The abolition of serfdom and other reforms of the 60s and 70s had a strong impact on the economic development of the country. 1860-90s is a very important stage in economic history Russia. The processes that took place at that time different areas national economic life was largely determined by the fact that at this time the Russian economy was entering a period of industrialization (since the 1880s). This left a strong imprint on the state of affairs in all other sectors of the country.
What is industrialization? The economic literature gives different definitions. We will understand industrialization as the process of gradual transformation of industry into a leading sector of the economy. Industrialization is a phenomenon that radically changes the life of human society.
In the pre-industrial era, the main industry National economy was the agricultural sector, where the bulk of the population was employed. The agricultural sector created the bulk of the gross national product. The state of affairs in the agricultural sector influenced all other sectors of the national economy.
With industrialization the situation changes radically. The main role belongs to industry; it already provides the main share of the main national product. The bulk of the working population is employed here. Agriculture is losing its importance. Moreover, it is no longer so much the state of affairs in agriculture that determines the state of affairs in industry, but rather, on the contrary, agriculture itself is being transferred to an industrial basis.
The process of industrialization on a global scale began at the end of the 18th century. The impetus was given to it by the industrial revolution, the birthplace of which was England. The industrial revolution in the technical sense is the replacement of manual labor with machine labor, the displacement of manufacturing and handicraft production by factories. Having begun in England, the industrial revolution gradually drew more and more countries into its orbit, first Western Europe, then North America, and then further. The Industrial Revolution radically changed the balance of power on the world stage. It split the world into countries that joined industrialization, which became the workshops of the world, and countries that failed to join this process, which found themselves in the position of an agricultural periphery.
Russia is also joining the global industrialization process. Industrialization changes the face of the economy and changes the relationship between those employed in agriculture and industry. Its consequence is urbanization, a sharp increase in the urban population. The urban lifestyle is fundamentally different from the rural one. Consciousness and psychology are changing. Russia has faced these problems.
The process of industrialization in Russia was somewhat different from the classic Western version. Usually England is taken as a standard, although England is the most specific country.
What are the features of Russian industrialization? Her exceptional speed. Those processes that took centuries in the West took several decades in Russia. Railways, the telegraph, and the telephone entered the life of Russian society literally before the eyes of one generation. All stages of industrialization were extremely compressed.
The role of the state in the economic development of the country was exceptionally great. This intervention reached its apogee in the early 1890s.
Important Feature was as follows. In the West, the industrial revolution was preceded by an agrarian revolution. The agrarian revolution is usually understood as a sharp increase in the efficiency of labor productivity in agriculture, achieved on a pre-industrial basis. This agrarian revolution was an important prerequisite industrial development Western countries. Agriculture had a growing demand for industrial products, which stimulated the growth of industrial production.
The rise in labor productivity in the agricultural sector pushed out a large number of workers, which in turn was a powerful stimulus for industrial development. In addition, a significant increase in productivity Agriculture led to the fact that it easily coped with the task of providing for the growing population of cities. City people don't feed themselves. The agricultural revolution provided sufficient food supplies.
In Russia, the agrarian revolution during the period of industrialization not only did not end, but it is doubtful that it even began.
The socio-economic consequence of the industrialization process was fast development capitalism in Russia. The question of the time of the emergence of the capitalist structure in Russia is covered in different ways. At present, there is almost no longer a shared opinion that its origin dates back almost to the end of the 17th century. The most common point of view is that we can talk about capitalism as one of the structures of the Russian economy no earlier than the end of the 18th century. But right up to the period of industrialization, it remained just one, and not the most important, economic structure in Russia. It did not become the most important by 1917. But with Russia's entry into the industrialization period, it became the most dynamic, the most rapidly developing. And he began to influence all other structures of Russia.
The development of capitalism in Russia had significant features that were derived from the Russian version of industrialization. First of all, it's speed. Capitalism developed extremely quickly in Russia. Russia was a country late development capitalism. Those forms of organizing economic activity under the conditions of the capitalist mode of production, which took shape in the West over the course of centuries, appear in Russia in a matter of decades.
Secondly, capitalism in Russia grew not only in a natural order, but was also imposed by the state from above. The question of how strong his influence was is currently debated. This is a controversial issue.
It should not be understood that the tsarist government set out to build a capitalist society. The tsarist government did not need capitalism at all. The authorities needed a developed industry, because it was clear that without powerful production in the 2nd half of the 19th century it was impossible to be a great power. And the development of capitalism was seen as a by-product of the course of development of domestic industry, and even as an undesirable result, but unfortunately inevitable. For a long time, those in power were not aware of the socio-economic consequences of the activities they carried out and the stimulation of industrial growth. IN official documents Only from the late 1890s of the 19th century, when describing the economic system of Russia, terms such as “our capitalist economy” began to be used. Before this, it was believed that capitalism could be avoided.
Russian capitalism is characterized by a shift in the phases of establishing an economy. Even in the classical version, the phases not only replace each other, but seem to overlap one another. In the classical version, the period of initial accumulation of capital precedes the period of the industrial revolution. In Russia, the industrial revolution ended in the 1890s of the 19th century, and as for the process of initial accumulation of capital, it did not end even by 1917. This gave the process of capitalist development in Russia a special contradiction.
The capitalist evolution of Russia was characterized by the widespread borrowing of technical and organizational forms, the active attraction of foreign capital, and capitalism in Russia developed in a multi-structured economy. The capitalist structure not only supplanted the pre-capitalist structure, but also coexisted with it. This was reflected in the widespread use of pre-capitalist forms and methods of management.
Capitalism in Russia developed in a socio-cultural environment that was not very favorable for it.
At one time, at the beginning of the 20th century, the work of the outstanding German sociologist Max Weber indicated that Protestant ethics, Calvinism, covering business activity, considering success in business as a criterion of God's chosenness.
As for Orthodoxy, the influence of which was felt by representatives of various strata of Russian society, including non-Orthodox ones, it is believed that the situation was not very favorable. Individualism, as an integral feature of capitalist economics, is not encouraged by Orthodox culture, as is success in business. In this regard, the accelerated penetration of capital into Russia. values caused a reaction of rejection. Opponents of the development of capitalism in Russia were not only socialists, but many representatives of the tsarist bureaucracy. Russian liberalism was largely anti-bourgeois in nature, in contrast to the West, where liberalism was bourgeois in nature.
This gave rise to unexpected results. Because those ideas that had a positive effect in the West were destructive character. For example, the West owes much of its success in economics and culture to individualism. But the same values that penetrated the Russian environment often turned out to have a destructive, destructive side. We see the same thing now, when there is a desire to consume wealth, but there is no desire to work.
But this question is very difficult. Much in the development of capitalism depends on the culture and traditions of the people. In research on this issue, much depends on the subjective preferences of the researcher or on his erudition, on the task that he sets for himself.
If we talk about Russia, then Orthodox Church did not fully correspond to the development of capitalism, but on the other hand, active entrepreneurial activity in Russia in the 2nd half of the 19th century was demonstrated by those who were kept most clean - the Old Believers. Moscow entrepreneurs came from the Old Believers.
clause 1 questions and tasks to paragraph paragraph page 91
Question. Fill out the table and draw conclusions about the meaning technical achievements second half of the 19th century
paragraph 2 questions and tasks to paragraph paragraph page 93
Question. Analyze the characteristics of different types of monopolies and explain what distinguishes them from each other. How did the degree of centralization of management determine a specific type of monopoly?
Types of monopolies from cartel to concern are distinguished by the consolidation of their positions: if in a cartel entrepreneurs agree on prices and volumes, then a concern unites enterprises from different industries that are under the same control and management.
paragraph 3 questions and tasks to paragraph paragraph page 96
Question 1. Draw up a logical diagram showing the causes of economic crises in the 19th century. and their social consequences.
Question 2. What were the positive and negative consequences of the monopolization of markets and areas of production? Why in the second half of the 19th century. Has it become more profitable for entrepreneurs to export capital rather than goods from industrial countries?
Entrepreneurs quickly increased the production of goods for which there was demand, but having become saturated with the goods, production began to decline. Moreover, the decline that began in one industry affected the entire economy.
paragraph 4 questions and tasks to paragraph paragraph page 97
Question 1. What changes took place in the composition hired workers in the process of industrialization?
There is a stratification in the composition of hired workers: administrative personnel, office workers, skilled workers, unskilled workers.
Question 2. How has the position of hired workers changed?
These layers differed in income level and education.
paragraph 5 questions and tasks to paragraph paragraph page 98
Question. What new features did the trade union movement acquire in industrial countries at the turn of the nineteenth and twentieth centuries? Name four or more differences.
Trade unions united on a national scale. Relations developed between trade unions of different states. The International Secretariat of Trade Unions was created, which ensured cooperation and mutual support of trade union centers in different countries.
They united mainly highly skilled workers of the same profession. Subsequently, unification took place at the industry level and the inclusion of unskilled workers in their organizations.
Questions and assignments for paragraph page 98
Question 1. Which of the following characterized the industrial and social development of the countries of Europe and the USA in the first half of the 19th century, and which in the second:
1) removal of machinery and equipment; 2) export of capital; 3) completion of the industrial revolution; 4) industrialization; 5) conveyor production; 6) concentration of production; 7) modernization of production; 8) monopolization of production and markets; 9) the first crisis of overproduction; 10) transformation of trade unions into influential political force; 11) stratification of hired workers; 12) merger of banking capital with industrial capital; 13) the formation of the labor movement; 14) formation of the working class; 15) centralization of production?
Completion of the Industrial Revolution; formation of the working class; the formation of the labor movement; modernization of production; conveyor production; concentration of production; centralization of capital; merger of bank capital; crisis of overproduction; monopolization of production and market; export of capital; industrialization; stratification of hired workers; transformation of trade unions into an influential political force.
Question 2. From this list, make pairs of concepts meaning the causes and consequences of economic and social processes XIX century; explain your answer. Example: industrialization - stratification of hired workers.
industrialization - stratification of wage workers;
completion of the industrial revolution - modernization of production - assembly line production;
the formation of the working class - the formation of the labor movement;
concentration of production – centralization of capital;
monopolization of production and market - merger of banking
capital – export of capital;
crisis of overproduction – monopolization of markets.
Question 3. Think about why in the second half of the 19th century. in industrial countries there were no longer such massive social movements like Chartism.
There were no mass social movements in industrial countries, as the trade union movement developed and fought for workers' rights.
Question 1. What in the situation of society, and specifically workers, worried the head of the Catholic Church at the end of the 19th century?
The Church wants the poor to live better, calls people to virtue and educates them morally.
Question 2. Why does the Pope invite workers to organize trade unions? What should their activities be?
The activity of trade unions should consist (in the opinion of the Pope) of turning to God, engaging in religious instruction, teaching what constitutes duties to God, what he believes, what he hopes for and what leads him to eternal salvation.
Question 3. Whose interests did the Church care about when it proposed the creation of Catholic trade unions?
Analyzing these statements, you understand that the Church does not care about the interests of the working class.
Features of industrialization of Russia at the end of the 19th – beginning of the 20th century. Transition to " modern pace economic growth. Witte reform.
After the abolition of serfdom in 1861 and bourgeois reforms, capitalism was established in Russia. From an agrarian, backward country, Russia was turning into an agrarian-industrial one: a network of railways was quickly created, a large machine industry was developing, new types of industry were emerging, new areas of capitalist industrial and agricultural production were emerging, a single capitalist market was being formed, and important social changes were taking place in the country .
Industrialization required significant capital investments from the budget, which was supposed to ensure the implementation of the developed policy. One of the directions of the reform carried out by him (Witte) was the introduction in 1894 ᴦ. state wine monopoly, which became the main budget revenue item (365 million rubles per year). Were increased taxes, primarily indirect (they grew by 42.7% in the 90s). The gold standard was introduced, ᴛ.ᴇ. free exchange of the ruble for gold.(1897)
The latter made it possible to attract foreign capital into the Russian economy, because foreign investors could now export gold rubles from Russia. customs tariff protected domestic industry from foreign competition, the government encouraged private enterprise. During the years of the economic crisis of 1900 - 1903. the government generously subsidized both government and private enterprises. Getting widespread concession system, issuing government orders to entrepreneurs for a long period at inflated prices. All this was a good stimulator for domestic industry.
At the same time, the process of industrialization in Russia was contradictory. Capitalist methods of management (profit, cost, etc.) did not affect the public sector of the economy - the largest in the world. These were defense factories. And this created a certain imbalance in capitalist development countries.
In his reform activities Witte had to experience resistance from the aristocracy and higher officials, who had great influence on the reigning persons. Witte's most active opponent was the Minister of the Interior VC. Plehve. His course social policy- this is opposition to reforms, upholding conservative development principle, which invariably preserves the privileges of the nobility to power, and, consequently, the preservation of feudal remnants. This trend of confrontation between reforms and counter-reforms at the turn of the two centuries ended not in Witte’s favor.
Changes in the global economic situation at the turn of the 19th - 20th centuries. led to a crisis in industries that developed intensively in the 90s. - metallurgy, mechanical engineering, oil and coal mining industries. The minister's opponents accused him of the decline in Russian production and called his policies adventurous and destructive for Russia. Dissatisfaction with Witte's policies led to his resignation in 1903.
Features of industrialization of Russia at the end of the 19th – beginning of the 20th century. Transition to “modern rates of economic growth. Witte reform. - concept and types. Classification and features of the category “Features of industrialization of Russia in the late XIX – early XX centuries. Transition to “modern rates of economic growth. Witte’s reform.” 2017, 2018.
The development of portraiture in the 19th century was predetermined by the Great French revolution, which contributed to solving new problems in this genre. In art it becomes dominant a new style- classicism, and therefore the portrait loses the pomp and sweetness of the works of the 18th century and becomes more...
For several centuries the cathedral continued to stand unfinished. When in 1790 Georg Forster glorified the upwardly slender columns of the choir, which was already considered a miracle of art in the years of its creation, Cologne Cathedral stood as an unfinished frame...
Option No. 1 Instructions for students STUDENT EVALUATION CRITERIA Grade “5”: 53-54 points Grade “4”: 49-52 points Grade “3”: 45-48 points Grade “2”: 1-44 points 1 is required to complete the work hour 50 min. – 2 hours. Dear student! Your attention... .
Socialist realism Neoplasticism Purism Cubo-futurism Art... .
A physiological essay is a genre whose main purpose is visual representation certain social class, his life, habitat, foundations and values. The genre of physiological essay originated in the 30-40s of the 19th century in England and France, and later appeared in... .
Robe Clothes for combat. Sources do not directly indicate the presence of special types of combat clothing. Probably, the Chukchi did not yet have a clear specialization of civilian and military clothing. In general, in the opinion of Europeans, the Chukchi dressed lightly for their harsh climate. A man usually...
1. Industry and crafts in the XVI-XVII centuries.
During the era of Ivan the Terrible, Russia had quite developed industry and crafts. Particularly great progress was achieved in weapons and artillery. In terms of the volume of production of cannons and other weapons, their quality, variety and properties, Russia in that era was perhaps the European leader. In terms of the size of its artillery fleet (2 thousand guns), Russia surpassed other European countries, and all the guns were domestically produced. A significant part of the army (about 12 thousand) on end XVI V. was also armed small arms domestic production. A number of victories won during that period (the capture of Kazan, the conquest of Siberia, etc.) were largely due to the quality and successful use of firearms.
As the historian N.A. Rozhkov pointed out, in Russia at that time many other types of industrial or handicraft production were developed, including metalworking, the production of furniture, dishes, linseed oil, etc., some of these types of industrial products were used for export . Under Ivan the Terrible, the country's first paper factory was built.
Apparently, a significant part of industry and crafts ceased to exist during the Time of Troubles (early 17th century), accompanied by economic decline and a sharp reduction in urban and rural population countries.
In the middle- late XVII V. a number of new enterprises arose: several ironworks, a textile factory, glass, paper mills etc. Most of them were private enterprises and used free hired labor. In addition, the production of leather products has greatly developed, which large quantities were exported, incl. to European countries. Weaving was also widespread. Some of the enterprises of that era were quite large: for example, one of the weaving factories in 1630 was located in a large two-story building, where there were machines for more than 140 workers.
2. Attempt at industrialization under Peter I
Since during the 17th century. Russia is lagging behind in terms of industrial development Western Europe, then several nobles and officials (Ivan Pososhkov, Daniil Voronov, Fyodor Saltykov, Baron Lyuberas) around 1710 presented Peter I with their proposals and projects for industrial development. During these same years, Peter I began implementing a policy that some historians call mercantilism.
Peter I's measures to carry out industrialization included increasing import duties, which in 1723 reached 50-75% on competing imported products. But their main content was the use of command-administrative and coercive methods. Among them are the widespread use of the labor of assigned peasants (serfs “assigned” to the plant and obliged to work there) and the labor of prisoners, the destruction of handicraft industries in the country (leatherworks, textiles, small metallurgical enterprises, etc.), which competed with Peter’s manufactories , as well as the construction of new factories by order. The largest manufactories were built at the expense of the treasury, and worked mainly on orders from the state. Some factories were transferred from the state to private hands (as, for example, the Demidovs started their business in the Urals), and their development was ensured by the “attribution” of serfs and the provision of subsidies and loans.
The production of cast iron during the reign of Peter increased many times and by its end reached 1073 thousand poods (17.2 thousand tons) per year. The lion's share of cast iron was used for the production of cannons. Already in 1722, the military arsenal had 15 thousand cannons and other weapons, not counting ship ones.
However, this industrialization was largely unsuccessful; most of the enterprises created by Peter I turned out to be unviable. According to the historian M.N. Pokrovsky, “The collapse of Peter’s large industry- an undoubted fact... The manufactories founded under Peter burst one after another, and hardly a tenth of them survived until the second half of the XVIII century." Some, such as 5 silk manufactories, were closed soon after their founding due to the poor quality of the products and lack of zeal on the part of Peter's nobles. Another example is the decline and closure of a number of metallurgical plants in the south of Russia after the death of Peter I. Some authors point out that the number of cannons produced under Peter I many times exceeded the needs of the army, so such mass production of cast iron was simply unnecessary.
In addition, the quality of the products of Peter's manufactories was low, and their price was, as a rule, much higher than the price of handicraft and imported goods, for which there is a number of evidence. Thus, uniforms made from cloth from Peter’s manufactories fell into disrepair with amazing speed. A government commission that later inspected one of the cloth factories found that it was in an extremely unsatisfactory (emergency) condition, which made it impossible to produce cloth. normal quality.
As it was calculated in a special study devoted to Peter’s industry, by 1786, out of 98 manufactories built under Peter, only 11 had survived. “Thus,” the study said, “what was created by the will of Peter hastily and without consideration of the internal needs of the people and lack of necessary elements of production, could not exist for long."
3. In the era of Catherine II
After Peter I, industrial development continued, but without such active government intervention. A new wave of industrialization began under Catherine II. Industrial development was one-sided: metallurgy received disproportionately large development, at the same time, most branches of the processing industry did not develop, and Russia purchased everything large quantity"manufactured goods" abroad.
Obviously, the reason was the opening up of opportunities for the export of cast iron, on the one hand, and competition from the more developed Western European industry, on the other. As a result, Russia came out on top in the world in the production of cast iron and became its main exporter to Europe. Average annual volume of pig iron exports to last years the reign of Catherine II (in 1793-1795) was about 3 million poods (48 thousand tons); A total number factories by the end of Catherine's era (1796), according to official data of that time, exceeded 3 thousand. According to academician S.G. Strumilin, this figure was greatly exaggerated real number factories and factories, since even kumys “factories” and sheepdog “factories” were included in it, “only for the greater glorification of this queen.”
The metallurgical process used in that era remained virtually unchanged in technology since ancient times and was more of a craft rather than an industrial production in nature. Historian T. Guskova characterizes it even in relation to the beginning of the 19th century. as “individual labor of the craft type” or “simple cooperation with an incomplete and unstable division of labor,” and also states the “almost complete absence of technical progress” in metallurgical plants during the 18th century. Iron ore was smelted in small furnaces several meters high using charcoal, which was considered an extremely expensive fuel in Europe. By that time, this process was already outdated, since from the beginning of the 18th century in England a much cheaper and more productive process based on the use of coal(coke). Therefore, the massive construction in Russia of artisanal metallurgical industries with small blast furnaces for a century and a half ahead predetermined the technological lag of Russian metallurgy from Western European and, in general, the technological backwardness of Russian heavy industry.
Bilimbaevsky iron smelting plant near Yekaterinburg: founded in 1734, photo from the end of the 19th century.
In the foreground is a 1-2-storey building of the 18th century, in the background on the right is a new blast furnace plant built in the 1840s.
Apparently important reason of this phenomenon, along with the export opportunities that opened up, was the presence of free serf labor, which made it possible not to take into account high costs for the preparation of firewood and charcoal and the transportation of cast iron. As historian D. Blum points out, transportation of cast iron to the Baltic ports was so slow that it took 2 years, and was so expensive that cast iron on the coast Baltic Sea cost 2.5 times more than in the Urals.
The role and significance of serf labor during the second half of the 18th century. have increased significantly. Thus, the number of assigned (possession) peasants increased from 30 thousand people in 1719 to 312 thousand in 1796. The share of serfs among the workers of the Tagil metallurgical plants increased from 24% in 1747 to 54.3% in 1795, and by 1811, “all the people at the Tagil factories” were in general rank"serf factory masters Demidovs." The duration of work reached 14 hours a day or more. It is known about a number of riots by Ural workers, who took an active part in Pugachev’s uprising.
As I. Wallerstein writes, in connection with the rapid development of the Western European metallurgical industry, based on more advanced and efficient technologies, in the first half of the 19th century. the export of Russian cast iron practically ceased and the Russian metallurgy collapsed. T. Guskova notes the reduction in the production of cast iron and iron at the Tagil factories that occurred during 1801-1815, 1826-1830 and 1840-1849. , which indicates a prolonged depression in the industry.
In a sense, we can talk about the complete deindustrialization of the country, which occurred by the beginning of the 19th century. N.A. Rozhkov points out that at the beginning of the 19th century. Russia had the most “backward” exports: there were practically no industrial products, only raw materials, and imports were dominated by industrial products. S.G. Strumilin notes that the process of mechanization in Russian industry in the 18th – early 19th centuries. moved at a “snail’s pace,” and therefore lagged behind the West by the beginning of the 19th century. reached its maximum, pointing to the use of serf labor as the main reason for this situation.
The predominance of serf labor and command-administrative methods of managing manufactories, from the era of Peter I to the era of Alexander I, caused not only a lag in technical development, but also the inability to establish normal manufacturing production. As M.I. Tugan-Baranovsky wrote in his study, until the early to mid-19th centuries. “Russian factories could not satisfy the army’s needs for cloth, despite all the government’s efforts to expand cloth production in Russia. The cloth was made of extremely low quality and in insufficient quantity, so that sometimes it was necessary to buy uniform cloth abroad, most often in England.” Under Catherine II, Paul I and at the beginning of the era of Alexander I, there continued to be bans on the sale of cloth “outside”, which applied first to the majority, and then to all cloth factories, which were obliged to sell all cloth to the state. However, this didn't help at all. Only in 1816 were cloth factories freed from the obligation to sell all cloth to the state and “from that moment,” wrote Tugan-Baranovsky, “cloth production was able to develop...”; in 1822, the state was for the first time able to place its entire order among factories for the production of cloth for the army. In addition to the dominance of command-administrative methods, main reason The economic historian saw the slow progress and unsatisfactory state of Russian industry in the predominance of forced serf labor.
Typical factories of that era were noble-landowner factories, located right in the villages, where the landowner forcibly drove his peasants and where there were neither normal production conditions nor the workers’ interest in their work. As Nikolai Turgenev wrote, “The landowners placed hundreds of serfs, mostly young girls and men, in miserable shacks and forced them to work... I remember with what horror the peasants spoke about these institutions; they said: “There is a factory in this village” with an expression as if they wanted to say: “There is a plague in this village.”
4. Development of industry under Nicholas I
As I. Wallerstein believes, the real development of industry in Russia began under Nicholas I, which, in his opinion, was facilitated by the system of protectionism introduced in 1822 (at the end of the reign of Alexander I) and maintained until the end of the 1850s. Under this system, high duties were levied on imports of about 1,200 various types goods, and the import of some goods (cotton and linen fabrics and products, sugar, a number of metal products, etc.) was actually prohibited. It was thanks to high customs tariffs, according to I. Wallerstein and D. Blum, that a fairly developed and competitive textile and sugar industry was created in Russia during this period. M.I. Tugan-Baranovsky also pointed out important role protectionist policies, starting in 1822, in the development of textile and other industries.
Another reason, obviously, was the provision of freedom of movement and economic activity to peasants at the beginning of the reign of Nicholas I. Earlier, under Peter I, peasants were prohibited from making transactions and a rule was introduced according to which any peasant who found himself at a distance of more than 30 miles from his village without a vacation pay certificates (passports) from the landowner, was considered a runaway and subject to punishment. As historian N.I. Pavlenko wrote, “The passport system made it difficult for the peasant population to migrate to long years slowed down market formation work force". These strict restrictions remained in place until the 19th century. and were abolished during the first 10-15 years of the reign of Nicholas I, which contributed to the emergence of the mass phenomenon of peasant entrepreneurs and peasant wage workers.
Due to the rapid development of the cotton industry, the import of cotton into Russia (for the purpose of processing) increased from 1.62 thousand tons in 1819 to 48 thousand tons. in 1859, i.e. almost 30 times, and cotton production grew especially rapidly in the 1840s. As S.G. Strumilin wrote, “even England did not know such rates as in the 40s, quadrupling in just one decade.” best years industrial coup XVIII V." .
The roles of sugar refiners were most often landowners, and the entrepreneurs in the textile industry were overwhelmingly peasants, serfs or former serfs. For example, according to historian D. Blum, all or almost all of the 130 cotton factories in the city of Ivanovo in the 1840s belonged to peasants who became entrepreneurs. All cotton mill workers were civilian employees.
Other industries were also developing. As N.A. Rozhkov points out, during 1835-1855. There was an “unusual flowering of industry and manufacturing,” including cotton, metal, clothing, wood, glass, porcelain, leather, and other products. He also writes about a reduction in imports of finished products, as well as machines and tools, during this period, which indicates the development of corresponding Russian industries.
In 1830 in Russia there were only 7 engineering (mechanical) factories producing products worth 240 thousand rubles, and in 1860 there were already 99 factories producing products worth 8 million rubles. – thus, engineering production over the specified period increased by 33 times .
According to S.G. Strumilin, it was in the period from 1830 to 1860. An industrial revolution took place in Russia, similar to what took place in England in the second half of the 18th century. Thus, at the beginning of this period in Russia there were only single copies of mechanical looms and steam engines, and by the end of the period only in the cotton industry there were almost 16 thousand mechanical looms, on which about 3/5 of the total products of this industry were produced, and there were steam machines (steam locomotives, steamships, stationary installations) with a total power of about 200 thousand hp. As a result of intensive mechanization of production, labor productivity has sharply increased, which previously either did not change or even decreased. Thus, if from 1804 to 1825 the annual output of industrial products per worker decreased from 264 to 223 silver rubles, then in 1863 it was already 663 silver rubles, that is, it increased 3 times. As S.G. Strumilin wrote, Russian pre-revolutionary industry had never known such high rates of growth in labor productivity as there were in this period in its entire history.
In connection with the development of industry, the share of the urban population during the reign of Nicholas I more than doubled - from 4.5% in 1825 to 9.2% in 1858 - despite the fact that the overall growth of the Russian population also noticeably accelerated .
Simultaneously with the creation in the 1830-1840s, practically from scratch, of new industries - cotton, sugar, engineering and others - there was a rapid process of ousting serf labor from industry: the number of factories using serf labor decreased to 15% in 1830-1840. e years and continued to decrease in the future. In 1840 it was decided State Council, approved by Nicholas I, on the closure of all possession factories that used serf labor, after which only in the period 1840-1850, on the initiative of the government, more than 100 such factories were closed. By 1851, the number of possession peasants had decreased to 12-13 thousand.
The technical reconstruction of metallurgy also began under Nicholas I. Historian A. Bakshaev points out that at the Goroblagodat plants in the Urals in the 1830-1850s. a number of new technologies were introduced; T. Guskova gives a long list of innovations introduced in the Nizhny Tagil Okrug in the first half of the 19th century.
For a long time, there has been a debate among historians about the timing and stages of " technical revolution"in Russian metallurgy. Although no one doubts that she the peak came for the 1890s, but many dates for its beginning are given: the 30s, 40-50s, 60-70s of the 19th century. In this regard, it is unclear to what extent we can even talk about a “technical revolution” or a “technical revolution” in relation to the period preceding the 1890s. According to N. Rozhkov, in 1880, more than 90% of all pig iron in the country was still smelted using wood fuel. But by 1903, this share had decreased to 30%; accordingly, almost 70% of cast iron in 1903 was smelted using more modern technologies, mainly based on coal (coke). Thus, it makes sense to talk about the very slow reconstruction of the old metallurgy, which took place from 1830 to the 1880s, and about the technical revolution that occurred in the 1890s. According to M.I. Tugan-Baranovsky, backwardness and slow progress in Russian metallurgy during almost the entire 19th century. were due to the fact that from the very beginning it was completely based on forced labor, which made it very difficult for it to transition to “normal” working conditions.
5. In the second half of the 19th century.
In the early 1860s. Russian industry experienced a serious crisis and, in general, in the 1860-1880s. its development slowed down sharply. As M.N. Pokrovsky pointed out, from 1860 to 1862. Iron smelting fell from 20.5 to 15.3 million poods, and cotton processing - from 2.8 to 0.8 million poods. Accordingly, the number of workers in the manufacturing industry decreased very sharply, almost 1.5 times - from 599 thousand people in 1858 to 422 thousand in 1863. In subsequent years, periods of growth alternated with periods of recession. In general, economic historians characterize the period from 1860 to 1885-1888, which occurred mainly during the reign of Alexander II, as a period of economic depression and industrial decline. Although in general during this period, production volumes in the textile industry, mechanical engineering and other industries increased, but to a much smaller extent than in the previous 30 years, and on a per capita basis they remained almost unchanged, due to the rapid demographic growth in the country. Thus, pig iron production (in the European part of the country) increased from 20.5 million poods in 1860 to 23.9 million poods in 1882 (by only 16%), i.e. per capita even decreased.
After Alexander III came to power, starting in the mid-1880s, the government returned to the protectionist policy pursued under Nicholas I. During the 1880s. there were several increases in import duties, and starting in 1891, the country began to operate new system customs tariffs, the highest in the previous 35-40 years. According to scientists of that era (M.M. Kovalevsky]]) and modern economic historians (R. Portal, P. Bayrokh), the implementation of a policy of protectionism played an important role in the sharp acceleration of industrial growth in Russia at the end of the 19th century. In just 10 years (1887-1897), industrial production in the country doubled. For 13 years - from 1887 to 1900 - iron production in Russia increased almost 5 times, steel - also almost 5 times, oil - 4 times, coal - 3.5 times, sugar - 2 times . The construction of railways proceeded at an unprecedented pace. At the end of the 1890s. Every year about 5 thousand kilometers of railway were put into operation.
At the same time, economic historians point to a number of shortcomings of Russia's protectionist policy during this period. Thus, import duties stimulated the production not of complex industrial products, but of basic products of Russian industry (iron, steel, oil, coal, etc.). Unreasonably high duties and excise taxes were imposed on a number of consumer goods, primarily food (on average 70%). Import duties were levied only in the European part of the country, while the Asian border along almost its entire length was virtually free of any duties and fees, which was taken advantage of by traders who imported the lion's share of industrial imports through it.
Characteristic feature industrialization of the 1890s. there was a rapid monopolization of leading industries. For example, a syndicate will sell at the beginning of the 20th century. controlled more than 80% of the total Russian production of finished metal products, the Krovlya syndicate controlled more than 50% of the total production of sheet iron, a similar picture was in other industries where Prodvagon, Produgol and other monopolistic associations were created. The Tobacco Trust was created in the tobacco industry - it was created by the British who bought up all Russian tobacco companies. This led to an ever-increasing concentration of production in industry, exceeding even the level of concentration that developed in Western Europe. Thus, in large enterprises with more than 500 workers in Russia at the beginning of the 20th century. About half of all industrial workers worked; such a high figure in Europe was only in Germany; in other countries this figure was much lower.
6. Development of Russian industry at the beginning of the 20th century
An undoubted fact is the slowdown in industrial growth in Russia on the eve of the First World War compared to the end of the 19th century. In 1901-1903 there was a drop in production. But even in 1905-1914. the rate of increase in industrial production was several times lower than in the 1890s. . According to historian N. Rozhkov, the growth rate of industry during this period was only slightly faster than the growth rate of the Russian population.
For example, the production of steel and iron from 1900 to 1913. grew by 51%, and the country's population - by 27% (from 135 to 171 million people). In the previous 13 years, at the same rate of population growth, steel and iron production increased 4.6 times:
Production of main types of industrial products in 1887-1913, million poods
Source: R.Portal. The Industrialization of Russia. Cambridge Economic History of Europe, Cambridge, 1965, Vol. VI, part 2, pp. 837, 844
Slowdown of industrial growth at the beginning of the 20th century. did not mean that there was no demand for industrial products, but a significant part of this demand was covered by imports. As indicated English economist M. Miller, during this entire period there was a rapid increase in the import of machinery and equipment from Germany, and therefore only in the period from 1902-1906. By 1913, imports from Germany doubled.
At the beginning of the 20th century. The process of concentration of production and monopolization continued. On January 1, 1910, there were already 150 syndicates and other monopolistic associations in Russia in 50 industries of the country, which, as N.A. Rozhkov noted, were little involved in technical progress, but contributed to rising prices for industrial products, examples of which he cites.
A number of industries in pre-revolutionary Russia was developed quite well: metallurgy, locomotive building, textile industry. Steam locomotive construction has gone through several stages in its development - from the first Russian steam locomotive of the Cherepanovs (1834) to armored trains of the First World War and Civil War. Before the revolution, Russia had the largest railway network in Europe (length - 70.5 thousand km in 1917), and a large fleet of domestically produced steam locomotives and carriages was used for its operation. The textile industry emerged from the very beginning as a competitive industry based on private initiative, and remained so at the beginning of the 20th century.
One of the most powerful pre-revolutionary steam locomotives (Lp series)
At the same time, even in the development of basic industries, Russia lagged significantly behind leading European countries. For example, metal production in Russia in 1912 was 28 kg per person, and in Germany - 156 kg, that is, 5.5 times more. As for more complex and knowledge-intensive industries, the lag there was much greater. As N.A. Rozhkov pointed out, its industrial engineering and production of means of production (machines and equipment) in Russia at the beginning of the 20th century. actually didn't exist.
The shipbuilding industry was poorly developed: about 80% of all ships were purchased abroad; Some of our own ships were produced in the Caspian region, where imported ships simply could not reach. New industries: automobile and aircraft manufacturing, had just begun to develop shortly before the First World War, but even here there was a significant lag between Russia and the leading Western countries. Thus, during the First World War, Russia produced 4 times fewer aircraft than Germany, France or England. In addition, almost 90% of Russian aircraft were equipped with imported engines, despite the fact that the engine was the most high-tech element of the design, and its price accounted for more than 50% of the cost of the aircraft.
“Ilya Muromets” by I. Sikorsky is the best Russian bomber of the First World War.
From 70% to 100% of production capacity in most industries on the eve of the First World War was controlled by foreign capital, largely French.
The handicraft industry, which was engaged in the production of a number of industrial products (for example, samovars, fabrics, clothing, etc.), received disproportionately large development. According to the historian S.G. Kara-Murza, the number of factory workers (adult men) on the eve of the revolution was 1.8 million people, and together with families - 7.2 million people. , that is, only about 4% of the population of the Russian Empire. At the same time, the number of artisanal peasants at the end of the 1890s, according to M.M. Kovalevsky, was about 7-8 million, or about 12% of the total adult working population of the country at the end of the 19th century.
According to the professor Harvard University G. Grossman, the volume of industrial production in Russia in 1913 per capita was 1/10 of the corresponding figure in the United States. The lag in Russia's development from Western countries in industry was more significant than the general lag in the country's economic development. Thus, the volume of Russia's gross domestic product per capita in 1913, according to the American economic historian P. Gregory, was 50% of the corresponding German and French, 1/5 of the English and 15% of the American figure.
Shortcomings in the development of Russian industry played a significant role in the events of the First World War, when the Russian army turned out to be worse equipped with military equipment, weapons and ammunition than other warring countries.
Economists of the early 20th century. and modern economic historians have cited a number of reasons that could contribute to these shortcomings in the development of pre-revolutionary Russian industry. Among them are mistakes in implementing the government’s protectionist policy (see above), high monopolization of industry, incorrect priorities of the state industrial and transport strategy, corruption state apparatus.
All the wars of world history, according to the Harper's Encyclopedia military history R. Dupuis and T. Dupuis with comments by N. Volkovsky and D. Volkovsky. S-P., 2004, book. 3, p. 142-143
All wars of world history, according to the Harper Encyclopedia of Military History by R. Dupuis and T. Dupuis with comments by N. Volkovsky and D. Volkovsky. S-P., 2004, book. 3, p. 136
Rozhkov N. Russian history in comparative historical light (fundamentals of social dynamics) Leningrad - Moscow, 1928, vol. 4, p. 24-29
Pokrovsky M. Russian history since ancient times. With the participation of N. Nikolsky and V. Storozhev. Moscow, 1911, vol. III, p. 117
Pokrovsky M. Russian history since ancient times. With the participation of N. Nikolsky and V. Storozhev. Moscow, 1911, vol. III, p. 117-122
Strumilin S.G. Essays on the economic history of Russia M. 1960, p. 297-298
Rozhkov N. Russian history in comparative historical light (fundamentals of social dynamics) Leningrad - Moscow, 1928, vol. 5, p. 130, 143
Pokrovsky M. Russian history since ancient times. With the participation of N. Nikolsky and V. Storozhev. Moscow, 1911, vol. III, p. 82
An example is the decree of Peter I to the Senate in January 1712 to force merchants to build cloth and other factories if they themselves do not want to. Pokrovsky M. Russian history since ancient times. With the participation of N. Nikolsky and V. Storozhev. Moscow, 1911, vol. III, p. 124-125. Another example is the prohibitive decrees that led to the destruction of small-scale weaving in the Pskov, Arkhangelsk and other regions Tugan-Baranovsky M. Russian Factory. M.-L., 1934, p. 19
Yatskevich M.V. Manufacturing production in Russia during the Northern War of 1700-1721. Author's abstract. diss... Ph.D., Maykop, 2005, p. 25
Yatskevich M.V. Manufacturing production in Russia during the Northern War of 1700-1721. Author's abstract. diss... Ph.D., Maykop, 2005, p. 17-19
Strumilin S.G. Essays on the economic history of Russia M. 1960, p. 348-357; Rozhkov N. Russian history in comparative historical coverage (fundamentals of social dynamics) Leningrad - Moscow, 1928, vol. 5, p. 150-154
Augustin E.A. Formation and development of the metallurgical industry of the black earth south of Russia at the end of the 17th - XVIII centuries. Author's abstract. diss... Ph.D., Voronezh, 2001, p.20
Yatskevich M.V. Manufacturing production in Russia during the Northern War of 1700-1721. Author's abstract. diss... Ph.D., Maykop, 2005, p. 21, 17
Pokrovsky M. Russian history since ancient times. With the participation of N. Nikolsky and V. Storozhev. Moscow, 1911, vol. III, p. 123
Augustin E.A. Formation and development of the metallurgical industry of the black earth south of Russia at the end of the 17th - 18th centuries. Author's abstract. diss... Ph.D., Voronezh, 2001, p. 16, 19
Tugan-Baranovsky M. Russian factory. M.-L., 1934, p. 19, 25-26
D.I. Nine-strong. Factories and factories during the reign of Emperor Peter the Great. Historical and economic research. Kyiv, 1917, p. 72-75
It is significant, for example, that the population assigned to the industry’s largest Tagil metallurgical plants in the Urals from 1757 to 1816 grew more than 5 times. Guskova T.K. Factory economy of the Demidovs in the first half of the 19th century. Author's abstract. diss... Ph.D., M., 1996 p. 15
Pokrovsky M. Russian history since ancient times. With the participation of N. Nikolsky and V. Storozhev. Moscow, 1911, t. 4, p. 99
Strumilin S.G. Essays on the economic history of Russia. M. 1960, p. 412
Guskova T.K. Factory economy of the Demidovs in the first half of the 19th century. Author's abstract. diss... Ph.D., M. 1996, p. 15, 22
As historian A. Bakshaev points out, already in the first half of the 19th century. maximum height stoves has doubled compared to the 18th century. (see photo), later the domain size increased even more. Bakshaev A.A. The formation and functioning of the mining industry of the Goroblagodatsky district of the Urals in the 18th - first half of the 19th centuries. Author's abstract. diss... Ph.D., Ekaterinburg, 2006, p. 19
Historians believe that the technical reconstruction of heavy industry, which began in the 19th century, did not end even by 1917. Bakshaev A.A. The formation and functioning of the mining industry of the Goroblagodatsky district of the Urals in the 18th - first half of the 19th centuries. Author's abstract. diss... Ph.D., Ekaterinburg, 2006, p. 6-7
N.Tourgeneff. La Russie et les Russes, op. by Tugan-Baranovsky M. Russian factory. M.-L., 1934, p. 89 See Kuzovkov Yu. History of corruption in Russia. M., 2010, paragraph 17.1
G. Grossman. Russia and the Soviet Union. Fontana Economic History of Europe, ed. by C. Cipolla, Glasgow, Vol. 4, part 2, p. 490
Paul Gregory. Economic growth of the Russian Empire (late XIX - early XX centuries). New calculations and estimates. M, 2003, p. 21
Kahan A. Government Policies and the Industrialization of Russia. Journal of Economic History, Vol. 27, 1967, No. 4; Kirchner W. Russian Tariffs and Foreign Industries before 1914: the German Enterepreneures’ Perspective. Journal of Economic History, Vol. 41, 1981, No. 2
Miller M. The Economic Development of Russia, 1905-1914. With special reference to Trade, Industry and Finance. London, 1967; Rozhkov N. Russian history in comparative historical light (fundamentals of social dynamics) Leningrad - Moscow, 1926-1928, vol. 11-12; Kuzovkov Yu. History of corruption in Russia. M., 2010, pp. 17.1, 17.2, 18.5
By the second half of the 18th century. in the socio-economic field of development of the countries of Western Europe and the USA, all conditions were created for the start of the industrial revolution. The destruction of the old feudal order, the economic and political strengthening of the bourgeois strata of society, the growth of manufacturing production - all this testified to the maturation of global changes in the sphere of production. Of great importance for the beginning of the industrial revolution were the results of the agrarian revolution of the 18th century, which led to the intensification of agricultural labor and at the same time to a reduction in the rural population, part of which began to move to the city. Industrialization, which spanned from the end of the 15th to the 19th centuries. throughout Europe, developed extremely unevenly and had its own characteristics in each region. The most rapid growth was typical for areas with long industrial traditions, as well as for areas rich in coal, iron ore and other minerals.
The Industrial Revolution began in England in the 60s XVIII century This country had a dense network of manufactories that functioned on the basis of the principle of division of labor: the organization of production here reaches a high degree of development, which contributed to the extreme simplification and specialization of individual production operations. The replacement and displacement of manual labor by machines, which is the essence of the industrial revolution, first occurred in light industry. The introduction of machines in this area of production required less capital investment and brought quick financial returns. In 1765, weaver D. Hargreaves invented a mechanical spinning wheel in which 15-18 spindles worked simultaneously. This invention, which was modernized several times, soon spread throughout England. An important milestone In the process of improvements, D. Watt invented a steam engine in 1784, which could be used in almost all industries. New technology required a different organization of production. Manufacture begins to be replaced by factory. Unlike manufacture, based on manual labor, the factory was a large machine plant designed to produce a huge number of standard products. The development of industry resulted in the growth of transport infrastructure: the construction of new canals and highways is being carried out; from the first quarter XIX V. actively developing railway transport. By the middle of the century the length railway tracks in England amounted to more than 8000 km. Sea and river trade also modernized with the beginning of the use of steam engines in the fleet. England's successes in the industrial sector were impressive: at the end of the 18th - first half of the 19th centuries. it began to be called the “workshop of the world.”
Industrial development of the 19th century. characterized by the expansion of machine production, the transfer of technological knowledge, commercial and financial experience from England to others European countries and the USA. In continental Europe, one of the first countries to be affected by industrialization was Belgium. As in England, there were rich reserves of coal and ore; large shopping centers (Ghent, Liege, Antwerp, etc.) flourished due to the convenient geographical location between France and Germany. The ban on the import of English goods during the Napoleonic wars contributed to the flourishing of cotton production in Ghent. In 1823, the first blast furnace was built in the Liege coal basin. Belgium's independent existence since 1831 favored the acceleration of its industrial development: over the next 20 years, the number of machines used increased sixfold, and the level of coal production increased from 2 to 6 million tons in year. In France technological innovations penetrated primarily into large industrial centers such as Paris and Lyon, as well as into areas where the textile industry developed (the northeast and center of the country). Of great importance for French industry was the fact that banks and financial institutions actively invested their capital in the construction of new enterprises and improvement of technologies. The French economy developed especially actively during the era of the Second Empire (1852-1870), when export volumes increased 400 times and energy production five times.
A significant obstacle to the industrialization process in Germany there was political fragmentation of this country. The situation improved significantly after the unification of the German states in 1871. The Ruhr region became the largest industrial region in Germany, where there were significant deposits of high-quality coal. Subsequently, the Krupp company, which was a leading steel manufacturer in Germany, was founded here. Another industrial center of the country was located in the valley of the Wupper River. At the beginning of the century, it gained fame due to the production of cotton fabrics, coal and iron ore mining. It was in this region of Germany that coke was first used for the production of cast iron instead of charcoal.
Industrialization in Austria-Hungary, Italy, Spain affected only certain regions, without having a significant impact on the economic development of these countries as a whole.
IN USA Industrial production began to develop at a particularly rapid pace in the 1940s. XIX century. The most important industrial region of the country was the northeastern states (Pennsylvania, New York, etc.), where by the middle of the 19th century there were large enterprises producing iron and agricultural machinery that ran on coal fuel. The constantly increasing size of the country (by 1848 the US borders extended from the Atlantic to the Pacific oceans) contributed to rapid development. means of communication - railways and highways. The industrial development of the United States was carried out in the conditions of a constant influx of cheap labor - emigrants from Europe and Asia. Technical innovations also penetrated into the southern United States, where in the first half of the 19th century. plantation agriculture developed, based on the use of the labor of black slaves: the cotton gin, invented in 1793, was increasingly being introduced; enterprises for processing agricultural products are being built. In general, the industrial development of the United States has proceeded at the fastest pace since the second half of the 19th century, when internal socio-political contradictions (the conflict between the southern and northern states) were overcome.
The Industrial Revolution had significant social consequences^ associated with the formation of two main classes of industrial society: the industrial bourgeoisie and wage workers. These two social groups had to find common ground and develop an effective system of relationships. This process was extremely difficult. At the first stage of industrial development, which can be conventionally designated as the era of “wild capitalism,” the degree of exploitation of workers was extremely high. Entrepreneurs sought to reduce the cost of producing goods at any cost, in particular by reducing wages and increasing working hours. In conditions of low labor productivity, a complete lack of basic safety precautions, as well as legislation protecting the rights of hired workers, the situation of the latter was very difficult. Similar situation could not but cause spontaneous protest, which had various manifestations: from the destruction of machines (the “Luddite” movement in England) to the creation of trade unions and the formation of ideological concepts in which the proletariat was assigned a vital role in the development of society. The nature of the relationship between industrialists and government authorities has also changed. The capitalists were no longer satisfied with the fact that the state took into account their interests; they gradually began to openly lay claim to power.