Reign of Ivan III. Formation of a unified Russian state

Folding Moscow states in XIV-XVI

_____centuries _______

1/ The unification of Russian lands around Moscow and the formation of a single

Russian states

2/ Role of Russian Orthodox Church in its formation and strengthening

Russian state

Z/ Formation of a centralized Russian state

4/ XVII century - crisis of the Muscovite kingdom

The unification of Russian lands around Moscow and the formation of a single Russian state

As in Western Europe after the period of feudal fragmentation, in Rus' in the 14th-15th centuries. The time is coming for the formation of a unified Russian state. What are the reasons for the unification of Russian lands? If we follow the logic of the formational approach, then the decisive condition should have been the economic factor. Economic needs, regardless of the will and desire of people, force the establishment of economic ties between individual regions, and a single market begins to form. Political fragmentation becomes a brake on economic development. Under the influence of economic factors, political boundaries are overcome, lands are united, and a single state is formed.

To some extent, this scheme worked quite accurately in Western Europe. But in Rus' the process of unification followed a different scenario. And although economic ties between individual principalities undoubtedly developed, the common all-Russian market arose later - only in the 17th century, and the economic remnants of the former fragmentation - internal customs - would be eliminated only in mid-18th century c., during the reign of Empress Elizabeth. Thus, political processes in Rus' were ahead of economic ones.

Giving an explanation for this phenomenon, most historians are inclined to believe that the decisive incentive for the unification of Russian lands lies in the existential plane. During this period, the most pressing question arose about survival of the Russian state" preserving the identity of the Russian people with his culture and beliefs. In the XIV-XV centuries. Rus' was under extreme pressure simultaneously with two sides - from the East and West. In the East its vital activity was encroached upon by the Golden Horde, and in the West by the young and aggressive Principality of Lithuania. It was in the confrontation and victory over these two forces that the foundations of a unified Russian states. Successful or confrontation could only be carried out by a single large state. Through the efforts of several pok deer prominent figures in Rus' such a state is taking shape. Let us consider specifically how this process.

Historians testify that XIV century most strong positions in the Russian lands the principalities of Tver, Moscow and Novgorod occupy. The struggle for the seizure of Russian lands for a long time went on, first of all, between the Tver and Moscow principalities. The complexity of this struggle lay in the fact that both principalities were politically dependent on the Golden Horde. Therefore success their politicians depended on how they would build their relations with the Horde and be able to use the Horde khans as patrons.

The organizer of the unification of Russian lands was Principality of Moscow. The reasons for this are related both to the advantageous geographical position of Moscow and the personal qualities of a number of princes who occupied the Moscow “table” in the 14th-16th centuries. The city of Moscow appears in the 12th century on the southern outskirts of the Rostov-Suzdal land, not far from the border with the Chernigov-Seversk land, i.e. in the center of the then Russian world, at the crossroads of three important roads. The first road ran from West to East: from the upper Dniester region to Vladimir-on-Klyazma and further to the land of the Volga Bulgars. The second is from the South-West to the North-East - from the Kyiv and Chernigov South to Pereslavl-Zalessky and Rostov. The third - from the North-West to the South-East, from the Novgorod land to the Ryazan land. Thus, Moscow early became a junction of trade routes, and, in particular, an important center for the grain trade. And this gave great advantages to the Moscow princes, who, enriched by trade and duties, later managed to acquire from the khans of the Golden Horde a “label” for the great reign of Vladimir, and on the other hand, expand their possessions by buying land from small appanage princes. The strengthening of the Moscow principality occurs under Daniil Alexandrovich (1276-1303) (son of Alexander Nevsky), who captured Kolomna in 1301, Pereslavl in 1302, Mozhaisk in 1303 and so he himself almost doubled his possessions and became the master of the coast of the entire Moscow River. The son of Daniil Alexandrovich, Ivan Daniilovich Kaliga (1325-1340), sharply intensified the process of consolidation of Russian lands around the Moscow principality. Politically them tacking, intrigues Ivan Kaliga intercepted the “label” for the great reign from the Tver princes. Since 1327, he received the right to collect tribute from Russian lands in favor of the Golden Horde. He collects this tribute with an “iron hand,” mercilessly suppressing any resistance. A considerable part of the money remains in his treasury (hence the nickname “Kaliga” - money bag). He buys part of the land for his possessions from neighboring small princes. This policy was continued by his heirs:

Semyon Ivanovich Proud (1340-1353), Ivan Ivanovich the Red (1353-1359) and Dmitry Ivanovich Donskoy (1359-1389). Under Grand Duke Dmitry Donskoy, significant events took place in the unification process. Moscow becomes the largest economic and political center of Rus'. During this period, the trade and craft population of Moscow increased significantly. The production of weapons is undergoing great development. A whole settlement of gunsmiths appears in Moscow. The development of weapons manufacturing contributed to the growth of the military power of the Moscow principality. The Moscow prince had at his disposal a large and well-armed army. In the 60-70s, Moscow successfully withstood the struggle for the great reign of Vladimir with the Suzdal-Novgorod, Tver and Ryazan princes. The territory of the principality was significantly expanded.

The strengthening of the Moscow principality allowed Dmitry Donskoy to raise the banner of an open struggle for the liberation of the country from the Tatar-Mongol enslavers. In 1378, on the Vozha River, Dmitry Donskoy won a major victory over the Tatars. The greatest significance for the formation of a unified Russian state was his famous victory on the Kulikovo Field in 1380. The victory on the Kulikovo Field is not only a military-political, but a spiritual and moral victory. In military-political terms, the Battle of Kulikovo showed that the Russian army can fight on equal terms, and even defeat such a strong enemy. The myth about the invincibility of the Golden Horde army was dispelled. The spiritual and moral meaning of this victory is that thanks to it, the Russian people managed to overcome the age-old fear of enslavers and revive a sense of national pride and national dignity. After the victory on the Kulikovo field, the Golden Horde yoke continued in Rus' for about another hundred years. However, the nature of the relationship between Rus' and the Horde has changed significantly. And although Khan Tokhtamysh burned Moscow in 1382 and restored the formal subordination of Rus' to the Horde, in reality there was no longer subordination in the previous form. In 1389, Dmitry Donskoy for the first time transferred the great reign without a label to his son Vasily I (1389-1425). In 1393, Vasily I, without the consent of the khan, captured Nizhny Novgorod, Moore, Mosher. A significant contribution to the unification process was the victory of Vasily II the Dark (1425-4462) over the Galician prince Yuri Dmitrievich and his sons Dmitry Shemyaka, Vasily Kosy and Dmitry the Red in the struggle for the grand-ducal throne.

The final phase in the unification process is associated with the activities of two outstanding political figures of Rus': Ivan III and Ivan IV. During the reign of Ivan III Vasilyevich (1462-1505), Rostov (1474), Veliky Novgorod (1478), Dvina land (1478), Tver (1485), Kazan (1487), Vyatka land (1489) were annexed to the Moscow principality. Pskov and Ryazan became dependent on Moscow. Thus, at the end of the 15th century, the borders of the territory of the united Russian state in the north reached the White Sea, in the south - to the Oka, in the west - to the Upper Dnieper, in the east - to the spurs Northern Urals.

Ivan III's greatest achievement was the final overthrow of the Tatar-Mongol yoke in 1480(famous standing on the Ugra River). By that time, the Golden Horde was in decline. As a result of feudal fragmentation, a number of territories fell away from it, in which independent khanates arose. In the middle of the 15th century, the Kazan Khanate was formed on the territory of the middle Volga region, the Astrakhan Khanate was formed in the lower reaches of the Volga, the Northern Black Sea region became part of the Crimean Khanate, and an independent state was formed in the territory between the Volga and Ural rivers - the Nogai Horde. The Tatars, living east of the Ural Mountains in the lower reaches of the Irtysh and Tobol rivers, formed Khanate of Siberia. On the territory of Kazakhstan and Central Asia The Kazakh and Uzbek khanates were formed.

As a result of the collapse of the Golden Horde, the balance of forces developed in favor of the Russian state. But Khan of the Golden Horde Akhmat decided to force Moscow to pay tribute. A meeting of Russian and Tatar troops took place on the Ugra River. Realizing the superiority of the Russian army, which was numerous and better armed, Akhmat did not dare to fight and gradually retreated. After the failure of Akhmat's campaign against Rus', the Golden Horde ceased to exist in 1502.

The overthrow of the Tatar-Mongol yoke provided Rus' with conditions for intensive economic, political and cultural development. The international authority of the Moscow Principality has greatly increased both in the East and in the West. From that time on, Rus' began to exist again as an independent state in Eastern Europe, but in a new capacity. It was from this time that the unification of the Russian state around Moscow actually led to the creation of the Russian state, although the term “Russia”, “Russian state” formally entered the political lexicon during the reign of Ivan IV.

Principality of Lithuania. As a result of these wars, Moscow annexed the Supreme Regions - the region of the upper reaches of the Oka River (Novosil, Odoev, Vorotynsk, Belev, etc.) and the northern cities (Putivl, Novgorod-Seversky, Trubachevsk, etc.). At the same time, the status of the head of state changed radically. The Grand Duke of Moscow and Vladimir turns into the “sovereign of all Rus'” - “autocrat”. The word “autocrat” was first used to mean the independence of the Grand Duke from any other state, and then in the sense of the unlimited power of his power in his country.

In order to strengthen autocratic power, Ivan III married the niece of the last Byzantine emperor Constantine XI, Sophia (Zoe) Paleologus. He used his relationship with the Byzantine emperor to strengthen the authority of the grand ducal power and the Russian state. Ivan III combined the old Moscow coat of arms with the image of St. George the Victorious slaying a serpent with a spear with the ancient coat of arms of Byzantium - double headed eagle. On the seal with the coat of arms of the Russian state it was indicated new title Ivan III "By the grace of God, the sovereign of all Rus', Grand Duke John." By introducing the new coat of arms of the Russian state and the new title, Ivan III wanted to emphasize that after his marriage with Sophia Palaeologus Russian state becomes the direct heir to the Roman Byzantine Empire, and the Moscow sovereign becomes the direct successor to the autocratic power of the Byzantine emperor. Ceremonies were built according to the Byzantine model. During the reception of foreign ambassadors, Ivan IV sat on the throne given to him by Constantine XI. The ambassadors had to bow low to the sovereign, dressed in ceremonial clothes embroidered with gold and silver with Byzantine “barmas” (shoulders) and crowned with the “Monomakh’s cap.”

The unification policy was continued by the son of Ivan III, Vasily III (1505-1533). During his reign, Pskov was subordinated to the authorities of Moscow (1510), and in 1521 the last appanage principality, Ryazan, ceased to exist.

During the reign of Ivan IV the Terrible (1547-1584), the expansion of the territory of the Russian state was carried out through the seizure and colonization of new territories from the fragments of the Golden Horde. In 1552, Ivan the Terrible conquered the Kazan Khanate. In 1556, the troops of Ivan the Terrible conquered the Astrakhan Khanate. Thus, the entire Volga region became part of the Russian state. The Volga trade route, along which one could sail to the Caspian Sea, and from there to Persia, Turkey and move further to the East, belonged to Russia. In 1581, a detachment of Cossacks led by Ermak conquered the Siberian Khanate. Part of the population of Siberia submitted to Russia voluntarily. Now the Russian state occupied all of Eastern Europe and advanced its border far beyond the Urals.

2.

The role of the Russian Orthodox Church in the formation and strengthening

Russian state

In the consolidation of Russian lands, the formation of a unified Russian states The Orthodox Church played an important role. Within a relatively short period of two or three centuries Christianity has taken deep roots on Russian land. The Orthodox Church has become one of the most authoritative institutions. She remained the most important link everyone Russian lands during the period of feudal fragmentation before the Tatar-Mongol invasion.

During the Tatar-Mongol yoke, its importance increased even more. Orthodoxy served as the spiritual and moral support of the Russian people during the years of severe hardship. The great princes of Moscow relied on her authority when pursuing their unification policy. It is known that the head of the Russian Orthodox Church, Metropolitan Peter of Vladimir, was in close friendship with Ivan Kalita, lived for a long time in Moscow, where he died in 1326 and was buried in the Assumption Cathedral. His successor, Metropolitan Theognost, finally settled in Moscow, which thus became the ecclesiastical capital of all Rus'. The transfer of the metropolitan see to Moscow contributed to the strengthening of the political role of the Moscow principality.

The Orthodox clergy played an active role in the liberation process from the Tatar-Gol yoke. Of particular merit in this is the founder of the Trinity-Sergius Monastery near Moscow, Sergius of Radonezh, who became one of the most revered saints of the Russian Orthodox Church. Sergius of Radonezh, together with Dmitry Donskoy, can rightfully be called the organizer and inspirer of the victory of Russian troops over the Tatar troops during the Battle of Kulikovo.

The Battle of Kulikovo, as follows from the above, took place after the victory of Prince Dmitry Donskoy over the Tatar-Mongols skim troops led by Begich on the river. Vozhe in 1378. Immediately after this event, the new Horde military leader Mamai began intensive preparations to pacify the Russians. Rus' also began to prepare for battle. And in this preparation, the creation of an appropriate spiritual and moral attitude by Sergius of Radonezh was of great importance. It was at this time that Rus' was preparing for great trials that Sergius had a vision. The Mother of God appeared to him in a dream and promised her care and protection of the Russian land." This kind of spiritual revelation had a huge impact on the mood and state of mind of people. The news of the “appearance of the Mother of God” to Sergius quickly spread throughout the Russian lands, which contributed to the rise of patriotic feelings and the unity of the Russian people. The Mother of God’s promise to protect the Russian land was combined in the popular consciousness with preparations to repel the new Golden Horde invasion.

It is difficult to overestimate the significance of the blessing Dmitry Donskoy received from St. Sergius on the eve of the Battle of Kulikovo “for the battle.” for Russian land." Together with With blessing, Sergius of Radonezh sent two monks of his monastery, the heroes Andrei, for spiritual and military support Oslyabya and Alexander Peresvet. Peresvet, as you know, opened the Battle of Kulikovo with its duel with the Tatar hero Chelubey.

St. Sergius strove to overcome conflicts between Russian princes and contributed to their consolidation in the name of the interests of the Russian land. Before the Battle of Kulikovo, he warned the Ryazan prince Oleg against acting on the side of the Horde. And Prince Oleg listened to the admonitions of the authoritative clergyman, which undoubtedly contributed to the victory of the Russian troops. After the Battle of Kulikovo in 1387, he insisted on the marriage of the daughter of Dmitry Donskoy with the son of the Ryazan prince Oleg Fedor. In this way, problems in relations between Moscow and Ryazan were resolved and peace was concluded between them for a long time.

In the formation of a unified Russian state, the formation of national Russian Orthodox Church.

In the process of formation of the national Russian Orthodox Church, two sides can be distinguished - formal-organizational and content-spiritual. The formal organizational side is associated with the gradual acquisition of independence by the Russian Orthodox Church in relation to the Byzantine Church, obtaining the status of an autocephalous (independent) church. As is known, from the beginning of its formation, the Russian Orthodox Church was under the jurisdiction of the Patriarch of Constantinople. The highest official in Rus' - the Metropolitan of Kiev, then Vladimir and Moscow - were directly appointed by Constantinople and were Greeks by nationality. In the 13th-15th centuries, in connection with the Tatar-Mongol invasion of the Balkan Peninsula and the seizure of Byzantium by the crusaders, the procedure for appointing and approving a metropolitan changed somewhat. Most often, the metropolitan was consecrated at home, in Rus', and the patriarch only confirmed this consecration.

At the end of the 15th century, significant changes occurred in the relations between the Orthodox churches of Rus' and Constantinople. In 1439, in order to ensure the protection of Byzantium from the invasion of the Turks, at the Ecumenical Council in the Italian city of Florence, the Orthodox Church signed a union with the Catholic Church - a document on the unification of the Eastern and Western Christian churches. This document recognized the dogma of the primacy of the Pope over all

Christian churches, but it persisted For Orthodoxy the right to perform rituals according to its canonical rules* For centuries, Orthodox Rus' was brought up in the spirit of hatred of the Roman Catholics which church. Therefore, the conclusion of the Union of Florence was regarded by the Russian Orthodox Church and the entire Russian society How betrayal, apostasy true faith. Florentine union was rejected, and this served as a powerful impetus for the separation of the Russian Orthodox Church from the Patriarchate of Constantinople. Participant in Ecumenical Council and the protege of the Patriarch of Constantinople, Metropolitan Isidore, who signed the union, was deposed and in 1448 the council of Russian bishops for the first time, without the participation of Constantinople, elected a Russian person - Jonah - as metropolitan. The Russian Orthodox Church finally becomes independent (autocephalous), and therefore, in the full sense of the word, a national church in 1589. This year, the Russian Orthodox Church turns from the metropolis of the Patriarch of Constantineple into the autocephalous Moscow Patriarchate and the first Russian patriarch is elected at the Local Council riarch Job. In content and spiritual terms, in the formation of a single

of the Russian state and the formation of the national Orthodox Church, the creation of all-Russian shrines was of great importance. Famous Russian historian and public figure P.N. Milyukov noted that even during the times of Kievan Rus, the inhabitants of each locality loved to have their own special, special them

belonging to the shrine: their icons and their local saints, under whose patronage this or that region was. Naturally, such local saints were honored only within their own region, and other regions their ignored and even treated

hostile to them.

The unification of lands also required a change in views on local shrines. Collecting their inheritance, the Moscow princes without ceremony transported the most important of these shrines to the new capital. Thus, the icon of the Savior from Novgorod, the icon of the First Annunciation from Ustyug, the icon Mother of God Hodegetria from Smolensk and others. The purpose of collecting these shrines in Moscow is not to deprive the conquered regions of local shrines, but to attract their favor, but to bring all local shrines to universal fame and thus create a single treasury of national piety (Milyukov L.N. Essays on the history of Russian culture in 3 volumes. T.2. Ch. 1 . P.38). The work of two spiritual councils during the reign of Ivan the Terrible on the canonization of Russian saints was aimed at solving the same problem. At the first council (1547) he was canonized, that is, canonized. 22 pleasers.

On the second (1549) there are 17 more saints. Thus, in the Russian Orthodox Church, in 3 years, as many saints were canonized as were not canonized in the five previous centuries of its existence. Thus the Russian Orthodox Church proved. that it has rich spiritual foundations and in this regard can compete with any ancient Christian church

Against the backdrop of the rise of the international authority of the Russian state, the growth of national self-awareness in the depths of the Russian Orthodox Church, already at the end of the 15th century, the idea of ​​the world-historical role of the Muscovite kingdom, of Moscow as the “third Rome,” began to take shape. This idea is based on the idea of ​​the saving role of Russian Orthodoxy for all humanity after the conclusion of the Union of Florence and the capture of Constantinople by the Turks. This idea is clearly formulated in a letter to Ivan III by the abbot of the Pskov monastery, Philaret. “The Church of old Rome fell through unbelief of the Apollinarian heresy, but the second Rome - the Church of Constantinople - was cut down by the Hagarians with axes. Now this third new Rome - your sovereign kingdom - the holy catholic apostolic church throughout the whole of heaven shines more than the sun. And may your power, O pious king, know that all kingdoms Orthodox faith have come together into your single kingdom: you alone are the king of Christians in all the heavenly regions. Watch and listen, pious king, that all Christian kingdoms have come together into your one, that two Romes have fallen, and a third stands, and there will not be a fourth. Your Christian kingdom will no longer go to others.” Thus, the Moscow sovereign received religious illumination not only for the management of all Russian lands, but also for the entire world.

In the 16th century, the formation of the national church acquired new features. The National Russian Orthodox Church is increasingly turning into a state church. The prerequisites for such a transformation are embedded in the very tradition of Eastern Christianity. The Eastern Church recognized the supremacy of state power over itself and was part of government institutions. In Rus', Prince Vladimir and his heirs - Andrei Bogolyubsky, Vladimir Monomakh and others - sought to continue this tradition. But after the collapse of the unified Russian state on appanage principalities, the close union of church and state was broken. This union begins to recover as a unified Russian state is formed. The greatest impetus for establishing such union, transformation into a state national church was given by three major church figures of the XVI century: Abbot of the Volokolamsk Monastery Joseph, Metropolitans Daniel and Macarius. As noted P.N. Milyukov, Joseph theoretically put Russian the prince for that place, which occupied in eastern church emperor Byzantine. Daniel practically subordinated the church and its representatives to the will of secular authorities. Finally Macarius applied the theory;

the practice of secular intervention to revise the entire spiritual content of the national church. The crowning achievement of the Josephine policy was the spiritual councils of the first years of the independent reign of Ivan the Terrible (Milyukov P.N. Essays on the history of Russian culture in 3t. T.2. Part 1. P.37).

The most important fruit of such a union between the state and the church was the national exaltation of both - the creation of a religious-political theory (ideology) sanctioning the original Russian power (statehood) and placing it under the protection of an original national shrine.

Formation of a centralized Russian state

In parallel with the unification of Russian lands and the creation of the spiritual basis of the national state, there was a process of strengthening Russian statehood and the formation of a centralized Russian state. The prerequisites for this process were laid during the period of the Tatar-Mongol yoke. Researchers note that the vassal dependence of Russian lands on the Golden Horde to a certain extent contributed to the strengthening of Russian statehood. During this period, the volume and authority of princely power within the country increases, the princely apparatus crushes the institutions of popular self-government, and the veche - the oldest organ democracy is gradually disappearing from practice throughout the entire territory of the historical core of the future Russian state (Lyutykh A.A, Skobelkin O.V.” Thin V.A. History of Russia (Lecture course. Voronezh, 1 993. P. 82).

During the period of the Tatar-Mongol yoke, city liberties and privileges were destroyed. The outflow of money to the Golden Horde prevented the emergence of the “third estate,” the pillar of urban independence in Western Europe. "

The wars with the Tatar-Mongol invaders led to the fact that during their Most of the warriors - feudal lords - were destroyed. The feudal class began to be reborn on a fundamentally different basis. Now princes distribute lands not to advisers and comrades, but to their servants and stewards. All of them are personally dependent on the prince. Having become feudal lords, they did not cease to be his subordinates.

Due to the political dependence of the Russian lands on the Golden Horde, the unification process took place under extreme conditions. And this left a significant imprint on the nature of power relations in the emerging Russian state, the process of annexing other states, “principalities-lands”

to the Principality of Moscow most often relied on violence and assumed the violent nature of power in the unifying state. The feudal lords of the annexed territories became servants of the Moscow ruler. And if the latter, in relation to his own boyars, according to tradition, could retain some contractual obligations that came from vassal relations, then in relation to the ruling class of the annexed lands he was only a master for his subjects. Thus, due to a number of historical reasons in In the formation of statehood of the Moscow kingdom, elements of eastern civilization predominated. The relations of vassalage, established in Kievan Rus before the Tatar-Mongol yoke, are inferior to the relations of subjection.

Already during the reign of Ivan III, a system of authoritarian power, which had significant elements of eastern despotism. The “Sovereign of All Rus'” had a volume of power and authority immeasurably greater than that of European monarchs. The entire population of the country - from the highest boyars to the last smerd - were the tsar's subjects, his slaves. The relations of citizenship were introduced into law by the Belozersk charter of 1488. According to this charter, all classes were equalized in the face of state power.

The economic basis of subject relations was predominance of state ownership of land. In Russia, noted V.O. Klyuchevsky, the tsar was a kind of patrimonial owner. The whole country for him is property, with which he acts as a rightful owner. The number of princes, boyars and other patrimonial owners was constantly decreasing: Ivan IV reduced their specific gravity in economic relations in the country to a minimum. The decisive blow to private ownership of land was dealt by the institution of reason. From an economic point of view, the oprichnina was characterized by the allocation of significant territories in the west, north and south of the country to a special sovereign inheritance. These territories were declared the personal possessions of the king. This means that all private owners in the oprichnina lands had to either recognize the sovereign rights of the tsar or be subject to liquidation, and their property was confiscated. The large estates of princes and boyars were divided into small estates and distributed to the nobles for the sovereign's service as hereditary possession, but not as property. In this way, the power of appanage princes and boyars was destroyed, and the position of service landowners - nobles - was strengthened under the unlimited power of the autocratic tsar.

The oprichnina policy was carried out with extreme cruelty. Evictions and confiscation of property were accompanied by bloody terror and accusations of conspiracy against the tsar. The strongest pogroms were carried out in Novgorod, Tver, Pskov. No wonder words“oprichnina” and “oprichnik” became common nouns and were used as figurative expressions of gross tyranny.

As a result of the oprichnina, society submitted to the unlimited power of a single ruler - the Moscow Tsar. The serving nobility became the main social support of power. Boyarskaya Duma A was still preserved as a tribute to tradition, but became more manageable. Owners economically independent from the authorities have been liquidated. which could serve as the basis for the formation of civil society.

In addition to state ownership, corporate, that is, collective ownership, was quite widespread in the Muscovite kingdom. Collective owners were church and monasteries. Free communal peasants (chernososnye) had collective ownership of land and holdings. Thus, in the Russian state there was practically no institution of private property, which in Western Europe served as the basis for the principle of separation of powers and the creation of a parliamentary system.

However, Russian statehood cannot be fully attributed to Eastern despotism. For a long time, such bodies of public representation as the Boyar Duma, Zemstvo self-government and Zemsky Sobors functioned in it.

The Boyar Duma as an advisory governing body existed in Kievan Rus. At that time it was not part of the state apparatus. With the formation of a single centralized state, the Boyar Duma turns into the highest state body of the country. In addition to the sovereign, the Boyar Duma included former appanage princes and them boyars The most important power functions are practically concentrated in her hands. The Boyar Duma is the legislative body of the state. Without its “sentences,” legislative acts could not come into force. She had the legislative initiative in the adoption of new “charters”, taxes and the famous Code of Laws (1497, 1550), which were sets of legal norms and laws that were in force throughout the entire territory of a single state. At the same time, the Boyar Duma was also the highest executive body. She carried out general management of orders, supervised local administration, and made decisions on organizational issues. armies and land affairs. From 1530-1540 The Boyar Duma becomes a state bureaucratic institution.

From the middle of the 16th century, the so-called “Near Duma” emerged from the Boyar Duma, and under Ivan the Terrible - the “Elected Rada” (1547-1560), which consisted of a narrow circle of close associates

tsar, such as the priest of the Annunciation Cathedral in the Kremlin Sylvester, the tsar's bed-guard A. Adashev and others, who resolved emergency and secret issues. In addition to the Duma clerks, Ivan the Terrible introduced Duma nobles into the bureaucracy. The decisions of the “Chosen Rada” came on behalf of the Tsar and were implemented by Duma officials, among whom more and more were his favorites and relatives.

However, over the years, the Boyar Duma gradually becomes a conservative body that opposes the sovereign’s initiatives. Ivan the Terrible is pushing her away from the legislative and executive powers. The importance of the Boyar Duma will increase briefly after his death, but by the end of the 17th century. it will no longer meet the urgent needs of government and will be cancelled.

During the formation of the unified Russian state, the process of forming central executive authorities was underway. Already at the beginning of the 16th century. Orders occupy an important place in the structure of public administration. The order was usually headed by a boyar. Direct executive activities were carried out by clerks and clerks, recruited from among the serving nobility. Orders are sectoral management bodies. They were created for various reasons, performed many functions, and sometimes were temporary. The treasury was in charge of all state finances. But at certain times the treasury order also oversees the southern direction foreign policy. The state order was in charge of national institutions; Zemsky - carried out police functions; Yamskoy (postal) - was responsible for uninterrupted communications between Moscow and the interior of the country;

robber - engaged in the analysis of criminal cases; rank - he was in charge of recruiting the army, he was also in charge of the construction of fortresses and border cities; local - was in charge of state lands, etc.

There were many small orders (stable, pharmacy, etc.) and a whole network of financial orders.

The development of artillery during the Livonian War led to the formation of the Pushkar order, which was in charge of the production of cannons, shells and gunpowder.

After the capture of Kazan and Astrakhan, the order of the Kazan Palace was organized - the department of territorial administration. Back at the end of the 15th century. The Armory Chamber arose - the arsenal of the Russian state. For more than a quarter of a century, it was headed by the talented diplomat and subtle connoisseur of art B.I. Khitrovo.

Precisely on Ivan's orders Grozny and his government assigned the responsibility of implementing major reforms in the middle of the 16th century. Final registration orders as institutions occurred at the end of the 16th century, when for everyone of which a certain staff and budget were established and special buildings were built on the territory of the Kremlin. |

By the middle of the 17th century. the total number of orders reached 53 with a staff of 3.5 thousand people. During major orders, special schools were created to train qualified government officials. However, the main shortcomings of the order management system appeared quite early: the lack of clear regulation and distribution of responsibilities between individual institutions; red tape, embezzlement, corruption, etc.

Administratively, the main territory of the Russian state was divided into counties, and the county into volosts and camps.

Uyezds were administrative districts consisting of cities assigned to him lands. There was no significant difference between the volost and the camp: the camp was the same rural volost, but usually directly subordinate to the city administration. Instead of counties, the Novgorod land was divided into Pyatyns, and Pyatyns into graveyards. The Pskov land was divided into lips. Novgorod churchyards and Pskov lips roughly corresponded to Moscow skim volosts

General local administration was concentrated among governors and volosts. Governors ruled cities and suburban camps; The volostel governed the volosts. The power of governors and volostels extended to different sides local life: they were judges/rulers, collectors of the princes' income, with the exception of income of purely palace origin and tribute; Moreover, the governors were the military commanders of the city and district. The governors of the Grand Duke were the boyars, and the volostels were service people, as a rule, from among the children of the boyars. Both of them, according to the old custom, were supported, or, as they said then, “fed,” at the expense of the population. Initially, “feeding” (that is, extortions in favor of governors and volosts) nothing were not limited. Later, in order to centralize local government and increase state revenues, “feeding” standards were established, and the exact amounts of judicial and trade duties collected by governors and volosts in their favor were determined.

All office work in the local administration, as well as in the central one, was concentrated in the hands of clerks and clerks, who were also supported by the local population.

In addition to the general administration carried out by governors and volosts, on In some places there was also a system of palace, patrimonial administration, which was in charge of the Princely lands and palaces, and

also by performing such generally obligatory palace duties (“princely affairs”), such as mandatory participation local population in harvesting, threshing and transporting princely grain, feeding the princely horse and mowing hay for him, building the princely courtyard, mill, participating in the princely hunt, etc.

At the turn of the fifteenth and sixteenth centuries. In the cities, so-called city clerks appeared - a kind of military commandants appointed by the Grand Duke from among the local nobles. City clerks were in charge of the construction and repair of city fortifications, roads and bridges, ensuring the transportation of military supplies, the production of gunpowder, and the storage of ammunition, weapons and food for the army. The task of city clerks also included holding a district meeting of city and peasant militias.

To create a uniform system of administration and court throughout the state, the Code of Laws was published in 1497 - the first set of existing laws, something between the criminal code and the constitution. The general trend towards centralization of the country and the state apparatus entailed the publication of a new Code of Law of 1550. In the Code of Code of 1550, for the first time in Russia, law was proclaimed as the only source of law. He eliminated the judicial privileges of appanage princes and strengthened the role of state judicial bodies. The Code of Law introduced punishment for bribery for the first time. The population of the country was obliged to bear taxes - a complex of natural and monetary duties. The Moscow ruble became the main payment unit in the state. A procedure for filing complaints against governors was established, which ensured control over them by the local nobility. The right to collect trade duties passed into the hands of the state. A radical management reform was carried out.

In 1555-1556. The feeding system was eliminated. All volosts and cities were given the right to move to a new order of self-government, according to which volosts and cities were required to contribute a special rent to the sovereign's treasury - “fodder farming”. The power of governors was completely replaced by the power of elected zemstvo bodies. The latter were headed by provincial and zemstvo elders, who were involved in the analysis of criminal cases, the distribution of taxes, and were in charge of the city economy, land allocation, that is, the basic needs of the townspeople and district people. Black-nosed peasants, townspeople, and service people used the word “zemshchina” to select “kissers” - jurors who kissed the cross, swearing an oath to a fair trial.

In addition to the system of local self-government, zemstvo councils were an influential institution of democracy in Russia in the 16th-18th centuries. Zemsky Sobors were convened at the initiative of the sovereign to discuss the most important problems of domestic and foreign policy. First Zemsky The cathedral was convened on February 27, 1549 as a meeting of “every rank of people in the Moscow state” or the “great zemstvo duma” to discuss the issue of how to build local government and where to get money to wage a war against Lithuania. Its composition included members of the Boyar Duma, church leaders, governors and boyar children, representatives of the nobility, townspeople. There were no official documents defining the principles for selecting participants in the council. Most often, the highest layers of the state hierarchy were included there by position, and the lower ones, according to certain quotas, were elected at local meetings. Zemsky Sobors had no legal rights. However their authority consolidated the most important government decisions.

The era of Zemsky Sobors lasted over a century (1549-1653). During this time their convened several dozen times. The most famous: in 1550 regarding the new Code of Laws; in 1566 during the Livonian War; in 1613 - the most crowded (over 700 people) for the election of Mikhail Romanov to the Russian throne; in 1648, the issue of creating a commission to draw up the Council Code was discussed and, finally, in 1653, the last Zemsky Sobor decided to reunite Little Russia with the Muscovite kingdom (Ukraine with Russia).

Zemsky Sobors were not only a tool for strengthening the autocracy, but they contributed to the formation of the national-state consciousness of the Russian people.

In the second half of the 17th century. The activity of the Zemsky Sobors, as well as the Zemshchina, is gradually fading away. The final blow was dealt by Peter I: during the reign of the great reformer in the empire, the bureaucracy ousted the zemshchina.

An important element of Russian statehood, bringing it closer to Eastern civilization, is Institute of serfdom.

The process of forming serfdom was a long one. d It was generated by the feudal social system and was its main attribute. In the era of political fragmentation there was no common law, which determined the position of the peasants and them responsibilities. Back in the 15th century. peasants were free to leave the land on which they lived and to pass to another landowner, having paid the previous owner debts and a special fee for the use of the yard and land plot - elderly. But already at that time, the princes began to issue charters in favor of landowners, limiting the peasant exit, that is, the right of rural residents to “cross from volost to volost, from village in the village” for one period of the year - a week before St. George’s Day (November 26, old style) and a week after the bliss

Although there is no direct decree on the introduction of serfdom, the fact of its establishment is confirmed in writing by the St. George’s Day rule in the Code of Laws of 1497. The condition for the transition was the payment of the elderly - compensation to the landowner for the loss of workers. Old-timers-peasants (who lived with the landowner for at least 4 years) and newcomers paid differently. The elderly accounted for a large, but not the same amount in the forest and steppe zones. Approximately, it was necessary to give at least 15 pounds of honey, a herd of domestic animals, or 200 pounds of rye.

The Code of Law of 1550 increased the size of the “elderly” and established an additional duty “for the cart”, which was paid in the event of a peasant’s refusal to fulfill the obligation to bring the landowner’s crop from the field. The judge defined in detail the position of slaves. The feudal lord was now responsible for the crimes of his peasants, which increased their personal dependence on the master.

Ivan the Terrible established a regime of “reserved years”, and Tsar Fedor’s decree of 1597 introduced a 5-year detective runaways peasants B. Godunov either abolished or re-introduced the system of “reserve and designated years.” V. Shuisky increased the “lesson summers” to 10, and then 15 years, in addition, the sale of peasants was allowed without land.

The Council Code (1649) introduces an indefinite period for the search and return of fugitive and forcibly removed peasants and punishment their concealers. This is how the process ended legal registration serfdom in Russia.

Serfdom arose and developed simultaneously with feudalism and was inseparable from it. It was in serfdom that the opportunity of owners of the means of production to receive feudal rent in its most diverse forms from direct producers was realized. Until the middle of the 16th century. quitrent in kind prevailed, less often in money, and then corvée took priority.

In Russia, peasants were divided into palace (royal), patrimonial, local, church and state. A feature of feudalism in Rus' was the development of “state feudalism”, in which the state itself acted as the owner. In the XVI-XVII centuries. characteristic features of the process of further evolution of feudalism was the increased development of the state estate system, especially in the northern regions and on the outskirts of the country.

In the center and south of Russia, there was a tendency to strengthen serf relations, manifested in the further attachment of peasants to the land and the right of the feudal lord to alienate peasants without land, as well as the extreme limitation of the civil capacity of peasants. Three-part peasant plots in the first half of the 16th century. amounted to 8 acres. The size of quitrents and corvée was constantly growing.

An indicator of the deep aggravation of social contradictions caused by the strengthening of serfdom were mass popular uprisings in the 16th century: a peasant uprising (1606-1607) led by I. Bolotnikov, urban uprisings, a peasant war led by S. Razin (1670-1671). ), etc.

XVI-XVII centuries in Russian history were turning point time When finally development was determined feudalism along the way of strengthening serfdom and autocracy.

4. 17th century - crisis of the Muscovite kingdom

So, by the end of the 16th century, the Muscovite kingdom became a powerful centralized state, uniting significant territories. The apogee of the Muscovite kingdom occurred during the reign of Ivan the Terrible. After the death of Ivan IV, the throne passed to his weak-willed and weak-minded son Fedor (1584-1598). Fedor was practically unable to govern the state, and gradually all power was concentrated in the hands of the boyar Boris Godunov (1598-1605). The years of his reign coincide with the first period of the “time of troubles” - dynastic), whose sister was or Nat Tsar Feodor. Continuing the policies of Ivan the Terrible, Godunov dealt harshly with representatives of the boyar nobility who were hostile to him. His actions were supported by wide circles of the nobility, wealthy sections of the townspeople, and the closest associates of Ivan IV. He acquired a strong ally in the person of the higher clergy. In 1589, Godunov took advantage of the visit to Russia of the Patriarch of Constantinople, who, according to ancient custom, was considered the head of the Russian Church, and obtained from him the ordination of his supporter, the Moscow Metropolitan Job, as patriarch. As a result, the Russian Orthodox Church ended its dependence on the Patriarch of Constantinople.

An ambitious, intelligent and subtle politician, Boris Godunov headed the government of Tsar Fedor for 10 years. During this time, significant successes were achieved in the struggle to strengthen the Russian centralized state and strengthen its international position.

Soon after the death of Ivan IV, the Polish-Lithuanian feudal lords began preparations for war against Russia. The Polish throne was taken by King Sigismund III, a graduate of the Jesuit Order. Incited Roman Pope, he hoped to achieve the introduction of the Catholic religion in Rus' and deprive it of independence. Godunov managed to conclude a 15-year truce with Poland and strengthen the southern borders; forcing the feudal lords of Crimea to sign peace with Russia. As a result successful war with Sweden Russia was open to

steps to the Baltic Sea. Founded in 1584 in the north, at the mouth of the Dvina, the city of Arkhangelsk became a center of trade with England and the Netherlands.

In 1591, under unclear circumstances In Uglich, the heir to the Russian throne, Tsarevich Dmitry, the youngest son of Ivan IV, died. According to the official report, the prince, who suffered from epilepsy, fell on a knife while playing and stabbed himself. However, a rumor also spread that he was killed by supporters of Boris Godunov.

In 1598, after the death of Tsarevich Dmitry, Tsar Fedor dies. He had no direct heirs and thus with his death the Rurik dynasty dried up. Russia faces dynastic crisis. In the history of any monarchy, this is a very dangerous moment, fraught with social upheaval. In Russia at that time, the dynastic crisis took place in conditions of major social upheavals associated with crop failures and famine, which lasted three years (1601-1603). People ate tree bark, cats, and dogs. Peasants fled in droves from the landowners. Entire detachments were formed from fugitive peasants, attacking merchants and nobles. Peasant uprisings began. The largest of which was led by Ivan Bolotnikov. The country gradually slipped into the abyss of civil war, which was called the “Time of Troubles.”

The “time of troubles,” as noted earlier, began with a dynastic crisis. They tried to resolve this crisis in a way unprecedented in Russia - by electing a tsar at the Zemsky Sobor. In 1598, at the Zemsky Sobor, with great support from the serving nobility, Boris Godunov (1598-1605) was elected Tsar. He abandoned the policy of terror and sought to consolidate the entire landowning class. B. Godunov supported the townspeople, easing the situation of those who were engaged in crafts and trade. During his reign, the construction of new cities in the Volga region became widespread. However, the famine of 1601-1603 and the inability of the authorities to cope with him caused discontent among all layers of Russian society with the rule of B. Godunov, who was also accused of the murder of Tsarevich Dmitry, which led to the suppression of the Rurik dynasty.

The growth of social tension in society gave rise to a civil war and created a threat to Russian statehood. With the death of Boris Godunov, the second stage of the crisis of power began in Russia - social(1605-1609) - False Dmitry I appeared in Poland, who at that difficult time, demagogically using the idea of ​​a “good tsar” with the help of Polish magnates, invaded the country with the aim of dividing Russia. In conditions of civil war and thanks to betrayal, False Dmitry I manages to capture Moscow. False Dmitry I reigned for almost a year (June 1605 - May 1606)" favor with the support of not only the Poles, but also a certain part of the Russian people. However, with their anti-Russian anti-patriotic actions he caused general discontent, was overthrown and killed.

And yet, the reasons for imposture were not eliminated. At the next Zemsky Sobor, one of the well-born aristocrats, Prince V. Shuisky (1606-1610), was elected Russian Tsar, but he not only failed to stop the civil war, but plunged the country into even greater chaos. Dissatisfied with the policies of V. Shuisky, the Cossacks, nobles, and peasants united around the “voivode Tsarevich Dmitry” - I. Bolotnikov (1606-1607). The rebels tried to take Moscow, but were defeated And With them dealt with mercilessly.

Poland took advantage of the critical situation in Russia and again organized a campaign against Moscow under the leadership of False Dmitry II. Russia turned out to be split: some territories recognized the Moscow Tsar, others - the impostor. Civil war between their subjects was again gaining strength. Soon, as a result of hostilities, False Dmitry II, the “Tuvan thief,” was defeated and destroyed. However, the Polish-Lithuanian Commonwealth did not abandon its aggressive goals. The Polish king Sigismund III concluded an agreement with the “Russian Tushins” to recognize his son Vladislav as the Russian Tsar, and foreign troops entered Russian territory.

The Russian people rise to fight the Polish interventionists, and the third begins - national liberation period of the “time of troubles”(1610-1613). Squads are being created people's militia, headed by: Ryazan serviceman P. Lyapunov, Prince Trubetskoy and Cossack leader I. Zarutsky. They pursue the goal of expelling the Poles from Moscow and restoring the Orthodox monarchy. However, the first militia did not solve its main tasks, attempts to take Moscow ended in failure, and it ceased to represent a real military force.

In the fall of 1611, on the initiative of the zemstvo elder K. Minin and Prince D. Pozharsky, a second militia was created in Nizhny Novgorod. In August 1612, it approached Moscow and broke the resistance of the Polish interventionists, liberating the capital of Russia in October 1612.

The country faced the difficult question of electing a new monarch, whose candidacy would be supported by all the main political forces and the common population of the country. For this it was necessary to convene a Zemsky Sobor with the widest representation. Letters were sent to cities and districts with a decree on the election of representatives from different strata of the Russian people. After two months of preparation in January 1613. The Zemsky Sobor began its work, and in February it elected 16-year-old Mikhail Romanov (1613-1645) was appointed Tsar to the Russian throne.

It took the authorities almost 6 years to basically bring the country out of the state of turmoil and restore proper order. The weakened state was forced to make concessions to foreigners. According to the Stolbovo Peace Treaty with Sweden in 1617, Russia retained the Novgorod land, but gave the Smolensk region to Poland and lost access to the Baltic Sea.

So, the “time of troubles” was a shock to the entire political, social and economic life countries. It was a test of the Moscow state's viability. Gradually, Russia began to emerge from social catastrophe and restore statehood, destroyed during the Time of Troubles.

In conditions of devastation and difficult financial situation, the government was in great need of support from the main groups of the ruling class. Therefore, after the new royal dynasty came to power, the zemstvo councils met almost continuously. In addition to finding financial resources to replenish the state treasury, foreign policy matters were also discussed at the councils. The local nobility and townspeople were represented much more widely at these cathedrals, how in the 16th century, voices their were heard more and more confidently. But, despite the increased importance of the local nobility and townspeople, the Boyar Duma was still the most important body of the state, sharing supreme power with the tsar. Meetings of the Duma, as a rule, were held daily in one of the chambers of the Tsar's Palace or in its sovereign room.

During the reign of Mikhail Fedorovich, power was actually in the hands of his father, Patriarch Filaret. And this contributed to the strengthening of the influence of the church. As P.N. Milyukov noted, during this period the patriarchal power was freed from under the influence of the state and even acquired decisive influence over it. In internal administration, the church literally became a state within a state, since it received a structure copied from national institutions. Church administration, court, finance, court life of the Patriarch himself - all this was, from the time of Filaret, under the control of various orders, structured on the model of state ones. (Milyukov P.N. Essays on history of Russian culture, 3 vols. T.2.h .1. P. 169).

The efforts of Tsar Mikhail's successor, Alexei Mikhailovich (1645-1676), were aimed at restoring and strengthening the statehood of the Muscovite kingdom. During the reign of Alexei Mikhailovich, Russia made significant progress towards building a rule of law state. In 1649, the Zemsky Sobor adopted Cathedral Code, which represented the foundations of Russian legislation.

The Council Code of 1649 affirmed the principle of the centrality of a titled state with the authoritarian power of the king. The tsar relied on the nobility to govern society. Where elective positions were retained, they were subordinate to representatives of the royal power - the governors. Only in the “black” lands, that is, among the black-growing communal peasants, did elected bodies continue to operate relatively independently. The Code somewhat limited the corporate interests of the church. The property that the church owned was retained by it, but it was strictly forbidden to reacquire church estates. Management of church affairs passed into the hands of the secular body of the monastery order. The command system of management has become widespread.

The largest historical event of the reign of Alexei Mikhailovich is reunification of Ukraine with Russia. The lands of Ukraine were still part of the Old Russian state. In the 13th century A significant part of Ukraine was conquered by the Tatar-Mongols. Another part of it was captured by Lithuanian feudal lords. Then Lithuania entered into an alliance with Poland, and the Polish-Lithuanian state was formed. Ukraine found itself under his yoke. Alien customs and religion were imposed on the Ukrainian people.

In the 16th and first half of the 17th century. In Ukraine, uprisings break out against Polish landowners and officials. The major force fighting against lordly Poland in Ukraine was the Dnieper Cossacks, who had their own organization on the Dnieper beyond the threshold - the Zaporozhye Sich. Here fugitives from the Ukrainian, Belarusian and Russian lands hid from serfdom, from the oppression of the landowners and masters, from the oppression of tsarist and royal officials.

In the middle of the 17th century. in Ukraine the flames of a huge people's war against lordly Poland flared. Bohdan Khmelnytsky led the war. The war began in the spring of 1648. The Russian people sympathized with the struggle of the Ukrainians against the lordly Poland. Detachments of Don Cossacks, Russian peasants, and townspeople took part in this struggle. Russian government helped the rebellious Ukraine with food and weapons. Khmelnitsky turned to Tsar Alexei Mikhailovich with a request to accept Ukraine into the Russian state. Moscow agreed to Khmelnitsky’s proposal and sent an embassy to Ukraine with the boyar Buturlin. In the city of Pereyaslavl, a general council (council) was assembled to resolve this important matter. The Pereyaslav Rada of 1654 unanimously decided: Ukraine should reunite with Russia, “so that everyone would be one forever.” Poland tried to retake Ukraine, but her attempts ended in failure.

XVII century - time of great popular movements. The uprising led by the Don Cossack Stepan Razin was one of the most significant.

The uprising began on the Don, where the peasantry - fugitives from serfdom - flocked. There were also wealthy, “homely” Cossacks on the Don, but the bulk were representatives of the Cossack poor - the “golytba”. Stepan Razin became its leader. The beginning of the uprising was the march of the Golytba along the Volga in 1667. The differences attacked the royal and merchant caravans, dealt with the royal servants, and accepted working people into their detachments. Caravans of rich Persian ships were captured in the Caspian Sea, which increased Razin's prestige. In May 1670, Razin’s troops took Tsaritsyn, Astrakhan, Saratov, and Samara. The royal commanders were killed or expelled from these cities. Not only Russian serfs, but also the peoples of the Volga region - Mordovians, Chuvash, Mari, who were severely oppressed by the tsarist authorities - flocked to Razin's detachments. It seemed to the rebel peasants that the main their the goal is to destroy their own, local boyar, landowner, but the main enemy of the peasants was the entire serf system as a whole, with the main landowner - the tsar - at its head. But the peasants thought that instead of hostile them a landowner tsar can be installed as a “good” tsar for the peasantry, a kind tsar.

Having flared up brightly in one place, the peasant uprising immediately died out. The rebels did not have a unified plan of action; they were poorly trained in military affairs and poorly armed.

The tsarist government sent huge military forces and the most experienced commanders against Razin. The rebels heroically resisted, but the uprising was suppressed. Rich Cossacks handed Razin over to the authorities, and in 1671 he was executed.

Increasing social cataclysms showed that the social system in Russia is in need of deep reform. However, such reform had to begin in the spiritual sphere, since Russia continued to remain a deeply religious society. In the middle of the 17th century, the Russian Orthodox Church began reform of the cult system. The idea of ​​the reform was to eliminate differences in liturgical practice between the Russian Church and the rest of the Orthodox churches, introducing uniformity of church services throughout Russia.

The external background of this reform was as follows: a theological school was opened in Kyiv, where one could learn ancient languages ​​and grammar. Several students of this school were allowed to publish liturgical books at the Moscow Printing Yard - the only state printing house at that time. Comparing the handwritten and printed texts of published books according to their official duties, they coughed that the printed editions were unsatisfactory, and the handwritten ones were full of discrepancies. The only way to establish a correct and uniform text was to turn to the Greek originals. They wrote out the Greeks and the Greek originals and began to compare And, in addition to translation errors and copyist's slips, we noticed original Russian inserts in Russian books that corresponded to national ritual characteristics. These insertions were to be removed from the revised text.

Patriarch Nikon, who was elected to the position, personally went to the patriarchal library and, as far as he could, compared the books of the Moscow press there with ancient Greek manuscripts and became convinced of the existence of disagreements. He convened a Local Council. And at this council the necessary changes were made to the liturgical books and liturgical practice. These changes were insignificant for Orthodox doctrine and cult, since they did not affect the foundations of Orthodoxy, its dogma and sacraments, but concerned some grammatical and cult innovations. Instead of “Isus” they began to write “Jesus”, instead of “singers” - “singers”, etc. The two-finger sign of the cross was replaced by a three-finger one, along with the eight-pointed cross, the four-pointed one was recognized, etc. Bows to the ground were replaced by bows, the direction of movement during the service was changed (“posolon”), i.e. movement in the direction of the Sun, movement against the Sun, etc.

However, these changes have had enormous consequences. All Russian society split into adherents of the old and new faiths. This split had its own ideological and socio-political motives. Supporters of the “old faith”, “old rite” defended the idea of ​​​​the originality of Russian Orthodoxy, its superiority over other Orthodox churches, including over its ancestor - the Constantinople, which, according to their opinion, having concluded the Union of Florence with the Roman Catholic Church, she fell into heresy. Moreover, the fact of signing the Union of Florence allegedly indicates the weakness of the faith of Constantinople. This means that he did not have true, that is, Orthodox faith. Therefore, given the difference in church forms and rituals, all preferences should belong to national Russian forms. Only they should be considered truly Orthodox. Since Greek Orthodoxy is corrupted, the highest and most important task of Russian piety should be to preserve everything that didn't look like into Greek.

Supporters of the old rite are usually represented as inert people, unable to accept unimportant formal and ritual innovations. However, according to the famous Russian historian Kostomarov, schismatics are the most active part of the Orthodox Church. In ancient Rus', few people thought about religions, schismatics not only thought about religion, but their spiritual focus was concentrated on it life. In ancient Rus' the ritual

was a dead form and performed poorly. The schismatics searched in him meaning and sought to fulfill it sacredly and precisely. The consciousness of national-religious identity and the resulting firm belief in the world-historical mission of Russian Orthodoxy (Moscow is the third Rome) formed the ideological basis of the schismatic movement. The retreat of the state and the official church from these guidelines during church reform was the main reason for the schismatic movement. This reason was joined by social motives associated with the consolidation of serfdom and the increased exploitation of the peasantry and urban population.

Opponents of the reform were subjected to a church curse - anathema at the Local Council of 1666-1667. From that time on they were subjected to severe repression. Fleeing from persecution, the defenders of the “old faith” fled to the remote places of the North, the Volga region, Siberia, and the south of Russia. As a sign of protest, they burned themselves alive. In 1675-1695. 37 collective self-immolations were registered, during which at least 20 thousand people died. The ideological leader of the Old Believers was Archpriest Avvakum, who also carried out an act of collective self-immolation in the log house of a house under construction.

Brutal repression by the tsarist government, as a result of which thousands of supporters of the Old Believers were executed, tens of thousands were tortured, imprisoned and exiled, did not sway the most ardent adherents in their beliefs. They declared the existing authorities to be proxies of the Antichrist and refused all communication with the worldly (in food, drink, prayer, etc.).

However, the official church won. Church reform was implemented. The Council recognized all Greek patriarchs and Greek liturgical books as Orthodox, and the Russian Orthodox Church became closer to the rest of the Orthodox world. The council also approved the principle of separation of secular and spiritual power. The king has the advantage in deciding civil matters, and the church - in deciding spiritual ones. For his extraordinary claims to secular power, the council condemned Patriarch Nikon and deprived him of his patriarchal rank.

Federal Agency for Education

Belgorod State University

Department of Russian History and Political Science

PRACTICUM ONDISCIPLINE "NATIONAL HISTORY"

Belgorod 2011

Topic 1. Old Russian state inIX – XIIIcenturies

1. The problem of ethnogenesis of the Eastern Slavs.

2. Formation and evolution of the ancient Russian state - Kievan Rus.

3. The adoption of Christianity in Rus' and its influence on ancient Russian culture.

4. Feudal fragmentation of Rus'.

First question. It is advisable to consider this issue in the context of the Great Migration. Students should understand the origin of the term "Slavs", what group of peoples they belonged to, and also name the Slavic peoples. Regarding the origin and settlement of the Eastern Slavs, there are two main points of view: migratory and autochthonous. In the migration theory, three options can be distinguished: Danube, Baltic and Scythian-Sarmatian. When considering migration theory, it is necessary to answer the question: what peoples did the Eastern Slavs encounter during their resettlement? It is also necessary to name the East Slavic tribes from which the Old Russian people were formed.

Second question. When studying this issue, it is necessary to understand Why a state arose and How this process took place.

The formation of the state was preceded by certain preconditions . Name them. The desire of the Slavic tribes for unification intensified under the influence of constant raids by nomadic tribes, as well as the desire to establish control of the trade route “from the Varangians to the Greeks.”

Formation of the Old Russian state is the subject of intense scientific debate. In simplified form, they come down to two theories - « Norman» And " anti-Norman." Reveal their contents. Modern historians are inclined, having abandoned extremes, to combine the arguments of the opposing sides, believing that the state arose as a result of the formation internal prerequisites, and role Varangians in this process was expressed in the fact that the state formed faster and over a larger territory.

Considering political system, understand the functions of the Kyiv prince, squads, the role of town meetings ( veche). Think about why Kievan Rus was early feudal monarchy .

The history of Ancient Rus' can be divided into three periods . Name them. Give them a description of the first Kyiv princes. Please note that until the end of the 10th century. former tribal centers were ruled by former tribal princes, who retained autonomy and paid tribute to the Kyiv prince. Prince Vladimir (980–1015) changed this system; he planted his sons in large cities, who became his vassals. What is characteristic of vassal relations? Folds up "staircase" form of government under which Rus' becomes collective possession of the Rurik family , because Only representatives of this dynasty reigned throughout the country. A peculiarity of Ancient Rus' was that there was a custom of inheritance of principalities according to the principle ancestral seniority (from older brother to younger), which, given the large number of the Rurik family, confused the inheritance and gave rise to numerous civil strife.

In the social structure ancient Russian society there are two main groups – servicemen (princes who were in the service of the Grand Duke and boyars) and non-service - peasants and townspeople. Peasants ( People) divided into free X community members and dependent from feudal lords ( purchases, stinkers, rank and file). It should be emphasized that the bulk of the peasants were personally free. Living on the prince's land, they paid tribute for this and carried out various duties.

It is also necessary to consider the question of the metamorphosis of Kievan Rus in world civilization. Consider the relationship of Ancient Rus' with Byzantium and nomadic peoples.

Third question. The adoption of Christianity by Russia was of enormous importance and influenced all aspects of the life of our state and society. What were the reasons for accepting Christianity? When considering this issue, it should be taken into account that the formation of statehood among all peoples is accompanied by a rejection of paganism, because it does not correspond to the new level of development of society. The adoption of a new religion was dictated by the need to spiritually unite numerous Slavic tribes (one faith - one people), as well as strengthen the position of the state. The choice of Christianity was not accidental; it testified to the European orientation of Rus'. The adoption of Christianity in its eastern version ( Orthodoxy) was largely a consequence of close ties with Byzantium. Tell us how and when the baptism of Kievan Rus took place. Uncover the meaning adoption of Christianity for the development of ancient Russian culture.

Fourth question. The feudal fragmentation of Russian lands was a pan-European phenomenon and had a number of reasons. Name them. As a result of fragmentation, 15 independent principalities were formed. What role did the congress of princes in the city of Lyubech in 1097 play in this process? Name the largest government centers, which were formed in Rus'. It is necessary to find out their geographical location, as well as the most important factors that contributed to their power and influence. Vladimir-Suzdal Principality– North-Eastern Rus'. Note the active colonization of lands, the growth of cities, crafts and trade in the 12th century. Give a description of the reign of Yuri Dolgoruky, Andrei Bogolyubsky, Vsevolod Big Nest. There is a tendency here to become strong princely power, which caused resistance from the boyars . Galicia-Volynskoe principality was the strongest in the south of Rus'. The proximity of European countries contributed to the prosperity of crafts and trade, and the mild climate and fertile lands contributed to the development of agriculture. It happened here strong boyars, which fought with the prince for power. Novgorod Boyar Republic– Northwestern Rus' developed in a special way. Novgorod was one of the ten largest trading cities in Europe and was a major craft center. Power in Novgorod belonged to veche which elected prince, mayor, thousand, archbishop. Find out their functions. Please note that virtually all the main issues were resolved here boyars. What's it like meaning of feudal fragmentation? Find in the educational literature data indicating the flourishing of cities, crafts and trade, and the further development of culture during this period.

Basic literature:

1. Gumilyov L.N. From Rus' to Russia: essays on ethnic history / L.N. Gumilev. – M.: Ecopros, 1992. – P. 20-86.

2. History of Russia from ancient times to 1861: Textbook. manual for universities / N.I. Pavlenko, I.L. Andreev, V.B. Kobrin, V.A. Fedorov; Ed. N.I. Pavlenko. – M.: Higher. school, 2000. – P. 30-55.

3. History of Russia. Textbook. / A.S. Orlov, V.A. Georgiev, N.G. Georgieva, T.A. Sivokhina. –M.: LLC “TK Velby”, 2002. – P. 14-49.

4. History of Russia: Textbook. for universities / A.A. Chernobaev, I.E. Gorelov, M.N. Zuev et al; Under. re. M.N. Zueva, A.A. Chernobaeva. – M.: Higher. school, 2001. P. 10-46.

Further reading:

1. Anisimov E.V. History of Russia from Rurik to Putin. People. Events. Dates / E.V. Anisimov. – St. Petersburg: Peter, 2007. – P. 17-35, 37-39, 43-44, 48-52, 55-58, 60-64.

2. Gorsky A.A. Old Russian squad / A.A. Gorsky. – M., 1989.

3. How Rus' was baptized. – M.: Politizdat, 1989.

4. Klyuchevsky V.O. Works: In 9 volumes. Volume I. Course of Russian history. / V.O. Klyuchevsky. – M.: Mysl, 1987.

5. Lukyanov L.P. Eastern Slavs: Is this us? Evolution of the 6th-10th centuries / L.P. Lukyanov. – M.: Kraft+, 2004.

6. Lyubavsky M.K. Review of the history of Russian colonization from ancient times to the 20th century. / M.K. Lyubavsky. – M.: Publishing house Mosk. Univ., 1996. pp. 88-128.

7. Pereverzentsev S.V. Russia. Great destiny / S.V. Pereverzentsev. – M.: White City, 2005. P.13-170.

8. Rybakov B.A. Kievan Rus and Russian principalities in the XII-XIII centuries. / B.A. Rybakov. – M., 1993.

9. Soloviev S.M. Essays. In 18 books. Book 1. T. 1-2. "History of Russia from ancient times." T. 1-2. / CM. Soloviev. – M.: Golos, 1993.

Topic 2. Unification of Rus'. The beginning of the formation of a centralized Russian state

1. The establishment of the Mongol-Tatar yoke in Rus' and its consequences.

2. Alexander Nevsky: the fight against Swedish feudal lords and German knights.

3. The rise of Moscow.

4. Specifics of the formation of a unified Russian state in the 14th – early 16th centuries.

5. Ivan IV. Search for alternative ways of socio-political development of Russia: reforms and oprichnina.

Question one. In the 13th century Russian lands experienced blows from conquerors both from the north-west - Swedish feudal lords and German knights, and from the east - Mongol-Tatars.

The student needs to find out where they settled mongol tribes at the end of the 12th – beginning of the 13th century, their social system, main occupation, characterize the Mongol-Tatar army. Tell us about invasion Mongols to North-Eastern Rus' in 1237-1238. and Southern Rus' in 1239-1241. What are the reasons for the military successes of the conquerors? Where and when did the Golden Horde state arise?

Question about consequences The Mongol-Tatar invasion of Russian lands is debatable. Recommended educational literature will help you clarify existing points of view. It is necessary to separate concepts "invasion" and "domination". In the first case, we are talking about the devastation of Russian lands, the death of people, material and spiritual values. In the second - about the system of relations between Rus' and the Horde. Rus' became part of the Golden Horde with the rights vassal Political dependence Russian lands consisted of the Horde issuing labels (letters) to the princes for the right to reign. Economic dependence consisted of paying tribute (Horde exit). What was the attitude of the Mongol-Tatars to the Russian Church?

It should be noted that in western and southwestern Rus' the Mongol-Tatar yoke lasted about a century. They were replaced by the Lithuanians, who included the lands of the future Belarus and Lithuania into the Grand Duchy of Lithuania. Initially, the situation of the former ancient Russian lands was prosperous. The princes and boyars, while retaining their possessions, even took an active part in the political life of the principality. But with the establishment of the union of Lithuania and Poland in 1385 and the spread of Catholicism among the Lithuanians, the position of Orthodox people gradually began to be infringed.

Question two. When considering this issue, it is advisable to point out that the attack of the Swedish feudal lords and German knights should be considered not as local phenomena, but as an attack of Catholicism on Orthodoxy. It is also necessary to show here the strategic position of Veliky Novgorod, which at that time was an outpost of Orthodoxy in the north-west of Rus'. It should also be noted that Alexander’s relations with the Novgorod ruling elite were not easy. Students must also discover Alexander's talent as both a military leader and a politician who prioritized national interests over regional ones. It is necessary to describe the Battle of the Neva and the Battle of the Ice. Show their historical significance for all of Rus'.

Question three. In the XIV – XV centuries. a unified Russian state is being formed. Should find out preconditions this process. Unlike Western Europe, where they prevailed socio-economic factors V state formation , dominated in Russian lands political factor - the need to unite the Russian principalities to overthrow Mongol-Tatar rule. However, economic conditions for unification were also developing. Read what changes are happening in agriculture, in engineering and technology, pay attention to the growth of cities. The possibility of unification is also common: faith, language, the foundations of culture.

Next, it is necessary to take into account that the role center Tver, Novgorod, and Moscow could claim unification of Russian lands. Moreover, Moscow, as the youngest principality, had the least chance of success. Consider reasons for the rise Moscow. The most important among them is policy Moscow princes. Being flexible allowed them to get ahead of their less fortunate rivals.

Tell us about the board Ivan Kalita. Why did he manage to receive a label for a great reign from the Horde? What did this give to the Russian lands? Dmitry Donskoy the first of the Moscow princes began open struggle with the Mongol-Tatars. What is the meaning Battle of Kulikovo?

Fourth question. The formation of a centralized Russian state began with the reign of Ivan III. Using various methods, he annexed Russian lands to the Moscow Principality.

Ivan III was already called “the sovereign of all Rus'”, and not the Moscow prince. Find facts in the literature confirming the formation of a single state.

The state cannot exist without governing bodies. Tell us about their formation. What role did they play under the Grand Duke? Boyar Duma. For what purpose did Ivan III divide the country into counties and volosts? What's happened feeding? In 1497, the first set of all-Russian laws was adopted - Code of Law. What was its content? What is the specificity of the formation of a unified Russian state? What is autocracy, and what points of view are there in Russian historical science on the issue of its genesis? How did Ivan III manage to free himself from the rule of the Mongol-Tatars?

Question five. By the 16th century the centralization of the state was not completed; large-scale transformations were necessary to solve this problem. Their implementation is associated with the name IvanaIV, describe his personality, note that he is the first of the rulers of Russia married to the kingdom. In the reign of Ivan IV, two periods are clearly visible - reforms late 40's - 50's. and about cause 60s – early 80s In carrying out reforms, the tsar relied on the support Zemsky Sobor. Representatives of what strata of society were part of it? What issues did he solve? What is an estate-representative monarchy? The unofficial government under Ivan IV became Elected Rada(to please - to take care). Who were its members? In 1550, the Zemsky Sobor adopted a new Code of Law. Tell us about its contents. Created system of specialized orders. Name the most important of them. Changes are taking place in local government system. The governorship turned out to be ineffective. In those areas of the country where nobles lived, the population chose labial headman. Where there were no nobles, the peasants chose zemstvo elder. What duties did they perform? To conduct an active foreign policy, the state needed armed forces. Military reform approved the “domestic” and “recruitment” service. What's happened estate? To whom and under what conditions was it provided? Who was recruiting? In 1551, at a church council it was adopted Stoglav. What changes in religious sphere did he fix it? Was limited localism. Define it. What was the significance of the reforms of Ivan IV?

Oprichnina(1564 – 1572). Tell us about the circumstances of its introduction. Which lands were included in the oprichnina? How were the oprichnina lands governed? What policy was pursued in relation to those areas of the country that were not included in the oprichnina lands? Reasons The transition to oprichnina is a complex issue on which there are lively discussions in historical science. Find different points of view on this issue in the educational literature. In general, we can highlight objective contradictions(political and social) internal structure of the state and personal motives Ivan IV. What were the consequences of the oprichnina policy? Give a general assessment of the reign of Ivan IV.

Basic literature:

1. Derevyanko A.P., Shabelnikova N.A. History of Russia / A.P. Derevianko. – M.: TK VELBY, Prospekt Publishing House, 2006. – P. 65-97.

2. History of Russia from ancient times to 1861: Textbook. manual for universities / N.I. Pavlenko, I.L. Andreev, V.B. Kobrin, V.A. Fedorov; Ed. N.I. Pavlenko. – M.: Higher. school, 2000. – P. 93-136.

3. History of Russia. Textbook. / A.S. Orlov, V.A. Georgiev, N.G. Georgieva, T.A. Sivokhina. –M.: TK Velby LLC, 2002. – P. 50-84.

4. History of Russia: Textbook. for universities / A.A. Chernobaev, I.E. Gorelov, M.N. Zuev et al.; Under. re. M.N. Zueva, A.A. Chernobaeva. – M.: Higher. school, 2001. P. 47-87.

Further reading:

1. Anisimov E.V. History of Russia from Rurik to Putin. People. Events. Dates / E.V. Anisimov. – St. Petersburg: Peter, 2007. – P. 71-108, 11-114, 116-155,158-159.

2. Vernadsky G.V. Russia in the Middle Ages / G.V. Vernadsky. – Tver: LEAN, Moscow: AGRAF, 2000, – P. 21-179.

3. Gumelev L.N. Ancient Rus' and the Great Steppe / L.N. Gumilev. – M.: Mysl, 1992. – P. 378-560, 569-577, 586-588.

4. Klyuchevsky V.O. Essays. At 9 t. T.” Russian history course. Part 2. / V.O. Klyuchevsky. – M.: Mysl, 1987.

5. Kobrin V.B. Ivan the Terrible / V.B. Kobrin. – M., 1989.

6. Skrynnikov R.G. Ivan the Terrible. Boris Godunov. Vasily Shuisky / R.G. Skrynnikov. - M.: AST: Transitkniga, 2005. - P. 7-419.

7. Solovyov S.M. Essays. In 18 books. Book III. T. 5-6. History of Russia since ancient times / S.M. Soloviev. – M.: Golos, 1993.

Topic 3. Time of Troubles. Restoration and development of Russian statehood in the 17th century

1. Time of Troubles, its causes, main stages and results.

2. The rise to power and reign of the first Romanovs (1613 – 1676).

Question one . In historical literature, the events of the late 16th century are usually called the Time of Troubles. early XVII centuries It was structural crisis, which covered all areas of life. Without going into details of scientific discussions about reasons The Troubles, it should be said that the devastating consequences of the oprichnina increased tension in society, which was already high. The formation of a state required enormous material costs, which placed a heavy burden on all segments of the population. The situation became even more complicated as a result dynastic crisis. What are its reasons?

Time of Troubles begins accession to the throne of Boris Godunov in 1598 and ends the election of Mikhail Romanov to the throne in 1613. Next, it is necessary to consider the main events of the Time of Troubles. Why was he elected to the kingdom? Boris Godunov? Describe his reign. Pay attention to his policy on the peasant issue. What's happened “lesson summer”? The fragility of Godunov’s position on the throne can be explained by the fact that in the perception of people of that time, he was not real, “unnatural,” but a chosen king. Hence the phenomenon of imposture, the search for a real king. Tell us about False DmitryI. On what terms did he receive Polish support? Why was he able to take the Russian throne? What was the reason for the overthrow of False Dmitry? He was then elected to the throne Vasily Shuisky(1606 – 1610). During this period the Troubles reached their climax. Tell us about the uprising I. Bolotnikova. The defeat of this uprising did not lead to the strengthening of Shuisky’s power, because a new False Dmitry appeared near Moscow. Why was he called the “Tushino thief”? Influence False DmitryII spread over a large area of ​​the country. In fact, a dual power arose - two sovereigns, two capitals, two patriarchs. Vasily Shuisky concludes an agreement with Sweden for help in fighting the impostor. How did this agreement turn out for Russia? These events led to open intervention of the Polish-Lithuanian Commonwealth. What were Poland's plans for the Russian throne? When did the Poles occupy Moscow? Since the autumn of 1610, the Troubles took on the character of a national struggle against the Polish invaders. October 26 (old style) 1612 d. second militia liberated Moscow from foreigners. Who led it? In February 1613, at the Zemsky Sobor, he was elected king Michael Romanov. The time of troubles is over. What were the consequences of the Troubles? Please note that statehood was restored only thanks to the selfless struggle of the Russian people.

Question two. After being elected tsar, life would present three tasks to Mikhail Romanov: it was necessary to calm the country, expel the interventionists and restore Russian statehood. Show how Mikhail solved these problems.

The beginning of the reign of the Romanov dynasty was the time heyday of the estate-representative monarchy. Its main elements were Boyar Duma And Zemsky Sobor. Who was part of the Boyar Duma? What role did she play in governing the country? After the end of the Time of Troubles, it was necessary to restore the state, therefore, in the person of the Zemsky Sobor, the government received the support of the entire society. From 1613 to 1619 he met almost continuously. WITH mid-17th century V. begins in Russia formation of absolutism. Define absolutism. Firstly, is changingappearance and meaning Boyar Duma. Its numbers are growing due to the nobles appointed by the Tsar. Why does power seek to rely not on the boyars, but on the nobles? Later, the Near or Indoor Duma was separated from the Duma. Secondly, by the middle of the century The activities of Zemsky Sobors ceased. To resolve what issue did he meet in full force for the last time? Thirdly, it begins heyday of the order systems. At this time, the formation of a bureaucracy occurs. Its characteristic feature was numerous abuses. Why? IN local government Changes are also taking place indicating increased centralization. Elected elders are being replaced by governors, appointed by the authorities.

In 1649, the Zemsky Sobor adopted Cathedral Code. Tell us about its contents. Please note that its provisions, in particular, contributed to the strengthening of autocracy.

Split of the Russian Orthodox Church. Began in the 17th century. the formation of absolutism changed the relationship between government and the church and, inevitably, should have led to its deprivation of feudal privileges and subordination to the state. Tell us about the conflict between Tsar Alexei Mikhailovich and Patriarch Nikon. What caused this conflict? Why was there a need? church reforms. What role did Patriarch Nikon play in its implementation? Tell us about the most significant changes adopted in 1654 by the church council, which became cause of the church split. Who began to be called Old Believers?

The first Romanovs completed their tasks. But they failed to avoid social upheaval. Tell us about the “salt” and “copper” riots, the uprising led by Stepan Razin? How did Alexei Romanov manage to eliminate them?

Basic literature:

1. Derevyanko A.P., Shabelnikova N.A. History of Russia: textbook. allowance / A.P. Derevianko. – M.: TK Welby, Prospekt Publishing House, 2006. – P. 98-105, 473-478.

2. History of Russia from ancient times to 1861: Textbook. manual for universities / N.I. Pavlenko, I.L. Andreev, V.B. Kobrin, V.A. Fedorov; Ed. N.I. Pavlenko. – M.: Higher. school, 2000. – P. 157-190, 211-217, 219-228.

3. History of Russia from ancient times to the end of the 17th century. / A.P. Novoseltsev, A.N. Sakharov, V.I. Buganov, V.D. Nazarov; resp. ed. A.N. Sakharov, A.P. Novoseltsev - M.: AST Publishing House, 1996. - P. 457-512, 533-540, 546-550.

4. History of Russia. Textbook. / A.S. Orlov, V.A. Georgiev, N.G. Georgieva, T.A. Sivokhina. –M.: TK Velby LLC, 2002. – P. 85-96, 105-126.

5. Platonov S.F. Lectures on Russian history / S.F. Platonov. – M.: Higher. school, 1993. – P. 248-334, 344-405.

Further reading:

1. Anisimov E.V. History of Russia from Rurik to Putin. People. Events. Dates / E.V. Anisimov. – St. Petersburg: Peter, 2007. – P. 160-211.

2. Valishevsky K. The First Romanovs / K. Valishevsky. – M.: TERRA – Book Club, 2003.

3. Klyuchevsky V.O. Essays. In 9 volumes. T. 3. Course of Russian history. Part 3. / V.O. Klyuchevsky. – M.: Mysl, 1988.

4. Skrynnikov R.G. Boris Godunov / R.G. Skrynnikov. – M.: AST Publishing House LLC, 2002.

5. Skrynnikov R.G. Vasily Shuisky / R.G. Skrynnikov. – M.: AST Publishing House LLC, 2002.

6. Skrynnikov R.G. Three False Dmitrys / R.G. Skrynnikov. – M.: AST Publishing House LLC, 2003.

7. Soloviev S.M. Essays. In 18 books. Book IV. T. 7-8. History of Russia from ancient times. / CM. Soloviev. – M.: Golos, 1994.

Topic 4. Formation and strengthening of the Russian Empire in the 18th century.

1. Reforms of Peter I.

2. “Enlightened absolutism” of Catherine II.

Question one. During the reign of Peter I (1682–1725) in Russia, major reforms. What are their premises? What is the meaning? By the end of the 17th century. the country lagged significantly behind Western European countries: science and education, industry and navy were absent, the organization of the army and the state apparatus were hopelessly outdated. The transformations of Peter I covered a wide variety of areas public life(which?), their essence was “Europeanization” Russia.

The implementation of reforms was associated with Northern War. Who did Russia fight with? What goals did she pursue? Failures at the beginning of the war required military reform. Tell us about its contents. Why regular army more combat-ready? Peter I attached great importance construction navy. What are the results of military reform? underwent a radical restructuring organs central and local government. In 1711 it was created Governing Senate, which replaced the Boyar Duma. What is the difference between them? What functions did the Senate perform? The outdated order system has been replaced collegiums. Name the most important of them. Was created Chief Magistrate, to which all city magistrates were subordinate. Regional reform changed the territorial division of the country. Governorates were formed. What powers did the governor have? Peter I completed the process of subordinating the church to the state, transferring its management Synod. In the social sphere, the introduction of Table of ranks, because it provided the opportunity for career advancement thanks to personal qualities, and not origin. Decree on unified inheritance Peter I equated estates with estates, thereby the line between boyars and nobles ceased to exist. Summing up Peter's transformations, it should be emphasized that there are positive and negative points of view in assessing their significance. Consider the Arguments opposite sides, whose assessment seems most reasonable to you.

Question two . When studying the domestic policy of Catherine II (1762–1796), a number of circumstances should be taken into account. Firstly, being an ardent admirer of the ideas of the Enlightenment, the empress sought to rule in the spirit of “ enlightened absolutism." Secondly, the peasant war of E. Pugachev, the bourgeois revolution in France, the “rebel worse than Pugachev” A. Radishchev forced her to be careful in carrying out reforms. Thirdly, caution was also required because Catherine illegally took the throne and had to take into account the sentiments of the nobility. Therefore, the empress's policy was contradictory. You need to familiarize yourself with the basic ideas of the Enlightenment and “enlightened absolutism”. In accordance with them, Catherine sought to transform Russia on the basis of the principles of freedom and legality, but not to allow the weakening of the autocratic foundations of her power. Tell us why Catherine called Stacked commission. What ideas did she present in "Nakaze"? Why was she forced to dissolve the commission? In accordance with the theory of separation of powers, Catherine did attempt to create an independent judiciary, transferring judicial powers Senate. A system of estate courts was created. Peasants' War E. Pugacheva showed the need to shift the center of gravity in public administration from the center to the localities. In 1775 it was carried out provincial reform. What changes have occurred in local government? One of the largest transformations in the spirit of “enlightened absolutism” was “Charter of Complaint to the Nobility” 1785. Check out its contents. In accordance with the theory of the “regular state,” Peter I obliged the nobles be in public service for life. By decree of Catherine, the first free estate. At the same time, the empress tried to create another free class - the urban one. « Certificate of merit cities" Elected governing bodies were introduced, but they came under strict control of the central authorities. At the same time, Catherine's reign was marked tightening serfdom, the nobles received, in fact, an unlimited right to dispose of serfs. Support this point with examples. Significant impact on spiritual development Russian society was influenced by the educational initiatives of the empress. Tell us about them. Under the influence of the French bourgeois revolution, Catherine persecuted A. Radishchev, N. Novikov, and introduced strict censorship. Assess the transformations of Catherine II.

Question three . The peculiarity of cultural processes in Russia in the 18th century. was transition from traditional, church and closed culture to secular and European. The country has experienced a real spiritual revolution. Before Peter's reforms, there was no science or secular education in the country; a religious worldview dominated spiritual life. Peter's reform activities affected literally all aspects of society. Tell us about the origins Russian science, appearance secular schools And special education. What do you know about the publication of the first newspaper, the founding of the Kunstkamera, changes in everyday life. These transformations of Peter led to sociocultural split between the “bottom” and “top” of society. Peasants and urban inhabitants continued to be the bearers of traditional culture. It should be emphasized that the consequence of this split was the mutual alienation of the educated part of society and the people. Tell us about the opening in Russia first university A. What was the role in this M. Lomonosova? What do you know about the achievements of Russian culture in the field of science, literature, architecture, art in the 18th century? What contribution did Catherine II make to the development of national culture?

Basic literature:

1. Derevianko A.P., Shabelnikova N.A. History of Russia: textbook. allowance / A.P. Derevianko. – M.: TK Welby, Prospekt Publishing House, 2006. – P.122-135, 148-164, 488-493.

2. History of Russia. Textbook. / A.S. Orlov, V.A. Georgiev, N.G. Georgieva, T.A. Sivokhina. – M.6 TK Velby LLC, 2002. – P. 128-144, 154-188.

3. History of Russia from the beginning of the 18th to the end of the 19th century / L.V. Milov, P.N. Zyryanov, A.N. Bokhanov; resp. ed. A.N. Sakharov. – M.: AST Publishing House. 1996. – P.9-76, 80-107, 181-244, 248-256, 262-266, 270-296.

4. History of Russia: Textbook. for universities / A.A. Chernobaev, I.E. Gorelov, M.N. Zuev, etc.; Ed. M.N. Zueva, A.A. Chernobaeva. – M.: Higher. school, 2001. – P. 127-163.

5. Domestic history / I.Yu. Zaorskaya, M.V. Zotova, A.V. Demidov and others; Ed. M.V. Zotova: Textbook for university students. – M.: Logos, 2002. – P. 125-166.

Further reading:

1. Walishevsky K. Peter the Great / K. Walishevsky. – M.: TERRA – Book Club, 2003.

2. Knyazkov S. Essays on the history of Peter the Great and his time / S. Knyazkov. – Pushkino: Publishing Association “Culture”, 1990.

3. Works of Catherine II. / Comp., intro. Art. HE. Mikhailova. – M.: Sov. Russia, 1990.

4. Stegny P.V. Partitions of Poland and the diplomacy of Catherine II. 1772. 1793. 1795. / P.V. Stegny - M.: Intern. Relationships, 2002.

5. Sukhareva O.V. Who was who in Russia from Peter I to Paul I. / O.V. Sukhareva. – M.: AST Publishing House LLC: Astrel Publishing House LLC: Lux OJSC, 2005.

6. Hosking J. Russia: people and empire (1552-1917). / J. Hosking. – Smolensk: “Rusich”, 2000.

Topic 5. The Russian Empire in the first half of the 19th century

1. Attempts to reform the political system and liberalize society during the reign of Alexander I.

2. Domestic policy of Nicholas I.

3. Russian economy in the first half of the 19th century. The crisis of the feudal-serf system.

Question one. Alexander I reigned from 1801-1825. After taking the throne, he carried out a number of liberal events. In particular, he declared an amnesty for prisoners and exiles under Paul I, restored Complained letters of Catherine II, etc. This raised hopes that he would rule in the traditions of Catherine’s time. However, Alexander I decided to reform the state and society.

He took an active part in the development of reform projects at the beginning of his reign. Secret committee. Since 1807 this work was entrusted MM. Speransky. His project for the reorganization of public administration was based on principle of separation of powers. Legislative power was concentrated in the State Duma. Who received voting rights under this project? Executive power belonged to the ministries. The Senate became supreme judicial organ. The State Council was created under the emperor. What functions was he supposed to perform? Laws were to be adopted by the Duma, and presented by the emperor, the government and the State Council. The emperor himself could pass laws apart from the Duma. Could such a reform, if implemented, limit the autocracy? Why didn't the emperor sign this project? In 1810 there was the State Council was established, which existed until 1917. In 1802 there were ministries created. Tell us about the significance of these reforms. In 1815 Alexander signed constitution of Poland. After the Patriotic War of 1812, the Tsar again ordered the development of a draft constitution for Russia N.N. Novosiltsev. Tell us about its contents. Why did Alexander withdraw from government affairs in the 1920s? What role did he play at this time? A.A. Arakcheev? What's happened military settlements? Why were plans to reform the political system not implemented?

Show what Alexander I did to alleviate the situation of the peasants. Why didn’t he agree to abolish serfdom, although he created a committee to prepare for the liberation of the peasants?

Question two. Starting with Peter, Russian emperors looked to Europe as a role model. NikolaiI(1825-1855) ascended the throne when bourgeois revolutions were taking place in the West, and the Decembrist nobles rebelled in Russia. These circumstances determined conservative-protective nature his reign. At the same time, the king was convinced of the need to resolve the most pressing issues. In general, his domestic policy was aimed at strengthening the power of Russia. Considering that all state affairs should be led personally by the emperor, Nicholas turns His Imperial Majesty's Own Office to the highest body that controlled all government agencies. Tell me what you were doing IIdepartment Offices? Tell us about your work codification of Russian laws. Who was it assigned to? What tasks were set for IIIdepartment? Emphasize that first and foremost it was supposed to monitor public attitudes. Nikolai considered one of the most important internal political tasks strengthening police-bureaucratic apparatus on the principles of centralization and bureaucratization, which, in his opinion, should have made it possible to effectively combat revolutionary sentiments in society and strengthen the autocracy. To achieve this goal, a huge army of officials was required, the main quality of which should be diligence. What is the meaning of the expression “the uniform defeated the tailcoat”? Who did Nicholas I rely on? What policy did he pursue towards the peasants? Why didn’t he decide to free them, although he thought serfdom evil?

Third question. Tell us about economic development Russia in the first half of the 19th century. Expand the structure feudal land tenure. Show how manufacturing and industrial production developed. How did the crisis of the feudal-serf system manifest itself?

Basic literature:

1. Derevyanko A.P., Shabelnikova N.A. History of Russia: textbook. allowance / A.P. Derevianko. – M.: TK Welby, Prospekt Publishing House, 2006. – P. 164-191.

2. History of Russia. Textbook / A.S. Orlov, V.A. Georgiev, N.G. Gergieva, T.A. Sivokhina.- M.: TK Velby LLC. 2002. – P. 187-222.

3. History of Russia from ancient times to 1861: Textbook. manual for universities / N.I. Pavlenko, I.L. Andreev, V.B. Kobrin, V.A. Fedorov; Ed. N.I. Pavlenko. – M.: Higher. school, 2000. – P. 421-439, 473-484.

4. History of Russia from the beginning from the beginning of the 18th to the end of the 19th century / L.V. Milov, P.N. Zyryanov, A.N. Bokhanov; resp. ed. A.N. Sakharov. – M.: AST Publishing House, 1996. – P. 297-323, 335-345.

5. History of Russia: Textbook. for universities / A.A. Chernobaev, I.E. Gorelov, M.N. Zuev et al.; Under. ed. M.N. Zueva, A.A. Chernobaeva. – M.: Higher. school, 2001. – P. 163-177, 184-189.

6. Platonov S.F. Lectures on Russian history / S.F. Platonov. – M.: Higher. school, 1993. – P. 646-684.

Further reading:

1. Anisimov E.V. History of Russia from Rurik to Putin. People. Events. Dates. / E.V. Anisimov. – St. Petersburg: Peter, 2007. pp. 296-326.

2. De Custine A. Nikolaevskaya Russia / A. De Custine. – M., 1990.

3. Mironenko S.V. Autocracy and reforms. Political struggle in Russia at the beginning of the 19th century. / S.V. Mironenko. – M.: Nauka, 1989.

4. Tomsinov V.A. The luminary of the Russian bureaucracy: A historical portrait of M.M. Speransky / V.A. Tomsinov. – M.: Mol. Guard, 1991.

Topic 6. Russia during the period of reforms and counter-reforms of the 19th century

1. Abolition of serfdom in Russia in 1861.

2. Liberal reforms of the 60s – 70s of the 19th century: judicial; zemstvo; education; military

3. Counter-reforms of the 80s - 90s of the 19th century.

4. Economic development of Russia in the 60s – 90s of the 19th century.

Question one. Alexander I and Nicholas I began preparing for the abolition of serfdom by creating secret committees. But they never dared to do it. Meanwhile, serfdom hampered the country's socio-economic development. This manifested itself not only in agriculture, but also in industry and trade. Explain why? Alexander II also did not immediately begin to resolve this issue. Tell us how preparations were made for the abolition of serfdom, how the project and manifesto were drawn up. Who took part in this matter? Show under what conditions the peasants were freed and given land. Did the peasants receive land in private property? What is the historical significance of the abolition of serfdom?

Question two. The abolition of serfdom required changes in political and spiritual sphere. In the 60s - 70s followed series of reforms, the purpose of which was to bring the state system and administration into conformity with the new situation of the peasantry. In 1864 it was held zemstvo reform, a little later - urban. Zemstvos became local government bodies. How did they form? Which classes participated in the elections? What issues were under the jurisdiction of zemstvos? In the same year it is held judicial reform. It was based on the following principles: lack of authority of the court; its independence from the administration; adversarial legal process; openness and transparency of the judicial process; creation of the institution of jurors. Please evaluate this reform. How was the education reform carried out? What are the main units of General Educational Institutions? What has changed in higher education? Reveal the basics "autonomy", which the universities received. In 1874, transformations were carried out into army . Tell us about the content of the military reform. Universal conscription made it possible to maintain a relatively small army in peacetime, and during war to increase its number at the expense of reserves. How has your military service changed? The series of reforms was to be completed by the implementation project M.T. Loris-Melikova to involve elected officials from local governments in decisions government issues, which, in fact, would mean limitation of autocracy. The signing of this document by Alexander II was scheduled for March 1, 1881. Why was it not signed? What happened on this day? Assessing the reforms of the 60-70s. XIX century, emphasize that they marked Russia’s entry onto the path bourgeois development and beginning of formation civil society and right states.

Question three. After the death of Alexander II, his second son (by age), Alexander III, ascended the throne. The implementation of counter-reforms in Russia is associated with his name. They were due to both objective and subjective reasons. After the abolition of serfdom, the process of ruining part of the nobility, who had not adapted to market relations, began. A wave of peasant riots swept across the country. Crime has increased. The first working class protests took place. The populists carried out a number of terrorist acts. As a result of one of them, Alexander II died. Finally, the formation of the views of Alexander III was greatly influenced by K.P. Pobedonostsev, who was his mentor, who believed that reforms in Russia were necessary freeze". But the counter-reforms were not comprehensive. Explain how they manifested themselves in legal proceedings, zemstvo and city government, and in the field of education. Why didn't counter-reforms prevent a social explosion in Russia? Also explain why Alexander III was nicknamed "peacemaker king".

Question four. The abolition of serfdom contributed to the acceleration of the country's economic development. Show the evolution of forms of land ownership in post-reform times, the growth of commercial agricultural production. Give examples. Please note that in post-reform times, trade turnover increases, which requires improved transport. Railway construction is underway. This, in turn, influences the development of metallurgy, machine tool and mechanical engineering. Development railway transport ensured the intensification of trade and the completion of the formation of a single All-Russian market. All this led to the formation of an industrial society in Russia.

2. History of Russia. Textbook / A.S. Orlov, V.A. Georgiev, N.G. Gergieva, T.A. Sivokhina.- M.: TK Velby LLC. 2002. – pp. 248-258.

3. History of Russia from the beginning from the beginning of the 18th to the end of the 19th century / L.V. Milov, P.N. Zyryanov, A.N. Bokhanov; resp. ed. A.N. Sakharov. – M.: AST Publishing House, 1996. – 381-407, 437-440.

4. History of Russia: Textbook. for universities / A.A. Chernobaev, I.E. Gorelov, M.N. Zuev et al.; Under. ed. M.N. Zueva, A.A. Chernobaeva. – M.: Higher. school, 2001. – P. 200-212, 223-233.

5. Domestic history: textbook. allowance / under. edited by R.V. Degtyareva, S.N. Poltoraka – M.: Gardariki, 2007. – P. 166-172.

Further reading:

1. Zayonchkovsky P.A. Russian autocracy at the end of the 19th century (political reaction of the 80s - early 90s) / P.A. Zayonchkovsky. – M.: “Thought”, 1970.

2. History of Russia in the 19th century. The era of reform. – M.: ZAO Publishing House Tsentrpoligraf, 2001.

3. Litvak B.G. The coup of 1861 in Russia: why the reformist alternative was not realized / B.G. Litvak. – M.: Politizdat, 1991.

4. Mironov B.N. Social history Russia during the imperial period (XVIII - early XX century): In 2 vols. T. 1 / B.N. Mironov. – St. Petersburg: “Dmitry Bulanin”, 2003. – P. 360-415.

5. Nolde B.E. Yuri Samarin and his time / B.E. Nolde. – M.: Eksmo Publishing House, 2003.

6. Reforms of Alexander II. – M.: Legal. lit., 1998.

7. Tatishchev S.S. Emperor Alexander II, his life and reign. Book 1-2 / S.S. Tatishchev. – M.: “Charlie”, 1996.

Topic 7. Russia in 1894 – 1914

1. Political crisis at the turn of the XIX-XX centuries. Revolution of 1905 – 1907: prerequisites, causes, driving forces, consequences.

2. Political parties of Russia: genesis, classification, programs, tactics.

3. Problems of economic growth and modernization. Reforms S.Yu. Witte and P.A. Stolypin.

Question one. In 1894, Nicholas II occupied the royal throne. Give him a general description. His reign began during a period of aggravated socio-political contradictions in the country. The foreign policy situation is also unfavorable for Russia. The Russo-Japanese War begins, which ends with the defeat of the Russian Empire. Tell us about its progress. The economic situation in the country is also deteriorating. All this leads to the first Russian revolution 1905-1907 It began with the shooting of a peaceful procession of workers to the Tsar in order to submit a petition. What do you know about this? Reveal the driving forces of the revolution and forms of struggle. In October-December 1905 the revolution reached its climax. What methods did the tsarist government use to suppress the revolution? Why did the revolution decline after the defeat of the December uprising in Moscow in 1905? Summing up the results of the revolution, it should be noted that, despite the defeat, it forced the tsarist government to modernize the state and social structure of Russia. The achievement of the revolution was the creation of the State Duma. The activities of political parties, trade unions and other public organizations, with the exception of the councils of workers' deputies that appeared during the revolution. Redemption payments by peasants for land were stopped. Restrictions on the use of some national languages ​​in education have been lifted. But at the same time, the main tasks of the revolution were not solved; it turned out to be incomplete, which led to a new revolution in February 1917.

Question two. At the beginning of the century, oppositional sentiments in society intensified. What caused this? On this wave the process begins formation of political parties. The first to organize socialist parties. In 1902 the formation was proclaimed Socialist Revolutionary Party (SRs), which inherited the traditions of the populists. In her program also contained some elements of Marxism. Tell us about its content, pay attention to the fact that the Socialist Revolutionaries expressed, first of all, the interests of the peasantry. What's happened "socialization of the earth"? How did they imagine the future of Russia? What was the social composition of the Socialist Revolutionary Party? Name the leaders of this party. Education completed in 1903 social democratic parties. At the Second Congress of the RSDLP the Program was adopted. What provisions contained minimum program And maximum program? The reason for the split of the party into Bolsheviks and Mensheviks was disagreement on the issue about the attitude towards liberals and party membership. What were they? What was the social composition of the RSDLP? Name the party leaders. It should be especially emphasized that both parties recognized only the revolutionary nature of the actions. What were the disparate anarchist organizations like? What goals did they set for themselves? The growing opposition to power among liberals contributed to the emergence liberal organizations. In 1903 the Union was formed liberation and the Union of Zemstvo Constitutionalists. Education liberal political parties occurs in October–November 1905 after publication Manifesto October 17“On the improvement of public order” by Nicholas II. Tell us about the party's program requirements cadets(constitutional democrats) in relation to the state structure, political rights and freedoms, in worker, peasant and national issues. What do you know about the content of the party program Octobrists(“Union October 17”). Liberal parties only recognized reforms as a way to restructure society. What was the social composition of the parties? Name the leaders of these parties. During the revolution the right was created monarchical organizations. The largest among them was the Union of the Russian People party. What goals did she proclaim? Whose interests did she defend?

Question three. At the end of the 19th century. Russia, despite economic growth, remained an agricultural country. The government recognized the need for further changes. Therefore it is accepted economic modernization or industrialization program. Its developer was S.Yu. Witte. What do you know about him? The main goal of the program was to create a modern industry in the country. This problem was supposed to be solved within 10 years. To achieve this, it was planned to create a developed transport system in the country, form new centers of industrial production and develop new industries. It is worth noting that the program of S.Yu. Witte differed from the previous economic policies pursued in the country. If earlier the government focused on eliminating obstacles to the development of industry, now it has moved on to directly supporting it. What exactly did this mean? It should be noted that in the Ministry of Finance, which was headed by S.Yu. Witte, at the same time being Prime Minister, began preparing a project for agrarian reform. At the same time, it was carried out by the Ministry of Internal Affairs.

In 1906, P.A. was appointed to the post of Minister of Internal Affairs, and then Chairman of the Council of Ministers. Stolypin, famous statesman beginning of the century. What measures were taken by Stolypin to combat revolutionary actions? Meanwhile, P.A. Stolypin understood perfectly well that repressive measures alone could not resolve the situation, hence his formula "calm and reform". By decree of November 9, 1906 peasants were allowed to leave the community and secure a plot of land for themselves as a private own. Why do you think this measure, according to Stolypin, should have contributed to the resolution of the agrarian question? The second component of the peasant reform was policy encouraging the resettlement of land-poor peasants for the Urals. What was the purpose of this measure? What's the point peasant reform? How was its implementation? Talk about its positive consequences. What shortcomings did the reform have? Being a conservative, P.A. Stolypin, however, understood that in order to achieve political stability, Russia needed a whole set of reforms. What were his plans for local government? administrative management and ships? How was the work issue supposed to be resolved? What changes were planned in the field of education? It should be emphasized that the implementation of these transformations was supposed to bring Russia closer to the ideal rule of law. Why are most P.A. plans? Stolypin were not realized?

Basic literature:

1. Derevyanko A.P., Shabelnikova N.A. History of Russia: textbook. allowance / A.P. Derevianko. - M.: TK Welby, Prospekt Publishing House, 2006. - P. 210-247.

2. History of Russia. Textbook. / A.S. Orlov, V.A. Georgiev, N.G. Georgieva, T.A. Sivokhina. – M.: TK Velby LLC, 2002. – P. 284-313.

3. History of Russia. XX century / A.N. Bokhanov, M.M. Gorinov, V.P. Dmitrenko and others - M.: AST Publishing House, 1996. - P. 17-50, 61-113.

4. History of Russia: Textbook. for universities / A.A. Chernobaev, I.E. Gorelov. M.N. Zuev et al.; Ed. M.N. Zueva, A.A. Chernobaeva. – M.: Higher. school, 2001. – P. 244-275.

5. Domestic history: textbook / ed. R.V. Degtereva, S.N. Poltorak. – M.: Gardariki, 2007. – P. 200-215.

Further reading:

1. Avrekh A.Ya. Stolypin and the fate of reforms in Russia / A.Ya. Avreh. – M., 1991.

2. Witte S.Yu. Selected works / S.Yu. Witte. – M., 1991.

3. Ganelin R.Sh. Russian autocracy in 1905: reform and revolution / R.Sh. Ganelin. – St. Petersburg, 1991.

4. Milyukov P.N. Memories / P.N. Miliukov. – M.: Politizdat, 1991.

5. Mironov B.N. Social history of Russia during the imperial period (XVIII - early XX centuries): In 2 volumes. T. 2 / B.N. Mironov. – St. Petersburg: “Dmitry Bulanin”, 2003. – P. 150-162.

6. Nikolaevsky B.I. The story of a traitor. Terrorists and politics, police / B.I. Nikolaevsky. – M.: Politizdat, 1991.

7. Oldenburg S.S. The reign of Emperor Nicholas II S.S. Oldenburg. – M., 1992.

8. Political history of Russia in parties and persons / Compiled by: V.V. Shelokhaev (leader), A.N. Bokhanov, N.G. Dumova, N.D. Erofeev and others - M.: TERRA, 1993.

9. Rybas S.Yu., Tarakanova L.V. Reformer: The Life and Death of Pyotr Stolypin / S.Yu. Rybas. – M.: Nedra, 1991.

Topic 9. Russia during the First World War and the national crisis. 1914 – October 1917.

1. Russia during the war.

3. Russia from February to October 1917.

Question one. Reveal the causes of the First World War and Russia's participation in it. What military-political blocs opposed each other during the war? How did the Russian public react to the war? Explain the positions of Russian political parties on this issue. Tell us about the main military operations of the Russian army and their results. Russia's defeats on the fronts of the First World War increased the severity of social contradictions. The war led to economic disorganization and contributed to the paralysis of power. The economic breakdown of the country has begun since the crisis of railway transport, which was unable to simultaneously supply the front and rear in full. The consequence was interruptions in supplying cities with food and raw materials for enterprises. Low purchasing prices for bread caused the peasants to hide it and further worsened the situation. What consequences did this have? Power turned out to be incapable cope with economic difficulties. The ineffectiveness of the state apparatus caused criticism in society. Tell us about the attempts liberal bourgeoisie fix the situation. Which parties were included? "Progressive Bloc"? What did his demand for a “responsible ministry” mean? What role did personality play in discrediting Emperor Nicholas II? Rasputin? What was the mood in army? In conclusion, it should be emphasized that in the conditions of incomplete socio-economic and political reforms, the war aggravated the situation in the country to the limit. By the beginning of 1917, the crisis had become systemic.

Question two. Unlike the revolution of 1905-1907, the February Revolution lasted just over a week and developed spontaneously. Name driving forces revolution? Which tasks did she have to decide? Tell us about its main events. Assess the significance of the February Revolution. A characteristic feature of the country’s subsequent development was the emergence dual power. Tell us about the composition Provisional Government, which before convening Constituent Assembly was supposed to carry out executive and administrative functions. Please note that, in fact, it also became a legislative body. The second authority was Petrograd Soviet workers' and soldiers' deputies, which consisted of representatives of socialist parties. Which ones? What program of action did the Provisional Government propose? It should be emphasized that the Socialist-Revolutionary-Menshevik Petrograd Soviet believed that due to the prematureness of the socialist revolution, their support for the bourgeois Provisional Government was necessary.

Question three. After the February events, the country was faced with the prospect of developments in two options. In the first case, it could follow the democratic path of reforms initiated by liberal parties. The second way is the establishment of either a military or socialist dictatorship. During the period between February and October, events can be considered within the framework three crises of power. April crisis. In the “April Theses”, V.I., who returned from emigration. Lenin called on the Bolsheviks to change tactics and set a course for carrying out a socialist revolution in the country. Name the main provisions of Lenin's program of action. Under these conditions, the desire of the Provisional Government to continue the war provoked demonstrations in Petrograd. What were the strikers' demands? How did the crisis end? It should be emphasized that, having become part of the Provisional Government, the left parties (Socialist Revolutionaries and Mensheviks) shared with the liberals responsibility for what was happening in the country. Tell us about the events that caused June crisis? The main result July crisis has become elimination of dual power. The peaceful period of development of the revolution ended, the Bolsheviks began preparations for armed uprising, and right-wing bourgeois parties - to establish military dictatorship. Tell us about Kornilov's speech. What were L.G.’s plans? Kornilov? What role did the Bolsheviks play in suppressing the rebellion? These events caused a huge increase in sympathy for the Bolsheviks in society. In September 1917 they received a majority in the Soviets. Russia faced an alternative: either the Provisional Government or dictatorship of the proletariat.

Basic literature:

1. Derevyanko A.P., Shabelnikova N.A. History of Russia: textbook. allowance / A.P. Derevianko.- M.: TK Welby, Prospekt Publishing House, 2006. – P. 247-253.

2. History of Russia. Textbook. / A.S. Orlov, V.A. Georgiev, N.G. Georgieva, T.A. Sivokhina. – M.: TK Velby LLC, 2002. – P. 313-317, 327-335.

3. History of Russia. XX century / A.N. Bokhanov, M.M. Gorinov, V.P. Dmitrenko and others - M.: AST Publishing House, 1996. - P. 124-168.

4. History of Russia: Textbook. for universities / A.A. Chernobaev, I.E. Gorelov. M.N. Zuev et al.; Ed. M.N. Zueva, A.A. Chernobaeva. – M.: Higher. school, 2001. – P. 279-294.

5. Domestic history: textbook / ed. R.V. Degtereva, S.N. Poltorak. – M.: Gardariki, 2007. – P. 221-226.

Further reading:

1. Galili Z. Leaders of the Mensheviks in the Russian Revolution / Z. Galili. – M., 1993.

2. Milyukov P.N. Memories / P.N. Miliukov. – M.: Politizdat, 1991.

3. Paleolog M. Tsarist Russia on the Eve of the Revolution / M. Paleolog. – M.: Politizdat, 1991.

4. Radzinsky E. “Lord... save and pacify Russia.” Nicholas II: life and death / E. Radzinsky. – M.: Publishing house “VAGRIUS”, 1993.

5. Rodzianko M.V. The collapse of the empire / M.V. Rodzianko. – Kharkov: Interbook, 1990.

Topic 10. Establishment of Soviet power. Civil war, its results and consequences

2. The beginning of the formation of the structure of Soviet power and a one-party political regime.

3. Economic policy of the Bolsheviks. "War communism".

4. Civil war in Russia.

Question one. The Bolshevization of the Soviets created the opportunity for the Bolsheviks to take power into their own hands. However, the leadership of their party did not have a consensus on this matter. Lenin, whose arrest was announced by the Provisional Government, was forced to go into hiding. While outside Petrograd, he writes two letters to the Party Central Committee: “Marxism and uprising” and “The Bolsheviks must take power.” In them, Lenin specifically proposed that the party take a course towards an armed uprising. However, the letters delivered to Petrograd did not receive approval from the Central Committee. Then Lenin decides to return to Petrograd. He managed to convince the majority of the Central Committee of the need for an armed uprising. But his closest associates in emigration: Kamenev and Zinoviev opposed the armed uprising. Why? Despite this, organizational preparations for an armed uprising began. What bodies were created to lead the uprising? Tell us about the course of the uprising and the capture of the Winter Palace. Representatives of which parties and revolutionary organizations took part in the uprising? The results of the uprising were summed up at the Second Congress of Soviets. What are his decisions? Reveal the content of the decrees on peace and earth.

Question two. After the uprising, the formation of new government bodies began. What were they called and what functions were assigned to them? It is worth noting that at first there were representatives of the Bolsheviks and Left Socialist Revolutionaries in the government. But then the Left Social Revolutionaries rebelled against the Bolsheviks. Why? This marked the beginning of the formation of a one-party political regime, which led to the elevation of party bodies over the state apparatus. Why did the Bolsheviks convene and then dissolve the Constituent Assembly? What are the consequences of this act? What methods did the Bolsheviks use against the activities of other political parties? Name the punitive bodies of the Soviet government and show how they acted.

Question three. Reveal the content of the economic policy of the Bolsheviks in the first months of their stay in power. Who owned the land and factories? What is "war communism"? Reveal its main provisions. Pay special attention to the introduction surplus appropriation, which became the main reason for the peasants' dissatisfaction with the Bolsheviks.

Question four. When preparing this question, it should be noted that a certain share of the blame for the outbreak of the Civil War lies with all the opposing political and social forces. But among the Bolsheviks, the Civil War was programmed back in 1914, when Lenin put forward the slogan of turning the imperialist war into a civil war. Reveal the main causes of the civil war, the political and social composition of the hostile camps. At the same time, it should be understood that the Civil War cannot be reduced only to the struggle of the Reds and the Whites, because the Greens, the National Separatists and the Socialist-Revolutionary-Menshevik bloc also took part in it. In addition, interventionists intervened in the war. Which states took part in the armed invasion of Russian territory? What were their goals? The main political opponents in the war were the Reds and the Whites . When studying these two political forces, consider the following. Disengagement white And red didn't happen only by social sign. Important role At the same time, national, religious, regional, and personal factors played a role. Often the choice could be random. The white movement was not homogeneous. Reveal the main stages of the struggle between the whites and the reds. Analyzing the reasons for the victory of the Reds and the defeat of the Whites, one should pay attention to the fact that the Bolshevik program was closer to the masses, since it put forward the slogans: “Land for the peasants” and “Factory workers.” The White movement was unable to offer anything similar; its goal was revenge on the Bolsheviks for the destruction of a huge empire. In the white camp it was never achieved ideological and organizational unity. Talk about the differences within white movement. The outcome of the struggle ultimately depended on who the peasantry would follow. What changes in the Bolshevik Party's policy towards the peasantry occurred during the war? The Bolsheviks also occupied a more advantageous geopolitical space, since all railways began in Moscow. Finally, the Bolsheviks proclaimed rights of nations to self-determination to a greater extent at that time corresponded to the interests of the national outskirts than the white slogan about united and indivisible Russia. During the war, the movement also had a massive character "green" which was attended mainly by peasants who were dissatisfied with both the Bolshevik surplus appropriation system and the return of land and property to the white landowners. What do you know about the movement? N. Makhno and ataman N. Grigorieva? Talking about the consequences of the Civil War , It should be noted that from a moral point of view, for a long time it established in society an atmosphere of intolerance and the desire to resolve social conflicts by violent methods.

Basic literature:

1. Derevyanko A.P., Shabelnikova N.A. History of Russia6 textbooks. allowance / A.P. Derevianko. – M.: TK Welby, Prospekt Publishing House, 2006. – 253-257, 261-281.

2. History of Russia. Textbook. / A.S. Orlov, V.A. Georgiev, N.G. Georgieva, T.A. Sivokhina. – M.: TK Velby LLC, 2002. – P. 335-351.

3. History of Russia. XX century / A.N. Bokhanov, M.M. Gorinov, V.P. Dmitrenko and others - M.: AST Publishing House, 1996. - P. 168-196.

4. History of Russia: Textbook. for universities / A.A. Chernobaev, I.E. Gorelov. M.N. Zuev et al.; Ed. M.N. Zueva, A.A. Chernobaeva. – M.: Higher. school, 2001. – P. 294-321.

5. Domestic history: textbook / ed. R.V. Degtereva, S.N. Poltorak. – M.: Gardariki, 2007. – P. 226-258.

Further reading:

1. Volkovinsky V.N. Makhno and his collapse / V.N. Volkovinsky. - M., 1991.

2. Volkogonov D.A. Lenin: a political portrait. In 2 books. Book 2 / D.A. Volkogonov. – M., 1994.

3. Diterichs M.K. Murder Royal Family and members of the House of Romanov in the Urals / M.K. Dieterichs. – M.: Veche, 2007.

4. Kostikov V.V. Let us not curse the exile...(The paths and destinies of the Russian emigration) / V.V. Kostikov. – M.: International. relationship. 1990.

5. Melgunov S.P. Red terror in Russia. 1917 – 1924 / S.P. Melgunov. – M., 1990.

6. Shulgin V.V. Years. Days. 1920 / V.V. Shulgin. – M.: Publishing house “Novosti”, 1990.

Topic 11. Transformation of power, society and culture in 1921 – 1928.

1. New economic policy: prerequisites, content, results.

2. Education of the USSR.

3. The struggle in the leadership of the RCP (b) - the All-Union Communist Party (Bolsheviks) on issues of the country’s development. The rise of Stalin.

Question one. By the end of 1920, the country was struck by a deep economic, social and political crisis. Tell us about its manifestations. What were reasons crisis? The speeches of workers and peasants under the slogan “Soviets without Communists” testified that dissatisfaction was caused by the policies pursued by the Bolshevik leadership. By this time it became clear that the hopes of V.I. Lenin’s support for the Russian revolution from the world revolution was not justified, and the Soviet state would have to exist in a “hostile environment.” In 1921, at the X Congress of the RCP (b), decisions were made that laid the foundation new economic policy. Among opponents of Bolshevism, the NEP gave rise to hope for its rebirth and the return of Russia to the path of capitalism. How did the Bolsheviks themselves view the NEP?? What was it like content new economic policy? The main elements of the NEP are tax in kind, freedom of trade and hiring of labor, permission to lease land and small industrial enterprises . Large industry remained in the hands of the state and was transferred to self-financing. Think about why these measures were chosen as an anti-crisis program? Next we should focus on implementation of the NEP. Tell us about the achievements in restoring agriculture and industry. Think about why it happened in such a short period? What was the incentive? However, the new economic policy could not solve a number of problems. Tell us about the NEP crises in 1923, 1925 and 1927. What was the inconsistency NEP?

Question two. The October Revolution completed the collapse of the Russian Empire. In accordance with its program requirement " on the right of nations to self-determination" Right up to the separation and creation of an independent state, the Bolsheviks sanctioned the emergence of a number of independent states. What caused the desire of the peoples of the former empire to independence? At the same time, there were a number of factors that created conditions for unification republics Name them. Started civil war led to the formation military-political union republics in which it was established Soviet power. Which ones? In the early 20s. a system has been formed bilateral treaties between individual republics. In the subsequent period it continued to develop. Then the unification process entered a new phase. Tell us about "autonomization" plan Stalin, please note that it provided for the entry of the republics into the Russian Federation without the right to secede from it. What is the difference between the proposed Lenin union form unification of republics? Formally, the formation of the USSR took place according to Lenin’s plan. When and by which republics was it signed? alliance treaty? Tell us about the creation of the highest authorities of the new state. What issues were within the jurisdiction of the union and republican bodies for Constitution of 1924.? What was the significance of the formation of the USSR?

Question three. After Lenin's death on January 21, 1924, a struggle for power unfolded among the Bolshevik elite. Students should understand that this was not only a struggle of personalities, but also a struggle of concepts for the further development of the country. The main opponents were L.D. Trotsky and I.V. Stalin. What positions did they hold? What characteristics did Lenin give them shortly before his death? Why did Lenin demand the removal of Stalin from the post of General Secretary of the party? At the first stage of the struggle for power, a triumvirate consisting of Stalin, Kamenev and Zinoviev acted against Trotsky. Why did Kamenev and Zinoviev support Stalin? Who won? At the second stage, a struggle developed between "new opposition" led by Zinoviev and Kamenev and Stalin, who in 1925 was supported by the majority of the Central Committee of the All-Union Communist Party of Bolsheviks. What is the program "new opposition"? Why did she fail? Then a new bloc led by Trotsky, Zinoviev and Kamenev came out against Stalin. What brought the former opponents together? What program from the bloc did Trotsky present? Why did this block get its name? "left bias". The majority of the Central Committee of the All-Union Communist Party (Bolsheviks) supported Stalin. What penalties were applied against the Trotskyists? After this, Stalin and his supporters began to fight against "right bias" headed by N.I. Bukharin. What is his program? Why did Stalin defeat all potential opponents?

Basic literature:

1. Derevyanko A.P., Shabelnikova N.A. History of Russia6 textbooks. allowance / A.P. Derevianko. – M.: TK Welby, Prospekt Publishing House, 2006. – 283-294, 296-305, 513-519.

2. History of Russia. Textbook. / A.S. Orlov, V.A. Georgiev, N.G. Georgieva, T.A. Sivokhina. – M.: TK Velby LLC, 2002. – P. 352-362, 389-394.

3. History of Russia. XX century / A.N. Bokhanov, M.M. Gorinov, V.P. Dmitrenko and others - M.: AST Publishing House, 1996. - P. 211-279.

4. History of Russia: Textbook. for universities / A.A. Chernobaev, I.E. Gorelov. M.N. Zuev et al.; Ed. M.N. Zueva, A.A. Chernobaeva. – M.: Higher. school, 2001. – P. 322-336.

5. Domestic history: textbook / ed. R.V. Degtereva, S.N. Poltorak. – M.: Gardariki, 2007. – P. 259-273.

Further reading:

1. Beladi L., Kraus T. Stalin: Transl. from Hungarian / L. Beladi. – M.: Politizdat, 1990.

2. Boffa J. History of the Soviet Union. T. 1. From the revolution to the Second World War. Lenin and Stalin. 1917-1941 / J. Boffa. – M.: International. Relations, 1990. pp. 153-311.

3. Bushkov A. Red Monarch. Chronicles of a great and terrible time / A. Bushkov. – St. Petersburg: Publishing House “Neva”, 2004.

4. Volkogonov V.A. Triumph and tragedy: a political portrait of I.V. Stalin. In 2 books. / V.A. Volkogonov. – M., 1989.

5. Shubin A.V. Leaders and conspirators: political struggle in the USSR in the 1920s - 1930s / M.: Veche, 2004.

Topic 12. Formation of a totalitarian regime in the USSR in the 30s: politics, economics, culture

1. Strengthening the regime of Stalin’s personal power. The establishment of totalitarianism in the USSR in the 30s.

2. Forced industrialization in the USSR

3. The policy of complete collectivization of agriculture and its consequences.

4. “Cultural revolution” and the totalitarian type of Soviet culture in the 30s.

Question one. In the 30s formation took place in the USSR totalitarian regime. What is totalitarianism? What are its symptoms? Considering origins totalitarianism, attention should be paid to the historical traditions of autocratic power in our country and the low level of democratic and general culture of various strata of society. An important role in the formation of totalitarianism (a synonym was played by the ideological guidelines of the Bolsheviks for their exclusive role in protecting the interests of the working people and hostility to the people of all other parties. In the 20s, the Bolshevik party eliminated its political opponents from the political arena and formed one-party political system. Tell us how it happened. What decision did you make? XCongress of the RCP(b) against the opposition within its own ranks? Already in the 20s. The dictatorship of the proletariat has become dictatorship of the party represented by its Central Committee. There was a merging of the party and state apparatus. How did this manifest itself? Formally, power belonged to the workers, but in fact, they were deprived of it. The party's instrument for maintaining power was the creation of a powerful repressive apparatus And carrying out mass repressions. Tell us about them. Who were they directed against? What was their scale? Economic basis totalitarian regime became state ownership of the means of production. What did this mean? IN spiritual life full control was established over the activities of public organizations, the transformation of party ideology into state ideology.

Question two. Despite the fact that by the mid-20s. The country's economy has been restored, in general, to its pre-war level, the absolute gap with developed capitalist countries has increased. It was necessary to continue the industrialization that began at the beginning of the century. Considering the international isolation of the USSR and the growing threat of a new international conflict, this task had to be solved as soon as possible. When the country's leadership was proclaimed course towards industrialization? What economic development strategy was proposed N.I. Bukharin? What was the fundamental difference Stalin's model industrialization? In essence, the disagreements concerned relations with the peasantry, because . main source The creation of large-scale industry was supposed to come from the sale of grain abroad. Why did the country's leadership abandon the NEP at the end of the 20s? Tell us about first five year plans? What were their results in the field of industrial production?

Question three. Refusal market model relationship between the state and the peasantry occurred towards the end of 1929 and a different mechanism was created for pumping funds from the countryside for the needs of industrialization. To this end, a course was proclaimed towards collectivization of agriculture. It should be emphasized that collectivization made it possible to solve several more problems. Which ones? Tell us about the methods of collectivization. The direct consequence of its implementation was the famine of 1932-1933. What do you know about collectivization in the Belgorod region? What are the results of collectivization?

Question four. What problems was it supposed to solve? "cultural revolution"? Tell us about the measures to literacy. By the mid-30s. Soviet education took shape. What was she like? The authorities also faced the task of approving communist ideology in the public consciousness. How was it resolved? What's happened totalitarian culture? For what purpose was the transition to it carried out in the 30s? What are its main features? Tell us about their manifestation in cultural life countries.

Basic literature:

1. Derevyanko A.P., Shabelnikova N.A. History of Russia6 textbooks. allowance / A.P. Derevianko. – M.: TK Welby, Prospekt Publishing House, 2006. – P. 305-325.

2. History of Russia. Textbook. / A.S. Orlov, V.A. Georgiev, N.G. Georgieva, T.A. Sivokhina. – M.: TK Velby LLC, 2002. – P. 363-376, 394-398.

3. History of Russia. XX century / A.N. Bokhanov, M.M. Gorinov, V.P. Dmitrenko and others - M.: AST Publishing House, 1996. - 302-389.

4. History of Russia: Textbook. for universities / A.A. Chernobaev, I.E. Gorelov. M.N. Zuev et al.; Ed. M.N. Zueva, A.A. Chernobaeva. – M.: Higher. school, 2001. – 336-344.

Further reading:

1. Anisimov E.V. History of Russia from Rurik to Putin. People. Events. Dates. / E.V. Anisimov. – St. Petersburg: Peter, 2007. pp. 419-446.

2. Boffa J. History of the Soviet Union. T. 1. From the revolution to the Second World War. Lenin and Stalin. 1917-1941 / J. Boffa. – M.: International. relations, 1990. – P. 329-366, 388-410, 450-520.

3. Documents testify: From the history of the village on the eve and during collectivization, 1927 - 1932. / Ed. V.P. Danilova, N.A. Ivanitsky. – M.: Politizdat, 1989.

4. History gives a lesson / Under general. ed. V.G. Afanasyeva, G.L. Smirnova; Comp. A.A. Ilyin. – M.: Politizdat, 1989.

5. Khlevnyuk O.V. 1937: Stalin, the NKVD and Soviet society / O.V. Khlevnyuk. – M., 1992.

6. Hosking J. Russia and the Russians: In 2 books. Book Per. from English / J. Hosking. – M.: AST Publishing House LLC: Transitkniga LLC, 2003. P. 153-215.

Topic 13. USSR during the Second World War and the Great Patriotic War (1939-1945)

1. Foreign policy of the Soviet state in the 20-30s.

2. German attack on the USSR. The reasons for the retreat of the Red Army at the beginning of the war.

3. The main stages of the war and their characteristics.

4. Reasons for the victory of the Soviet people. Lessons and results of the Great Patriotic War and the Second World War.

Question one. Foreign policy of the Soviet state in the 20s. was supposed to provide a solution to two rather contradictory problems. Firstly, it was necessary restore economic ties with capitalist countries, because hopes for revolutions in Europe did not come true, and Soviet Russia had to live “in a capitalist encirclement.” Secondly, the Bolshevik leadership did not give up hope of implementing world proletarian revolution. For what purpose was the Comintern created? What issue was the main obstacle in establishing diplomatic relations between Soviet Russia and Western countries? For what purpose was it organized? Genoa Conference in 1922? At this conference, the Soviet Union and Germany were able to break through international isolation and sign a mutually beneficial trade agreement. Under what conditions? With which countries did the USSR establish diplomatic relations in the subsequent period? Assess the results of Soviet foreign policy in the 20s.

Until 1933, the main partner of the Soviet Union on the world stage was Germany. Hitler's rise to power forced the Soviet state change foreign policy. Tell us about the USSR's efforts to create a system collective security. Why didn't the West create such a system? England and France, on the one hand, and the Soviet Union, on the other, had reason not to trust each other. What do you know about the “appeasement” policy pursued by Western countries? Why were the negotiations between the military missions of England, France and the USSR in Moscow in the summer of 1939 unsuccessful? Tell us about the signing of the USSR on August 23, 1939. Non-Aggression Pact with Germany. Pay attention to the content secret protocols to him. The territories of which countries belonged to the sphere of influence of the USSR? Evaluate the agreement Friendship and borders September 28, 1939 In accordance with these agreements, the USSR participated in the division of Poland. The Baltic states and Bessarabia were included in the USSR, and a war was launched against Finland. What were the consequences of the foreign policy of the Soviet state pursued during the initial period of the Second World War?

Question two. When starting to study the Great Patriotic War, determine the goals of Nazi Germany. What was the name of the German plan to capture the USSR? Do you think the attack by Germany and its allies on the USSR was really sudden? Reveal the reasons for the retreat of the Red Army at the beginning of the war. How did you mobilize forces to repel the enemy?

Question three. You are invited to consider the war in stages: the initial period - June 22, 1941 - November 1942; a radical turning point in the course of the war - November 19, 1942 - end of 1943; end of the war - beginning of 1944 - May 9, 1945 Tell us about the most important battles Patriotic War. Show the significance of the Battle of Kursk. Name the names of the most prominent military leaders of the Red Army. Give examples of the heroism of Soviet soldiers and officers.

Question four. When discussing this issue, it should be emphasized that the war from the very beginning acquired a nationwide character. The enemy was crushed not only at the front, but also in the rear, where a powerful partisan movement unfolded. Tell us about the partisans' contribution to the victory. Despite the confusion of the Soviet leadership in the first days, the war acquired an organized character. On June 30, the State Defense Committee (GKO) was created. Who entered it? Victories on the fronts would have been impossible without the efforts of workers rear. When was it implemented translation of Soviet economy on a war footing? When was the USSR able to surpass Germany in terms of military production? What new weapon models were created by Soviet scientists and designers. The war was not fought by the USSR alone. Tell us about the formation anti-Hitler coalition, emphasize that in the face of a common threat, the USSR and the West were able to join forces in the fight against a common enemy. In what forms did cooperation take place between the allies? Tell us about the contribution of cultural figures to the Great Victory. Hitler hoped to set the various peoples of the USSR against each other. But, despite some exceptions, the multinational Soviet Union passed the test of strength. All the peoples of the USSR rose up to fight the enemy. Give examples. There is no doubt that all countries included in anti-Hitler coalition, contributed to the victory over fascist bloc. But main role in the defeat of the aggressor belongs to the USSR. Give the facts. What are the lessons of the Great Patriotic War and the Second World War?

Basic literature:

1. Derevyanko A.P., Shabelnikova N.A. History of Russia: textbook. allowance / A.P. Derevianko. – M.: TK Welby, Prospekt Publishing House, 2006. – P. 325-362.

2. History of Russia. Textbook. / A.S. Orlov, V.A. Georgiev, N.G. Georgieva, T.A. Sivokhina. – M.: TK Velby LLC, 2002. – P. 381-388, 399-415.

3. History of Russia. XX century / A.N. Bokhanov, M.M. Gorinov, V.P. Dmitrenko and others - M.: AST Publishing House, 1996. - 280-302, 411-466.

4. History of Russia: Textbook. for universities / A.A. Chernobaev, I.E. Gorelov. M.N. Zuev et al.; Ed. M.N. Zueva, A.A. Chernobaeva. – M.: Higher. school, 2001. – P. 344-376.

5. Domestic history: textbook / ed. R.V. Degtereva, S.N. Poltorak. – M.: Gardariki, 2007. – P. 284-312.

Further reading:

1. Zhukov G.K. Memories and reflections. In 3 volumes / G.K. Zhukov. – M., 1992.

2. Documents on the history of the Munich agreement. 1937 – 1939 / Foreign Ministry Affairs of the USSR, Ministry of Foreign Affairs. Case of Czechoslovakia. M.: Politizdat, 1979.

3. Zemskov I.N. Diplomatic history of the second front in Europe / I.N. Zemskov. – M.: Politizdat, 1982.

4. History of the Second World War. In 12 volumes - M., 1973-1982.

5. History of international relations and foreign policy of the USSR: In 3 volumes: T. 1 / Ed. I.A. Kirilina. – M.: International. Relationships, 1986.

6. The eve and beginning of the war: documents and materials. – L., 1991.

7. Lubenkov Yu.N. 100 great commanders of World War II / Yu.N. Lubenkov. – M.: Veche, 2005.

8. Rozanov G.L. Stalin - Hitler: a documentary sketch of Soviet-German diplomatic relations. 1939-1941. / G.L. Rozanov. – M., 1991.

9. Samsonov A.M. Second world war. In 3 volumes / A.M. Samsonov. – M., 1993.

Topic 14. The Soviet Union in the Cold War

1. Changes in the world after the Second World War. The beginning of the Cold War.

2. Socio-economic development, socio-political life and culture in the post-war years.

3. Attempts to implement political and economic reforms during the “thaw”.

4. Changes in the foreign policy course of the USSR in 1956-1984.

5. USSR in the mid-60s – 80s: increasing crisis phenomena.

Question one. With the end of the Second World War, the world experienced new balance of power. Firstly, the authority of the USSR increased, which played a decisive role in the defeat of fascism. Secondly, the economic and political power of the United States has increased immeasurably, and it has begun to lay claim to world domination. Thirdly, it began cold war, as a result of the confrontation between these powers. What is the Cold War? When did it start? What goals did both sides pursue in the Cold War? The confrontation was aggravated by the creation of nuclear weapons in the United States shortly before the end of World War II. Tell us about the formation socialist regimes in Eastern European countries. What role did the USSR play in this process? On what terms did the United States provide assistance to European countries in economic recovery? What was the Truman Doctrine? What do you know about the formation military-political and economic blocs NATO, Warsaw Pact Organization, Council for Mutual Economic Assistance. How were the relations between the USSR and the Commonwealth countries built? Tell us about the armed confrontation between the USSR and the USA in Korea how did it end for this country? In conclusion, it should be noted that the consequence of the Cold War policy was race weapons.

Question two. Talk about the damage caused by the war to the country's economy, emphasizing that the USSR lost about a third of its national wealth. What were the casualties? Please note that in the process of reviving the national economy, as in the pre-war period, emphasis was placed on heavy industry, to the detriment and expense of light industry and agriculture. Economic recovery has become more difficult the need for huge expenses to create nuclear weapons and support socialist countries, as well as the severe drought of 1946. The war changed the Soviet people, and contributed to liberalization sentiments in society. What aspects of life in Soviet society were criticized? These sentiments were reflected in the party itself. What changes were supposed to be made to the draft of the new program of the CPSU (b), which was developed in 1947? Tell us when the new round began repression? Name the largest political processes 1946 – 1952 After the war, party ideological control over culture intensified. How did it manifest itself? Give examples.

Question three. In March 1953, Stalin died. As a result of the struggle for power in the fall of 1953, he became the First Secretary of the CPSU Central Committee N.S. Khrushchev, who remained in this post until October 1964. This period of our history was called the Khrushchev decade or "thaw", when an attempt was made to renew “state socialism”. The central event was XX Congress of the CPSU, at which N.S. presented a report. Khrushchev about "cult of personality" Stalin. Assess the significance of this speech. In 1957, opponents of exposing Stalin’s personality cult tried to remove N.S. Khrushchev. Why didn't they succeed? Tell us about the reform of party and government bodies. For what purpose was it carried out? In 1961 at XXIICongress of the CPSU was accepted new party program. What task was set in it? These transformations aroused enormous enthusiasm in society and contributed to democratization spiritual life, which especially influenced the state of literature and art. What artistic works of this time are you familiar with? Significant efforts were aimed at increasing the efficiency of the Soviet economy. Tell us about the measures taken for development agriculture. Why did the development of virgin lands and the “corn campaign” not produce the expected results? Pay attention to the inconsistency of N.S.’s agricultural policy. Khrushchev. How can the liquidation be explained? MTS? Why in the early 60s? Was the USSR forced to start purchasing food abroad? What role did the creation play? economic councils in economic management? What were the successes of the USSR in the field scientific and technological revolution. Tell us about the changes in everyday life Soviet people, mass housing construction, production of household appliances. Why did opponents manage to remove N.S. from power in October 1964? Khrushchev?

Question four. Foreign policy course of N.S. Khrushchev's was significantly different from Stalin's. The foreign policy of the new leadership was based on the principles of peaceful coexistence of two social systems, the possibility of preventing world wars, and various forms of transition to socialism. However, the principle of peaceful coexistence did not mean abandoning the ideological struggle. N.S. Khrushchev opened it slightly "iron curtain". How did this manifest itself? The USSR unilaterally decided to reduce the size of the army. What are the consequences? However, the new leadership of the USSR failed to avoid confrontation with developed Western countries, which became evident during Cuban missile crisis of 1962 Tell us about it. The debunking of Stalin's personality cult made a great impression on countries that followed the socialist path of development. This caused discontent in some (China, North Korea, Albania, Romania), while in other countries (Poland, Hungary) unrest began aimed at deepening democratic processes. What position did the Soviet leadership take in both cases? What is the reason for the conflict with the leadership of the CCP? In relation to the countries that freed themselves from the colonial yoke, the Soviet leadership pursued a policy aimed at strengthening comprehensive cooperation with them and expanding the camp "non-aligned" countries, providing assistance to those states that have taken a course towards socialism.

What changes took place in foreign policy under L.I. Brezhnev and his successors? Why did the USSR, together with four countries, send troops into Czechoslovakia in 1968? In the mid-60s. the Cold War received additional impetus. This was caused by the US-Vietnamese War. But after withdrawal American troops from Vietnam in the first half of the 70s. began the period of the so-called "discharge". What did this mean? However, the introduction of Soviet troops into Afghanistan led to a new round in the development of the Cold War. What are the results of the Cold War?

Question five. Khrushchev's resignation in 1964 led to change of political course and a return to the previous system, but in a softer form. Rise stagnation in the economic field was that growth rate gradually decreased. After L.I. came to power. Brezhnev, for some time economic growth was even significant, which was a consequence of the 1965 economic reform. Tell us what measures have been taken to production intensification in industry and agriculture? Study the digital indicators of economic development of the USSR according to five-year plans. Please note that high economic growth eighth five year plan, are gradually replaced by increasingly lower rates. Why was the principles of the 1965 reform abandoned? The increase in stagnation phenomena also manifested itself in political And public life of the country. Back it up with facts. What do you know about adoption? Constitution of 1977. What place was given to the CPSU under Article 6? During these years, the country has dissident movement. What did it see as its task? Name the most famous representatives of dissidence. What attempts have been made to bring the country out of stagnation? What are the results?

Basic literature:

1. Derevyanko A.P., Shabelnikova N.A. History of Russia: textbook. allowance / A.P. Derevianko. – M.: TK Welby, Prospekt Publishing House, 2006. – P. 363-421, 520-534.

2. History of Russia: modern times (1945-1999): Textbook for universities / Ed. A.B. Bezborodova. – M.: “Olympus”. "AST Publishing House", 2001. – P. 15-254.

3. History of Russia. Textbook. / A.S. Orlov, V.A. Georgiev, N.G. Georgieva, T.A. Sivokhina. – M.: TK Velby LLC, 2002. – P. 416-451, 478-490.

4. History of Russia. XX century / A.N. Bokhanov, M.M. Gorinov, V.P. Dmitrenko and others - M.: AST Publishing House, 1996. - 466-559.

5. History of Russia: Textbook. for universities / A.A. Chernobaev, I.E. Gorelov. M.N. Zuev et al.; Ed. M.N. Zueva, A.A. Chernobaeva. – M.: Higher. school, 2001. – P. 376-422.

6. Domestic history: textbook / ed. R.V. Degtereva, S.N. Poltorak. – M.: Gardariki, 2007. – P. 313-337.

Further reading:

1. Aksyutin Yu.V., Volobuev O.V. XX Congress of the CPSU: innovations and dogmas / Yu.V. Aksyutin. – M., 1991.

2. Bezborodov A.B. Power and scientific and technical policy in the USSR in the mid-50s – mid-70s / A.B. Bezborodov. – M., 1997.

4. Boffa J. History of the Soviet Union. T. 2. From the Patriotic War to the position of the second world power. Stalin and Khrushchev. 1941-1964: Transl. from Italian / J. Boffa. – M.: International. Relations, 1990. pp. 251-545.

5. Volkogonov D.A. Seven leaders. – In 2 books / D.A. Volkogonov. – M.: JSC Publishing House “Novosti”, 1996.

6. Voslensky M.S. Nomenclature. The ruling class of the Soviet Union / M.S. Voslensky. – M.: “Soviet Russia” jointly. from MP "October", 1991.

7. Voschenkov K.P. USSR in the struggle for peace. International conferences 1944-1974 / K.P. Voschenkov. – M.: “International. relations, 1975.

8. Nikita Sergeevich Khrushchev: Materials for the biography / Comp. Yu.V. Aksyutin. – M.: Politizdat, 1989.

Topic 15. Soviet Union in 1985-1991.

1. “Perestroika” M.S. Gorbachev.

2. New foreign policy of the USSR.

Question one. In April 1985, he came to leadership of the Soviet state M.S. Gorbachev. Started era of "perestroika", the content of which was an attempt global reform of the political system while maintaining socialist path of development. The following stages should be distinguished in the implementation of “perestroika”: April 1985 - 1986, 1987 - 1989, 1990-1991. On first stage was supposed to be implemented acceleration socio-economic development through technical re-equipment of industry and the “human factor”. What did this mean? At the same time, the idea was put forward . Tell us about the foreign policy initiatives of the Soviet leadership. By the end of 1986, the country's leadership concluded that changes in the economy were impossible without deep-rooted political change. Second period begins with the January 1987 Plenum of the CPSU Central Committee, at which the need was stated democratization internal party and public life. A characteristic phenomenon of this time was the mass participation of people in the discussion political events, “rally” period. Increased social activity was largely a consequence of growing economic difficulties. In the summer of 1987 it began economic reform, prepared by L.I. Abalkin. What changes did she envision? At the same time, the political reforms. What decisions did you make in this matter? XIXparty conference? What changes were made to the Soviet political system? At this time the formation begins multi-party system. Tell us about the elections held in the country in 1989 under the new electoral law. In the second half of the 80s. there is an exacerbation national question. Which ones do you see? reasons? Under these conditions, the CPSU is increasingly losing its role as a leader of reforms, and a critical attitude is growing in society. In an effort to maintain power and stability, M.S. Gorbachev agrees to the introduction of positions in the country President of the USSR. When was he elected to this position? This event begins last stage"perestroika". After elections are held in the republics, "parade sovereignties". How did this find expression? This process took place against the backdrop of a rapidly growing economic crisis and a falling standard of living of the country's population. A mass strike movement begins. To keep the country from falling apart in the summer 1990. preparations began project new union treaty. Tell us about its main provisions. When was it supposed to be signed? Tell us about the events August 19 – 21, 1991. What were the plans of the putschists? How did these events end? What are the results of perestroika? Why did she fail?

Question two. In the mid-80s. The foreign policy of the USSR was based on the concept of “ new political thinking". Its core was the thesis about the globalization of international relations, the convergence of the interests of states with different social systems. The universal way to resolve interstate issues was proclaimed balance of interests. The main ideas of the new Soviet foreign policy were voiced at the XXVII Congress of the CPSU in 1986. Expand them. The most important component of international relations was the existence of two superpowers: the USSR and the USA. What has changed in their relationship? What agreements were reached? At the end of the 80s. The Soviet leadership took a series of major measures to reduce the USSR's military presence abroad. Tell us about it. At the same time, Soviet-Chinese relations were normalized. What do you know about this? An important condition for the successful implementation of the new foreign policy course was de-ideologization of foreign policy. What was meant by this? The key issue in relations with Western European countries For the Soviet leadership, the question of Germany arose. How was it resolved? What are the results of the new foreign policy course?

Question three. The political crisis of 1991 led to the collapse of the USSR. How did this happen? What are the reasons? When answering the last question, you should pay attention to the fact that the collapse of the USSR was caused not only by socio-economic and political processes the second half of the 80s, but also by the mistakes made during the formation of the USSR. Name them. How did education happen? CIS? Which republics were included in it? Tell us about the beginning of his activities.

Basic literature:

1. Derevyanko A.P., Shabelnikova N.A. History of Russia: textbook. allowance / A.P. Derevianko. – M.: TK Welby, Prospekt Publishing House, 2006. – P. 422-440.

2. History of Russia: modern times (1945-1999)6 Textbook for universities / Ed. A.B. Bezborodova. – M.: “Olympus”. “AST Publishing House”, 2001. – pp. 255-323.

3. History of Russia. Textbook. / A.S. Orlov, V.A. Georgiev, N.G. Georgieva, T.A. Sivokhina. – M.: TK Velby LLC, 2002. – P. 452-464.

4. History of Russia: Textbook. for universities / A.A. Chernobaev, I.E. Gorelov. M.N. Zuev et al.; Ed. M.N. Zueva, A.A. Chernobaeva. – M.: Higher. school, 2001. – P. 423-436.

5. Domestic history: textbook / ed. R.V. Degtereva, S.N. Poltorak. – M.: Gardariki, 2007. – P. 338-346.

Further reading:

1. Anisimov E.V. History of Russia from Rurik to Putin. People. Events. Dates / E.V. Anisimov. – St. Petersburg: Peter, 2007. – P. 515-523.

2. Volkogonov D.A. Seven leaders. - In 2 books. - Book 2 / D.A. Volkogonov. – M.: JSC Publishing House “Novosti”, 1996.

3. Volobuev O.V., Kuleshov S.V. Purification = History and perestroika / O.V. Volobuev. – M.: Publishing House of the News Press Agency, 1989.

4. Russia. Complete encyclopedic illustrated reference book / Author-comp. P.G. Deinichenko / Edited by A.A. Krasnovsky. – M.: OLMA-PRESS Star World, 2005. – P. 312-322.

5. Hosking J. Russia and the Russians: In 2 books. Book 2. Translated from English. / J. Hosking. – M.: AST Publishing House LLC: Transitkniga LLC, 2003. P. 340-373.

Topic 16. Formation and development of a new state –

Russian Federation

1. Formation of a new Russian statehood. Constitution of 1993

2. Russia is on the path of radical socio-economic modernization.

3. Foreign policy activities in the new geopolitical situation.

4. Culture in modern Russia.

Question one. After the collapse of the USSR and the formation of a sovereign Russian state, the priority task became the task of preventing the collapse of Russia. The “parade of sovereignties” has begun. Many subjects of the Federation delayed or stopped paying taxes to the federal budget. Illegal armed groups appeared in Chechnya, led by D. Dudayev, who dispersed the Supreme Council of the Chechen-Ingush Autonomous Republic and announced the separation of Chechnya from Russia. Under these conditions, it was necessary to take measures to preserve the new state. What was done for this? What are the main provisions of the federal agreement of March 31, 1992? Have all subjects of the Federation signed it?

At the end of 1992, a new danger emerged for the Russian state: confrontation between the legislative and executive powers. In conditions of growing socio-economic tension, the center for uniting forces dissatisfied with the progress of reforms became Supreme Council of the RSFSR(legislative branch of government). Who was its chairman? During the discussion of the draft Constitution, the conflict between the legislative and executive branches of government further intensified. The latter was represented by the President and the Government. What is the cause of the conflict? In these conditions, only the judiciary could act as an arbiter. Chairman of the Constitutional Court V.D. Zorkin proposed the “zero option.” What was its essence? How did the warring parties react to the proposals of the Chairman of the Constitutional Court? Tell us about the events October 3 – 4, 1993. On December 12, 1993, elections were held Federation Council and State Duma, was held simultaneously referendum on the draft Constitution of the Russian Federation. Tell us about the election results. Which parties won the majority of seats in the Duma? Describe the main provisions of the Russian Constitution. In 1996, elections were held in the country President of the Russian Federation. Who won this election? Political life Russia in the second half of the 90s was characterized by instability: frequent changes of governments, the struggle of financial groups for influence on the president. The campaign to remove B.N., which began at the initiative of the State Duma. Yeltsin from office ended with December 31, 1999. he announced his resignation as president. V.V. becomes president. Putin? What changes in the socio-political life of the country occurred during the eight years of his rule? How was the “Chechen issue” resolved? Give the layout of the main political forces in the country. What socio-political difficulties did the new President D.A. face? Medvedev?

Question two. In January 1992, a large-scale economic reform, the purpose of which was to create market economy. The country's national economic reform program was developed by a group of economists led by E.T. Gaidar, who headed the Russian government. The first step on this path was price release from state control for most goods and services. What did this lead to? Consequences These actions were ambiguous, on the one hand, empty store shelves disappeared, the market quickly filled with goods, on the other hand, they led to a sharp rise in prices, while wage growth lagged behind. At the end of 1992 it began privatization of state property. What is privatization? What was her goal? It should be emphasized that it was supposed to lead to the creation of a wide middle class in the country and give the state funds to provide social support to low-income people. On first stage privatization of small enterprises, mainly in the service sector, was carried out. The transition to market relations was accompanied by profound crisis in heavy industry and agriculture farm. Provide figures that demonstrate this.

Why was there a change of government in December 1992? The head of government was appointed V.S. Chernomyrdin, to whom By the beginning of 1995, it was possible to reduce the rate of inflation. Started second stage privatization. Tell us about its content and results. In 1995-1996 the economic downturn intensified. Inflation, external debt, arrears of wages, pensions and social benefits grew. The government tried to make up for the lack of funds through external loans, as well as by introducing government short-term liabilities(GKO). These measures could not change the situation, since the government had to pay huge sums to the holders of GKOs. In April 1998, the Cabinet of Ministers headed S.V. Kiriyenko, who tried to prevent a financial disaster, but failed to achieve this. August 17, 1998. A crisis broke out - the state announced that it was unable to pay GKOs and canceled the “currency corridor.” What were consequences crisis for the country and population? What is default? Government E.M. Primakova, sent their efforts to overcome the consequences of the crisis. In 1999, economic development saw positive trends, which was associated with a sharp jump in world energy prices. Give facts indicating this. However, by the end of the 90s it became clear that hopes for quickly overcoming the difficulties associated with the transition of the economy to a market economy were not justified. Describe the main economic problems of the present time. What is benefit monetization? What are its consequences? What changes have occurred in social structure Russian society? Tell us about how the “middle class” is being formed. Emphasize that the main social problem remains the existence of a large part of the population living below the poverty line.

Question three. After the collapse of the USSR, Russia found itself in a fundamentally new geopolitical position. It was surrounded by former Soviet republics, which had different attitudes towards new Russia. It was necessary to build relationships with them in a new way. Relations between Russia and the CIS countries began to be regulated by the Agreement signed by the parliaments of these states on March 27, 1992. What efforts did the Russian leadership make to develop integration processes in CIS. Compare how the relations of the Russian Federation with Belarus and Ukraine developed. Give a description of Russia's relations with the republics that were not part of CIS. Tell us about the relationship between the Russian Federation and the former socialist countries. What changes have occurred in relations between Russia and Western European countries? Reveal the problems of developing relations between Russia and the United States. Show the participation of the Russian Federation in the fight against global terrorism and aggression. What are the prospects for the development of Russia’s relations with other countries of the Eurasian world. Please note that the Russian Federation defends the concept of a multipolar world in the international arena.

Question four. The emergence of new socio-economic relations had a profound impact on the development of Russian culture. Students must understand that the new sociocultural situation is characterized by its uncertainty, complexity and inconsistency. On the one hand, economic and political freedom, cultural pluralism, abolition of censorship, freedom of creativity; on the other hand, the “market”, the commercialization of culture, its economic dependence, the criminalization of society. The only acceptable communist ideology is being replaced by a spiritual vacuum. On the one hand, there are attempts to revive Russian spirituality. Strengthening the role of the Orthodox Church in society, on the other hand, is the Americanization of Russian culture, the formation of a “market” personality, ready to be what is in demand. Hence, what tasks and problems are facing modern Russian culture? What programs of national and regional significance have been adopted in recent years? What is being done to implement them? Give examples. What new moments have appeared in artistic culture? What is being done to maintain the traditions of folk culture? Students should understand that a people exists as long as the national national culture is preserved.

Basic literature:

1. Derevyanko A.P., Shabelnikova N.A. History of Russia: textbook. allowance / A.P. Derevianko. – M.: TK Welby, Prospekt Publishing House, 2006. – P. 441-471, 534-540.

2. History of Russia: modern times (1945-1999): Textbook for universities / Ed. A.B. Bezborodova. – M.: “Olympus”. “AST Publishing House”, 2001. – pp. 324-422.

3. History of Russia. Textbook. / A.S. Orlov, V.A. Georgiev, N.G. Georgieva, T.A. Sivokhina. – M.: TK Velby LLC, 2002. – P. 465-477, 490-492.

4. History of Russia: Textbook. for universities / A.A. Chernobaev, I.E. Gorelov. M.N. Zuev et al.; Ed. M.N. Zueva, A.A. Chernobaeva. – M.: Higher. school, 2001. – P. 436-464.

5. Domestic history: textbook / ed. R.V. Degtereva, S.N. Poltorak. – M.: Gardariki, 2007. – P. 3347-361.

Further reading:

1. Anisimov E.V. History of Russia from Rurik to Putin. People. Events. Dates / E.V. Anisimov. – St. Petersburg: Peter, 2007. – P. 525-543.

2. Ozersky V.V. Rulers of Russia. From Rurik to Putin. History in portraits. / V.V. Ozersky. – Rostov n/d: Phoenix, 2004. – P. 321-340.

3. Russia. Complete encyclopedic illustrated reference book / Author-comp. P.G. Deinichenko / Edited by A.A. Krasnovsky. – M.: OLMA-PRESS Star World, 2005. – P. 322-350 .

“Every nation has the right to be proud of its history. But the history of the Russian people is unique, special, original. Our ancestors created it over thousands of years, they formed statehood, piece by piece collected the Russian character. What we inherited from past generations was achieved through the labor of millions of people, therefore We must remember with gratitude the deeds of the past, study and know the history of our Fatherland and our people.” The formation and development of the Russian centralized state is the main topic of my work today. Here, we have to understand this complex, long and labor-intensive process, get acquainted with it. the activities of many outstanding people and try not to lose sight of those important facts that served as an incentive for the unification of the Russian lands, the Russian people traveled a long way before the formation of a unified Russian state. The beginning of this path, the times of political fragmentation of the Kyiv state. As a result, new ones appeared. independent principalities, which grew and developed rapidly. Political fragmentation did not at all mean a severance of ties between Russian lands; did not lead to their complete fragmentation. This is evidenced by a single religion and church organization, a single language, the legal norms of the “Russian Truth” in force in all lands, people’s awareness of a common historical destiny. The next step was the struggle of the Russian lands and principalities with the Mongol conquest and the crusaders. The overthrow of the Golden Horde yoke began in the 13th century. - The 15th century was the main national task. The restoration of the country’s economy and its further development created the preconditions for the unification of the Russian lands. The question of which center the Russian lands would unite around was decided, and here the process of centralization of the state was completed. describes what our country had to face before becoming a single, independent state only after the Moscow boyars and the church finally sided with Vasily II. feudal war ended in victory for the forces of centralization. By the end of the principality of Vasily II, the possessions of the Moscow principality increased 30 times compared to the beginning of the 16th century. The Moscow Principality included Murom, Nizhny Novgorod and a number of lands on the outskirts of Rus'. The strength of the Grand Ducal power is evidenced by the refusal of Vasily II to accept the union between the Catholic and Orthodox churches under the leadership of the pope. The choice of the head of the Russian Church is determined in Moscow. The process of formation of the Russian state with its capital in Moscow became irreversible. The annexation of the Novgorod, Vyatka and Perm lands with the non-Russian peoples of the north and north-east living here to Moscow expanded the multinational composition of the Russian state. The princes in the annexed lands became boyars of the Moscow sovereign. These principalities were now called counties. were governed by governors from Moscow. After the annexation of Tver, Ivan III received the honorary title “By the grace of God, the sovereign, All Rus', Grand Duke of Vladimir and Moscow, Novgorod and Pskov and Tver and Ugra and Perm and Bulgaria and other lands.” Under him, the term “Russia” began to be used in relation to our state, and the double-headed eagle became the coat of arms of our country. Vasily III continued his father's work. Son of Ivan III and Sophia Paleologus - nieces of the last Byzantine emperor. He began the fight for the abolition of the appanage system and behaved like an autocrat. In 1521, the Ryazan land, which was already dependent on Moscow, became part of Russia. Thus, the process of unification of the north-eastern and north-western Rus' in one state was completed. The largest power in Europe was formed, which from the end of the 15th century began to be called Russia. A huge burden was lifted from the shoulders of our country by the liberation from the Mongol - the Tatar invasion and the fall of the Golden Horde. The unification of principalities and lands of the period of fragmentation took place in the most developed countries of Western Europe in connection with the growth of material production due to the development of commodity-money relations and destruction subsistence farming as the basis of the economy. This, in turn, allowed the city and craft to develop quickly. There are also peculiarities in the formation of the Russian state, the process of creation of which chronically coincides with many Western European countries. The Mongol-Tatar invasion and the Golden Horde yoke slowed down the socio-economic development of Russian lands. In contrast to the advanced countries of Western Europe, the formation of a single state in Russia took place under the complete dominance of the traditional method of economy of Russia - on a feudal basis. This allows us to understand why a bourgeois, democratic, civil society, and in Russia serfdom, class, and inequality of citizens before the laws will dominate for a long time. The word "sovereign" in Russian comes from the Old Russian "sovereign" (the so-called prince-ruler in ancient Rus'). A state is a special organization of society, united by common social and cultural interests, occupying a certain territory, having its own management system, security system and possessing internal and external sovereignty. “The state is a machine for the oppression of one class by another, a machine for keeping other subordinate classes in obedience to one class.” "The state is the embodiment of law in society." The following theories of the origin of the state are distinguished: theological theory, patriarchal theory, social contract theory, theory of violence, materialist (Marxist) theory, psychological theory, racial theory Gunter, organic theory, irrigation theory, complex theory of the origin of the state J.M. Klassen, crisis theory of A.B. Vengerov, etc. The initial factor in the emergence of the state should be sought in the immediate political force. In his opinion, property, classes and the state arise as a result of violence of one part of society over another. As for the characteristics of a state, summarizing the above, we can say that the state is characterized by the following characteristics:

Based on the above characteristics, a definition of the state can be given. “The state is an organization of sovereign political power, acting in relation to the entire population on the territory assigned to it, using the right of a special coercive apparatus.”

In conclusion, I would like to note that in addition to the above-mentioned features, there are formal attributes and symbols of the state. The latter include the coat of arms, flag, anthem, and capital. As the historical practice of many states, including the Russian state, shows, attributes are mobile and changeable. This happens due to various reasons and circumstances, ideological, ideological, political, religious, national, military, etc. Attributes and symbols, of course, help to more fully and subtly comprehend the state, its intentions, preferences, and help build a detailed image of the state as a whole. Therefore, according to this definition and the above-mentioned signs and concepts, we can say with confidence that by the XIII - XVI centuries. a unified Russian state emerged.

The period of feudal fragmentation and invasion of enemies lasted until the 14th century. At the end of the 14th century, a powerful unified state with its center in Moscow was formed from many lands and principalities.

The main factors for the unification of the Russian lands were: economic development, revitalization of cities, strengthening economic ties between individual regions, the boyars were interested in strong centralized power that would help them cope with the peasantry, and the peasantry itself needed strong power to protect them from the feudal lords, the princes sought to strengthen its power, the Orthodox Church sought centralized power in order to strengthen itself.

It is necessary to clearly imagine the stages of the formation of a unified Russian state. The founder of the dynasty of Moscow princes was the youngest son of Alexander Nevsky, Daniil Alexandrovich (1276–1294). Under Ivan Kalita (1328–1340), the Moscow principality expanded, Moscow became not only the political center of the Russian lands, but also a religious one, the metropolitan head moved here Russian Church. It must be recalled that the Russian Church became independent from Constantinople already during the time of Yaroslav the Wise (1019–1054).

Moscow was finally transformed into the largest city of Rus' under the Moscow prince Dmitry Donskoy (1362–1389).

Ivan III Vasilyevich (1462–1505) played an important role in the process of creating a unified Russian state. During his unification policy, the territory of the state grew 5–6 times. Under him, the Golden Horde yoke finally fell (1480). It is necessary to pay attention to the fact that the fall of the Horde yoke was prepared by a long process of strengthening the Moscow principality and weakening the Horde. From that time on, Ivan III began to call himself “Sovereign of All Rus'.”

The second wife of Ivan III in 1472 was the Byzantine princess Zoya (Sophia) Paleologus. This marriage contributed to increasing the international prestige of the Grand Duke of Moscow and his descendants.

By this time (1453), Byzantium as a center of Orthodoxy had ceased to exist. Moscow State was the only one among the Orthodox who was independent. Ivan III, occasionally calling himself Tsar, showed that the rights of the fallen Byzantine house were transferred to Moscow as to the new Constantinople. Initially, Byzantine rulers styled themselves with this title - king. Ivan III did not accept the royal title, because after 1480 he considered himself no weaker than any European ruler. A royal title would place him below the emperor and the pope. The title of Tsar was officially legitimized in 1547 by Ivan the Terrible, and it was with him that the dynasty of Moscow Tsars began. Since the institution of abdication was not formed in Russia, the Russian tsars occupied the throne until the end of their lives.

From the end of the 15th century, on Moscow grand-ducal seals, along with a horseman slaying a serpent, a Byzantine double-headed eagle appeared - the coat of arms of the Byzantine rulers. The symbols of the highest royal power were the Monomakh cap, barmas, orb, and scepter. According to legend, Monomakh's hat and barmas were allegedly received by Vladimir Monomakh as a gift from the Byzantine ruler Constantine Monomakh. All the great Moscow princes were crowned with the Monomakh cap. For the first time, Ivan the Terrible was crowned on the royal throne with the Monomakh cap. This tradition continued until 1721, when the importance of the coronation crown passed to the imperial crown.

Since 1492, in the Moscow state, the new year began to be counted from September 1, as in Byzantium; before that, the new year began on March 1.

The customs of the Moscow court have changed. Under the influence of Zoya Paleolog, a complex court ceremony was formed, emphasizing the high status of the Grand Duke, compared to the boyars.

At the beginning of the 16th century. a political theory about “Moscow – the third Rome” arises. This theory substantiated the historical significance of the capital of the Russian state, Moscow, as a political and church center. By this time, Russia was the only independent Orthodox state, and the Russian Church was the largest and most influential among the Orthodox churches.

The process of uniting Russian lands into a single state was similar to the same process in Europe. But unlike Europe, where feudal relations were gradually being eliminated, in Russia they became increasingly cruel. The nature of power gradually changed. It became unlimited, i.e. autocratic, despotic. The lecture will examine this issue in detail and show the trends that gave rise to this process.

The Mongol conquest turned out to be a great shock. One of the consequences was the enormous concentration of power in the hands of the head of state. If in Kievan Rus the princes, even the most powerful, were very dependent on the squad, then already in the 14th century the position of the Moscow sovereigns was completely special. The power of the ruler becomes unquestionable, and, starting from the reign of Ivan III, a terrible process of cultivating not just anyone, but the ruling class itself, including the highest aristocracy, has been going on.

The ruling class is completely deprived of political rights (under Ivan IV).

The term “state” itself was first used in the Moscow Chronicle in the late 90s of the 15th century. A state is a territory and a political body subordinate to the sovereign. In Rus' at that time, the concept of “sovereign” had two meanings. It denoted the owner of slaves (i.e. people who are legally completely powerless) and the head of state. In the future, this political body, headed by the sovereign, will become a community of completely powerless individuals, “the sovereign’s servants.”

A new system of public administration has been formed. The head of the Russian state was the Grand Duke, later the Tsar. The power of the Rurikovichs was inherited in two ways: horizontally - to the eldest in the family, and vertically - from father to son. In the 15th century, the second method of inheritance was finally established. Below were the appanage princes-brothers and nephews of the Grand Duke. Below the appanage princes were the service princes - formerly independent sovereigns who transferred to the service of the Moscow Grand Duke. Later, serving princes became ordinary patrimonial owners with princely titles. Throughout the 15th century. many princes entered the Boyar Duma - an advisory body under the prince and tsar. In a narrow sense, the word “boyar” means a member of the Boyar Duma and their at the end of the 15th century. there were just over ten. IN in a broad sense The term “boyars” means a set of ancient Moscow service families that did not have princely titles. This issue will be discussed in detail during the seminar.

In the system of general government until the middle of the 16th century. included, in addition to the Boyar Duma, the Sovereign Palace and the Sovereign Treasury. In the middle of the 16th century. Orders appear. In 1497, the first set of laws of a unified state, the Code of Laws, appeared.

The basis of local government was the feeding system. The country was divided into counties and volosts. The district was ruled by a governor, the volost - by the volost. They did not receive a salary for their managerial and judicial activities, which was only an addition to the main thing - the right to receive food, i.e. collect part of taxes and court fees for your benefit. Feeding was given as a reward for previous service. Initially, the feeding system contributed to the unification of the Russian state. Service people were interested in expanding the possessions of Moscow, since this increased the number of feedings. But this system had flaws and was later replaced.

In the 15th century, the country's population was 3 million people, estates were formed - groups of the population that had certain rights and responsibilities, which were enshrined in laws (the estate system in Russia remained until 1917). In the 16th century, the nobility - a privileged, influential class - became the support of the Moscow ruler. Ivan III was the first creator of the Russian nobility; he relied on the Moscow cavalry army - landowners who received lands seized from former appanage princes. The large, overwhelming part of the “state-owned” agricultural land was divided up and distributed for exploitation to “the servants of the Grand Duke of Moscow.” The lecture will describe in detail the stages of formation of this population group.

In the 14th century the term “peasants” appeared. This term was applied to farmers and apparently to all “common people”, urban and rural. And only in the 17th century did peasants begin to be called peasants in the modern sense of the word. In the 15th century, some peasants began to be called “old residents.” These peasants cultivated the same plot for many years and were tied to the established strong economy and could not leave this economy. For the feudal lord, this group of peasants was the most economically important. Farmers who lived in private feudal estates were exempted from part of state duties; as they said then, they were “whitewashed.”

Some peasants lived on state lands and were called “black”, later “chernososhny”.

From the end of the 15th century. The Russian state began to be called Russia.

In conclusion, it should be noted that the process of unification of Russian lands was complex; favorable conditions were created for the socio-economic development of the country, but it is also necessary to highlight the negative aspects of this process, which later led to the strengthening of despotism. This will be discussed in detail in the lecture.

The rise of the Russian autocracy

With the formation of a centralized state, a system of supreme power takes shape (practically and ideologically) - autocracy. Autocracy is a monarchical form of government in Russia, when the bearer of supreme power - the tsar, the emperor - had the supreme right in legislation (approval of bills), in administration (appointment and dismissal of senior officials), supreme leadership of central and local institutions and governing bodies, high command army and navy, financial management, etc., in the highest court (confirmation of sentences, pardon). In the history of autocracy, two stages can be traced: in the 16th–17th centuries. the monarch exercised his rights together with the Boyar Duma and the boyar aristocracy; in the XVIII – early XX centuries. absolute monarchy was established. The Manifesto of October 17, 1905 limited the tsarist power and introduced the State Duma. In this form, the autocracy lasted until March 2, 1917, until the abdication of the last Emperor Nicholas II.

The development of feudal land ownership and economy created by the second half of the 15th century. necessary material and social prerequisites for strengthening Moscow. In the second half of the 15th - first third of the 16th centuries. The unification of Russian lands around Moscow is completed. This process occurs during the reigns of Ivan III (1462-1505) and Vasily III (1505-1533).

Ivan III Vasilyevich, who reigned for more than 40 years, is one of the key figures in Russian history. He was the first to accept the title of “Sovereign of All Rus',” which meant supreme dominion over the Russian lands. A new red brick Kremlin was erected in the center of Moscow, which over time became a symbol of the greatness of the Russian state. During the years of his reign, Ivan managed to increase the territory of the Moscow principality approximately six times and leave the Moscow state to his heirs at the zenith of glory.

With great success, Ivan III unified the northeastern lands of Rus' under his rule. He proved himself to be a cautious politician, skillfully combining political, diplomatic and military means, avoiding unnecessary bloodshed. The princes and boyars of the annexed lands generally willingly transferred to Moscow's service and did not put up serious resistance. In 1485, the Tver boyars took an oath to him, and Tver, surrounded by Moscow lands, finally passed to Moscow. The Moscow principality became an all-Russian principality.

The Novgorod Boyar Republic, which had considerable power, remained independent of the power of the Moscow prince. Back in 1410 in Novgorod, as a result of the posadnik reform, the veche system lost its significance, and the oligarchic power of the boyars increased. In the middle of the century, the boyars, led by the mayor Martha Boretskaya, focused on Lithuania, fearing the loss of their privileges in the event of subordination to Moscow. Ordinary Novgorodians, on the contrary, stood on the side of Moscow, which predetermined the final annexation in 1478 of Novgorod, which had suffered back in 1471 defeat from the Moscow army on the river. Sheloni. Moscow governors began to govern the city. The symbol of independence of the Novgorod Republic - the veche bell - was transported to Moscow, but the Novgorodians were granted some privileges, including the right to foreign relations with Sweden. Strengthening the position of Rus' on the borders with the lands of the Livonian Order, Ivan III founded the Ivangorod fortress on the Baltic coast near Narva, which belonged to the order, and obtained confirmation from the order of the payment of the “Yuriev tribute” for Yuryev of Livonsky.

In relation to the Horde, Ivan III began to behave as an independent sovereign and stopped paying tribute. In 1480, the Golden Horde yoke, which had weighed on Russia for more than two centuries, finally collapsed. Russian troops met with the army of Khan Akhmat against each other on the banks of the river. Ugra, left tributary of the Oka. Akhmat's ally was the Polish king and Grand Duke of Lithuania Casimir IV, but he did not help the khan. The Moscow prince attracted the Crimean Khan Mengli-Girey to his side, whose troops attacked Casimir’s regiments. After standing for several weeks, Akhmat did not dare to join the battle, turned back and went to the Volga steppes. The famous “Great Stand” on the Ugra, which determined the future fate of the Russian people, meant the liberation of Rus' from under the hated yoke.

Starting from the 13th century, the fate of the Western Russian principalities under the conditions of the offensive of their western neighbors - the Teutonic and Livonian German Erdens, on the one hand, and the Mongol troops, on the other, developed differently than that of the northeastern and northwestern lands. The threatening danger forced them to look for allies. The Grand Duchy of Lithuania, whose creator was the Lithuanian prince Mindovg, became such an ally. In the XIV century. pagan Lithuania united with the Orthodox Western Russian lands under the rule of Prince Gediminas. As a result, the Novogrudok land, known as “Black Rus'” (now Western Belarus), Polotsk, Vitebsk, Minsk and other Russian principalities joined Lithuania. In fact, almost the entire territory of present-day Belarus came under the rule of Gediminas. The capital of the new Lithuanian-Russian state at the beginning of the 14th century. became the city of Vilna (modern Vilnius).

Russian cultural influence prevailed in it over Lithuanian: at court and in official office work the Russian language dominated for a long time, Gediminas himself and his sons were married to Russian princesses. In correspondence with foreign courts, the rulers of the Lithuanian principality were called “kings of Lithuania and Rus'.” The higher level of development of feudal relations, characteristic of the Slavic lands, and the traditions of Orthodox culture allowed them not only to fully preserve their originality, but also to have a very significant influence on the structure of native Lithuania.

Under Olgerd and other descendants of Gediminas, the Kyiv princes recognized the supreme power of the Lithuanian prince, and the Volyn, Podolsk, Pereyaslavl, Chernigov and Seversk lands submitted to them in order to get rid of the power of the Mongols. The Principality of Smolensk also recognized itself as a vassal of the Lithuanian sovereign in the fight against the Horde Khan. Thus, it was a state in which most of the territory and population were Russian, and many lands were ruled by the former Rurik princes. The forms of dependence of the Western Russian principalities on Lithuania provided representatives of the old princely dynasties with significant internal autonomy and the inviolability of the socio-economic and political institutions that had developed in the previous period.

However, in the 80s. XIV century The situation has changed radically: Poland is trying to persuade Lithuania to conclude a Polish-Lithuanian union under the auspices of Catholicism, which would mean the incorporation of the vast Grand Duchy of Lithuania into the Kingdom of Poland and the destruction of its identity. Poland's plans initially provoked strong resistance from the Lithuanian princes and boyars, led by Prince Vytautas. Later, at the turn of the 14th-15th centuries, the Smolensk and Vyazemsky principalities were annexed to Lithuania. Thus, the Grand Duchy of Lithuania included northwestern and almost all southwestern Rus', as well as the western part of Great Russia (Smolensk and neighboring lands).

The Lithuanian prince Jagiello entered into an agreement with the Polish magnates, promising to baptize Lithuania into Catholicism and annex it to the possessions of the Polish crown. The adoption of Catholicism affected only pagan Lithuanians, the Orthodox Church retained its privileges, but Lithuania “turned its face” to the West, to Catholic Europe. After the conclusion of the union of the Grand Duchy of Lithuania and Poland in 1387, Polish norms of state and administrative structure began to penetrate the Lithuanian and Western Russian lands. Gradually Polish and Polish cultural influence began to prevail among the Lithuanian aristocracy, the Lithuanian nobility, subject to the adoption of the Catholic faith, received all the privileges and political rights enjoyed by its Polish neighbors.

The policy of the Polish crown in Lithuania, meanwhile, contributed in every possible way to reducing the power of the Grand Duke, which was recognized as elected and not hereditary. Thus, only those who were pleasing to the feudal nobility could occupy the grand-ducal throne. In the absence of a strong monarchical power, the Lithuanian-Russian state had the character of a federation of regions and lands that retained their autonomy and were united only by the supreme power of the Grand Duke of Lithuania. The socio-political system of the Grand Duchy of Lithuania, in contrast to the Moscow state, had all the characteristic features of Western European medieval feudalism: fragmentation of political power between landowners, hierarchical ladder vassals with a suzerain (grand duke) at the top and a system of private citizenship.

Within the Russian feudal aristocracy, national-religious hostility began between supporters of Polonization and those who remained devoted to their faith and nationality. From the middle of the 15th century. Lithuania's influence in Eastern Europe began to weaken, and it moved from a policy of attack to a policy of defense, which coincides with the successes of Moscow's unification policy. The confrontation between Lithuania and Moscow gradually acquired not only a political, but also a religious character. Since the late 80s. XV century The rulers of the Verkhneoksky principalities came under the rule of the Grand Duke of Moscow one after another, among whom were the princes Odoevsky, Vorotynsky, Trubetskoy and others with their lands. Since 1500, the Chernigov and Novgorod-Seversk lands, and behind them many more cities, have been part of the Moscow state.

The son of Ivan III and the Byzantine princess Sophia, Paleologus Vasily III, continued the unification of Russian lands: in 1510 Pskov was annexed, and in 1514 - Smolensk, conquered from Lithuania. In honor of this event, the Novodevichy Convent was built in Moscow, the central cathedral of which is Smolensky. In 1521, the Ryazan land, which was already dependent on Moscow, became part of the Russian state. This completed the process of uniting northeastern and northwestern Rus' in one state. The largest power in Europe was formed, which from the middle of the 16th century. began to be called Russia.

The Russian lands brought together under the rule of Moscow retained the remnants of the former feudal fragmentation. There were no economic ties between them. It was necessary to create an apparatus for unified state administration of the country, central and local. The political system of the Russian state at the turn of the XV-XVI centuries. began to develop towards centralization. The princes in the annexed appanage principalities became boyars of the Moscow sovereign. This process was called the “boyarization” of the princes who became subjects of the “Sovereign of All Rus'.” The nature of princely land ownership changed, which became more and more similar to ordinary boyar estates. If previously large feudal lords served their princes by voluntary agreement and could move from one prince to another, now this ancient feudal right of “departure” was abolished and began to be regarded as high treason.

The former appanage principalities, which became known as counties, were liquidated. They were governed by governors appointed from Moscow. These governors were called “feeder boyars”, since for managing the districts they received food - part of the tax from the population in favor of the Grand Duke. This control system is usually called a feeding system.

The feudal aristocracy gained access to government through the order of localism - the right to occupy a particular position depending on the nobility or length of service at the court of the Moscow prince. The highest state body with advisory functions became the Boyar Duma, which consisted of boyars and okolnichy - the two highest ranks in the state, appointed from aristocratic families, as well as Duma nobles and later Duma clerks. The national executive authorities were the Palace, which administered the lands of the Grand Duke, and the Treasury, which managed finances, the state archive and the press.

In 1497, a new, all-Russian code of laws of a single state was adopted - the Code of Laws of Ivan III. His 68 articles were aimed at strengthening the role central government in the state structure and legal proceedings of the country. Article 57 of the Code of Law limited the right of peasants to transfer from one feudal lord to another to a single period of the year - St. George's Day in the autumn - November 26, old style (as well as the week before and the week after it), when the harvest was harvested and all duties were paid. The peasant had to pay compensation to the previous owner for the loss of workers - the so-called elderly. This was the first step towards the establishment of serfdom.

Simultaneously with the strengthening of the grand ducal power and the emergence of a centralized administrative apparatus, the ideological and political rise of this power took place. After the fall of Byzantium, not a single independent Orthodox state remained except Moscow. The marriage of Ivan III with Sophia Palaeologus, the niece of the last Byzantine emperor, had important consequences for the rise of autocratic power in Moscow: the Grand Duke of Moscow became, as it were, the successor of the Byzantine emperor, the only Orthodox and independent sovereign remaining in the world.

At the court of Ivan III, a magnificent and solemn ceremony took place according to the Byzantine model. He himself rises to an unattainable height above his subjects and takes the title “By the grace of God, Sovereign of All Rus',” “autocrat” (from the Byzantine imperial title autocrator, which originally meant independent, not subordinate to the external authority of the sovereign). At the beginning of the 16th century. Moscow scribes in “The Tale of the Princes of Vladimir” say that the Monomakh cap, the grand ducal crown, now kept in the Armory Chamber of the Moscow Kremlin, was sent for a wedding to the Kiev throne by Emperor Constantine Monomakh to his grandson Vladimir Monomakh, from whom the Moscow sovereigns descend. Together with other symbols of power - the scepter and the orb - the Monomakh cap became an integral attribute of the coronation of Russian sovereigns. The emblem of the state was a double-headed eagle, borrowed from Byzantium, which symbolized the unification of West and East under the auspices of imperial power.

Under Vasily III, the grand ducal power strengthened even more. He began the fight for the abolition of inheritances. Since Vasily himself did not have an heir for a long time, he apparently forbade his brothers to marry for fear of the throne passing to other lines of the grand ducal family. At the turn of the XV-XVI centuries. a theory arises that Moscow, as the heir of Constantinople, the “second Rome,” is the “third Rome,” the capital of the entire Orthodox world. This theory found especially vivid expression in the letters of the monk of one of the Pskov monasteries, Philotheus. Objectively, it contributed to an even greater exaltation of the power of the Moscow sovereigns.

After the fall of the Horde yoke, the Moscow state rebuilt its relations with the outside world, starting with collecting information about foreign countries and compiling genealogies of “versts” of all ruling dynasties, up to the development of a new diplomatic etiquette. In this matter, the Moscow government deliberately abandoned mechanical copying of Byzantine and Western European models.

The reception of the ambassadors was arranged with extreme pomp, many tricks protected the honor of the sovereign from “ruin” (humiliation), those who arrived were forced to dismount (get off their horses) and bare their heads as early as possible when approaching the newly built Faceted Chamber (1487-1491) of the Moscow Kremlin, where these receptions took place. It doesn’t matter that often the clothes of the courtiers could be borrowed from the Kremlin storeroom, but the sovereign met the ambassadors sitting on the throne, extended his hand, previously washed in a gilded vessel, for a kiss, and four “rynds” (bodyguards) in white clothes stood motionless behind him, with ridge berdysh on their shoulders, coming from the most noble families. The Russian ambassadors, in turn, began to refuse to obey the traditional etiquette in the East. Thus, the ambassador to Turkey A. A. Pleshcheev greeted the Sultan not on his knees, but limited himself to a deep bow, and G. Vasilchikov did not kiss the foot of the Persian Shah.

Relations between the Moscow state and Europe, interrupted by the Mongol yoke, began to be restored. Not only Europeans came to Rus', but also people from Byzantium, conquered by the Turks, and Moscow became the center of a lively cultural dialogue between East and West. The concept of “Moscow - the third Rome” required external expression, in particular in the decoration of Moscow as the capital city of world Orthodoxy. The new Moscow Kremlin (architect Pietro Antonio Solari) captured the imagination of foreigners: its architecture had no analogues in world culture - it was not Gothic, not Byzantine or Muslim.

18 majestic towers (later there were 20) were crowned by grandiose fortress walls made of red brick, capable of withstanding the strongest enemy onslaught. Indeed, the Kremlin was never taken by storm. Now, on the Red Square side, the central one is the Spasskaya Tower with its chimes (from the French courant - running, current), the main entrance to the Kremlin for government and diplomatic officials. The entrance to the Kremlin is open to the general public from the side of the current Alexander Garden (Manezhnaya Square), through the Kutafya Tower and the Trinity Gate. Each of the 20 towers has its own name, history and original architecture. In 1937 they were topped with ruby ​​five-pointed stars.

Italian masters were considered the most skillful architects of the Renaissance, and they were invited to build the ensemble of the new Moscow Kremlin. In the center of the composition is Cathedral Square, the oldest in modern Moscow, overlooked by the main cathedrals. Since the 14th century she witnessed the most important events in the history of Russia and ceremonies. The five-domed Assumption Cathedral was the constant site of coronation throughout the era of autocracy, from Ivan the Terrible to Nicholas II. Even when the official capital was moved to St. Petersburg, Moscow remained the second, unofficial capital. Here the sacrament of crowning the kingdom took place, a sacred and unique action, in which all those present simultaneously became participants and spectators: after all, each time the only chosen one, “God’s anointed,” opened a new page in the life of the state.

According to the plan of Ivan III, the Assumption Cathedral in the Kremlin was built in 1475-1479. modeled on the Assumption Cathedral in Vladimir, traditionally dedicated to the patroness and intercessor of the Mother of God, but surpassed the Vladimir one in scale of execution. Pskov craftsmen, under the leadership of the Italian Aristotle Fioravanti from Bologna, created a white-stone masterpiece with perfect proportions, combining the best traditions of Russian monumental architecture with advanced execution techniques.

The Annunciation Cathedral, the home church of the Moscow sovereigns, was built in 1481 -1489. as a three-domed one, but under Ivan the Terrible it was rebuilt into a nine-domed one and decorated with an additional entrance for the tsar himself, who was considered a sinner due to violation of marriage norms of church law. The Archangel Cathedral, the tomb of the Moscow Grand Dukes, was built under the leadership of the Venetian Aleviz Novy, who introduced elements of a secular palazzo (palace) and the classical order system into the ancient Russian architectural tradition.

The process of transformation of the ancient Russian painting tradition from the Byzantine one found expression in the works of artists of the 14th-16th centuries. - Theophanes the Greek, Andrei Rublev, Dionysius. Theophanes the Greek, who came from Byzantium, worked in Novgorod and Moscow. Among the works that have come down to us, we should name his fresco paintings of the Novgorod Church of the Savior on Ilyin Street (XIV century). The annexation of Novgorod to Moscow then contributed to the interpenetration and mutual enrichment of traditions and principles of painting in the northeastern and northwestern Russian lands. Local art schools are merging into an all-Russian one.

Even at the turn of the XIV-XV centuries. its pinnacle was the work of Andrei Rublev. The perfect images of his “Trinity” (the original is kept in the Tretyakov Gallery), frescoes of the Assumption Cathedral in Vladimir, icons of the Trinity Cathedral in Sergiev Posad and the Annunciation Cathedral in the Kremlin are recognized as one of the pinnacles of world art. At the end of the 15th - beginning of the 16th century. The ancient Russian painting tradition is completed in the work of Dionysius, as exemplified by the fresco paintings of the Nativity Cathedral of the Ferapontov Monastery near Vologda.

During the formation of a unified Russian state with its center in Moscow, the role of chronicle writing increased. The first chronicle records began to be kept in Moscow in 1325, and in 1408 an all-Russian chronicle- Trinity Chronicle (the manuscript was lost in a fire in Moscow in 1812). During the reign of Ivan III, chronicle writing became increasingly subordinate to the interests of the strengthening autocracy. The Moscow chronicle, the creation of which dates back to 1479, emphasized the role of Moscow in the unification of all Russian lands.

Thus, by the first third of the 16th century. An autocratic monarchy was established in Russia, in which all political power belonged to the Grand Duke. Only the Grand Duke had the right to appoint to the highest government positions, determined the directions of domestic and foreign policy, all laws and orders were issued in his name, and benefits were distributed. In addition to the legislative and executive powers, the Grand Duke represented the highest judicial authority. This expressed the undivided nature of supreme power. Restrictive immunity policy (i.e., limiting the judicial and tax independence of feudal lords) reduced the limits of feudal separatism. At the same time, the political system was class monarchy, when former appanage princes and the Boyar Duma as a body of the feudal aristocracy were attracted to participate in governance. The capabilities of the central government were also limited by the absence of local government bodies, i.e. lack of a national government apparatus.

The Russian Orthodox Church was a major feudal institution and an influential social force. She owned huge land holdings. Higher church hierarchs played a large role in resolving political issues. Having brought from Byzantium the idea of ​​divinely established royal power, the highest clergy contributed in every possible way to strengthening the autocracy. Having become independent after the fall of Constantinople, the Russian metropolitans actually became dependent on the Grand Duke, since they were elected by a council of bishops at the request of the Grand Duke. But the economic power of the church strengthened its claims to a position independent of secular power.

Since land remained the main means of production, the issue of land ownership was decisive in the state. The paradox was that the territory of the state increased, but the issue of land remained acute. One of the ways to solve it could be the confiscation of church lands and their transfer into the hands of the state.

IN last decades XV century Church peace was disrupted by the appearance of the “Judaizers” heresy in Novgorod. At one time, heresy even captured part of the higher clergy. Heretics denied the Christian dogma of the trinity of deity, the church hierarchy, the power of priests, icons and rituals, which outwardly coincided with the demands of the Reformation that began in Europe. Along with this, they opposed church land ownership, which for some time won over Ivan III himself, who needed to distribute land grants to supporters of the Moscow government by limiting the immunity privileges of the church.

There was also no unity within the church itself. Militant churchmen, led by the influential abbot of the Volokolamsk monastery near Moscow, Joseph Volotsky, condemned the heretics. Joseph's supporters, the Josephites, or money-grubbers, defended the right of the church to own land and peasants. Their opponents, led by the ascetic monk Nil Sorsky (named after the monastery he founded on the Sor River in the Vologda land) also condemned the heretics. The non-acquisitives, or Soreans, objected to the accumulation of wealth and land holdings of the church. Both of them claimed a position in the state independent of secular power. The thesis put forward by the Josephites about the “sacred (divine) origin” of the sovereign’s power, which proclaimed the autocrat the king of the earth, won Ivan III over to their side. Joseph Volotsky wrote in his teachings: “For the king is similar in nature to all people, but in power he is similar to the Most High God.” Thus, the government entered into an alliance with the church in the person of the Josephite elite, but it was a temporary alliance, since a strong contradiction over the land remained between them. Church and monastic land ownership was preserved. The heresy was suppressed and the heretics executed.

The formation of a unified Russian state became a major event in world history. On the site of fragmented lands and principalities, the largest state in Europe arose. The formation of the Great Russian nationality took place on its territory. The formation of a unified Russian state had its own characteristics: it took place on a feudal basis in the absence of economic unity. Trade was based on the natural-geographical division of labor and the surpluses of the subsistence economy. Russian cities failed to achieve political independence from the central government, as was the case in Western Europe, where “the air of the city made a person free.” They remained typical feudal centers.

Foreigners who came to Rus' were amazed by the appearance of Russian cities with many gardens, vegetable gardens, pastures, and low prices for agricultural products. Moscow was larger in territory than the largest city of that era - London, but this did not indicate its high economic development. Rather, it spoke of the low cost of land and the desire of the Russian nobility to own, in addition to their patrimony, an estate in the capital closer to the royal court. All of Moscow and its suburbs belonged to the great princes, and then to the tsars, who distributed lands both in Moscow itself and around it, in the form of rewards to their fellow boyars for their merits. Ivan III bestowed Moscow lands on more than 1,000 people from his entourage, and granted 28 selected boyars more than 300 thousand acres of land in the Moscow vicinity.

The development of large-scale production was only within the power of the treasury, which took upon itself to meet the needs of the military department in the conditions of a constant struggle against external danger. Thus, the most important branches of craft that could “capitalize” production were withdrawn from the sphere of free competition and subordinated to the treasury and state monopoly: metallurgy, weapons and textiles, and salt making. The merchant class, weakly connected with commodity production, sought to invest the accumulated money not in the development of crafts and manufacturing, but in the purchase of land, i.e. socially, they strived to become landowners. It focused mainly on the external, rather than internal trade, the income of merchants often went to stockpiling treasures or usury. Thus, merchant capital did not revolutionize production, but preserved feudal relations.

By the middle of the 16th century. Russia's population was approximately 9-10 million people. The Center and Novgorod-Pskov land were relatively densely populated. The population density here was 5 people per square meter. km, while in Western Europe it reached 10-30 people per square meter. km. Average density The population in Russia was approximately 2 people per square meter. km, while for the normal functioning of a three-field farming system, 15-35 people per square meter were required. km. Thus, the concentration of the population in Russia was insufficient for intensive farming; it was extensive in nature. Feudal relations continued to develop.

The internal unity of the Russian state was not strong due to the underdevelopment of economic ties and the dominance of subsistence farming. The preservation of the remnants of autonomy of the former appanages was manifested in issues of land ownership, court, administration and monetary circulation, which undermined the stability of the central government.

The first wife of Vasily III was Solomonia Saburova, who came from an old boyar family devoted to the power of the Moscow princes, but their twenty-year marriage remained childless. In anticipation of an heir, the Grand Duke forbade his brothers to marry so that his nephews would not compete with his future son. In the end, Vasily decided to divorce, and Solomonia was tonsured a nun. The second wife of the Grand Duke was Elena Glinskaya. The long-awaited birth into the family of the heir to the throne, Ivan Vasilyevich, became a triumph for supporters of autocracy and was marked by the construction of the famous Church of the Ascension in the village of Kolomenskoye.