The 30-year reign (1825-1855) of Alexander I's brother, Emperor Nikolai Pavlovich, or Nicholas I, was the apotheosis of autocratic Russia, highest level traditional society in its later, relatively civilized and, moreover, military-police-bureaucratic form. Emperor Nikolai Pavlovich himself represents the most powerful and colorful personality of the later Russian emperors (from the time of the death of his grandmother Catherine the Great until the revolution), with an iron will, regal charm and brilliant manners, personifying (along with the imperial court that blinded foreigners with its splendor) external splendor great empire, an excellent actor who knew how to put on many masks, moreover, a pedantically precise, stern martinet, a fanatic of the idea of legitimate autocracy.
The main content of the internal policy of Nicholas I boils down to the following:
Undoubted positives:
1. Codification of laws (which previously represented a shapeless heap), carried out by M.M. Speransky, and streamlining the work of the state apparatus.
2. Development technical education, the founding of the first technical universities in Russia.
3. Currency reform Minister of Finance E. Kankrin with the transition to the silver standard of the ruble, which strengthened its stability.
4. Easing the situation of state peasants (P. Kiselev’s reform).
5. Patronage national culture(Pushkin, Glinka, etc.).
“Nullified” positive - 6. Repeated attempts to begin the abolition of serfdom through secret committees convened 7 times, unrealized due to the resistance of the nobility and the inertia of the higher bureaucracy.
Controversial Features:
7. Political reaction after the suppression of the Decembrist uprising, which began the reign of Nicholas, and the pacification Polish uprising 1831 The reaction was expressed primarily in the suppression of any dissent, tightening censorship and political repression. Resumed use death penalty, which had not previously been used for 50 years (since Pugachev revolt and before the Decembrist putsch). When did “sedition” not fall under criminal article, other measures of influence were invented, a striking example is the case of P. Chaadaev. A Westerner, a friend of Pushkin, who diverged from him politically, since Pushkin stood for patriotic positions, Chaadaev in 1836, due to a censor’s oversight, published an article with sweeping criticism Russian history, culture, religion and traditions; at the same time, it did not contain language that would directly subject the author to trial. Then Chaadaev was declared mentally ill. Thus, Nicholas I became an “innovator” in the method of repression and in this far anticipated the later Soviet leaders who sent dissidents to mental hospitals.
The reaction especially intensified in the last years of Nicholas's reign, after revolutionary events 1848 in European countries. In particular, previously free travel abroad was sharply limited (mainly only for diplomats) - in fact, for the first time, an “iron curtain” was erected between Russia and Europe, so in this too, Nikolai was far ahead of the leaders of the USSR.
8. Creating a mystery political police- The third department of His Imperial Majesty’s own chancellery and the corps of gendarmes subordinate to it (1826, first chief - General Count A.H. Benckendorff), nicknamed “blue uniforms”, to fight the revolutionary and other opposition movements. She had enormous powers (including checking personal letters) and was personally subordinate to the emperor and monitored all subjects of the empire.
9. A turn from Peter’s ideology of “learning from Europe” to a nationalist course, expressed in the motto “Orthodoxy, autocracy and nationality” (a formula invented by the Minister of Education Count S. Uvarov) and protecting the conservative foundations of Russian life. The reason for this turn, like the “Iron Curtain,” was the dangerous influence of the revolutionary and liberal tendencies of the West for the monarchy, which began from the time French Revolution. On the one hand, this ideology was partly anticipated Patriotic War with Napoleon and is aimed at reviving patriotic self-awareness, largely lost top layers society as a result of the general and uncritical passion for everything Western and especially French since the time of Peter. (In particular, Nicholas obliged the nobles to speak Russian at court, since many of them had already forgotten native language). On the other hand, the fence off from Europe with the “Iron Curtain”, although it did not reach such a degree of confrontation as during the times of “Moscow - the Third Rome”, since it was no longer dictated religious fanaticism, and quite pragmatic motives (in particular, scientific, technical and business contacts with the West, teaching foreign languages to young people were preserved), but still contributed to the partial conservation of the country.
In general, most historians agree in recognizing the Nicholas era as a time of missed opportunities to modernize the country - and not only because of the personal conservatism of the emperor, but also the inertia of the ruling bureaucracy and nobility - after all, it was they who ultimately “slowed down” all the tsar’s initiatives on the issue of the abolition of serfdom. Rejecting the false, unequivocally negative stereotype regarding Nicholas I, created by liberal and revolutionary historiography (starting with A. Herzen) and entrenched in Soviet era, something else should be recognized. With all the extraordinary personal qualities Nicholas is certainly the largest and most colorful of the Russian emperors after Peter and Catherine, and despite all the positive innovations, they still had a private character. Behind the regal image of Nicholas that captivated people and the external splendor of his empire, from the dazzling court splendor to the army, drilled with cane discipline to the acrobatic art of parades, and behind the apparently ideal bureaucratic mechanism, lay outdated class-serf remnants, and most importantly, a growing economic, technical and military lag behind Europe, which has already experienced industrial revolution, dominated by machine production, railways, steam fleet and rifled weapons, while in our country all these processes were still in the initial and extremely slow stage, since they were slowed down by the lack of free labor under the conditions of serfdom. All this gave rise to the aforementioned revolutionary publicist A. Herzen, with all his tendentiousness, to very successfully call Nicholas Russia “an empire of facades.”
The main directions of the foreign policy of Nicholas I were:
1) expansion to the East and South;
2) the fight against the revolutionary movement in Europe, the result of which was the transformation of Russia into the “gendarme of Europe” (the figurative expression of K. Marx), which further increased the hostility of the advanced European public opinion and its international isolation, which led to a dramatic outcome in the Crimean War.
The chronicle of the main events of foreign policy is as follows:
1828-1829 - accession Eastern Armenia and Northern Azerbaijan as a result of victorious wars with Turkey and Persia (Iran).
1831 - Polish national liberation uprising and its suppression.
1834-1859 - a war of extermination for the conquest of the North Caucasus (in many ways similar to the recent war in Chechnya) with the mountaineer tribes led by Shamil (ended in victory after the death of Nicholas).
1849 - military intervention to Hungary and the suppression of the revolution in it, which saved the Austrian monarchy from collapse and death, which later turned against Russia itself.
The sad result of Nicholas's reign was Crimean War(1853-1855), which was the result of his desire for the final destruction and division of the once formidable for Europe, and by that time decrepit Muslim Ottoman (or Ottoman) Empire (Turkey). Contrary to Nicholas’s calculations, England and France came to its defense (and even Austria, which he saved from collapse, took a hostile position). This reflected the international isolation of Russia, whose foreign policy ambitions had long caused general discontent. Despite the victories over the Turks (in particular, the defeat Turkish fleet at Sinop) and lasted almost a year heroic defense Sevastopol from the British and French under the leadership of Admiral P.S. Nakhimov, the war ended in defeat and (after the death of Nicholas, under the terms of the peace treaty of 1856) the loss of Russia Black Sea Fleet.
The Crimean War clearly and mercilessly exposed the economic and military-technical backwardness of Russia from the leading countries of Europe. In the words of A. Tyutcheva, “the whole magnificent phantasmagoria of Nicholas’s reign dissipated like smoke,” which was the reason for his premature death(even before the end of the war). The halo of invincibility of autocratic-serf Russia dissipated. As a result, the defeat in the Crimean War became the decisive impetus for the Great Reforms of the next reign.
Introduction1.2 Peasant question
2.1 Formation of a revolutionary democratic direction
2.2 Activities of Belinsky and Herzen in the 40s
2.3 Slavophiles and their opponents
2.4 Social movement in Russia and the revolution of 1848
ConclusionIntroduction
The accession to the throne of Nicholas I was overshadowed by the Decembrists' speech at Senate Square December 14, 1825 Having suppressed this speech, Nicholas I, however, made for himself important conclusion about the need to solve the peasant question. Nicholas himself considered reforms, including peasant reforms, to be an urgent matter that society desired. It should be noted that in the period 1837-1842. under the leadership of P.D. Kiselev, a reform of the State Peasants was carried out. However, Nicholas never decided to abolish serfdom.
The second important conclusion was that the nobility ceased to be the support of the regime. Even Paul I and Alexander I opposed the dominance of the nobility created in Russian society in the 18th century. Hence the desire of Nicholas I to rely on the bureaucracy and officialdom. The years of the reign of Nicholas I were marked by the strengthening of autocracy, the complication of all parts of the state apparatus, further numerical growth and strengthening of the positions of the bureaucracy. In this regard, it should be noted provincial reform, held in the 30s years XIX century, which greatly limited the power of the nobility locally. After it was carried out, “the nobility became auxiliary crown administration, the police instrument of the government." The official became the main figure in the province, pushing the class nobility into the background. Shifting executive power onto the shoulders of the bureaucracy led to its sharp quantitative growth. Special place His Imperial Majesty's Own Office played a role in the system of power. It had several branches. Among them, an important place was occupied by the III Department, which had a corps of gendarmes.
The main idea of Nicholas's reign boiled down to the following: “do not introduce anything new and only repair and put in order the old.” In this regard, we can point to the tightening of the censorship regime and a number of measures in the field of education and enlightenment, for example, the elimination of the autonomy of universities. During the reign of Nicholas I, Russia waged wars with Turkey and Iran, and military operations continued in the North Caucasus against the highlanders. In 1853, Russia became involved in the Crimean War (1853-1856), which had far-reaching consequences for the country.
1. The regime of Nicholas I: political reaction and reforms. The beginning of the crisis of the Nicholas Empire.
After the death of Alexander I, the interregnum and the brutal reprisal of the rebel Decembrists, Alexander’s brother Nicholas I ascended the Russian throne.
Nikolai was not specially trained to manage such huge empire like Russia. In his youth he did not receive a sufficiently serious education. He was interested primarily in military affairs. However, it should be noted that his natural intelligence, iron will, and love of discipline gave him the opportunity to manage the state quite effectively.
The reign of Nicholas I is rightly considered one of the most reactionary periods our history. He became famous for his uncompromising struggle against revolutionary, democratic movements not only in Russia, but also in Europe.
The accession to the throne of Nicholas I was overshadowed by the Decembrists' speech on Senate Square on December 14, 1825.
The Decembrist cause was of enormous importance for the young sovereign, as well as for the entire state. It had a huge impact on the entire government activity of Emperor Nicholas and greatly affected public mood his. Throughout his reign, Emperor Nicholas I remembered “his friends on December 14th” (as he put it about the Decembrists). Personally familiar with their case, himself, participating in interrogations and investigations, Nikolai had the opportunity to think about the circumstances of the case.
From his acquaintance with the Decembrist case, he concluded that the nobility was in an unreliable mood. A very large number of people participated in secret societies, was from the nobility. Nicholas I was inclined to consider the conspiracy of December 14, 1825 to be class-based noble movement, which covered all circles and strata of the nobility. Suspecting the nobles of striving for political dominance in the state, Nicholas tried to create a bureaucracy around himself and rule the country through obedient officials, without the help of noble institutions and figures. Under Nicholas I, the centralization of management was greatly strengthened: all matters were decided by officials in ministerial offices in St. Petersburg, and local class institutions turned into simple executive bodies for ministries.
Getting acquainted with the affairs of the Decembrists, Emperor Nicholas I became convinced that the desire for change and reform that guided the Decembrists had deep foundations. Serfdom, the lack of a good code of laws, the bias of judges, the arbitrariness of rulers, the lack of education, in a word, everything that the Decembrists complained about was the real evil of Russian life. Having punished the Decembrists, Emperor Nicholas I came to the conclusion that the government itself had to make corrections and begin reforms legally.
In order to calm public opinion, the first secret committee(Committee 6 December 1826). Nicholas I set the committee the task of reviewing the papers of Alexander I in order to “review the current situation of all parts of government” and determine “what is good now, what cannot be left and what can be replaced with.” The committee was headed by the Chairman of the State Council, an experienced and careful administrator V.P. Kochubey, and one of its active members was M.M. Speransky, whose constitutional “dreams” had long disappeared, and his knowledge, efficiency, faith in form and legislative activity, government attracted the sympathy of the king.
The December 6 Committee worked regularly for 4 years. His proposals for reform central authorities The authorities proceeded from the idea of “separation of powers,” however, not to limit autocracy, but to strengthen it through a clearer delineation of functions between various departments. Local administration reform projects have boiled down to strengthening control over it both from related departments and from central authorities.
The draft law “on fortunes” developed by the committee was openly pro-noble in nature: it was proposed to abolish the provision of Peter’s “Table of Ranks” on receiving noble rank according to length of service. In order to satisfy other classes, it was proposed to limit the sale of serfs without land. The revolution that began in 1830 in France and Belgium and the uprising in Poland frightened the government and forced it to abandon such moderate reforms.
In order to manage important affairs, the emperor considered it necessary to have his own office. The transformation of his own began Imperial Majesty office in the most important body of state power (I department).
In the II department, all legislative work was carried out and through it, deviations from laws or changes to them were requested and received for various reasons “in the order of supreme government.”
Nicholas took the high police into direct control of his office and established for this purpose the famous III Department, headed by General Benckendorff. In connection with the III Division, a separate corps of gendarmes was established with the division of the entire country into five (and then up to eight) gendarmerie districts. These new institutions were presented as beneficial for “well-meaning” ordinary people and counted on their support.
Instruction IV department managed charitable and educational institutions. In 1836, the V department also arose to manage state property and state-owned peasants (then a special ministry was established).
The drafting of the legislative code was entrusted to M. M. Speransky. Initially, Speransky set himself a very serious task: to collect all the laws and on this basis create new current legislation. However, Nicholas 1 complicated the task: collect all known laws, publish them in chronological order and select current laws from them.
Speransky did a great job of identifying, collecting and publishing all the laws. In 1830-1832 45 volumes were published" Full meeting laws Russian Empire", which included all legislation starting with " Cathedral Code"1649 to 1825, and 6 volumes of laws adopted under Nicholas I (from 1825 to 1830). Then volumes were published annually passed laws. From this mass of legislative acts, Speransky made a selection and classification of existing laws. In 1833, 15 volumes of the Code of Laws were published, in which the laws were arranged according to a thematic and chronological principle.
It is generally accepted that Nikolai's attempt to improve government controlled failed. Over-centralization resulted in higher authorities were literally flooded with a sea of papers and lost real control over the progress of affairs on the ground.
1.2 Peasant question
The emperor's constant attention and interest was attracted by the issue of improving the life of the peasants. This interest was maintained frequent unrest peasants During the reign of Nicholas I, there were over 500 cases of peasant unrest. Several times Nicholas I established secret (“secret”) committees for peasant affairs. They collected information and materials, wrote memos, drew up projects, but all this paper production remained “under the carpet”, because Nicholas I himself could not decide to seriously disrupt the existing order. When discussed in State Council bill on " obligated peasants"(in 1842) Emperor Nicholas I stated: "There is no doubt that serfdom in its current situation is an evil, tangible and obvious to everyone; but to touch it now would be an evil, of course, even more disastrous."
The decree on “obligatory peasants” of April 2, 1842 did not repeal the decree of 1803. "about free cultivators", but the owners were allowed to "conclude agreements with their peasants mutual agreement agreements on such a basis that... the landowners retained the full right of patrimonial ownership of the land... and the peasants received from them plots of land for use for established duties." The decree of 1842 was only advisory in nature, the norms of allotment and duties of peasants were entirely inflated by the landowner, who retained full power over the “liberated”, “compulsory” peasant. Practical significance This decree was small - before the reform of 1861, slightly more than 27 thousand peasants were freed.
In 1837-1838 to manage “state property” (including state-owned peasants), a special Ministry of State Property was established; The humane general Count P. D. Kiselev was appointed minister. He persistently sought to comprehensively improve their situation.
The volost and rural administration were built on the beginning of peasant self-government. The ministry of Count P. D. Kiselev took care of satisfying the economic and everyday needs of the peasants: it delimited lands, allocated additional plots for those with little land, and established savings and loan banks, schools and hospitals. The reform of the state village carried out by P. D. Kiselev, new form the organization of state-owned peasants (including the introduction of self-government) served as a model for the organization of landowner peasants upon their liberation from serfdom.
Among the internal events of Nicholas' reign, mention should be made of the financial reform of Count E. F. Kankrin, who headed the Ministry of Finance from 1824 to 1844. In 1839-1843 Count E.F. Kankrin carried out a formal devaluation (official reduction in gold content monetary unit or a depreciation of the national currency against gold, silver...) banknotes (paper money), establishing that 350 rubles in banknotes are equal to 100 rubles in silver, and then issued new paper money - “credit notes”, the value of which was ensured by the money collected by the Minister of Finance metal exchange fund.
The economic development of the country forced the government to patronize industry, trade and, ultimately, promote development capitalist relations. Establishment of industry, establishment of banks, construction railways, establishment of technical educational institutions, promotion of agricultural and industrial societies, organizing exhibitions - all these incentive measures economic development carried out taking into account the interests of the landowner" and the needs of the autocracy.
Military expenses and expenses for the growing administrative apparatus required an increase in cash receipts. Hence the adoption of incentive measures for entrepreneurs and the publication of protective tariffs. Conservative in its origins, the policy slowed down, of course, the development of new processes in the economy. But they, nevertheless, slowly but surely made their way, deepening the crisis of the entire socio-economic system.
1825–1855– reign of Nicholas I. Reactionary politics. Arakcheevshchina - organization of military settlements.
From the beginning of his reign, Nicholas I entered into confrontation with prominent noble families. At the same time, he managed to win the sympathy of secular society. The reason was the hope of the nobles for a change in the atmosphere recent years the reign of Alexander I and the possible continuation of transformations.
Second quarter XIX century characterized by the growing crisis of the serf system, which hampered the development of production forces. At the same time, the processes of disintegration of old forms of management have become more clearly visible. As the foreign market takes shape and expands foreign trade, the economy increased specific gravity industry.
1826- by decree of Nicholas I, the II and III departments of the imperial chancellery were formed. The II department took up the legislation of the empire. The drafting of the legislative code was entrusted to M. M. Speransky.
1827- an order appeared on the admission of peasant children only to primary schools.
1828- district schools were separated from gymnasiums, in which only the children of nobles and officials had the opportunity to study. The new charter eliminated university independence. The number of students at the university was limited to 300 students.
1832– minister public education S. S. Uvarov proposed to base the entire internal policy of the government on the slogan : “Autocracy, Orthodoxy, nationality!”, which formed the basis of the theory of official nationality.
1833– two editions were published: “Complete Collection of Laws of the Russian Empire” (1832) and “Code of Laws of the Russian Empire” (1833).
1835- the creation of a committee on the issue of the abolition of serfdom, but the solution to this problem was expected to take decades.
1853–1856 – .
When they died down European revolutions 1848–49, Nicholas I decided to strengthen the strategic position of his empire. First of all, the emperor wanted to solve the problem of the Black Sea straits. According to the agreements in force at that time, the Russian navy could pass through the Bosporus and Dardanelles straits. In addition, Nicholas I sought to strengthen Russia's political influence on the Balkan Peninsula. He wanted to use liberation struggle Balkan peoples against the Turkish yoke.
The conflict in Palestine arose between the Orthodox and Catholic clergy over the question of who would be the guardian of the especially revered churches in Jerusalem and Bethlehem. Palestine was then part of Ottoman Empire. Under pressure from France, the Turkish Sultan resolved the issue in favor of the Catholics. This caused discontent in St. Petersburg. Taking advantage of the dispute over shrines, Nicholas I increased pressure on Turkey. Nicholas I’s favorite, A.S. Menshikov, was sent to Constantinople for negotiations. But his behavior only aggravated the situation.
Nicholas I tried to enlist the support of England, but was refused. After this, he continued to put pressure on Turkey, demanding that the Sultan recognize him as the patron of all Orthodox Christians living in Turkey. To reinforce these words, Russian troops were brought into the territory of Moldavia and Wallachia, which were in vassal dependence on Turkey. In response, the English and French squadrons entered the Sea of Marmara. Encouraged by this, the Turkish Sultan October 1853 declared war on Russia.
Türkiye planned to deliver the main blow in Transcaucasia. But this plan was thwarted by the decisive actions of the Russian fleet. Turkish squadron, standing in Sinop Bay and preparing to land, was shot at point-blank range by a Russian squadron consisting of only 8 ships, which, despite the barrage of coastal batteries, slipped into the bay. The squadron was commanded by a vice admiral. entered as the last battle of the era sailing fleet. Over the next few months, Russian troops inflicted a series of defeats on the Turks in Transcaucasia. Turkey was saved from imminent death by the Anglo-French squadron, which January 1854 entered the Black Sea.
IN March 1854 Russian troops crossed the Danube. Russian government rejected the ultimatum of England and France to withdraw their troops from Moldavia and Wallachia. Then England and France declared war on Russia. The Allies failed to create a pan-European coalition against Russia. But Austria concentrated its troops on the border of the Danube principalities. Russian troops were forced to retreat first across the Danube and then across the Prut. Frustrated, Nikolai accused him of ingratitude Austrian Emperor Franz Joseph.
Meanwhile, the Anglo-French squadron appeared in the Baltic Sea, blocked Kronstadt and Sveaborg, but did not dare to attack them. English warships entered the White Sea. At the end of summer, the Russian city of Kola on the Murmansk coast was burned. At the same time, the Anglo-French squadron appeared in front of Petropavlovsk-Kamchatsky. A small Russian garrison under the command of V.S. Zavoiko put up heroic resistance: he twice threw enemy troops into the sea and forced the enemy to leave.
WITH summer 1854 The Anglo-French army began to concentrate on the Bulgarian coast. In the course of decisive action, she landed on deserted beaches in the Evpatoria region and immediately moved to Sevastopol. September 8, 1854 The 60,000-strong Allied army met at the turn of the Alma River with the 35,000-strong Russian army under the command of Menshikov. The fire of the Anglo-French squadron allowed the Allies to outflank the Russian troops and continue moving towards Sevastopol. The main base of the Russian Black Sea Fleet did not have land fortifications, but, taking advantage of the respite associated with the death of the commander of the Anglo-French army, the garrison and population of the city were mobilized to build fortifications.
In the morning October 5 Allied troops began bombing Sevastopol, which inflicted heavy losses on the city's defenders. But still they failed to suppress Russian artillery. And therefore the assault following the bombing did not take place. October 13 the Russian army moved to offensive near Balaklava. In this battle, a select regiment of light cavalry, in which representatives served the most ancient families England. But the Russian command did not take advantage of the success at Balaklava. A few days later a new battle took place near Inkerman. The latest rifled weapons caused heavy losses to Russian troops. weapon allies. Russian bullets from smoothbore rifles did not reach the enemy. Battle of Inkerman ended in defeat. The war became protracted. The Allies gradually increased their forces, regularly receiving ammunition and reinforcements by sea. For the Russian army, the problem of ammunition became even more acute. Russian artillerymen had to respond with one shot to three or four enemy fires. After the defeat at Inkerman, it became clear that Russia's defeat in this war was inevitable.
February 18, 1855 Nicholas I died. His last order was the removal of Menshikov from command and the appointment of M.D. Gorchakov in his place. The replacement of the commander-in-chief did not bring a turning point in the course of the war; in winter, the allies were forced to retreat slightly near Sevastopol. But in the spring the bombing of the city resumed. On June 6, the Allies launched an assault. But the assault was repulsed with heavy losses for the attackers. The ranks of the defenders of Sevastopol also thinned. At the end of June Nakhimov died. On August 24, another bombing began, and on the 27th the Allies again launched an assault. This time they managed to capture Malakhov Kurgan. Russian troops left all south side Sevastopol, crossing the bay on a pontoon bridge. Thus ended the 349-day defense of Sevastopol. Operated more successfully Russian troops in Transcaucasia. IN November 1855 they took Kars, but this could no longer significantly improve the overall strategic position of Russia; the war was hopelessly lost. The Anglo-French fleet continued to blockade the coast in the Baltic, Black Sea and Far East, bombing coastal areas. Landing forces from these squadrons took Bomarsund on the Aland Islands, Kerch and Kinburn in the Black Sea region. IN late 1855 Austria presented Russia with a number of stringent demands, threatening to enter the war on the side of the coalition. The new Emperor Alexander II invited the most prominent dignitaries to the meeting. Almost all of them agreed that war inevitably leads to bankruptcy. By the end of 1855, hostilities had actually ceased, and in early 1856 Russian Tsar Alexander II decided to conclude a truce.
IN February 1856 A congress opened in Paris to develop a peace agreement. An intense diplomatic struggle broke out at the congress, which lasted over a month. March 30, 1856 The Treaty of Paris was signed, officially ending the Crimean War.
Russia renounced its demand for the transfer of Orthodox subjects of the Ottoman Empire under the special protection of the Russian Tsar and agreed to guarantee, together with other powers, the independence and integrity of the Ottoman Empire. The navigation of merchant ships on the Danube became free. The Black Sea was declared neutral. Russia and Turkey were prohibited from having a naval fleet and naval bases on it. Russia returned Kars to Turkey and southern part Bessarabia, and the allies gave Russia Sevastopol and others they captured Russian cities. Thus, the war demonstrated all the destructiveness Russian autocracy when, by the will of one person who has concentrated unlimited power in his hands, many countries are drawn into a bloody conflict, suffering significant human and material losses.
The main reason for Russia's failures in the Crimean War was the backward feudal-serf economy, which was unable to withstand the weight long war. Hence there are other reasons: poor equipment and armament of the army and navy, inept and indecisive leadership in combat operations. The Crimean War aggravated the crisis of the feudal-serf system in Russia and accelerated the ruling circles' awareness of the inevitability of reforms.
Sergei Sergeevich Ivanov
Natalia Olegovna Trifonova
History of Russia of the 9th–21st centuries in dates
Introduction
The reign of Emperor Nicholas I (1825-1855) is rightly regarded as the “apogee of autocracy.” It began with the massacre of the Decembrists and ended in the tragic days of the defense of Sevastopol during the unsuccessful Crimean War of 1853-1856.
The main goal of the emperor's internal policy was to strengthen and preserve the existing system. The program of his activities was determined by the phrase he uttered upon accession to the throne: “The revolution is on the threshold of Russia, but, I swear, it will not penetrate it as long as the breath of life remains in me.”
Realizing the need for broad reforms and fearing a new revolutionary surge, the emperor carried out a number of reforms that did not affect the foundations of the state structure. Hence the inconsistency and duality of the policies of Nicholas I: on the one hand, a broad political reaction, on the other, an awareness of the need to make concessions to the “spirit of the times.”
In general, the policy of Nicholas I was conservative throughout his reign. The main directions of activity were: strengthening autocratic power; further bureaucratization and centralization of the country. The key problem remained the peasant question. Understanding the need to abolish serfdom, Nicholas did not set himself the task of eliminating it.
The purpose of this work is to study the internal politics of the autocracy under Nicholas I, and in particular the issues of bureaucratization of the administrative apparatus and socio-political movements.
Chapter 1. Strengthening the reaction under Nicholas I.
1.1. Strengthening the reaction under Nicholas I. The Tsar’s Office.
Upon accession to the throne and after the massacre of the Decembrists new emperor Nicholas I published the Manifesto (July 1826); in which the paths for the development of Russian statehood were outlined and a number of ideas of which were definitely borrowed from the programs and projects of the Decembrists themselves and formulated under the influence of P. M. Karamzin (his note “On Ancient and New Russia” was presented to Alexander I in 1811).
Current problems of state reorganization were set out in a special note: it is necessary to grant “clear laws”, formulate a system of speedy justice, strengthen financial position nobility, develop trade and industry on the basis of sustainable legislation, improve the situation of farmers, abolish human trafficking, develop the fleet and maritime trade, etc. The Decembrist demands pointed out to the emperor the most obvious and urgent needs in the state, the conservative ideas of Karamzin - to the most acceptable ways for them solutions.
Nevertheless, in the first years of his reign, a number of major statesmen were among Nicholas’s closest associates. This is, first of all, M.M. Speransky, P.D. Kiselev and E.F. Kankrin. The main achievements of Nicholas's reign are associated with them.
Since the Council Code of 1649, thousands of manifestos, decrees and “provisions” have accumulated, which complemented, canceled, and contradicted each other. The absence of a set of existing laws made it difficult for the government to operate and created the ground for abuses by officials.
By order of Nicholas, the work on compiling the Code of Laws was entrusted to a group of specialists under the leadership of Speransky. First of all, all laws adopted after 1649 were identified in the archives and arranged chronologically. They were published in 51 volumes of the “Complete Collection of Laws of the Russian Empire”.
Then more the hard part works: were selected, arranged according to a certain scheme and all current laws were edited. Sometimes the existing laws were not enough to fill out the diagram, and Speransky and his assistants had to “complete” the law based on the norms of foreign law. By the end of 1832, the preparation of all 15 volumes of the Code of Laws of the Russian Empire was completed. “The All-Russian Emperor is an autocratic and unlimited monarch,” read Article 1 of the Code of Laws. “God Himself commands to obey His supreme authority not only out of fear, but also out of conscience.” The codification of laws played a huge role in the formation of Nicholas's domestic policy.
In the first years of his reign, Nicholas did not devote Special attention peasant question. Gradually, thoughts began to come to him that the serfdom question was fraught with the threat of a new Pugachevism.
The resolution of the peasant question was supposed to be carried out gradually and carefully, through a series of partial reforms. The first step in this direction was to be the reform of state village management. In 1837, the Ministry of State Property was created, headed by P.D. Kiselev.
He was a military general and an active administrator with a broad outlook. At one time, he gave Alexander I a note about gradual abolition serfdom. In 1837-1841. Kiselev achieved a number of measures, as a result of which it was possible to streamline the management of state peasants. Schools, hospitals, and veterinary stations began to open in their villages. Land-poor rural societies moved to other provinces on free lands.
The landowners were dissatisfied with Kiselev’s reform; their discontent and “potato riots” aroused fear in the government that with the beginning of the abolition of serfdom, all classes and estates of the vast country would come into motion. It was the growth of the social movement that Nicholas I was most afraid of. In 1842, at a meeting of the State Council, he said: “There is no doubt that serfdom, in its current situation with us, is an evil, tangible and obvious to everyone, but touching it now would be even more disastrous."
Nicholas's reactionary policy was most evident in the field of education and the press, for here, as he assumed, lay the main danger of “freethinking.” At the same time, education and the press were used as the most important means of ideological influence. One after another, bans on the publication of magazines rained down. In 1837, verification of works that had already passed censorship was established. In the field of education, control has increased over private educational institutions, where many Decembrists previously studied.
In all great history Our great Motherland was reigned by many kings and emperors. One of these was, who was born on July 6, 1796, and ruled his state for 30 years, from 1825 to 1855. Nikolai is remembered by many as very careful emperor, not pursuing an active internal policy in his state, which will be discussed later.
In contact with
The main directions of the domestic policy of Nicholas 1, briefly
The vector of development of the country that the emperor chose had a very great influence Decembrist revolt, which occurred in the year when the ruler ascended the throne. This event determined that all reforms, changes and, in general, the entire course of the ruler’s internal policy would be aimed at any destruction or prevention of the opposition.
Fight against any dissatisfied- this is what the head of state who ascended the throne adhered to throughout his reign. The ruler understood that Russia needed reforms, but his primary goal was the need for the stability of the country and the sustainability of all bills.
Reforms of Nicholas 1
The emperor, realizing the importance and need for reforms, tried to implement them.
Financial reform
This was the first change that the ruler made. Financial reform Also called the Kankrin reform- Minister of Finance. the main objective and the essence of the change was to restore confidence in paper money.
Nikolai is the first person who made an attempt not only to improve and create stability in the financial situation of his state, but also to issue a powerful currency that was highly valued in the international arena. With this reform, banknotes were to be replaced with credit notes. The entire change process was divided into two stages:
- The state accumulated a metal fund, which later, according to the plan, was supposed to become a security for paper money. To achieve this, the bank began to accept gold and silver coins and subsequently exchange them for deposit tickets. In parallel with this, the Minister of Finance, Kankrin, fixed the value of the assigned ruble at the same level, and ordered that all state payments be calculated in silver rubles.
- The second stage was the process of exchanging deposit tickets for new credit tickets. They could be exchanged for metal rubles without any problems.
Important! Thus, Kankrin managed to create a financial situation in the country in which ordinary paper money was backed by metal and was valued in exactly the same way as metal money.
The main features of Nicholas's domestic policy were actions aimed at improving the lives of peasants. During his entire reign, 9 committees were created to discuss the possibility of improving the lives of serfs. It’s worth noting right away that until the end decide peasant question the emperor failed because he did everything very conservatively.
The great sovereign understood the importance, but the ruler’s first changes were aimed at improving the lives of the state peasants, and not all:
- In state villages, towns and others populated areas the number of educational institutions and hospitals increased.
- Special plots of land were allocated where members peasant community could have used them to prevent a bad harvest and subsequent famine. Potatoes are what these lands were mainly planted with.
- Attempts were made to solve the problem of land shortage. In those settlements where peasants did not have enough land, state peasants were transferred to the east, where there were a lot of free plots.
These first steps that Nicholas 1 took to improve the lives of the peasants greatly alarmed the landowners, and even caused them discontent. The reason for this was that the life of state peasants began to really get better, and consequently, ordinary serfs also began to show discontent.
Later, the government of the state, headed by the emperor, began to develop a plan to create bills that, one way or another, improved the lives of ordinary serfs:
- A law was passed that prohibited landowners from retail trading in serfs, that is, the sale of any peasant separately from his family was henceforth prohibited.
- The bill, called “On Obligated Peasants,” was that now landowners had the right to release serfs without land, as well as to release them with land. However, for such a grant of freedom, the freed serfs were obliged to pay certain debts to their former masters.
- From a certain point, serfs gained the right to buy own land and therefore become free people. In addition, serfs were also given the right to purchase property.
ATTENTION! Despite all the above-described reforms of Nicholas 1, which came into force under this emperor, neither the landowners nor the peasants used them: the former did not want to release the serfs, and the latter simply did not have the opportunity to redeem themselves. However, all these changes were an important step towards the complete disappearance of serfdom.
Education Policy
Ruler of the State decided to distinguish three types of schools: parish, district and gymnasiums. The first and most important items languages studied in schools were Latin and Greek language, and all other disciplines were considered additional. As soon as Nicholas the first ascended the throne, there were about 49 gymnasiums in Russia, and by the end of the emperor’s reign their number was 77 throughout the country.
Universities have also undergone changes. Rectors, as well as professors of educational institutions, were now elected by the Ministry of Public Education. The opportunity to study at universities was given only for money. In addition to Moscow University, higher education institutions educational establishments were in St. Petersburg, Kazan, Kharkov and Kiev. Besides, High education people could be given some lyceums.
The first place in all education was occupied by “ official nationality”, which consisted in the fact that the entire Russian people are the custodians of patriarchal traditions. That is why in all universities, regardless of faculty, subjects such as church law and theology.
Economic development
The industrial situation, which had settled in the state by the time Nicholas came to the throne, was the most terrible in the entire history of Russia. There could be no talk of any competition in this area with Western and European powers.
All those types of industrial products and materials that the country simply needed were purchased and delivered from abroad, and Russia itself supplied only raw materials abroad. However, towards the end of the emperor's reign the situation changed very noticeably in better side. Nikolai was able to begin the formation technically developed industry already capable of competition.
Very strong development production of clothing, metals, sugar and textiles received. A huge number of products from completely different materials began to be produced in the Russian Empire. Working machines also began to be manufactured in the homeland, and not bought abroad.
According to statistics, for more than 30 years, industrial turnover in the country in one year it more than tripled. In particular, engineering products increased their turnover by as much as 33 times, and cotton products by 31 times.
For the first time in the history of Russia, the construction of highways with hard surfaces began. Three major routes were built, one of which was Moscow-Warsaw. Under Nicholas 1, the construction of railways also began. The rapid growth of industry served to increase the urban population by more than 2 times.
Scheme and characteristics of the internal policy of Nicholas 1
As already mentioned, the main reasons for the tightening of domestic policy under Nicholas 1 were the Decembrist uprising and new possible protests. Despite the fact that the emperor tried and made the life of the serfs better, he adhered to foundations of autocracy, suppressed opposition and developed bureaucracy . This was the internal policy of Nicholas 1. The diagram presented below describes its main directions.
The results of Nicholas's domestic policy, as well as overall rating modern historians, politicians and scientists, are ambiguous. On the one hand, the emperor managed to create financial stability in the state, to “revive” industry, increasing its volume tenfold.
Attempts were even made to improve life and partially free ordinary peasants, but these attempts were unsuccessful. On the other hand, Nicholas the First did not allow dissent and made it so that religion occupied almost the first place in people’s lives, which, by definition, is not very good for normal development states. The protective function was, in principle, respected.
Domestic policy of Nicholas I
Domestic policy of Nicholas I. Continued
Conclusion
The result of everything can be formulated in the following way: for Nicholas 1st important aspect during his reign there was precisely stability within your country. He was not indifferent to the life of ordinary citizens, but he could not improve it much, primarily because of the autocratic regime, which the emperor fully supported and tried to strengthen in every possible way.