CRIMINAL WAR 1853-1856
Causes of the war and the balance of forces. Russia, the Ottoman Empire, England, France and Sardinia took part in the Crimean War. Each of them had its own calculations in this military conflict in the Middle East.
For Russia, the regime of the Black Sea straits was of paramount importance. In the 30-40s of the 19th century. Russian diplomacy waged a tense struggle for the most favorable conditions in resolving this issue. In 1833, the Unkiar-Isklessi Treaty was concluded with Turkey. According to it, Russia received the right to free passage of its warships through the straits. In the 40s of the XIX century. the situation has changed. Based on a series of agreements with European states, the straits were closed to all navies. This had a hard impact on the Russian fleet. He found himself locked in the Black Sea. Russia, relying on its military power, sought to re-solve the problem of the straits and strengthen its positions in the Middle East and the Balkans.
The Ottoman Empire wanted to return the territories lost as a result of the Russian-Turkish wars of the late 18th - first half of the 19th centuries.
England and France hoped to crush Russia as a great power and deprive it of influence in the Middle East and the Balkan Peninsula.
The pan-European conflict in the Middle East began in 1850, when disputes broke out between the Orthodox and Catholic clergy in Palestine over who would own the Holy Places in Jerusalem and Bethlehem. The Orthodox Church was supported by Russia, and the Catholic Church by France. The dispute between the clergy escalated into a confrontation between these two European states. The Ottoman Empire, which included Palestine, sided with France. This caused sharp discontent in Russia and personally with Emperor Nicholas I. A special representative of the Tsar, Prince A.S., was sent to Constantinople. Menshikov. He was instructed to achieve privileges for the Russian Orthodox Church in Palestine and the right of patronage for Orthodox subjects of Turkey. Failure of A.S. mission Menshikova was a foregone conclusion. The Sultan was not going to give in to Russian pressure, and the defiant, disrespectful behavior of its envoy only aggravated the conflict situation. Thus, a seemingly private, but for that time important, given the religious feelings of people, dispute about Holy Places became the reason for the outbreak of the Russian-Turkish, and subsequently the pan-European war.
Nicholas I took an irreconcilable position, relying on the power of the army and the support of some European states (England, Austria, etc.). But he miscalculated. The Russian army numbered more than 1 million people. However, as it turned out during the war, it was imperfect, first of all, in technical terms. Its weapons (smoothbore guns) were inferior to the rifled weapons of Western European armies. The artillery is also outdated. The Russian navy was predominantly sailing, while the European navies were dominated by steam-powered ships. There was no good communication. This did not make it possible to provide the site of military operations with a sufficient amount of ammunition and food, or human replenishment. The Russian army could successfully fight the Turkish one, but it was not able to resist the united forces of Europe.
Progress of military operations. To put pressure on Turkey in 1853, Russian troops were sent to Moldova and Wallachia. In response, the Turkish Sultan declared war on Russia in October 1853. He was supported by England and France. Austria took a position of “armed neutrality.” Russia found itself in complete political isolation.
The history of the Crimean War is divided into two stages. The first - the Russian-Turkish campaign itself - was conducted with varying success from November 1853 to April 1854. In the second (April 1854 - February 1856) - Russia was forced to fight against a coalition of European states.
The main event of the first stage was the Battle of Sinop (November 1853). Admiral P.S. Nakhimov defeated the Turkish fleet in Sinop Bay and suppressed coastal batteries. This activated England and France. They declared war on Russia. The Anglo-French squadron appeared in the Baltic Sea and attacked Kronstadt and Sveaborg. English ships entered the White Sea and bombarded the Solovetsky Monastery. A military demonstration was also held in Kamchatka.
The main goal of the joint Anglo-French command was to capture Crimea and Sevastopol, the Russian naval base. On September 2, 1854, the Allies began landing an expeditionary force in the Evpatoria area. Battle on the river Alma in September 1854, Russian troops lost. By order of the commander, A.S. Menshikov, they passed through Sevastopol and moved to Bakhchisarai. At the same time, the garrison of Sevastopol, reinforced by sailors of the Black Sea Fleet, was actively preparing for defense. It was headed by V.A. Kornilov and P.S. Nakhimov.
In October 1854, the defense of Sevastopol began. The fortress garrison showed unprecedented heroism. Admirals V.A. became famous in Sevastopol. Kornilov, P.S. Nakhimov, V.I. Istomin, military engineer E.I. Totleben, Lieutenant General of Artillery S.A. Khrulev, many sailors and soldiers: I. Shevchenko, F. Samolatov, P. Koshka and others.
The main part of the Russian army undertook diversionary operations: the battle of Inkerman (November 1854), the attack on Yevpatoria (February 1855), the battle on the Black River (August 1855). These military actions did not help the residents of Sevastopol. In August 1855, the final assault on Sevastopol began. After the fall of Malakhov Kurgan, continuation of the defense was difficult. Most of Sevastopol was occupied by the allied forces, however, having found only ruins there, they returned to their positions.
In the Caucasian theater, military operations developed more successfully for Russia. Türkiye invaded Transcaucasia, but suffered a major defeat, after which Russian troops began to operate on its territory. In November 1855, the Turkish fortress of Kare fell.
The extreme exhaustion of Allied forces in the Crimea and Russian successes in the Caucasus led to a cessation of hostilities. Negotiations between the parties began.
Parisian world. At the end of March 1856, the Paris Peace Treaty was signed. Russia did not suffer significant territorial losses. Only the southern part of Bessarabia was torn away from her. However, she lost the right of patronage to the Danube principalities and Serbia. The most difficult and humiliating condition was the so-called “neutralization” of the Black Sea. Russia was prohibited from having naval forces, military arsenals and fortresses in the Black Sea. This dealt a significant blow to the security of the southern borders. Russia's role in the Balkans and the Middle East was reduced to nothing.
The defeat in the Crimean War had a significant impact on the alignment of international forces and on the internal situation of Russia. The war, on the one hand, exposed its weakness, but on the other, demonstrated the heroism and unshakable spirit of the Russian people. The defeat brought a sad conclusion to Nicholas' rule, shook up the entire Russian public and forced the government to come to grips with reforming the state.
What you need to know about this topic:
Socio-economic development of Russia in the first half of the 19th century. Social structure of the population.
Development of agriculture.
Development of Russian industry in the first half of the 19th century. The formation of capitalist relations. Industrial revolution: essence, prerequisites, chronology.
Development of water and highway communications. Start of railway construction.
Exacerbation of socio-political contradictions in the country. The palace coup of 1801 and the accession to the throne of Alexander I. “The days of Alexander were a wonderful beginning.”
Peasant question. Decree "On Free Plowmen". Government measures in the field of education. State activities of M.M. Speransky and his plan for state reforms. Creation of the State Council.
Russia's participation in anti-French coalitions. Treaty of Tilsit.
Patriotic War of 1812. International relations on the eve of the war. Causes and beginning of the war. Balance of forces and military plans of the parties. M.B. Barclay de Tolly. P.I. Bagration. M.I.Kutuzov. Stages of war. Results and significance of the war.
Foreign campaigns of 1813-1814. Congress of Vienna and its decisions. Holy Alliance.
The internal situation of the country in 1815-1825. Strengthening conservative sentiments in Russian society. A.A. Arakcheev and Arakcheevism. Military settlements.
Foreign policy of tsarism in the first quarter of the 19th century.
The first secret organizations of the Decembrists were the “Union of Salvation” and the “Union of Prosperity”. Northern and Southern society. The main program documents of the Decembrists are “Russian Truth” by P.I. Pestel and “Constitution” by N.M. Muravyov. Death of Alexander I. Interregnum. Uprising on December 14, 1825 in St. Petersburg. Uprising of the Chernigov regiment. Investigation and trial of the Decembrists. The significance of the Decembrist uprising.
The beginning of the reign of Nicholas I. Strengthening autocratic power. Further centralization and bureaucratization of the Russian state system. Intensifying repressive measures. Creation of the III department. Censorship regulations. The era of censorship terror.
Codification. M.M. Speransky. Reform of state peasants. P.D. Kiselev. Decree "On Obligated Peasants".
Polish uprising 1830-1831
The main directions of Russian foreign policy in the second quarter of the 19th century.
Eastern question. Russian-Turkish War 1828-1829 The problem of the straits in Russian foreign policy in the 30s and 40s of the 19th century.
Russia and the revolutions of 1830 and 1848. in Europe.
Crimean War. International relations on the eve of the war. Causes of the war. Progress of military operations. Russia's defeat in the war. Peace of Paris 1856. International and domestic consequences of the war.
Annexation of the Caucasus to Russia.
The formation of the state (imamate) in the North Caucasus. Muridism. Shamil. Caucasian War. The significance of the annexation of the Caucasus to Russia.
Social thought and social movement in Russia in the second quarter of the 19th century.
Formation of government ideology. The theory of official nationality. Mugs from the late 20s - early 30s of the 19th century.
N.V. Stankevich’s circle and German idealistic philosophy. A.I. Herzen’s circle and utopian socialism. "Philosophical Letter" by P.Ya.Chaadaev. Westerners. Moderate. Radicals. Slavophiles. M.V. Butashevich-Petrashevsky and his circle. The theory of "Russian socialism" by A.I. Herzen.
Socio-economic and political prerequisites for bourgeois reforms of the 60-70s of the 19th century.
Peasant reform. Preparation of reform. "Regulation" February 19, 1861 Personal liberation of the peasants. Allotments. Ransom. Duties of peasants. Temporary condition.
Zemstvo, judicial, urban reforms. Financial reforms. Reforms in the field of education. Censorship rules. Military reforms. The meaning of bourgeois reforms.
Socio-economic development of Russia in the second half of the 19th century. Social structure of the population.
Industrial development. Industrial revolution: essence, prerequisites, chronology. The main stages of the development of capitalism in industry.
The development of capitalism in agriculture. Rural community in post-reform Russia. Agrarian crisis of the 80-90s of the XIX century.
Social movement in Russia in the 50-60s of the 19th century.
Social movement in Russia in the 70-90s of the 19th century.
Revolutionary populist movement of the 70s - early 80s of the 19th century.
"Land and Freedom" of the 70s of the XIX century. "People's Will" and "Black Redistribution". Assassination of Alexander II on March 1, 1881. The collapse of Narodnaya Volya.
Labor movement in the second half of the 19th century. Strike struggle. The first workers' organizations. A work issue arises. Factory legislation.
Liberal populism of the 80-90s of the 19th century. Spread of the ideas of Marxism in Russia. Group "Emancipation of Labor" (1883-1903). The emergence of Russian social democracy. Marxist circles of the 80s of the XIX century.
St. Petersburg "Union of Struggle for the Liberation of the Working Class." V.I. Ulyanov. "Legal Marxism".
Political reaction of the 80-90s of the XIX century. The era of counter-reforms.
Alexander III. Manifesto on the “inviolability” of autocracy (1881). The policy of counter-reforms. Results and significance of counter-reforms.
International position of Russia after the Crimean War. Changing the country's foreign policy program. The main directions and stages of Russian foreign policy in the second half of the 19th century.
Russia in the system of international relations after the Franco-Prussian war. Union of Three Emperors.
Russia and the Eastern crisis of the 70s of the XIX century. The goals of Russia's policy in the eastern question. Russian-Turkish War of 1877-1878: causes, plans and forces of the parties, course of military operations. Treaty of San Stefano. Berlin Congress and its decisions. The role of Russia in the liberation of the Balkan peoples from the Ottoman yoke.
Foreign policy of Russia in the 80-90s of the XIX century. Formation of the Triple Alliance (1882). Deterioration of Russia's relations with Germany and Austria-Hungary. Conclusion of the Russian-French alliance (1891-1894).
- Buganov V.I., Zyryanov P.N. History of Russia: the end of the 17th - 19th centuries. . - M.: Education, 1996.
Crimean War.
Causes of the war: in 1850, a conflict began between France, the Ottoman Empire and Russia, the reason for which was disputes between the Catholic and Orthodox clergy regarding the rights to the Holy Places in Jerusalem and Bethlehem. Nicholas I was counting on the support of England and Austria, but he miscalculated.
Progress of the war: in 1853, Russian troops were introduced into Moldova and Wallachia, met with a negative reaction from Austria, which took a position of unfriendly neutrality, demanded the withdrawal of Russian troops and moved its army to the border with Russia. In October 1853, the Turkish Sultan declared war on Russia.
The first stage of the war - November 1853 - April 1854: Russian-Turkish campaign. November 1853 – Battle of Sinop. Admiral Nakhimov defeated the Turkish fleet, and in parallel there were Russian actions in the Caucasus. England and France declared war on Russia. The Anglo-French squadron bombarded Russian territories (Kronstadt, Sveaborg, Solovetsky Monastery, Kamchatka).
Second stage: April 1854 - February 1856 Russia against the coalition of European powers. September 1854 - the allies began landing in the Evpatoria area. Battles on the river Alma in September 1854, the Russians lost. Under the command of Menshikov, the Russians approach Bakhchisarai. Sevastopol (Kornilov and Nakhimov) was preparing for defense. October 1854 - the defense of Sevastopol began. The main part of the Russian army undertook diversionary operations (the battle of Inkerman in November 1854, the offensive at Yevpatoriya in February 1855, the battle on the Black River in August 1855), but they were not successful. August 1855 - Sevastopol was captured. At the same time, in Transcaucasia, Russian troops managed to take the strong Turkish fortress of Kars. Negotiations began. March 1856—Paris peace. Part of Bessarabia was torn away from Russia; it lost the right to patronize Serbia, Moldova and Wallachia. The most important thing is the neutralization of the Black Sea: both Russia and Turkey were prohibited from keeping a navy in the Black Sea.
There is an acute internal political crisis in Russia, due to which reforms have begun.
39. Economic, socio-political development of Russia at the turn of the 50-60s. XiX century Peasant reform of 1861, its content and significance.
In the 50s, the need and hardships of the masses noticeably worsened, this happened under the influence of the consequences of the Crimean War, the increasing frequency of natural disasters (epidemics, crop failures and, as a consequence, famine), as well as the increasing oppression from the landowners and the state in the pre-reform period. The economy of the Russian village was particularly severely affected by conscription, which reduced the number of workers by 10%, and requisitions of food, horses and fodder. The situation was aggravated by the arbitrariness of the landowners, who systematically reduced the size of peasant plots, transferred peasants to households (and thus deprived them of land), and resettled serfs to worse lands. These acts assumed such proportions that the government, shortly before the reform, was forced to impose a ban on such actions by special decrees.
The response to the worsening situation of the masses was the peasant movement, which in its intensity, scale and forms was noticeably different from the protests of previous decades and caused great concern in St. Petersburg.
This period was characterized by mass escapes of landowner peasants who wanted to enlist in the militia and thus hoped to gain freedom (1854-1855), unauthorized resettlement to war-ravaged Crimea (1856), a “sober” movement directed against the feudal system of wine farming (1858-1859 ), unrest and escapes of workers during the construction of railways (Moscow-Nizhny Novgorod, Volga-Don, 1859-1860). It was also restless on the outskirts of the empire. In 1858, Estonian peasants took up arms in their hands (“Machtra War”). Major peasant unrest broke out in 1857 in Western Georgia.
After the defeat in the Crimean War, in the context of a growing revolutionary upsurge, the crisis at the top intensified, manifested, in particular, in the intensification of the liberal opposition movement among part of the nobility, dissatisfied with military failures, the backwardness of Russia, who understood the need for political and social change. “Sevastopol hit stagnant minds,” wrote the famous Russian historian V.O. Klyuchevsky about this time. The “censorship terror” introduced by Emperor Nicholas I after his death in February 1855 was virtually swept away by a wave of glasnost, which made it possible to openly discuss the most pressing problems facing the country.
There was no unity in government circles on the issue of the future fate of Russia. Two opposing groups formed here: the old conservative bureaucratic elite (head of the III department V.A. Dolgorukov, Minister of State Property M.N. Muravyov, etc.), which actively opposed the implementation of bourgeois reforms, and supporters of reforms (Minister of Internal Affairs S.S. Lanskoy, Ya.I. Rostovtsev, brothers N.A. and D.A. Milyutin).
The interests of the Russian peasantry were reflected in the ideology of the new generation of revolutionary intelligentsia.
In the 50s, two centers were formed that led the revolutionary democratic movement in the country. The first (emigrant) was headed by A.I. Herzen, who founded the “Free Russian Printing House” in London (1853). Since 1855, he began publishing the non-periodical collection “Polar Star”, and since 1857, together with N.P. Ogarev, the newspaper “Bell”, which enjoyed enormous popularity. Herzen's publications formulated a program of social transformation in Russia, which included the liberation of peasants from serfdom with land and for ransom. Initially, the publishers of Kolokol believed in the liberal intentions of the new Emperor Alexander II (1855-1881) and placed certain hopes on wisely carried out reforms “from above.” However, as projects for the abolition of serfdom were being prepared, illusions dissipated, and a call to fight for land and democracy was heard loudly on the pages of London publications.
The second center arose in St. Petersburg. It was headed by leading employees of the Sovremennik magazine N.G. Chernyshevsky and N.A. Dobrolyubov, around whom like-minded people from the revolutionary democratic camp rallied (M.L. Mikhailov, N.A. Serno-Solovyevich, N.V. Shelgunov and others). The censored articles of N.G. Chernyshevsky were not as frank as the publications of A.I. Herzen, but they were distinguished by their consistency. N.G. Chernyshevsky believed that when the peasants were liberated, the land should be transferred to them without ransom; the elimination of autocracy in Russia would occur through revolutionary means.
On the eve of the abolition of serfdom, a demarcation emerged between the revolutionary-democratic and liberal camps. Liberals, who recognized the need for reforms “from above,” saw in them, first of all, an opportunity to prevent a revolutionary explosion in the country.
The Crimean War presented the government with a choice: either to preserve the serfdom that existed in the country and, as a consequence of this, ultimately, as a result of a political, financial and economic catastrophe, lose not only the prestige and position of a great power, but also threaten the existence of the autocracy in Russia, or to carry out bourgeois reforms, the primary of which was the abolition of serfdom.
Having chosen the second path, the government of Alexander II in January 1857 created a Secret Committee “to discuss measures to organize the life of the landowner peasants.” Somewhat earlier, in the summer of 1856, in the Ministry of Internal Affairs, comrade (deputy) minister A.I. Levshin developed a government program for peasant reform, which, although it gave serfs civil rights, retained all the land in the ownership of the landowner and provided the latter with patrimonial power on the estate. In this case, the peasants would receive allotment land for use, for which they would have to perform fixed duties. This program was set out in imperial rescripts (instructions), first addressed to the Vilna and St. Petersburg governors-general, and then sent to other provinces. In accordance with the rescripts, special committees began to be created in the provinces to consider the case locally, and the preparation of the reform became public. The Secret Committee was renamed the Main Committee for Peasant Affairs. The Zemstvo Department under the Ministry of Internal Affairs (N.A. Milyutin) began to play a significant role in preparing the reform.
Within the provincial committees there was a struggle between liberals and conservatives over the forms and extent of concessions to the peasantry. Reform projects prepared by K.D. Kavelin, A.I. Koshelev, M.P. Posen. Yu.F. Samarin, A.M. Unkovsky, differed in the political views of the authors and economic conditions. Thus, the landowners of the black earth provinces, who owned expensive land and kept peasants in corvee labor, wanted to retain the maximum possible amount of land and retain workers. In the industrial non-black earth obroch provinces, during the reform, landowners wanted to receive significant funds to rebuild their farms in a bourgeois manner.
The prepared proposals and programs were submitted for discussion to the so-called Editorial Commissions. The struggle over these proposals took place both in these commissions and during the consideration of the project in the Main Committee and in the State Council. But, despite the existing differences of opinion, in all these projects it was about carrying out peasant reform in the interests of the landowners by maintaining landownership and political dominance in the hands of the Russian nobility, “Everything that could be done to protect the benefits of the landowners has been done,” - Alexander II stated in the State Council. The final version of the reform project, which had undergone a number of changes, was signed by the emperor on February 19, 1861, and on March 5, the most important documents regulating the implementation of the reform were published: “Manifesto” and “General Provisions on Peasants Emerging from Serfdom.”
In accordance with these documents, peasants received personal freedom and could now freely dispose of their property, engage in commercial and industrial activities, buy and sell real estate, enter the service, receive an education, and conduct their family affairs.
The landowner still owned all the land, but part of it, usually a reduced land plot and the so-called “estate settlement” (a plot with a hut, outbuildings, vegetable gardens, etc.), he was obliged to transfer to the peasants for use. Thus, Russian peasants received liberation with land, but they could use this land for a certain fixed rent or serving corvee. The peasants could not give up these plots for 9 years. For complete liberation, they could buy the estate and, by agreement with the landowner, the allotment, after which they became peasant owners. Until this time, a “temporarily obligated position” was established.
The new sizes of allotments and payments of peasants were recorded in special documents, “statutory charters”. which were compiled for each village over a two-year period. The amounts of these duties and allotment land were determined by “Local Regulations”. Thus, according to the “Great Russian” local situation, the territory of 35 provinces was distributed into 3 stripes: non-chernozem, chernozem and steppe, which were divided into “localities”. In the first two stripes, depending on local conditions, “higher” and “lower” (1/3 of the “highest”) allotment sizes were established, and in the steppe zone - one “decreed” allotment. If the pre-reform size of the allotment exceeded the “highest” one, then pieces of land could be produced, but if the allotment was less than the “lowest” one, then the landowner had to either cut off the land or reduce duties. Cut-offs were also made in some other cases, for example, when the owner, as a result of allocating land to the peasants, had less than 1/3 of the total land of the estate left. Among the cut-off lands there were often the most valuable areas (forest, meadows, arable land); in some cases, landowners could demand that peasant estates be moved to new locations. As a result of post-reform land management, striped stripes became characteristic of the Russian village.
Charters were usually concluded with an entire rural society, the “world” (community), which was supposed to ensure mutual responsibility for the payment of duties.
The “temporarily obligated” position of the peasants ceased after the transfer to redemption, which became mandatory only 20 years later (from 1883). The ransom was carried out with the assistance of the government. The basis for calculating redemption payments was not the market price of land, but the assessment of duties that were feudal in nature. When the deal was concluded, the peasants paid 20% of the amount, and the remaining 80% was paid to the landowners by the state. The peasants had to repay the loan provided by the state annually in the form of redemption payments for 49 years, while, of course, accrued interest was taken into account. Redemption payments placed a heavy burden on peasant farms. The cost of the purchased land significantly exceeded its market price. During the redemption operation, the government also tried to get back the huge sums that were provided to landowners in the pre-reform years on the security of land. If the estate was mortgaged, then the amount of the debt was deducted from the amounts provided to the landowner. The landowners received only a small part of the redemption amount in cash; special interest notes were issued for the rest.
It should be borne in mind that in modern historical literature, issues related to the implementation of the reform are not fully developed. There are different points of view about the degree of transformation during the reform of the system of peasant plots and payments (currently these studies are being carried out on a large scale using computers).
The reform of 1861 in the internal provinces was followed by the abolition of serfdom on the outskirts of the empire - in Georgia (1864-1871), Armenia and Azerbaijan (1870-1883), which was often carried out with even less consistency and with greater preservation of feudal remnants. Appanage peasants (belonging to the royal family) received personal freedom based on decrees of 1858 and 1859. “By the Regulations of June 26, 1863.” the land structure and conditions for the transition to redemption in the appanage village were determined, which was carried out during 1863-1865. In 1866, a reform was carried out in the state village. The purchase of land by state peasants was completed only in 1886.
Thus, peasant reforms in Russia actually abolished serfdom and marked the beginning of the development of the capitalist formation in Russia. However, while maintaining landownership and feudal remnants in the countryside, they were unable to resolve all the contradictions, which ultimately led to a further intensification of the class struggle.
The response of the peasantry to the publication of the “Manifesto” was a massive explosion of discontent in the spring of 1861. The peasants protested against the continuation of the corvee system and the payment of dues and plots of land. The peasant movement acquired a particularly large scale in the Volga region, Ukraine and the central black earth provinces.
Russian society was shocked by the events in the villages of Bezdna (Kazan province) and Kandeevka (Penza province) that took place in April 1863. Peasants outraged by the reform were shot there by military teams. In total, over 1,100 peasant unrest occurred in 1861. Only by drowning the protests in blood did the government manage to reduce the intensity of the struggle. The disunited, spontaneous and devoid of political consciousness protest of the peasants was doomed to failure. Already in 1862-1863. the scope of the movement was significantly reduced. In the following years it declined sharply (in 1864 there were fewer than 100 performances).
In 1861-1863 During the period of intensification of the class struggle in the countryside, the activity of democratic forces in the country intensified. After the suppression of peasant uprisings, the government, feeling more confident, attacked the democratic camp with repression.
Peasant reform of 1861, its content and significance.
The peasant reform of 1861, which abolished serfdom, marked the beginning of the capitalist formation in the country.
Main reason Peasant reform resulted in a crisis of the feudal-serf system. Crimean War 1853–1856 revealed the rottenness and impotence of serf Russia. In the context of peasant unrest, which especially intensified during the war, tsarism moved to abolish serfdom.
In January 1857 A Secret Committee was formed under the chairmanship of Emperor Alexander II “to discuss measures to organize the life of the landowner peasants,” which at the beginning of 1858. was reorganized into the Main Committee for Peasant Affairs. At the same time, provincial committees were formed, which began developing projects for peasant reform, considered by the Editorial Commissions.
February 19, 1861 In St. Petersburg, Alexander II signed the Manifesto on the abolition of serfdom and the “Regulations on peasants emerging from serfdom,” consisting of 17 legislative acts.
The main act - “General Regulations on Peasants Emerging from Serfdom” - contained the main conditions of the peasant reform:
1. peasants received personal freedom and the right to dispose of their property;
2. landowners retained ownership of all the lands they owned, but were obliged to provide the peasants with “homestead residence” and field allotment “to ensure their livelihood and to fulfill their duties to the government and the landowner”;
3. For the use of allotment land, peasants had to serve corvee or pay quitrent and did not have the right to refuse it for 9 years. The size of the field allotment and duties should have been recorded in the statutory charters of 1861, which were drawn up by landowners for each estate and verified by the peace intermediaries;
-peasants were given the right to buy out the estate and, by agreement with the landowner, the field allotment; until this was done, they were called temporarily obligated peasants.
The “general situation” determined the structure, rights and responsibilities of peasant public (rural and volost) government bodies and the court.
4 “Local Regulations” determined the size of land plots and the duties of peasants for their use in 44 provinces of European Russia. The first of them is “Great Russian”, for 29 Great Russian, 3 Novorossiysk (Ekaterinoslav, Tauride and Kherson), 2 Belarusian (Mogilev and part of Vitebsk) and part of Kharkov provinces. This entire territory was divided into three stripes (non-chernozem, chernozem and steppe), each of which consisted of “localities”.
In the first two bands, depending on the “locality,” the highest (from 3 to 7 dessiatines; from 2 3/4 to 6 dessiatines) and the lowest (1/3 of the highest) amounts of per capita taxes were established. For the steppe, one “decreed” allotment was determined (in the Great Russian provinces from 6 to 12 dessiatines; in Novorossiysk, from 3 to 6 1/5 dessiatines). The size of the government tithe was determined to be 1.09 hectares.
Allotment land was provided to the “rural community”, i.e. community, according to the number of souls (men only) at the time of drawing up the charter documents who had the right to the allotment.
From the land that was in the use of peasants before February 19, 1861, sections could be made if the peasants' per capita allotments exceeded the highest size established for a given "locality", or if the landowners, while maintaining the existing peasant allotment, had less than 1/3 of the estate's land left. Allotments could be reduced by special agreements between peasants and landowners, as well as upon receipt of a gift allotment.
If peasants had plots of less than a small size, the landowner was obliged to cut off the missing land or reduce duties. For the highest spiritual allotment, a quitrent was established from 8 to 12 rubles per year or corvee - 40 men's and 30 women's working days per year. If the allotment was less than the highest, then the duties were reduced, but not proportionally.
The remaining “Local Provisions” basically repeated the “Great Russian Provisions”, but taking into account the specifics of their regions.
The features of the peasant reform for certain categories of peasants and specific areas were determined by 8 “Additional Rules”: “Arrangement of peasants settled on the estates of small-scale owners, and on benefits to these owners”; “People of the Ministry of Finance assigned to private mining plants”; "Peasants and workers serving work at Perm private mining plants and salt mines"; “Peasant peasants serving work in landowner factories”; "The peasants and courtyard people in the Land of the Don Army"; "Peasant peasants and courtyard people in the Stavropol province"; "Peasant peasants and courtyard people in Siberia"; "People who emerged from serfdom in the Bessarabian region."
The Manifesto and “Regulations” were published on March 5 in Moscow and from March 7 to April 2 in St. Petersburg. Fearing the dissatisfaction of the peasants with the conditions of the reform, the government took a number of precautions: it redeployed troops, sent members of the imperial retinue to places, issued an appeal from the Synod, etc. However, the peasants, dissatisfied with the enslaving conditions of the reform, responded to it with mass unrest. The largest of them were the Bezdnensky and Kandeevsky peasant uprisings of 1861.
As of January 1, 1863, peasants refused to sign about 60% of the charters. The purchase price of land significantly exceeded its market value at that time, in some areas -
2–3 times. In many regions, peasants sought to receive gift plots, thereby reducing allotment land use: in the Saratov province by 42.4%, Samara - 41.3%, Poltava - 37.4%, Ekaterinoslav - by 37.3%, etc. The lands cut off by the landowners were a means of enslaving the peasants, since they were vitally necessary for the peasant economy: watering place, pasture, haymaking, etc.
The peasants' transition to ransom lasted for several decades, on December 28, 1881. a law on compulsory redemption was issued on January 1, 1883, the transfer to which was completed by 1895. In total, by January 1, 1895, 124 thousand redemption transactions were approved, according to which 9,159 thousand souls in areas with communal farming and 110 thousand households in areas with household farming were transferred to redemption. About 80% of buyouts were mandatory.
As a result of the peasant reform (according to 1878), in the provinces of European Russia, 9,860 thousand peasants received an allotment of 33,728 thousand dessiatines of land (on average 3.4 dessiatines per capita). U115 thousand. landowners were left with 69 million dessiatines (an average of 600 dessiatines per owner).
What did these “average” indicators look like after 3.5 decades? The political and economic power of the tsar rested on the nobles and landowners. According to the 1897 census in Russia there were 1 million 220 thousand hereditary nobles and more than 600 thousand personal nobles, to whom the title of nobility was given, but not inherited. All of them were owners of land plots.
Of these: about 60 thousand were small-scale nobles, each had 100 acres; 25.5 thousand - average landowners, had from 100 to 500 acres; 8 thousand large nobles, who had from 500 to 1000 acres: 6.5 thousand - the largest nobles, who had from 1000 to 5000 acres.
At the same time, there were 102 families in Russia: princes Yusupov, Golitsyn, Dolgorukov, counts Bobrinsky, Orlov, etc., whose holdings amounted to more than 50 thousand dessiatines, that is, about 30% of the landowners' land fund in Russia.
The largest owner in Russia was Tsar Nicholas I. He owned huge tracts of so-called cabinet and appanage lands. Gold, silver, lead, copper, and timber were mined there. He rented out a significant part of the land. A special ministry of the imperial court managed the king's property.
When filling out the questionnaire for the census, Nicholas II wrote in the column about profession: “Master of the Russian land.”
As for peasants, the average allotment of a peasant family, according to the census, was 7.5 dessiatines.
The significance of the peasant reform of 1861 was that it abolished feudal ownership of workers and created a market for cheap labor. The peasants were declared personally free, that is, they had the right to buy land, houses in their own name, and enter into various transactions. The reform was based on the principle of gradualism: within two years, statutory charters were to be drawn up, defining the specific conditions for the liberation of peasants, then the peasants were transferred to the position of “temporarily obligated” until the transition to redemption and in the subsequent 49-year period, paying the debt to the state that bought the land for peasants from landowners. Only after this should land plots become the full property of the peasants.
For the liberation of peasants from serfdom, Emperor Alexander II was called the “LIBERER” by the people. Judge for yourself, what was more here - truth or hypocrisy? Note that of the total number of peasant unrest that occurred throughout the country in 1857–1861, 1340 out of 2165 (62%) protests occurred after the announcement of the 1861 reform.
Thus, the peasant reform of 1861 was a bourgeois reform carried out by serf owners. This was a step towards turning Russia into a bourgeois monarchy. However, the peasant reform did not solve the socio-economic contradictions in Russia, preserved landownership and a number of other feudal-serf remnants, led to a further aggravation of the class struggle, and served as one of the main reasons for the social explosion of 1905–1907. XX century.
In order to expand their state borders and thus strengthen their political influence in the world, most European countries, including the Russian Empire, sought to divide Turkish lands.
Causes of the Crimean War
The main reasons for the outbreak of the Crimean War was the clash of political interests of England, Russia, Austria and France in the Balkans and the Middle East. For their part, the Turks wanted to take revenge for all their previous defeats in military conflicts with Russia.
The trigger for the outbreak of hostilities was the revision in the London Convention of the legal regime for crossing Russian ships of the Bosporus Strait, which caused indignation on the part of the Russian Empire, since its rights were significantly infringed.
Another reason for the outbreak of hostilities was the transfer of the keys to the Bethlehem Church into the hands of Catholics, which caused a protest from Nicholas I, who, in the form of an ultimatum, began to demand their return to the Orthodox clergy.
In order to prevent the strengthening of Russian influence, in 1853 France and England concluded a secret agreement, the purpose of which was to counter the interests of the Russian crown, which consisted of a diplomatic blockade. The Russian Empire broke off all diplomatic relations with Turkey, and hostilities began in early October 1853.
Military operations in the Crimean War: first victories
During the first six months of hostilities, the Russian Empire received a number of stunning victories: Admiral Nakhimov’s squadron virtually completely destroyed the Turkish fleet, besieged Silistria, and stopped attempts by Turkish troops to seize Transcaucasia.
Fearing that the Russian Empire could capture the Ottoman Empire within a month, France and England entered the war. They wanted to attempt a naval blockade by sending their flotilla to large Russian ports: Odessa and Petropavlovsk-on-Kamchatka, but their plan was not crowned with the desired success.
In September 1854, having consolidated their forces, British troops made an attempt to capture Sevastopol. The first battle for the city on the Alma River was unsuccessful for Russian troops. At the end of September, the heroic defense of the city began, which lasted a whole year.
The Europeans had a significant advantage over Russia - these were steam ships, while the Russian fleet was represented by sailing ships. The famous surgeon N.I. Pirogov and writer L.N. took part in the battles for Sevastopol. Tolstoy.
Many participants in this battle went down in history as national heroes - S. Khrulev, P. Koshka, E. Totleben. Despite the heroism of the Russian army, it was unable to defend Sevastopol. The troops of the Russian Empire were forced to leave the city.
Consequences of the Crimean War
In March 1856, Russia signed the Treaty of Paris with European countries and Turkey. The Russian Empire lost its influence on the Black Sea, it was recognized as neutral. The Crimean War caused enormous damage to the country's economy.
The miscalculation of Nicholas I was that the feudal-serf Empire at that time had no chance of defeating strong European countries that had significant technical advantages. Defeat in the war was the main reason for the new Russian Emperor Alexander II to begin a series of social, political and economic reforms.
Crimean War 1853 – 1856 - one of the largest events of the 19th century, marking a sharp turn in the history of Europe. The immediate cause of the Crimean War was the events surrounding Turkey, but its true causes were much more complex and deeper. They were rooted primarily in the struggle between liberal and conservative principles.
At the beginning of the 19th century, the indisputable triumph of conservative elements over the aggressive revolutionary ones ended at the end of the Napoleonic wars with the Congress of Vienna in 1815, which established the political structure of Europe for a long time. Conservative-protective “System” Metternich“prevailed throughout the European continent and received its expression in the Holy Alliance, which initially embraced all the governments of continental Europe and represented, as it were, their mutual insurance against attempts to resume the bloody Jacobin terror anywhere. Attempts at new ("Southern Roman") revolutions made in Italy and Spain in the early 1820s were suppressed by decisions of the congresses of the Holy Alliance. However, the situation began to change after the French Revolution of 1830, which was successful and changed the internal order of France towards greater liberalism. The July coup of 1830 caused revolutionary events in Belgium and Poland. The system of the Congress of Vienna began to crackle. A split was brewing in Europe. The liberal governments of England and France began to unite against the conservative powers of Russia, Austria and Prussia. Then an even more serious revolution broke out in 1848, which, however, was defeated in Italy and Germany. The Berlin and Viennese governments received moral support from St. Petersburg, and the uprising in Hungary was directly helped by the Russian army to suppress the Austrian Habsburgs. Shortly before the Crimean War, the conservative group of powers, led by the most powerful of them, Russia, seemed to be even more united, restoring their hegemony in Europe.
This forty-year hegemony (1815 - 1853) aroused hatred on the part of European liberals, which was directed with particular force against “backward,” “Asian” Russia as the main stronghold of the Holy Alliance. Meanwhile, the international situation brought to the fore events that helped unite the Western group of liberal powers and separated the eastern, conservative ones. These events caused complications in the East. The interests of England and France, dissimilar in many ways, converged on protecting Turkey from being absorbed by Russia. On the contrary, Austria could not be a sincere ally of Russia in this matter, because it, like the British and French, most of all feared the absorption of the Turkish East by the Russian empire. Thus, Russia found itself isolated. Although the main historical interest of the struggle was the task of eliminating the protective hegemony of Russia, which had towered over Europe for 40 years, the conservative monarchies left Russia alone and thus prepared the triumph of the liberal powers and liberal principles. In England and France, the war with the northern conservative colossus was popular. If it had been caused by a clash over some Western issue (Italian, Hungarian, Polish), it would have united the conservative powers of Russia, Austria and Prussia. However, the eastern, Turkish question, on the contrary, separated them. It served as the external cause of the Crimean War of 1853-1856.
Crimean War 1853-1856. Map
The pretext for the Crimean War was the bickering over holy places in Palestine, which began in 1850 between the Orthodox clergy and the Catholic clergy, who were under the patronage of France. To resolve the issue, Emperor Nicholas I sent (1853) an extraordinary envoy to Constantinople, Prince Menshikov, who demanded that the Porte confirm the Russian protectorate over the entire Orthodox population of the Turkish Empire, established by previous treaties. The Ottomans were supported by England and France. After almost three months of negotiations, Menshikov received from the Sultan a decisive refusal to accept the note he presented and on May 9, 1853 he returned to Russia.
Then Emperor Nicholas, without declaring war, introduced the Russian army of Prince Gorchakov into the Danube principalities (Moldova and Wallachia), “until Turkey satisfies the just demands of Russia” (manifesto of June 14, 1853). The conference of representatives of Russia, England, France, Austria and Prussia, which gathered in Vienna to resolve the causes of disagreement peacefully, did not achieve its goal. At the end of September, Türkiye, under the threat of war, demanded that the Russians clear the principalities within two weeks. On October 8, 1853, the English and French fleets entered the Bosphorus, thereby violating the convention of 1841, which declared the Bosphorus closed to military vessels of all powers.
The Crimean War answered the long-standing dream of Nicholas I to take possession of the Bosporus and Dardanelles straits. Russia's military potential was quite realizable in the conditions of the war with the Ottoman Empire, however, Russia could not wage a war against the leading world powers. Let's talk briefly about the results of the Crimean War of 1853-1856.
Progress of the war
The main part of the battles took place on the Crimean peninsula, where the allies were successful. However, there were other theaters of war where success accompanied the Russian army. Thus, in the Caucasus, Russian troops captured the large fortress of Kars and occupied part of Anatolia. In Kamchatka and the White Sea, English landing forces were repulsed by garrisons and local residents.
During the defense of the Solovetsky Monastery, the monks fired at the Allied fleet from guns made under Ivan the Terrible.
The conclusion of this historical event was the conclusion of the Paris Peace, the results of which are reflected in the table. The date of signing was March 18, 1856.
The Allies failed to achieve all of their goals in the war, but they did stop the rise of Russian influence in the Balkans. There were other results of the Crimean War of 1853-1856.
The war destroyed the financial system of the Russian Empire. So, if England spent 78 million pounds on the war, then Russia’s costs amounted to 800 million rubles. This forced Nicholas I to sign a decree on the printing of unsecured credit notes.
TOP 5 articleswho are reading along with this
Rice. 1. Portrait of Nicholas I.
Alexander II also revised his policy regarding railway construction.
Rice. 2. Portrait of Alexander II.
Consequences of the war
The authorities began to encourage the creation of a railway network throughout the country, which did not exist before the Crimean War. The experience of combat did not go unnoticed. It was used during the military reforms of the 1860s and 1870s, where the 25-year conscription was replaced. But the main reason for Russia was the impetus for the Great Reforms, including the abolition of serfdom.
For Britain, the unsuccessful military campaign led to the resignation of the Aberdeen government. The war became a litmus test that showed the corruption of the English officers.
In the Ottoman Empire, the main result was the bankruptcy of the state treasury in 1858, as well as the publication of a treatise on freedom of religion and the equality of subjects of all nationalities.
For the world, the war gave impetus to the development of the armed forces. The result of the war was an attempt to use the telegraph for military purposes, the beginning of military medicine was laid by Pirogov and the involvement of nurses in caring for the wounded, barrage mines were invented.
After the Battle of Sinop, the manifestation of “information war” was documented.
Rice. 3. Battle of Sinop.
The British wrote in the newspapers that the Russians were finishing off the wounded Turks floating in the sea, which did not happen. After the Allied fleet was caught in an avoidable storm, Emperor Napoleon III of France ordered weather monitoring and daily reporting, which was the beginning of weather forecasting.
What have we learned?
The Crimean War, like any major military clash of world powers, made many changes in both the military and socio-political life of all countries participating in the conflict.
Test on the topic
Evaluation of the report
Average rating: 4.6. Total ratings received: 106.
