momentary, self-interested interests.
This fully applies to the so-called. "abdication" of Emperor Nicholas II. Only 90 years have passed since the first days of March 1917 (article written in 2009 – ed.), but the “fact of renunciation” is recognized by almost everyone as obvious and not worthy of any attention or time. “Renunciation” has already become an axiom of Russian history.
But we will still allow ourselves to attempt to assess the actions of the Sovereign... and, moreover, a legal assessment, as the most impartial.
As is known, before March 1, 1917, the “progressive public”, together with the highest army generals, demanded from the Autocrat a “responsible ministry” or, in another interpretation, a “ministry of public trust.” As one of the most active conspirators, the leader of the cadet faction in the State Duma P.N. Milyukov admitted, there was no fundamental difference between these revolutionary “formulas,” since they were still talking about the same circle of people, “responsible ministers.” It’s just that the first formula, supported, in particular, by the Chairman of the State Duma M.V. Rodzianko, required a government responsible to legislative institutions - the State Duma and the State Council. The formula of the “Ministry of Public Trust”, cultivated by Miliukov, expanded the circle of institutions to which ministers were supposed to be “responsible”, including the All-Zemsky Union headed by Prince G.E. Lvov, Military-Industrial Committees headed by the former Chairman of the Third Duma , the Moscow “non-trading merchant” A.I. Guchkov and other self-proclaimed organizations, whose representatives failed by 1917 to obtain the legal right to be called “representatives of the people.” In any case, the demand was for the creation of a government not answerable to the Emperor.
The Holy Tsar-Martyr remained the legitimate Sovereign of the Russian Empire until his martyrdom on July 17, 1918.
It’s amazing, but all these professors, private assistant professors, sworn attorneys and other representatives of the “educated society” did not bother to first ask at least the question of the legality of presenting such a demand and the possibility, from a legal point of view, of its satisfaction. The blindness of the charms of Western “democracy” was so great that the question of the legality, the legitimacy of such statements, with rare, and even then not enough, to put it mildly, persistent exceptions, did not even arise. And the situation was that There simply could not be a government that was not responsible to the Supreme Power in the Russian Empire. In accordance with Art. 10 Basic State Laws (OGZ), which are the main source (if you want, the autocratic constitution) of Russian imperial law, “the power of administration in its entirety belongs to the Sovereign Emperor; ...in matters of government of the subordinate, a certain degree of power is handed over from Him". This situation excludes the possibility of the existence of any civil servants who are not responsible, including up to and including dismissal, to the Monarch. That is why Art. 17 of the Law establishes the provision that “The Sovereign Emperor appoints and dismisses the Chairman of the Council of Ministers, Ministers and Chief Administrators of individual units”. Article 123 explicitly states: “The Chairman of the Council of Ministers, Ministers and Chief Managers of individual units are responsible to the Sovereign Emperor,” while “each of them is individually responsible for his actions and orders”.
"What is the problem? - you ask, “It was necessary to change the State laws, and everything would be in order.” Not at all. It was precisely these laws that were impossible to change under those conditions.
In accordance with Art. 84 OGZ “The Russian Empire is governed on the firm basis of laws issued in the prescribed manner.” According to Art. 92 “Legislative resolutions are not subject to promulgation if the procedure for their publication (not publication, of course, but adoption - A.S.) does not comply with the provisions of these Fundamental Laws”. Article 91 says that laws "before publication", and this was carried out for general information by the Governing Senate, "not put into action". It is precisely the procedure for adopting new Basic Laws or introducing amendments and additions to them that could not be, and was not in fact, observed.
According to Art. 8 OGZ were subject to revision "solely on initiative" Sovereign Emperor. However, the initiative to change the existing system, without a doubt, did not come from him. Moreover, according to Art. 86 OGZ of the Russian Empire “no new law can follow without the approval of the State Council and the State Duma”. The latter’s classes, as is known, were suspended on February 27, 1917, without even starting. Thus, there could be no prior approval of the chambers participating in the legislation. But the subsequent approval of the law by the Monarch was also required.
During the termination of the State Duma, changes to the State Duma, according to Art. 87, could not be introduced even in an emergency manner, including by the Sovereign himself.
But the main thing is what “public figures” could never understand. The Supreme Autocratic power belongs to the All-Russian Emperor. This means that the Russian monarchy, in principle, cannot become “constitutional”. The constitutional “monarchy”, so dear to the hearts of many “progressive” monarchists, is no longer a monarchy at all, but a beautiful screen for behind-the-scenes republican political gesheft. The Russian monarch did not have the right to limit his power, transfer the right to legislate, form and control the activities of the government. As the famous Russian historian N. Karamzin wrote to Emperor Alexander I: “You can do everything, but you cannot legally limit your power.”
Yes, yes, the Emperor of the greatest in the twentieth century. The empire could not do whatever it wanted. His power was limited, but not by human will, but by the Orthodox faith, the guardian of which the Sovereign was in accordance with Art. 64 Basic Laws. The autocratic-monarchical form of government constitutes one of the main principles of the Christian teaching about the state. Here is how St. Philaret of Moscow (Drozdov) writes about this: “Just as the sky is indisputably better than the earth and the heavenly is better than the earthly, then just as indisputably the best on earth should be recognized as that which is built in the image of the heavenly, as was said to Moses the seer of God: see , may you create everything according to the image shown to you on the mountain (Ex., 25, 40), that is, at the height of the vision of God. In accordance with this, God, in the image of His heavenly unity of command, established a king on earth; in the image of His heavenly omnipotence, he created an autocratic king on earth; in the image of his eternal kingdom, which continues from century to century, he has established a hereditary king on earth.”
The Church-State Council of 1613, as an instrument for the restoration of God-lawful power in a period of anarchy, reflected the deep popular conviction that hereditary Autocracy is a great shrine, an object of our political faith, Russian dogma, the only reliable protection from external and internal disasters in the future. Our holy fathers taught that the man-made willfulness of the crowd in choosing the form of government and the content of Russian statehood is theomachism.
Emperor Nicholas II, at the Holy Coronation and Confirmation, accepted Autocracy from God as a “great service” (Note 2 to Article 58 of the State Law), and it was not in his royal power to refuse it.
Could the fanatical Russian-speaking “dandies” who imagined themselves to be the spokesmen of the will of the Russian people understand this? Could they have realized that the Christian crowning commandments, including “Fear God, honor the king” (1 Pet. 2:17), “Do not touch My anointed” (1 Chron. 16:22), are an integral and irrevocable part of Russian state law?
But Russian imperial legislation, which, unlike republican legislation, does not ignore the existence of God, but, on the contrary, derives the very principle of power from the fact of this existence, in Art. 4 OGZ initially enshrines the principle that one must obey the Tsarist authority “God Himself commands for conscience”(see also Rom. 13:5). But the words “God” and “conscience” were an empty phrase for these “advanced” figures who supposedly represented the will of the Orthodox Russian people.
All this suggests that the telegram sent on behalf of the Sovereign (although there are doubts that it was sent on his behalf), in which Nicholas II allegedly agrees to the demand for a “responsible ministry” and instructs the Chairman of the closed State Duma Rodzianko to form a cabinet “ of persons enjoying the trust of all of Russia” has no legal significance. So the works of the nameless drafters of this “manifesto”, sent from the Headquarters of the Supreme Commander-in-Chief to the headquarters of the Northern Front, turned out to be useless.
In the same way, documents called acts or manifestos of renunciation that nevertheless retain historical value have no legal significance.
As is known, after the conversation between the commander of the Northern Front, General Ruzsky, and Rodzianko on the night of March 1-2, 1917, the conspirators openly demanded the abdication of the Sovereign. In the first half of the day on March 2, General Alekseev and General A.S. Lukomsky organized the presentation to the Sovereign of the “loyal subject” demand for abdication by all commanders-in-chief of the fronts: generals Brusilov, Evert, Sakharov and Grand Duke Nikolai Nikolaevich. Having secured a mutual guarantee, General Ruzsky on March 2, for two hours, “persuaded” the Emperor to abdicate, even allowing himself phrases like: “Well, make up your mind.” As a result, at 3 pm on March 2, 1917, the Tsar signed a telegram agreeing to abdicate in favor of his son Tsarevich Alexei.
It is noteworthy that General Ruzsky did not send this telegram, and when the Emperor, having changed his mind, demanded the return of the unsent telegram, he refused to carry out the Emperor’s order. It’s understandable, because this was the only “document” about renunciation so far. If Ruzsky had returned him to the Sovereign, the conspirators might not have had any written evidence of the Sovereign’s attitude towards abdication at all.
There are two versions of this document.
According to most sources, the text of the telegram was as follows:
“To the Chairman of the State. Duma Peter. There is no sacrifice that I would not make in the name of the real good and for the salvation of my dear Mother Russia. Therefore, I am ready to abdicate the Throne in favor of my Son, so that he will remain with us until he comes of age under the regency of my brother, Grand Duke Mikhail Alexandrovich. Nikolai."
However, a number of historians believe that this telegram was transmitted by the Emperor to General Alekseev on March 3, 1917 in Mogilev, when the Emperor learned that Grand Duke Mikhail Alexandrovich did not accept the Throne. According to this version, General Alekseev did not send this telegram so as “not to confuse minds.”
“In a difficult time of severe trials sent down for Russia, we, not having the strength to lead the Empire out of the grave turmoil experienced by the country in the face of an external enemy, considered it good, meeting the wishes of the Russian people, to lay down the burden of the power entrusted to us from God.
In the name of the greatness of the beloved Russian people and victory over the fierce enemy, we invoke God’s blessing on our son, in whose favor we abdicate our throne. Until he comes of age, our brother Mikhail Alexandrovich will serve as regent.”
Let's try to evaluate these documents.
The fact is that The concept of abdication of the Throne is not known at all to the Russian Basic State Laws. This is what the home-grown Robespierres did not take into account, “tormented” by the question: “Does Nicholas have the right to abdicate his son in favor of Grand Duke Mikhail Alexandrovich?”
The only article in the UPL that mentions the right to renounce is Art. 37. But she speaks of the right of abdication not of the reigning monarch, but only of the heirs. It directly speaks of the freedom to “renounce” the right, “under the operation of the rules depicted above regarding the order of succession to the Throne.” And this freedom is limited only to those cases “when there will be no difficulty in the further inheritance of the Throne”. In other words, even the inheritance of the Throne in certain cases is understood as an obligation, the refusal of which is not allowed.
It may be objected that even if the right to abdicate the Throne was not provided for by the Laws, then, guided by the principle “everything that is not prohibited is permitted,” the Emperor could still abdicate. However, this principle is the beginning of civil, rather than state, law regulating property turnover. In relation to the Supreme Power, relations of “subordination”, it is not applicable.
Considering that the enormous rights given by God to the Sovereign in inextricable connection with his duty, the duty of the Royal service, as well as the fact of anointing, it should be recognized that the refusal of duty, and duty before God, is completely unacceptable from a secular point of view, including and civil law, nor from the point of view of canon law, at least, without the appropriate prior permission, if not of the Church Council, then, in any case, of the Holy Synod. As is known, there was no such permission.
Firstly, during the abdication of Emperor Peter III, there were no written laws on succession to the Throne, except for the “Charter” of Emperor Peter I, which, by the way, allows not to abdicate the Throne, but to bequeath it. The rules on succession to the throne, which made up Chapter II of the first section of the Code of UGC, were adopted only by Emperor Paul I.
Secondly, the possibility of taking into account the abdication of non-Orthodox monarchs when considering the beginnings of the Russian Autocracy is very doubtful, to say the least.
At the same time, it should be taken into account that the cited Laws establish the only basis for the Heir to occupy the Throne - according to Art. 53 heir ascends to the Throne "after the death of the Emperor". There are no other grounds for occupying the Russian Imperial Throne.
Art. says the same thing. 43, 44 and 52, providing for the appointment of a Ruler and Guardian, as well as the appointment of the Council of the Government, in the case where, precisely after the death of the Emperor, the Throne passes to a minor heir.
Therefore abdication of the Throne under Russian imperial law, as already mentioned, not changed by anyone, impossible in principle.
There are, in addition to this, a number of private comments regarding these “documents of renunciation.”
So, both telegrams talk about the regency. But the concept of “regency” is not known to the Laws. Chapter three, “On the coming of age of the Sovereign Emperor, on government and guardianship,” provides for the appointment of a Ruler and Guardian until the Emperor reaches the age of 16 (Article 41). Moreover, its appointment is carried out in accordance with Art. 43, the reigning Emperor and precisely "in case of His death". Moreover, Art. 44 provides that “the government of the state and the custody of the person of the Emperor in childhood belongs to the father and mother”. Thus, what is called “regency” in the telegrams, if it still means “government and guardianship,” could only be established in the event of the death of Nicholas II. The assignment of “governments” to Grand Duke Mikhail Alexandrovich, since the parents of the Heir Tsarevich were alive, is generally illegal.
Now let's move on to the analysis of the most famous text of “renunciation”. Here is the full text:
"Bid. To the Chief of Staff. During the days of the great struggle with an external enemy, who had been striving to enslave our Motherland for almost three years, the Lord God was pleased to send Russia a new ordeal. The outbreak of internal popular unrest threatens to have a disastrous effect on the further conduct of the stubborn war. The fate of Russia, the honor of our heroic army, the good of the people, the entire future of our dear Fatherland demand that the war be brought to a victorious end at all costs. The cruel enemy is straining his last strength, and the hour is already approaching when our valiant army, together with our glorious allies, will be able to finally break the enemy. In these decisive days in the life of Russia, We considered it a duty of conscience to facilitate our people’s close unity and rallying of all the people’s forces for the speedy achievement of victory, and, in agreement with the State Duma, We recognized it as good to renounce the Throne of the Russian State and relinquish the Supreme Power. Not wanting to part with Our beloved Son, We pass on Our heritage to Our Brother Grand Duke Mikhail Alexandrovich and bless Him for his accession to the Throne of the Russian State. We command Our Brother to rule over state affairs in complete and inviolable unity with the representatives of the people in legislative institutions, on those principles that will be established by them, having taken an inviolable oath to that effect. In the name of our beloved Motherland, we call on all the faithful sons of the Fatherland to fulfill their holy duty to Him, to obey the Tsar in difficult times of national trials and to help Him, together with the representatives of the people, lead the Russian State onto the path of victory, prosperity and glory. May the Lord God help Russia.
There is some uncertainty regarding the appearance of this document. V.V. Shulgin in his memoirs claims that the text was completely written by the Sovereign himself even before the arrival of V.V. Shulgin and A.I. Guchkov in Pskov on the evening of March 2, 1917. However, the idea of abdicating the Throne in favor of the Grand Duke is unlikely Mikhail Alexandrovich arose from Nicholas II before the arrival of these “delegates”. The fact is that the right of Tsarevich Alexei Nikolaevich to inherit the throne “above all” was completely obvious. Hemophilia, which the Tsarevich was ill with, could not serve as the only basis for such a decision.
There was, most likely, another circumstance here.
As we have seen, Emperor Nicholas II wanted Alexei Nikolaevich to remain with him until he came of age, as provided for by the Basic State Laws. However, this situation was completely unacceptable for the conspirators. According to the memoirs of General A.S. Lukomsky, on March 2, 1917, after a conversation with A.I. Guchkov and V.V. Shulgin, the Emperor wanted to sign an abdication in favor of the heir. But when asked whether it would be possible for him to live in Crimea, A.I. Guchkov replied that the Emperor would have to immediately go abroad. “Then can I take the heir with me?” – asked the Emperor. Guchkov replied that “the new Sovereign under the regent must remain in Russia.”
Thus, the conspirators actually demanded abdication in favor of Mikhail Alexandrovich. We have already said that such a demand, as well as renunciation as such, is illegal and has no legal significance. The conspirators themselves recognized the illegality of abdication “bypassing” Alexei Nikolaevich. But a minor Emperor cannot abdicate the Throne or “swear allegiance to the constitution.” Consequently, the creation, as it seemed to them, of a “legal vacuum” already planned by the traitors as a result of the “abdication” of Mikhail Alexandrovich, would have been impossible. Hence the conclusion - the only possibility of establishing a constitutional “monarchy” or the speedy proclamation of Russia as a republic was, in the event of abdication in favor of Alexei Nikolaevich, regicide. This, quite understandably, deprived “persons invested with the country’s trust” of any appearance of legal succession. Therefore, the revolutionaries completely ignored the law. But dura lex est lex, the law is harsh, but it is the law. “Renunciation” in favor of Grand Duke Mikhail Alexandrovich was, of course, completely illegal.
According to Art. 39 Basic State Laws “The Emperor or Empress who inherits the Throne, upon accession to it and anointing, undertakes to sacredly observe... the laws on the succession to the Throne.”
Article 25 states that “The Imperial Russian Throne is hereditary”, and Article 28 states that “the inheritance of the Throne belongs first of all to the eldest son of the reigning Emperor”. All Members of the Imperial House also swear to observe this right of inheritance (Article 206 of the Code of Basic State Laws). To the oath “to allegiance of allegiance to the enthroned Emperor and His legitimate Heir, even if he was not named in the manifesto” about accession to the Throne, are given “in general, all male subjects who have reached the age of twenty, of every rank and title”(Note 2 to Art. 55).
Consequently, while the Heir Tsarevich Alexei Nikolaevich was alive, the Throne, in any case, could not pass to Grand Duke Mikhail Alexandrovich. The Grand Duke, having sworn allegiance to the Heir of Nicholas II and the laws on the succession to the Throne, had no right to officially speak out on the issue of occupying the Throne, except, of course, about non-acceptance of the Throne due to a violation of the Law. The entire Russian people were obliged to the same loyalty of citizenship.
Equally legally insignificant are the words invented by the Sovereign himself about abdication “in agreement with the State Duma” and about the right of legislative institutions to establish principles that should guide Mikhail Alexandrovich in managing “state affairs.” They, like the “responsible ministry,” contradict the principle of the inevitability of Autocracy. Regarding the taking of an inviolable oath, it is generally unclear who should take it: Mikhail Alexandrovich or “representatives of the people.”
Let us also pay attention to the form of this document. This, as we see, was addressed on March 2, 1917, not to “all our loyal subjects,” as it should be, but to Headquarters, the chief of staff of the Supreme Commander-in-Chief, traitor general Alekseev, signed, by the way, in pencil.
Basic State Laws provide that even the abdication of a person entitled to inherit the Throne becomes irrevocable only when it is made public, as already mentioned, in accordance with Art. 91 by the Governing Senate, and turned into law.
Consequently, this, so to speak, “state document,” which was later falsely called a “manifesto” of renunciation, did not acquire the force of law, and, as was discussed earlier, could not acquire it.
In conclusion, we note one more very important, if not the main, circumstance, along with the violation of the foundations of law and order established by law, the rules for the adoption, publication and execution of the considered “documents”.
The Emperor was almost openly threatened with the murder of his Son and the death of the entire dynasty. Truly, “treason, cowardice and deceit” reigned all around.
The main condition for recognizing an act as having legal significance is “freedom of will”.
V.V. Shulgin, in revolutionary blindness, believed that “in case of renunciation... there will be no revolution (that’s it, “as if”). The sovereign will abdicate the throne of his own free will, power will pass to the regent, who will appoint a new government. The State Duma, which obeyed the decree of dissolution and took over power (that’s how it “submitted”)... will transfer power to this new government.”
And it is precisely the absence of this very “own” desire that finally convinces of the legal insignificance of all these “acts” and “manifestos”.
If an action, and this is true not only for civil legal relations, is committed under the influence of violence, threat, deception, delusion or a combination of difficult circumstances, then the actual will of the actor himself to commit the corresponding action is absent, and the expression of will that takes place reflects the will of another person – in case of violence or threat, or the will of the actor in other cases is formed under the influence of circumstances that distort his true will.
All these circumstances took place during the “abdication” of Emperor Nicholas II, as well as Grand Duke Mikhail Alexandrovich.
The Emperor was misled regarding the commitment of the Duma members to the “inviolability of the monarchical principle” proclaimed in the appeal of the Provisional Committee. The Minister of War, General Belyaev, without taking any measures to restore order, irresponsibly telegraphed “about calm.” The commander of the Petrograd Military District, General Khabalov, proposed raising bridges as a way to pacify the rebellion of spare parts - this is when trams ran on the ice of the Neva. Naval Minister Grigorovich, in order to “preserve valuable shipbuilding maps,” demanded the withdrawal of troops loyal to the Sovereign from the Admiralty. The imperial train was not allowed into Petrograd. The Emperor was not allowed near the telegraph and telephone - the headquarters of the Northern Front had direct telephone and telegraph communication with Petrograd. The orders of the Supreme Commander-in-Chief were sabotaged and even canceled without His knowledge. Both Rodzianko and Alekseev all shamelessly lied to the Tsar about the true situation in the capital, and yet, according to the admission of Bublikov, who seized the Ministry of Railways, one division was enough to suppress the rebellion; in the Tauride Palace, when news of the movement of troops to Petrograd was reported, panic arose several times; when random shots were fired on the street, “revolutionary soldiers” jumped out of the windows.
The Tsar was deceived in the most vile way both regarding the real mood of the Petrograd population, which allegedly opposed the Tsar personally, and regarding the troops, among which there were supposedly no reliable units. The august family, unable to leave Tsarskoye Selo due to the illness of their children, was exposed to the greatest danger. Well, of course, the threat of internal unrest during the intense struggle with the external enemy, on the eve of victory, testified to the confluence of difficult circumstances, which are directly mentioned in the telegram of March 2, 1917. The Emperor was almost openly threatened with the murder of his Son and the death of the entire dynasty. Truly, “treason, cowardice and deceit” reigned all around.
The circumstances surrounding Grand Duke Mikhail Alexandrovich's decision to make the decision are interesting. On March 3, 1917, Prince Lvov, Guchkov, Rodzianko, Milyukov, Kerensky, Nekrasov, Efremov, Rzhevsky, Bublikov Tereshchenko, Shidlovsky, Shulgin arrived at house No. 12 on Millionnaya Street in Petrograd, where the Grand Duke was located. , Nabokov, Nolde and other persons and convinced him to renounce the throne in favor of the people, who would subsequently elect him or someone else. At the same time, Kerensky stated: “I have no right to hide here what dangers you personally are exposed to if you decide to take the throne... In any case... I cannot vouch for the life of Your Highness!..”
All this clearly indicates that the renunciation did not take place. The Holy Tsar-Martyr remained the legitimate Sovereign of the Russian Empire until his martyrdom on July 17, 1918.
The power of the Provisional Government, as well as the power of its “heirs”, is usurped power, illegal power. Since March 2, 1917, throughout the entire territory of the Russian Empire, not a single moment has existed and does not exist of any kind or type (“branch”) of state power that could lay claim to any kind or type of legal continuity. All available documentary acts of transfer of power from its legal holders, renunciation of it, etc. – all this, from a legal point of view, does not withstand the most lenient criticism. Russia to this day is an Autocratic Orthodox Monarchy. Every “voter” or his “chosen one” is only a link in the relay race of criminals, the continuation of which is the key to the disastrous success achieved 85 years ago.
In 1613, the Russian People swore allegiance to the House of Romanov until the end of time, “firmly and indestructibly throughout the preceding years, throughout generations and generations.” “And whoever does not want to listen to this Council Code... according to the sacred rules of the holy Apostles and the Seven Ecumenical Councils of the Holy Father and Local... will be deposed, and excommunicated from the Church of God, as a schismatic of the Church of God and all Orthodox Christianity...”.
Text of the speech at the conference “There was no renunciation? (study of the circumstances of the February coup of 1917)", Moscow, November 7, 2009. The text is abbreviated.
Member of the Russian Imperial Union-Order since 2001. Senior Companion-Leader. In 2005, elected Member of the Supreme Council of RIS-O. Since 2006, Secretary General of RIS-O.
The proposed project expresses the views of Russian liberals (the right wing of the future Kadet Party). Its main author is the famous lawyer Sergei Andreevich Muromtsev (1850-1910). He was the son of a colonel and an Oryol landowner, graduated from the Faculty of Law of Moscow University, served as its associate professor (1875-1877), extraordinary (1877-1878) and ordinary (1878-1884) professor, was secretary of the Faculty of Law (1880-1884) and vice-rector ( 1880-1881). Since the 1870s was a member of the Law Society at the university, in 1880-1899 he was its chairman, in 1878-1892 he was co-editor of the journal "Legal Bulletin", and actively published in other periodicals. He advocated the continuation of the Great Reforms. In 1884 Muromtsev was dismissed from the university by the Minister of Public Education I.D. Delyanov, dissatisfied with the professor’s social activities. After this, Muromtsev practiced law, and also served as a zemstvo and city councilor in Moscow and the Tula province, and was chairman of the financial commission of the Moscow provincial zemstvo assembly. Since 1903, he participated in the zemstvo liberal movement, in 1905 he joined the Constitutional Democratic Party and was elected to its Central Committee, but was not part of its narrow leadership.
In 1906, Muromtsev was elected to the First State Duma from Moscow and, at the proposal of the cadet faction, became its chairman. He made a huge contribution to the organization of its work and was one of the authors of the draft Order (regulations). After the dissolution of the Duma, Muromtsev signed (rather out of party discipline) the Vyborg Appeal calling for refusal to pay taxes and perform military service, for which he was sentenced to 3 months in prison with deprivation of voting rights.
The document brought to the attention of readers was written by Muromtsev with the participation of another future leader of the Cadet Party, private assistant professor of state law at Moscow University, landowner and zemstvo councilor F.F. Kokoshkina (1871-1918). The project was based on the basic demands of the Cadets: elections of parliament by universal and equal suffrage (with, however, an overestimation of the representation of cities) and the responsibility of the government to it. Also striking is the absence of a regulation on the inviolability of property. At the same time, the draft emphasizes the role of the emperor as head of state and retains the forms and a number of minor provisions of previous legislation.
This document had some influence (mainly editorial) on the Basic Laws of 1906, namely on their chapters 8-9. The project is presented with abbreviations.
SECTION ONE. About laws.
1. The Russian Empire is governed on the firm basis of laws issued in the manner established by this fundamental law.
3. Each law is valid only for the future, except for the case when the law itself stipulates that its force extends to the previous time.
4. All laws issued must not contradict the provisions of this fundamental law.
5. Draft laws come from the Imperial authority or from the State Duma and receive the force of law only with the approval of the State Duma and with the approval of the Emperor, signed by His Majesty in his own hand.
6. Laws are promulgated to the public by the governing Senate through printing in the prescribed manner and are not put into effect before promulgation.
7. Legislative decrees are not subject to promulgation if the procedure for their publication does not correspond to the provisions of this fundamental law, or when such decrees violate in some way the exact meaning of this fundamental law (Article 4).
8. Judicial rulings refuse to apply legislative decrees, even promulgated in the form of laws, when such decrees violate with their content the exact meaning of this fundamental law (Article 4).
12. The decrees and other acts of the Emperor, which followed in the order of supreme government, are subject to execution only by the seal of the state chancellor or one of the ministers, who by their own hold take responsibility for them.
13. The manner of execution of laws, since it is not predetermined in the law itself, can be established by decrees of the Emperor. Decrees supplementing the law can be issued only if their publication is provided for by the very laws that are supplemented by the said decrees.
Such decrees are subject to promulgation in the manner prescribed for laws (Articles 6 and 7).
14. A law-breaking order of a government place or person is not binding on anyone...
SECTION TWO. On the rights of Russian citizens.
15. The conditions and procedure for acquiring and losing the rights of Russian citizenship are determined by law.
16. All Russian citizens, regardless of differences in their tribal origin, faith, or class status, are equal before the law with regard to their political and civil rights.
17. All Russian citizens are free to practice their faith. No one may be persecuted for his beliefs or beliefs, nor forced to observe religious rites; no one is prohibited from leaving or leaving the faith he professes.
19. No one can be subject to persecution except in the manner prescribed by law.
20. No one can be detained other than on the grounds specified in the law.
21. Any detained person in cities and other places where the judicial power is located within 24 hours, and in other places of the empire no later than within three days from the time of detention, must either be released or presented to the judicial power, which, immediately consideration of the circumstances of the detention, or releases the detainee, or decides, with the announcement of the grounds, for his further detention. For remote rural areas, where it is impossible to comply with the above deadline, it can be extended by a special law.
22. Anyone who becomes aware of the detention of someone else has the right to report to the nearest judge, who, based on such a statement, will examine the existence of legal grounds for the detention or its continuation.
23. No one can be tried by a court other than the one that had jurisdiction over his act at the time of the crime, or subjected to another punishment than that which was established by law for his act at the time of the crime.
24. No penalties, penalties or restrictions in the exercise of rights can be imposed on private individuals by any authority other than the judiciary.
25. Without the consent of the owner of the premises, entry into it, as well as a search or seizure therein, is permitted only in cases and in the manner prescribed by law.
26. Private correspondence and other correspondence of any kind are not subject to detention, opening or otherwise reading; as by decision of the judiciary in cases and in the manner prescribed by law.
27. Everyone is free, without providing himself with a passport or other identification document, within the general limits established by law, to freely choose and change his place of residence and occupation, to acquire property everywhere, movable and immovable, to move freely within the state and travel beyond its borders.
The law may limit the right to travel abroad only in order to prevent evasion from serving military service or from court and investigation.
28. Everyone is free, within the limits established by law, to express his thoughts orally and in writing, as well as to make them public and distribute them by print or other means.
29. No censorship is allowed.
30. All Russian citizens are free to assemble both indoors and outdoors, peacefully and without weapons, without asking for prior permission.
The conditions for advance notification of local authorities about upcoming meetings, the presence of these authorities at meetings and the mandatory closure of these, as well as restrictions on places for open-air meetings, are determined only by law.
31. All Russian citizens are free to form societies and unions for purposes not contrary to criminal laws, without asking for prior permission.
The conditions for informing the authorities about the formation of companies and their mandatory closure in cases of violation of the criminal law are determined only by law.
32. The conditions and procedure for communicating the rights of a legal entity to societies and unions are determined by law.
33. All Russian citizens have the right to apply to government authorities for matters of public and state needs.
34. Foreigners enjoy the rights granted to Russian citizens, subject to the restrictions established by law.
35. The law may establish exemptions from Articles 21, 27, 28, 30, 31 of this Basic Law for persons in active military service and for areas declared under martial law.
Outside the area of military operations, martial law can be introduced each time only by issuing a special law for a period of no more than six months.
SECTION THREE. Establishment of the State Duma.
Chapter first. On the composition and procedure for the formation of the State Duma.
36. The State Duma is formed by meetings of the trust of the people of persons elected from the population, called by this election to participate in the exercise of legislative power and in matters of higher government administration.
37. The State Duma is divided into two chambers: the Zemstvo Chamber and the House of People's Representatives.
38. The Zemstvo Chamber consists of state councilors elected by provincial zemstvo or regional assemblies and city Dumas of cities with a population of over 100,000 inhabitants.
39. From provinces and regions with a population of up to 1,000,000 inhabitants, two state councilors are elected, with a population from 1,000,000 to 2,000,000 - three, from 2-3 million - four, over 3 million .-by five. For cities with a population of 100 to 200 thousand inhabitants, one state councilor is elected; from 200 to 400 thousand - two, from 400 thousand to 1 million - three, over 1 million - four...
40. State councilors are elected from among persons who can be people's representatives...
41. The election of state councilors is carried out in zemstvo assemblies during their first regular session and in city Dumas in one of the first three meetings after the renewal of their composition; with the subsequent election of state councilors of a new composition, the powers of the state councilors of the previous composition are terminated...
42. The House of People's Representatives is elected by the population through universal, equal, direct and closed voting.
43. The right to participate in elections of people's representatives belongs to every Russian male citizen who has reached the age of 25, with the exception of: 1) persons under guardianship or trusteeship; 2) persons declared insolvent debtors, except those recognized as private; 3) persons deprived of their rights by court sentences for the period of such deprivation; 4) persons treated in charitable institutions; 5) persons in active military service, and 6) persons holding the positions of governors and vice-governors, prosecutors and police officers.
46. The term of office of the House of People's Representatives of each composition is four years, counting from the day of the opening of the first meeting of the House after its election.
47. By decree of the Emperor, the House of People's Representatives may be dissolved and previously appointed in Art. 46th four-year term.
48. Elections of people's representatives... are appointed by Imperial decrees on one Sunday for the entire empire. Election day must follow no earlier than three months and no later than six months after the promulgation of the decree. In the event of early dissolution of the chamber (Article 47), the decree on dissolution must also set the day for new general elections, in compliance with the above deadlines.
50. The buildings and surrounding areas allocated to the chambers at the expense of the state treasury for occupation, within the boundaries established by a special law, are at the exclusive disposal of the chambers themselves according to their ownership.
Chapter two. About members of the State Duma.
55. Those in the civil service, having been elected members of the State Duma, do not need the permission of their superiors to join it and to appear at its meetings.
56. Members of the State Duma cannot be granted ranks, orders or court titles, as well as leases or any other property grants.
57. Members of the State Duma lose their rank if, not being in the Civil Service, they enter into a position that involves holding ranks or receiving any kind of salary from the treasury, or if, while already in the Civil Service, they are appointed to a higher position by class, or associated with receiving a higher salary from the treasury.
The rule of this article does not apply to the case of appointment of a member of the State Duma as a minister.
59. Except for death and cases provided for in Art. 52, 53 and 57, members of the State Duma are also considered to have retired when conditions arise that impede election (Articles 40, 43 and 45).
60. In his judgments and decisions, a member of the State Duma cannot be bound by the orders or instructions of his voters.
62. Outside the State Duma, its members are not subject to any prosecution or liability for the vote cast while performing the duties of a member of the State Duma, or for the judgments expressed during the performance of these duties.
63. During meetings of the State Duma, its members cannot, without the prior permission of the subject Chamber, be brought to criminal investigation and trial, or subjected to house arrest or detention on suspicion of committing a criminal act, or personal detention due to insolvency, or summoned to any court or other place as a witness or knowledgeable person. This excludes only the case when a member of the State Duma is caught committing a criminal act or immediately after its commission (Clause 1 of Article 257 of the statute, court), or when within 24 hours after signs of a criminal act are discovered (Article 250 st. corner, court.) suspicion will arise against a member of the State Duma and grounds for taking measures against him to suppress methods of evading the investigation (Article 257 st. corner court.). But even in these cases, the relevant chamber of the State Duma must be immediately notified of what has happened, and it is up to the Chamber to which the detained member of the State Duma belongs to approve or, conversely, cancel the order of detention.
Criminal proceedings against a member of the State Duma that arose before the opening of the meeting, as well as any kind of deprivation of his freedom, are interrupted for the entire duration of the meeting, if so requested by the relevant chamber.
64. Members of the State Duma receive remuneration in the amount determined by law. Refusal of remuneration is not acceptable.
Chapter three. About meetings of the State Duma.
65. Meetings (sessions) of both chambers are opened, interrupted and closed simultaneously.
66. Meetings of the State Duma are convened and closed by Imperial orders.
67. Meetings of the State Duma are convened annually on the third Monday of October, unless the need for an earlier convening of the chambers in that year is seen.
After the early dissolution of the House of People's Representatives (Article 47), a meeting of the State Duma is convened no later than two months after the election deadline.
71. Interruptions in the sessions of the assembly cannot occur without a consent decree of both chambers; such breaks cannot last longer than one month.
The Houses cannot decide to adjourn their proceedings for more than ten days if the ministers object to it.
Termination of classes due to the observance of Sundays, holidays and other non-public days is not considered a break in the meeting.
Chapter Four. On the internal structure and procedure of the State Duma.
76. Meetings of both chambers take place in public; but, at the proposal of the presiding officer or ten members present, the meeting is declared secret, after which the chamber is informed of the reasons for demanding the secret continuation of the meeting, on which the chamber makes its decision.
78. Decisions of the chambers are made by a simple majority of votes, except for the cases provided for in articles 95 and 96. For the validity of the decision, at least half of the legal number of members of the chamber must participate in voting...
79. Ministers, even if they are not members of the chamber, have, according to their position, the right to be present at all its meetings and to participate in the discussion of all issues considered by it.
80. The highest authority over the protection of order inside the buildings belonging to the chambers and in the surrounding area (Article 50) belongs to the chairmen of the subject chambers or, if both chambers are located within the same area, to one of the chairmen in turn, for the duration of each meeting . For this purpose, the chairmen have at their disposal a special guard in the required number, which is exclusively subordinate to them.
Chapter five. On the subjects of the department and the space of power of the State Duma.
82. Draft laws, before being submitted to the discretion of the Emperor (Article 84), are proposed for discussion by both chambers of the State Duma (Article 5).
83. The said projects are proposed to the State Duma by introducing them into one of the chambers by ministers, on behalf of the Emperor, or arise in the midst of which or from the chambers at the proposal of at least 30 members in the House of People's Representatives or 15 members in the Zemstvo Chamber. The draft in the form in which it is adopted in one of the chambers is transferred to the other. If this latter amendment is proposed, it is returned to the chamber that originally discussed it.
84. The projects approved by both chambers are presented by the State Chancellor to the Emperor, who has their approval.
85. Draft laws rejected by one of the chambers of the State Duma or by the Emperor cannot be proposed again during the same meeting of the State Duma.
86. State treaties, peace and trade, as well as all those that are associated with the establishment of obligations for the state treasury, with changes in the boundaries of state territory, or the implementation of which requires changes or additions to existing laws, shall not become valid until they are approved by the State Duma by law (Articles 82-84).
87. State registration is established for no more than a year by a special law. But the amount released from the state treasury to the personal disposal of the Emperor and for the maintenance of the Imperial Court is determined by the State Duma at the beginning of each reign and during it cannot be changed without the consent of the Emperor.
88. The draft state painting is proposed to the House of People's Representatives, from which, having been approved, it is transferred to the Zemstvo Chamber. The painting project, approved by both chambers, is presented to the Emperor (Article 84).
89. Establishment of taxes, taxes, duties and other fees, state loans, acceptance by the state of guarantees, establishment of states, permission of state buildings, alienation of certain state property or income, addition of arrears and government penalties and in general, establishment of all kinds of state revenues and expenses, if is not provided for by the state list, it can only be followed by issuing a special law about it.
90. All reports on the implementation of the state list are offered to the Chambers of the State Duma for their consideration and approval.
92. During meetings of the State Duma, its members have the right to make inquiries both to individual ministers and to the Council of Ministers as a whole on the subject of the course of action of the government or individual government agencies and officials. Explanations on such requests are presented by ministers personally to the relevant chamber at one of its meetings no later than the period determined by the chamber.
93. Each chamber has the right to carry out investigations everywhere through commissions elected by it from among itself.
94. The establishment of the Imperial family... may not be subject to legislative revision except by order of the Emperor.
Chapter six. Special rules.
95. If a draft law adopted by one of the chambers is rejected by the other, or if, after returning the draft to the chamber that initially considered it, with amendments from the other chamber, and after a new discussion of such a draft law in both chambers, there is no agreement between the decisions of the majority of both chambers, then each chamber has the right to decide whether to submit the project for discussion at a general meeting of the State Duma. Such a decision is considered valid if at least two-thirds of the legal number of votes is given for it.
96. The execution of the decision to convene a general meeting of the State Duma is suspended until the powers of the people's representatives are resumed. After this, within three months after the opening of the chamber meetings, the question of convening a general meeting of the State Duma is discussed a second time by the chamber that initiated it. If the chamber approves the previous decision by a majority of two-thirds of the legal number of votes, the draft law is submitted for discussion to the general meeting of the State Duma.<…>Decisions of the general meeting of the State Duma are adopted by a simple majority of votes and are considered equivalent to a unanimous decision of the majority of both chambers.
97. If a disagreement in the decisions of both chambers follows during the discussion of the state list, and if, after a second consideration of the issue that aroused the disagreement, agreement on the decisions of the majority of the chambers is not achieved, the controversial issues are submitted for discussion at the general meeting of the State Duma, without waiting for the renewal of the powers of people’s representatives and without resolutions of this chamber...
SECTION FOUR. About ministers.
98. The State Chancellor and, on his behalf, other ministers are appointed by decrees of the Emperor.
By the same decrees, the designated persons are dismissed from office.
99. The State Chancellor presides over ministerial meetings; the title of State Chancellor is compatible with the management of one of the ministries.
100. Each minister is individually responsible: 1.) for his personal actions or orders; 2) for the actions and orders of the authorities subordinate to him, based on his instructions; 3) for decrees and other acts of the Emperor signed by him.
101. The State Chancellor and other ministers are collectively responsible to the chambers of the State Duma for the general course of government administration.
102. For violations of laws or the rights of citizens committed during the exercise of office, ministers are subject to civil and criminal liability.
For deliberate violations of the provisions of this fundamental law and for causing grave damage to the interests of the state by excess, inaction or abuse of power, ministers can be held accountable by each chamber of the State Duma, with trial by the general meeting of the first and cassation departments of the government Senate.
103. The pardon of a convicted minister can only follow at the request of the chamber by whose decision he was brought to trial.
SECTION FIVE. On the basics of local self-government.
104. Regions, provinces, districts and volosts or divisions corresponding to them form self-governing unions called zemstvos. Cities form self-governing communities.
106. Local self-government of lower unions shall be based on universal, equal, direct and closed voting. Every person who has the right to participate in elections to the House of People's Representatives has the same right to participate in local elections if he has lived in a given place - county or city - for at least one year, or paid local zemstvo or city taxes during the same period . Assemblies of higher self-governing unions may be elected by assemblies of lower self-governing unions.
SECTION SIX. About the judiciary.
109. Places and persons exercising governmental (administrative) power cannot be vested with judicial power.
110. Judicial decisions cannot be subordinated to any authority other than the judicial one.
111. Judges cannot, against their will, be dismissed, moved, or removed from office, except by decision of the competent court and on the grounds specified by law.
112. No exceptions from the general procedure for criminal proceedings with the participation of jurors, depending on the type of crime, are allowed, except in the case provided for in Article 102 of this law. Officials for violations of laws and the rights of citizens committed during the performance of official duties are subject to judicial civil and criminal liability on a common basis with other citizens; To bring officials to trial, neither a conclusion nor the prior consent of their superiors is required.
113. No one is excluded from being included in the list of jurors on the basis of their property or social status.
Electoral law.
Constitutional projects in Russia in the 18th - early 20th centuries. M, 2010
1. The reign of Paul I, his personality and reign
2. Domestic policy of Nicholas I
3. Ideological struggle and social movement in the second quarter of the 19th century. (theory of official nationality, Westerners and Slavophiles)
4. Reforms of the 60-70s. XIX century (do not consider the abolition of serfdom)
Literature:
1. Great reforms in Russia 1856-1874. - M., 1992.
2. Vyskochkov, L.V. Emperor Nicholas I: man and statesman. - St. Petersburg, 2001.
3. Gershenzon, M. Nicholas I and his era. - M., 2001.
4. Ilyin, V.V., Panarin, A.S., Akhiezer, A.S. Reforms and counter-reforms in Russia: cycles of the modernization process. - M., 1996.
5. History of Russia in the 19th century. The era of reform. - M., 2000.
6. Obolensky, G. Emperor Pavel I. M., 2001.
7. Peskov, A.M. Pavel I. - M., 2000.
8. Pushkarev, S.G. Russia 1801 – 1917: power and society. - M., 2001.
9. Russian liberals. - M., 2001.
10. Sorokin, Yu.A. Paul I. Personality and destiny. - M., 1996.
11. With a sword and a torch: Palace coups in Russia 1725 - 1825. - M., 1991.
12. Eidelman, N.Ya. "Revolution from above" in Russia. - M., 1989.
Practical tasks
1. Compare the views of Slavophiles, Westerners and supporters of the theory of “official nationality”. Present your answer in the form of a table.
2. Guess what historical event this passage is talking about. What caused such bitter words by S.M. Solovyova?
“At the very time when Russia began to suffer the unusual shame of military failures, we were in a difficult situation: on the one hand, our patriotic feeling was terribly offended by the humiliation of Russia, on the other, we were convinced that only a disaster, namely an unfortunate war, could produce saving revolution..."
3. Read an excerpt from the appeal of Moscow manufacturers in the 1840s to the government and indicate the name of the phenomenon in question.
“... in the conditions of replacing manual needs with the automatic action of mechanics, the worker is required not only to have manual dexterity, but also to have a mental ability that ordinary workers do not demonstrate...”
4. Read an excerpt from the monarch’s speech and write the term that refers to the form of power discussed in the excerpt.
“The Russian Empire is governed on the solid foundations of positive laws, institutions and statutes, emanating from ... the authorities ....”
5. Determine who we are talking about:
Societies, universities, institutes, and congresses of scientists are named after him;
He took part in the defense of Sevastopol;
He became the founder of military field surgery;
He was the first in the world to use anesthesia in the field;
Thousands of Russian soldiers owe it to him that they did not lose their arms or legs after being wounded.
In the normal course of events he should not have reigned;
Before ascending the throne, he had no experience either in state affairs or in the military field;
He was a kind family man and not at all an evil person, but the desire to subject everything and everyone to the strictest discipline led him to injustice and cruelty;
His reign began with a lengthy trial.
6. Fill out the table “Bourgeois reforms in Russia in the second half of the 19th century.”
Seminar No. 5
Russia at the beginning of the 20th century
1. The political system of Russia: autocracy, its institutions and social base. Nicholas II
2. The first Russian revolution: causes, nature, stages, results
3. Russia in the First World War. February Revolution
4. Russia in 1917: from February to October, the Bolsheviks’ rise to power
Literature:
1. Avrekh, A.Ya. Tsarism on the eve of its overthrow. - M., 1989.
2. Power and reforms: From autocracy to Soviet Russia. - St. Petersburg, 1996.
3. Ganelin, R.Sh. Russian autocracy in 1905. Reform and revolution. - St. Petersburg, 1991.
4. Danilov, Yu.M. On the way to ruin: Essays from the last period of the Russian monarchy. - M., 1992.
5. Iskenderov, A.A. Russian monarchy, reforms and revolution // Issues of history. 1993. No. 3,5,7; 1994. No. 1,6,7.
6. Modernization: foreign experience and Russia / Responsible. ed. Krasilshchikov V. A. - M., 1994.
7. Pushkarev, S.G. Russia 1801 – 1917: power and society. - M., 2001.
8. Shambarov, V.E. State and revolutions. - M., 2001.
9. Shanin, T. Revolution as a moment of truth. 1905 – 1907 – 1917 – 1922 - M., 1997.
10. 1917 in the destinies of Russia and the world. October Revolution. From new sources to new understanding. - M., 1998.
Practical tasks
1. Name the historical figure.
- “Byzantine” - N.N. nicknamed him. Lvov, famous public figure;
The former commander-in-chief of the Russian army during the Japanese war, A.N., portrayed him as a cunning, vindictive, two-faced man. Kuropatkin;
Ordinary people considered him an insignificant, weak-willed, stupid person, insufficiently prepared for the extremely difficult role of the monarch of a great power.
Born into the family of a wealthy Jewish landowner from among the colonists in the Kherson province;
One of the organizers of the October events of 1917, creator of the Red Army, founder of the Soviet state;
After the Bolsheviks came to power, he held the posts of People's Commissar for Foreign Affairs, People's Commissar for Military and Naval Affairs, Chairman of the Revolutionary Military Council of the Republic;
Died in Mexico in 1940.
A law student at Kazan University, expelled for participating in student unrest;
Publicist, philosopher and Marxist theorist;
Revolutionary, one of the main organizers and leaders of the armed uprising of 1917;
Founder of the Soviet state;
First head of the Bolshevik government
2. Solve the crossword puzzle.
6) An event that occurred in 1905 - 1907. in Russia.
8) The mayor of St. Petersburg, who received his position after the “Bloody Resurrection”.
9) A document signed by the Tsar on October 17, 1905, which granted citizens freedom of personality, conscience, speech, and assembly.
10) Battleship, whose crew took part in the events of the revolution of 1905 - 1907.
12) How can you characterize the socio-political situation in the country on the eve of the revolution?
13) Bolshevik Party.
Vertically:
4) Emperor of Russia, during whose reign the first Russian revolution took place.
5) Nicholas II signed this document in the name of Bulygin with an order to prepare a law on the deliberative Duma.
7) The main remnants of feudalism in Russia at the beginning of the 20th century were class division, the lack of peasant ownership of land and absolute ....
11) The Socialist Party, which used terror as a means of struggle.
14) Chief military prosecutor of Russia, killed by terrorists in December 1906.
3. Find and fix errors:
After Russia's defeat in the Russo-Japanese War, a political crisis grew in the country. Events are increasingly occurring that make us talk about the approaching revolution. The terrorist movement is intensifying; in July 1904, the Socialist Revolutionary E. Sazonov killed the Minister of Internal Affairs P.A. Stolypin.
On January 9, 1905, priest Georgy Gapon organized a procession of workers to the Winter Palace to present the Tsar with a petition demanding the introduction of a constitution in the country. The workers were met with gunfire, killing about 1,200 people. The brutal massacre shook the country. Strikes began, the country actually entered a revolution.
On June 14, 1905, a revolt of sailors broke out on the battleship Potemkin, led by P.P. Schmidt. Unrest began in the Kingdom of Poland.
In August 1905, Minister of Internal Affairs A.G. Bulygin published a Manifesto on the creation of a new legislative body - the Duma, and in the winter of 1905 elections to it began.
On October 17, 1905, the tsar signed the Manifesto “On the Improvement of the State Order,” which introduced basic political freedoms—assemblies, unions, the press, and others. Russia became a constitutional monarchy.
However, the revolution was only on the rise. In October 1905, the All-Russian political strike began, and the culmination of events was the December armed uprising in Moscow.
In April 1906, the First State Duma opened, but it turned out to be so radical that Prime Minister S.Yu. Witte dismissed it.
The Second Duma began its activities in February 1907, in a situation when the revolutionary movement was in decline. Prime Minister S.Yu. Witte organized military courts, which summarily executed more than 2 thousand people. However, the Second Duma turned out to be no less radical than the First, which predetermined its dissolution.
On June 3, 1907, a new electoral law was published, which increased the property qualification for voters. The law was introduced without the approval of the Duma; thereby violating the Manifesto of October 17 and the provisions of the Basic Laws of Russia. On June 3, the Duma was dissolved and the revolution ended.
4. Fill out the table “Alternatives for the social development of Russia in 1917.”
5. Read a fragment from the address “To workers, soldiers, peasants!” and indicate the date of its adoption.
“Relying on the will of the vast majority of workers, soldiers and peasants, relying on the victorious uprising of the workers and garrison that took place in Petrograd, the congress takes power into its own hands. The Congress decides: all local power passes to the Soviets of Workers', Soldiers' and Peasants' Deputies."