Internal Nicholas 1. The fight against revolutionaries within the country

Nicholas I was a cautious and prudent person, so he did not make drastic changes in domestic policy Russian Empire. One of the main aspects of his government's activities was the codification Russian legislation, carried out for the first time in Russian history by M.M. Speransky. The most important problem under Nicholas I remained the peasant question, which was never finally resolved under the emperor. Some reforms were carried out, first in relation to state peasants, and then to landowners, but comprehensive solution the problem was not achieved. You will learn more about all this in this lesson.

Having ascended the throne, NicholasIrealized that the Russian Empire needed reforms. However, instead of drastic changes, Nikolai, a cautious man, preferred to first achieve stability in the state and the stability of Russian laws.

The emperor was well aware of the problem of the peasant question, but during his reign he did not find an opportunity to resolve this issue to the end. Nikolai, unlike his predecessor, tried to solve not only global national problems, but also delved into problems at a lower level. He wanted to control all matters taking place in the Russian state. For this the monarch significantly expanded the powers of his own Chancellery. After this, the Chancellery began to control the activities of ministries and other departments, effectively becoming the most important institution in the Russian Empire.

In 1826, by decree of NicholasIThe Second Division of the Chancellery was created. Its leader was M.M. Speransky (Fig. 2), whose exile actually ended in 1816, and in 1821 he returned to St. Petersburg. The task of the Second Department was codification, that is, streamlining of Russian legislation. This work was very necessary, since Russian legislation at the time of the reign of Nicholas I had a huge number of laws dating back to the 1500s. Which of them are valid and which are not was a very important question in the territories of parts of the Russian Empire. Attempts to codify Russian legislation have been made before, but without success. MM. Speransky accomplished in just 5 years grandiose project- in 1832, the “Complete Collection of Laws of the Russian Empire” was published, and a year later, in 1833, the “Complete Collection of Current Laws of the Russian Empire” was published.

Rice. 2. M.M. Speransky - Russian statesman ()

As for the peasant question, NikolaiI understood the need to abolish serfdom. But his first steps in peasant politics were aimed at improving the situation not of all, but only of state peasants. This was undertaken by the emperor’s associate, member of the State Council and Minister of State Property P.D. Kiselev (Fig. 3). Among Kiselev’s peasant reforms, the following can be distinguished:

1. The construction of schools and hospitals has increased in government villages.

2. Special lands were allocated, which were used jointly by members of the peasant community to prevent crop failure and famine. Basically, the above-mentioned lands were planted with potatoes as directed from above. The people were very dissatisfied with this, so the peasants raised the so-called. “potato riots” (Fig. 4): in 1834 there was a revolt of appanage peasants, and in 1840-1844. - revolt of state peasants.

3. An attempt was made to solve the problem of land shortage. In those regions of Russia where peasants did not have enough land, state peasants were transferred to free plots, mainly to the east. Later this practice was significantly expanded.

Rice. 3. P.D. Kiselev - creator and leader of peasant reforms ()

Rice. 4. Potato riot ()

The first steps taken by Nicholas's governmentIagainst state peasants, caused discontent among the landowners. This happened because the life of state peasants actually improved during the reforms, and this caused grumbling among the serfs. That's why further development P.D. reforms Kiselev was not received.

The Russian government did not stop only with state peasants. Soon laws were issued concerning serfs. They were as follows:

1. Prohibition law retail peasants. This meant that now the landowner did not have the right to sell peasants individually, excommunicating them from their families, but could only sell them as whole families (Fig. 5).

2. Permission to landowners to release peasants without land, as well as permission to landowners to release peasants with land. But for such liberation, the peasants had to pay their former owner certain debts. This law The decree was called “On Obligated Peasants” (1842).

3. Peasants received the right to redeem the land (and, accordingly, be freed) in the event that the estate in which they lived was sold for the debts of the owner.

4. Peasants received the right to buy property - uninhabited lands or buildings.

Rice. 5. Peasant family of the 19th century. ()

All the above reforms were only the first steps in the peasant question, and both landowners and peasants did not actively take advantage of new opportunities. However, it is worth noting that the peasant reforms of Nicholas I were an important step towards the abolition of serfdom.

References

1. Korkunov N.M. The meaning of the Code of Laws // Journal of the Ministry of Public Education. - 1894. - No. 9.

2. Lazukova N.N., Zhuravleva O.N. History of Russia. 8th grade. - M.: “Ventana-Graf”, 2013.

3. Lyashenko L.M. History of Russia. 8th grade. - M.: “Drofa”, 2012.

4. Nicholas the First and his time / Comp., intro. Art., comment. B. N. Tarasova. - M., 2000.

5. Nicholas I: personality and era: new materials / Rep. ed. A. N. Tsamutali; resp. comp. T. V. Andreeva and others - RAS, St. Petersburg. Institute of History. - St. Petersburg, 2007.

6. Troyat A. Nicholas I / Trans. from fr. E. Sutotskaya. - M., 2007.

7. Yurtaeva E. A. Historical experience of creating the Code of Laws of the Russian Empire // Journal Russian law. - 1998. - № 1.

4. Internet portal “Studopedia.ru” ()

Homework

1. Why did his own Chancellery become the main state body under Nicholas I? What was she doing? What powers did she have?

2. What is the codification of Russian legislation? By whom and how was it carried out?

3. List the reforms regarding state peasants. What did they lead to?

4. List the reforms regarding landowner peasants. What were the consequences of this?

Accession of Nicholas I to the throne.

Nicholas was the third son of Paul I. The eldest sons of Paul I - Alexander and Konstantin - were prepared for the throne from childhood, the younger ones - Nikolai and Mikhail - for military service.

Nicholas was five years old when his father was strangled. He remembered his father vaguely, but, having become emperor, he banned all conversations in the Winter Palace about the night of March 11, 1801, and turned the room in which his father’s murder took place into a home church.

After the death of Paul I, his wife Empress Maria Feodorovna devoted all her time to raising children. She adored her older sons, carefully selected teachers for them and reverently guarded the peace and quiet in their half during class hours. She ran past half of the younger ones, covering her ears: all day long, fortresses were being built there, drums were beating, trumpets were blowing, pistols were firing. The Grand Dukes rushed around the Winter Palace on wooden horses, sweeping away everything in their path. They turned a blind eye to their pranks: the lot of the youngest in royal families was always military service.

The teaching staff chosen for Nikolai Pavlovich was not as brilliant as his older brothers. His social studies teachers failed to instill in him an interest in their subjects. But he was given accurate and natural sciences, and his real lifelong passion was military engineering. He became a brilliant military engineer. Throughout his life, he proudly spoke about himself more than once: “We are engineers.”

Military education, the Romanovs' hereditary passion for the army, and an ability for exact sciences brought results. Nikolai Pavlovich grew up as an integral person, with strong principles and convictions. He was not characterized by internal doubts, hesitations, and tossing, like his older brother Alexander. He loved order and discipline in everything. In his opinion, one should not waste time in useless philosophical dreams, but build fortresses, bridges, roads. Nikolai was unusually modest in everyday life. His apartments in the Winter Palace were striking in their modest furnishings, cleanliness, and comfort. His life was strictly regulated: he got up early, slept on a bed stuffed with hay, and covered himself with a soldier's overcoat; He worked a lot and was moderate in food. Among the monarchical houses of Europe, the Romanovs were famous for their beauty. The physical beauty of Nicholas I was truly royal. He preserved his beauty and majesty until last days. He was married to the daughter of the influential Prussian king Frederick William III in Europe, Charlotte, who after accepting Orthodoxy was named Alexandra Feodorovna. Nikolai Pavlovich adored his wife, did not refuse her anything, but saved money on himself all his life. When he died, there were holey slippers next to his bed. Among the treasures left by the Romanov house is the collection of Alexandra Feodorovna's dresses and jewelry. Nicholas had a natural mind, an iron will, and the ability to find talented performers of his plans. The attitude of his contemporaries and descendants towards Nicholas I was ambiguous: some called him a rude martinet, others called him a genius of Russian history.

The accession of Nicholas I to the throne was accompanied by dramatic events.

On October 19, 1825, Alexander I unexpectedly died in Taganrog. He had no heirs. His successor was to be his brother Konstantin Pavlovich. Konstantin was very similar to father Paul I, was attached to him and loved him very much. The death of Paul I at the hands of drunken guards shocked Constantine. He promised himself that he would never ascend the throne. In 1823 he abdicated the throne in favor of younger brother Nikolai Pavlovich. But all this was kept secret.

After the death of Alexander I, a 3-week period of kingdomlessness ensued in Russia. Konstantin Pavlovich was the governor of Poland, was in Warsaw and refused to come to Russia. Negotiations began between the brothers, they dragged on, meanwhile some swore allegiance to Constantine, others to Nicholas. And only on December 12, 1825, 29-year-old Nikolai Pavlovich ascended the throne after he received written confirmation from Constantine about his voluntary abdication. The swearing-in of the highest authorities to Nicholas I and the promulgation of the manifesto on his accession to the throne were scheduled for December 14.

On December 12, Nicholas I learned that on the day he took the oath, a coup d'état would be attempted. He understood that in a day his fate would be decided: either he would be the emperor of a powerful empire, or he would be strangled with the scarf of some drunken guardsman. On the night of December 14, Nicholas I and Alexandra Feodorovna fervently prayed and swore to each other that if they were destined to die tomorrow, they would accept death with dignity.

On December 14, 1825, Nicholas I showed great personal courage. At six o'clock in the morning, ahead of schedule, he took the oath of the members of the Senate, the Synod, the State Council, and the generals, then he said to the audience: “After this, you answer with my head for the tranquility of the capital, and as for me, if I am emperor for even an hour, then I will show that I am worthy of it." Next, Nicholas I gave the 7-year-old heir Sasha to the faithful guards and went to Senate Square. By evening the uprising was suppressed. Arrests, investigations, and trials began.

Nicholas I will always remember December 14, 1825, and this memory was reflected in the nature of his entire reign.

The reign of brother Alexander began liberally, and ended with the Decembrists. Nikolai came to the conclusion that the independence of society can lead to dramatic consequences for the authorities and society itself. For the good of Russia, control must be established over the life of society; order, discipline, law must reign in society, everyone must fulfill their duties.

Domestic policy.

The Emperor began to restructure the system of government. His Imperial Majesty's Own Office began to play a huge role in his reign. It was created by Alexander I to consider petitions addressed to the highest name. Nicholas I significantly expanded its functions, giving it the significance of the highest governing body of the state. In 1826, the Chancellery was divided into 5 departments. Special significance acquired by the III Department - the secret police under the leadership of Count A.Kh. Benckendorf.

The III department was in charge of:

investigation and investigation in political cases;

control over literature and theater, periodicals;

fight against Old Believers and sectarianism.

At the very beginning of his reign, Nicholas I stated that he wanted to base public administration on the law. To do this, he decided to put Russian legislation in order, which had not been done since the time of Alexei Mikhailovich. Codification (streamlining) of legislation was carried out by the II Department of the Chancellery under the leadership of M.M. Speransky. MM. Speransky by this time had moved away from liberal beliefs and became a staunch supporter of the monarchy.

MM. Speransky did a titanic work and in 1830 presented to the sovereign 45 volumes of the “Complete Collection of Laws of the Russian Empire”, which contained more than 30 thousand laws published in chronological order from 1649 to the accession of Nicholas I. 3 years later the “Code of Laws” appeared Russian Empire" in 15 volumes, in which the current laws were set out in a systematic manner. The "Code" was sent to all government agencies and went on sale. It was assumed that now any person could be guided by them in his activities.

Under Nicholas I, railways appeared in Russia.

In 1837 the first railway was opened between St. Petersburg and Tsarskoe Selo(modern city of Pushkin) - Tsarskoye Selo. Six locomotives purchased abroad operated on the Tsarskoye Selo road. Since 1838, traffic along the Tsarskoye Selo road began to use steam traction.

In 1851, the Nikolaevskaya Railway connected St. Petersburg and Moscow.

Peasant question.

Nicholas I considered the issue of serfdom to be the most important. At the beginning of his reign, he was constantly occupied with the thought of liberating the peasants; he agreed that serfdom was evil. But then he came to the conclusion that the abolition of serfdom now would be an even greater evil for Russia. During the entire reign of Nicholas I, 10 secret committees were created on the peasant issue. In general, serfdom during the reign of Nicholas I remained unshakable, but in solving the peasant question there was accumulation significant experience, on which his son Alexander II was later able to rely.

The situation of the landowner peasants was eased. There were 36 million landowner peasants in the country, but they were the property of the landowners. The government adopted decrees that changed society's view of landowner peasants. Before this, the dominant view among the nobility was that the landowner peasants were private property on a par with land, livestock, work equipment, etc.

The government issued a number of laws that emphasized that “a serf is not the mere property of a private individual, but, first of all, a subject of the state” (V.O. Klyuchevsky).

In 1827, a law was passed according to which, if a peasant owned less than 4.5 dessiatines per capita on a noble estate, then such a peasant either transferred to state administration or to a free urban state.

In 1841, the peasant family was recognized as an indissoluble legal entity, and peasants were prohibited from being sold separately from the family.

In 1842, the Decree on Obligated Peasants was issued, which allowed the landowner to set the peasants free by providing them with land for temporary use in response to certain duties or quitrents.

In 1848, a law was passed giving peasants the right, with the consent of the landowner, to acquire real estate.

It should be noted that during the reign of Alexander I and Nicholas I, criticism of the autocrats as guardians of serfdom increasingly intensified among the nobility. Alexander I in 1803 issued a decree “On free cultivators”, Nicholas I in 1842 issued a decree “On obligated peasants”, which allowed the landowner to voluntarily release his peasants. But the consequences of these decrees were insignificant. From 1804 to 1855 The landowners released only 116 thousand serfs. This indicated that landowners were primarily interested in preserving serfdom.

Much more was done for state peasants. There were about 9 million people. From 1837 to 1841, a system of measures was taken to manage the state peasants. In 1837, the Ministry of State Property was created to manage the serfs. Nicholas I entrusted the leadership of this ministry to his associate Count P.N. Kiseleva. P.N. Kiselev, according to the recognition of the greatest historian V.O. Klyuchevsky, was one of the best administrators of that time. This was a man who put state interests and state benefits above all else.

Under his leadership, the reform of the state village was carried out. 6 thousand rural communities were created. They were given the right of self-government and the right to elect justices of the peace.

According to the decree of 1843, no district commander had the right to interfere in the affairs of the community.

2 million 300 thousand acres of free land were transferred to land-poor state peasants;

500 thousand des. the land was transferred to peasants who had no land at all;

170 thousand peasants were resettled to areas that had surplus land;

3 million dessiatines were transferred to educated rural communities. forests.

Much attention was paid to raising the agrotechnical level of peasant farming. The ministry created a seed fund and food warehouses in villages in case of crop failure. Thus, the government practiced planting potatoes and immediately putting the potatoes into warehouses. The peasants regarded the planting of potatoes as an increase in government plowing. “Potato riots” swept across the country. Over a thousand rural credit societies and savings banks were created for state peasants; 98 thousand brick houses were built for peasants. Much has been done to protect the health of peasants and education. In 1838, peasant communities had 60 schools with 1,800 students, and in 1866 they already had 2,550 schools with 110 thousand children. State peasants were freed from road repairs. Then the peasants began to be transferred to quitrent status.

Reform of the state village under the leadership of Count P.D. Kiselev became an undoubted achievement of Nikolaev's time. As a result of the measures taken, the legal and financial situation of state peasants has significantly improved. The landowner peasants began to look with envy at the state peasants. Landowner peasants became an increasingly pressing problem for the government.

From 1844 to 1847 In the Kiev General Government (9 western provinces) an inventory reform was carried out. After joining Russia in 1815, the land here belonged to Polish Catholic nobles who were in opposition to Russia. They oppressed their peasants - Ukrainians, Belarusians, Russians. Nicholas I began to pursue a policy of protecting the Orthodox population in these territories. Inventories were carried out here - an inventory of the landowners' estates. In accordance with the size of the landowners' estates, clear norms for corvée and quitrent were established, which the owner of the estate had no right to exceed.

Government policy in the field of education, press, religion.

Education policy became increasingly conservative. In 1828, a reform of lower and secondary specialized educational institutions was carried out.

Different levels of the school were separated from each other and intended for different classes:

rural parish schools - for peasants;

district schools - for urban residents;

gymnasiums - for nobles.

Since 1832, S.S. became the Minister of Public Education. Uvarov. He became the author of the famous formula “Orthodoxy, autocracy, nationality,” which argued that these three forces are the basis of Russian political system and ensure order and harmony in society. The Uvarov triad was created in opposition to revolutionary France, in which they tried to lay the principles of freedom, equality and fraternity as the basis of the state, social and even family structure. Under the Minister of Education S.S. Uvarov, the education and upbringing of Russian youth was based on respect for Orthodoxy, autocracy and nationality. In 1835, a new university charter was issued, according to which the autonomy of universities was sharply reduced. An audit was carried out of the activities of Kazan, St. Petersburg, and Moscow universities. A number of professors who propagated revolutionary ideas were put on trial. Education fees were increased, student enrollment was reduced, and training programs. The Charter of 1835 abolished the departments of philosophy, political economy, natural law and statistics at universities. At the same time, in 1835, the Imperial School of Law was founded - an elite educational institution for training employees of the Ministry of Justice and the Senate. A number of teachers were sent abroad on business trips to improve their qualifications. Under Minister S.S. Uvarov began the “golden age” of Moscow University, at which time such brilliant professors as T.N. Granovsky, K.D. Kavelin, P.G. Redkin and others. In 1832, a university was opened in Kyiv.

In 1826, a strict censorship charter was established, which from now on was supposed to guard the moral foundations of society, religious traditions and was supposed to perform the function of protecting state interests.

Nicholas I was unaware of the religious “vacillations” of his elder brother. He considered himself a son of the Russian Orthodox Church. In his opinion, the entire Russian history confirmed the right of birthright of the Orthodox Church in comparison with other churches. Therefore, his religious policy was aimed at supporting the authority of official Orthodoxy. Old Believers and sectarians began to be persecuted again. The state began to support the missionary activities of the Orthodox Church in the east of the empire.

The reign of Nicholas I was marked by the appearance in 1833 of the first official national anthem, “God Save the Tsar.” Words English anthem"God Save the King" poet V.A. Zhukovsky translated into Russian, and composer A.F. Lvov wrote a melody for them.

IN social policy Activities were carried out aimed at strengthening the class system and the positions of the nobility in society. In 1832, the government introduced a new class of “honorary citizens.” Large entrepreneurs, merchants of the 1st guild, scientists, artists, officials, persons who graduated from higher educational institutions, etc. could become “honorary citizens.” The government was concerned about the fragmentation and weakening of the financial situation of the nobles. In order to prevent the fragmentation of estates, reserved estates were introduced, which could only be inherited by one son, without fragmentation among other heirs. In 1845, a decree was issued on the procedure for acquiring nobility, which made it difficult to obtain noble status by rank and order.

Polish uprising 1830 - 1831

By decision of the Congress of Vienna in 1815, central Poland became part of Russia. Before this, Poland had been in a state of ruin for many years. Alexander I's policy towards Poland was liberal. Poland was granted broad autonomy: its own Sejm, its own army, local administration, and monetary system. Factories and roads were built in Poland, and a university was opened. Poland quickly recovered from its previous devastation. But by the end of Alexander's reign, Poland was all covered with a network of secret societies striving to restore a great Poland "from sea to sea."

In November 1830, a rebellion broke out in Poland. Armed Poles broke into the Belvedere Palace with the intention of killing Tsarevich Konstantin Pavlovich. The Sejm declared the Romanov dynasty overthrown and proclaimed Prince Adam Czartoryski the head of the government. The rebels captured the arsenal of Russian troops and distributed weapons to the population. The Poles attacked Russian soldiers in the barracks, on the streets, in the church. Many soldiers, officers, even generals were killed. Viceroy of Poland Grand Duke Konstantin Pavlovich barely managed to leave Warsaw alive. The Poles announced that they would only stop the uprising when the Kingdom of Poland was granted independence, and all the Russian lands that were previously part of the Polish-Lithuanian Commonwealth would be annexed to it: Lithuania, Belarus, Little Russia.

Nicholas I did not enter into any negotiations with the rebels. The Russian army was sent to Poland under the command of Field Marshal I.I. Dibich, who, after his death from a cholera epidemic in June 1831, was replaced by General I.F. Paskevich. The Poles resisted desperately, but could not resist the Russian army. On August 26, 1831, after bloody battles, Warsaw was taken by the troops of I.F. Paskevich. Poland's autonomy was eliminated. The Kingdom of Poland was converted into a general government, the Polish Sejm and army were dissolved. Poland was declared "an integral part of the Russian Empire." I.F. was appointed Governor-General of Poland. Paskevich, who received the title of His Serene Highness Prince of Warsaw. Nevertheless, the tsarist government did not break the local Polish administrative order. In 1832, the “Organic Statute” law was issued for Poland, according to which the Poles were left to use the Polish language in court and local authorities authorities. The West tried to intervene in Russian-Polish affairs and sided with the Poles. In Russia itself, part of society also condemned the actions of the tsarist government. In 1812 - 1815 Russian society experienced a patriotic upsurge, but then part of society, for various reasons, began to lose state-patriotic consciousness. In this regard, the attitude towards the Polish uprising of A.S. was very indicative. Pushkin. For A.S. Pushkin's honor and dignity of his country were above all. He also had romantic relationship to the Polish uprising, but a sober understanding of Russia's state interests prevailed. On the Polish uprising A.S. Pushkin responded with poems to “Slanderers of Russia,” in which he warned the West against interfering in Russian-Polish affairs.

Foreign policy.

After the defeat of Napoleonic army, Russia began to play a leading role in European affairs. Until the 50s. XIX century Russia maintained peaceful relations with all European powers. On the southeastern border of the Russian Empire, a different situation developed: relations with the Ottoman Empire were constantly deteriorating. One of the reasons for the complications in relations with Turkey was the increased influence of Russia in the Balkans among the Christian peoples of the Ottoman Empire. By this time, the Ottoman Empire began to experience a deep, comprehensive crisis. In the second quarter of the XIX V. The Eastern Question emerged in European politics. As a result, the liberation struggle of the Balkan Christian peoples for liberation from Turkish rule intensified. In this struggle, the Balkan peoples sought to rely on Russia. This irritated Turkey.

Another reason for hostile relations between Russia and Turkey was the events in the Caucasus.

The Caucasus is a magical and most restless place on Earth. This is a gigantic fortress separating Europe and Asia, washed by two seas - the Black and Caspian; The two largest rivers, the Terek and the Kuban, originate in the Caucasus Mountains. Since ancient times, the Caucasus has experienced many wars, migrations, and natural disasters. The Caucasus Mountains have long been inhabited by tribes of mountaineers - Chechens, Ingush, Lezgins, Ossetians, Circassians, etc. To survive, the mountaineers climbed higher and higher into the mountains, fought among themselves and lived off of wars and raids. Men here were born warriors. The mountain peoples were numerous, belonged to different linguistic and ethnic groups, were at different stages of development, professed different religions, were at enmity with each other and did not obey anyone. But time has created here a unique, unified civilization of highlanders. For many who dreamed of conquering the Caucasus, it actually turned out to be “a sharp blade made of multi-layered steel.” The Caucasus remained unconquered and belonged to no one.

Until the 16th century The Caucasus was the sphere of influence of Turkey and Iran. In the 16th century During the time of Ivan the Terrible, the situation changes. Ivan IV the Terrible married the Circassian princess Maria and turned his attention to the Caucasus. On the Terek River, on his orders, the first Russian fortress was founded, where 500 archers began to serve. Cossacks and fugitive peasants constantly arrived here, and cross-border trade continued briskly. This is how the Russians began to explore the Caucasus. After the Russian-Turkish wars of Catherine II, Kuban was annexed to Russia. After this, the Caucasus became the arena of a stubborn, fierce struggle between three powerful states - the Ottoman Empire, Persia and Russia. During the time of Catherine II, the natural border of Russia in the Caucasus became the Kuban and Terek rivers. After the liquidation of the hetmanate in Ukraine in 1764, several thousand Zaporozhye Cossacks moved to Kuban. Fortress cities arose - Stavropol (1777), Ekaterinodar (1793), etc. A continuous line of fortifications was built along the Kuban and Terek rivers. It was called the Caucasian Line. The Caucasian line became southern border Russia.

By this time, the Caucasian mountaineers had already converted to Islam and recognized the power of the Turkish Sultan over themselves as the head of the entire Muslim world. Therefore, in order to stop Russia’s advance into the Caucasus, the Turkish Sultan provided all possible support to the mountain peoples.

By 1804, Georgia became part of Russia. For communication with Georgia, the Russians built the Georgian Military Road through the Caucasus Range. It connected Vladikavkaz and Tiflis. IN early XIX V. has developed next situation: to the north of the Caucasus ridge there were Russian territories, to the south there were also Russian possessions. Between them were the mountain peoples. Communication along the Georgian Military Road was difficult due to constant attacks by mountaineers. The Cossacks also attacked the villages of the mountaineers. On the Georgian Military Road there was a constant war between the Russians and the highlanders. It became clear: it was possible to firmly master Transcaucasia only by conquering the mountain peoples of the Caucasus.

In 1816, all military units operating in the Caucasus were united into one Caucasian Army. A hero was appointed commander-in-chief of the Caucasian army Patriotic War 1812 General A.P. Ermolov. The Caucasian War began.

Caucasian War (1817 - 1864).

Upon taking office, A.P. Ermolov carefully studied the situation and developed tactics, which he subsequently used steadily and which began to bring results: he did not leave a single raid of the mountaineers unpunished, cut down impenetrable thickets, built roads and fortifications, and founded Cossack villages. In 1818 A.P. Ermolov founded the Cossack fortress Groznaya, in 1819 - Sudden, in 1821 - Stormy. "With a gun and an ax" A.P. Ermolov asserted Russia's presence in the Caucasus.

Türkiye constantly supplied the mountaineers with weapons. On the eastern shore of the Black Sea there were Turkish fortresses - Kars, Akhaltsikhe, Batum, Poti, Anapa. They cut off Russian possessions from the Black Sea. For the successful conduct of the war, it was extremely important to capture these fortresses and block the channels of supply of weapons to the highlanders.

Russia's relations with Turkey remained hostile. According to the Bucharest Peace Treaty of 1812, Türkiye was forced to grant autonomous governance to Serbia, Moldavia, and Wallachia. Other Orthodox peoples of the Ottoman Empire began to strive for the same benefits.

In the 20s Greeks in the Ottoman Empire were on the verge of extermination. In 1821, a general uprising broke out in Greece against the Turkish yoke. The Turks tried to drown the uprising in blood and massacred over 90 thousand Christians on the island of Chios alone. The Greeks turned their gaze to Russia. Alexander I sympathized with the Greek people, but he had the role of guardian of legitimate regimes in Europe. The Turkish Sultan was the legitimate ruler, so Alexander I took a neutral position in this conflict. The Turks, feeling impunity, resorted to unprecedented cruelty. On Easter night 1826, after matins, they hanged the 84-year-old Patriarch of Constantinople Gregory V at the gates of his residence. An explosion of indignation swept across Europe. Nicholas I was already on the Russian throne. He decisively demanded that Turkey stop such atrocities. Russia and England at first tried to reconcile the Greeks and Turks. By 1827, the Greeks no longer had the strength to resist. The Turks took Athens and brought their fleet into the Bay of Navarino to finally suppress the Greek uprising. But then Russia, England and France actively intervened in the situation. They presented the Porte with an ultimatum: immediately stop the atrocities and grant Greece independence. But these demands were ignored by the Turks. On October 20, 1827, the combined fleet of Russia, England and France in Navarino Bay defeated and sank the entire Turkish fleet. But then England and France decided not to continue the war against Turkey in order to prevent Russia from strengthening in the Caucasus. Russia decided to deal the Porte a decisive blow. But for this it was necessary to end the war with Iran.

Russian-Iranian War 1826 - 1828

Russia's relations with Iran also remained tense all this time. Iran wanted to return the territories it had lost under the Gulistan Peace Treaty of 1813. At the same time, England was actively pushing it towards war with Russia. In 1826, the Iranian army invaded Karabakh. The Russian army, with the support of Armenian and Georgian volunteer detachments, captured the fortress of Erivan (Yerevan), then southern Azerbaijan and Tabriz. In February 1828, the Turkmanchay Peace Treaty was signed between Russia and Iran, according to which the Erivan and Nakhichevan khanates, populated predominantly by Armenians, were transferred to Russia. Then the Armenian region was formed in these territories, which served as the beginning of the separation of Armenians in Azerbaijan. The Russian writer and diplomat A.S. was sent as ambassador to Tehran. Griboyedov. A year later, A.S. traveled along the Georgian Military Road. Pushkin. One day, on a dusty road, he saw a cart carrying a coffin. "Who are you taking?" - asked A.S. Pushkin with the driver. “Mushroom eater,” he heard in response.

Russian-Turkish War 1828 - 1829

In April 1828, Russia declared war on Turkey. Basic fighting unfolded in the Balkans and Transcaucasia. Nicholas I himself went to the Balkan theater of military operations. The Turkish Sultan had 80 thousand. army. In April 1828, 95 thousand. Russian army under the command of the elderly Field Marshal P.Kh. Wittgenstein made a lightning march from Bessarabia and occupied Moldavia and Wallachia in a matter of days. The entire Turkish army also crossed the Danube and occupied all of northern Dobruja. At the same time, the Caucasian army I.F. Paskevich occupied Turkish fortresses on the eastern shore of the Black Sea - Anapa, Poti, Akhaltsikhe, Akhalkalahi, Bayazet, Kars. But the 1828 campaign was unsuccessful. At the beginning of the next 1829, I.I. was appointed commander-in-chief of the Russian army. Dibich. After this, the emperor retired from the active army, since his presence constrained the actions of the military command. I.I. Diebitsch strengthened the army, and on June 19, 1829, the well-fortified fortress of Silistria was taken. Then the Russian army, having overcome incredible difficulties, unexpectedly crossed the main Balkan ridge for the Turks. During July, 30 thousand. The Russian army defeated 50 thousand Turks and in August advanced to Adrianople, the second most important Turkish city after Istanbul. At the same time I.F. Paskevich defeated the Turkish army in the Caucasus. On August 7, Russian troops were already standing under the walls of Adrianople; the next day the city surrendered to the mercy of the victors. The Turkish Sultan prayed for peace. Never since the times of Ancient Rus' have Russian troops been so close to Istanbul (Constantinople). But the collapse of the Ottoman Empire posed a great threat to world peace. On September 2, 1829, the Treaty of Adrianople was signed, according to which Russia gave Turkey all the conquered territories, but received Turkish fortress cities on the eastern shore of the Black Sea: Kars, Anapa, Poti, Akhaltsikhe, Akhalkalaki. The Porte recognized the independence of Greece and confirmed the autonomy of Moldova, Wallachia, and Serbia (lords there were to be appointed for life).

Russia's successes in the fight against Turkey caused great concern among the powers of Western Europe. Russia's impressive military successes once again showed that the decrepit Ottoman Empire was on the verge of collapse. England and France had already laid claim to the Balkan possessions. They feared that Russia alone would achieve the complete defeat of the Ottoman Empire and take possession of Istanbul and the Bosporus and Dardanelles, which at that time occupied the most important military-strategic importance in the world. An alliance of the strongest states against Russia was formed. England and France, in order to weaken Porto and Russia, began to intensively push them towards war.

References

History of Russia from the beginning of the 18th century to late XIX century. Ed. A.N. Sakharov. M., 2000.

Kovalchenko I.D. Russian serf peasantry in the first half of the 19th century, M., 1967.

Kornilov A.A. Course on the history of Russia in the 19th century. M., 1998.

Pashkov B.G. Rus', Russia, Russian Empire. M., 1997.

Romanovs. Historical portraits. Book two. M., 1999.

Romanovs. Historical portraits. Book three. M., 2001.

1812 in the memoirs of contemporaries. M.. 1995.

Eidelman N.Ya. From the political history of Russia in the 18th-19th centuries. M., 1993.

Shilder N.N. Emperor Nicholas I. His life and reign. In 2 vols. M., 1997.

Chulkov G.I. Emperors: Psychological portraits. M., 1991.

Mironenko S.V. Pages of the secret history of autocracy. Political history Russia first half XIX century. M., 1990.

Lesson topic: Nicholas's domestic policyI

Tasks:

Educational: introduce internal politics NicholasI, test students’ knowledge on the topic “Decembrist Movement”.

Developmental: develop memory, attention, imagination, thinking, monologue speech.

Educators: cultivate patriotism, cognitive interest.

Lesson type – combined

Methods: informational, reproductive, partial search

Equipment: laptop, projector, interactive whiteboard, textbook, handouts (document texts).

Progress of the lesson.

Organization of the beginning of the lesson.

Slide 2

This emperor's accession to the throne was not intended. But by the will of fate, he ruled Russia for 30 years. His domestic policy was not as active as foreign policy, but nevertheless, it was under him that the industrial revolution in Russia was completed. The topic of our lesson is Nicholas’s domestic policyI.

Updating knowledge

1. Individual survey on the following questions:

The emergence of secret societies

Decembrist uprising

2.2. Frontal survey for questions:

What were the reasons for the emergence of the Decembrist movement?

What are their main goals?

Why did the Decembrist uprising occur on December 14, 1825?

Why were the Decembrists defeated?

3. Studying new material.

Slide 3

Future Emperor Nicholas I , third son of the emperor and Empress Maria Feodorovna, born on July 6 (June 25, old style) 1796 in Tsarskoye Selo (Pushkin).

As a child, Nikolai was very fond of military toys, and in 1799, for the first time, he put on the military uniform of the Life Guards Cavalry Regiment, of which he had been the chief since infancy. According to the traditions of that time, Nikolai began serving at the age of six months, when he received the rank of colonel. He was prepared, first of all, for a military career.

Nicholas's education was limited mainly to military sciences.

Nevertheless, from a young age the emperor drew well, had good artistic taste, loved music very much, played the flute well, and was a keen connoisseur of opera and ballet.

SLIDE4

Having married on July 1, 1817, the daughter of the Prussian King Frederick William III, the German princess Friederike-Louise-Charlotte-Wilhelmina, who converted to Orthodoxy and became Grand Duchess Alexandra Feodorovna, Nicholas lived a happy family life. The Emperor had seven children: Emperor ; Grand Duchess Maria Nikolaevna, married Duchess of Leuchtenberg; Grand Duchess Olga Nikolaevna, married Queen of Württemberg; Grand Duchess Alexandra Nikolaevna, wife of Prince Friedrich of Hesse of Kassel; Grand Duke Konstantin Nikolaevich; Grand Duke Nikolai Nikolaevich; Grand Duke Mikhail Nikolaevich.

The idol of Nicholas I was . Extremely unpretentious in everyday life, Nicholas, already an emperor, slept on a hard camp bed, covered with an ordinary overcoat, observed moderation in food, preferring the simplest food, and almost did not drink alcohol. He was very disciplined and worked 18 hours a day.

His excellent memory, which helped him recognize the face and remember even ordinary soldiers by name, gained him great popularity in the army. The emperor was distinguished by considerable personal courage. When a cholera riot broke out in the capital, on June 23, 1831, he rode out in a carriage to a crowd of five thousand gathered on Sennaya Square and stopped the riots. He also stopped unrest in the Novgorod military settlements, caused by the same cholera. The Emperor showed extraordinary courage and determination during the fire of the Winter Palace on December 17, 1837.

Nicholas I died on March 2 (February 18, old style) 1855, according to official version- from a cold. He was buried in the Cathedral of the Peter and Paul Fortress.

Slide 5

Nicholas's domestic policyI

The principle of the regime of personal power of the monarch was embodied in the expanding “own office” of the king. It arose under Paul I in 1797. Under Alexander I in 1812, it turned into an office for considering petitions addressed to the highest name. Nicholas I, already in the first year of his reign, significantly expanded the functions of the personal office, giving it the significance of the highest governing body of the state. The former office of the king became its first department, whose responsibilities included preparing papers for the emperor and monitoring the execution of his orders. On January 31, 1826, the Second Department was created “to implement the code of domestic laws,” which was called “codification.” On July 3, 1826, the III Department (higher police) was created. In 1828, the IV department was added to them, which managed educational, educational and other “charitable” institutions included in the department named after Empress Maria Feodorovna (the Tsar’s mother), and in 1835, the V department was established to prepare the reform of the state village. Finally, in 1843, a VI, temporary, department appeared to manage the territories of the Caucasus annexed to Russia. Highest value had II and III departments of the imperial personal chancellery.

Slide 6

Even at the beginning of the reign of Alexander I, there was a Commission for drawing up laws under the leadership of Count P.V. Zavadovsky. However, her 25-year activity was fruitless. Instead, the II Department was established, headed by M. A. Balugyansky, professor of law at St. Petersburg University. Almost all the work on codification was carried out by M. M. Speransky, assigned to him as his “assistant”. Although Nikolai treats Speransky with restraint, even with suspicion, he saw in him the only person who could carry out this important task, giving Balugyansky the order to “watch” him, “so that he does not commit the same mischief as in 1810” ( referring to the Plan for the Transformation of Russia drawn up by Speransky).

Speransky submitted four notes to the emperor with his proposals for drawing up a Code of Laws. According to Speransky’s plan, the codification had to go through three stages: in the first it was supposed to collect and publish in chronological order all the laws, starting with the “Code” of Tsar Alexei Mikhailovich in 1649 and until the end of the reign of Alexander I; on the second, publish a Code of current laws, arranged in a subject-by-systematic order, without introducing any corrections or additions; the third provided for the compilation and publication of the “Code” - a new systematic body of legislation, “with additions and corrections in accordance with morals, customs and the actual needs of the state.” Nicholas I, having agreed to carry out two stages of codification, rejected the third - as the introduction of undesirable “innovations”.

During 1828 - 1830 45 volumes (and 48 with appendices and indexes) of the “Complete Collection of Laws of the Russian Empire” were published, which included 31 thousand legislative acts from 1649 to 1825. Legislative acts, published from 1825 to 1881, subsequently constituted the second, and from 1881 to 1913 - the third collection. All three collections amounted to a total of 133 volumes, including 132.5 thousand legislative acts - an important source on the history of Russia for more than two and a half centuries.

In 1832, the 15-volume “Code of Laws of the Russian Empire” was published, which contained 40 thousand articles of current legislation arranged in a systematic order. In addition, in 1839 - 1840. 12 volumes of the “Code of Military Regulations”, “Code of Laws of the Grand Duchy of Finland”, and codes of laws for the Baltic and Western provinces, prepared by Speransky (after his death), were published.

The codification of laws under Nicholas I played a huge role in streamlining Russian legislation and in providing a more solid and clear legal basis for Russian absolutism. However, she did not change either political or social structure autocratic-serf Russia (and did not set this goal), nor the management system itself. It did not eliminate the arbitrariness and corruption of officials, which reached a special peak during Nicholas’s reign. The government saw the vices of the bureaucracy, but was unable to eradicate them under the absolutist regime.

Slide 7

The activities of the III Department of the Imperial Chancellery became notorious. Under him, a corps of gendarmes was established, consisting first of 4, and later of 6 thousand people. The favorite of Nicholas I, General A.H. Benckendorf, was placed at the head of the III department; he was also the chief of the gendarmes. All of Russia, with the exception of Poland, Finland, the region of the Don Army and Transcaucasia, was divided first into 5 and later into 8 gendarmerie districts led by gendarmerie generals. In the provinces, the gendarmes were commanded by staff officers. Herzen called the III Department “an armed inquisition, police Freemasonry,” placed “outside the law and above the law.” His prerogatives were truly comprehensive. It collected information about the moods of various segments of the population, carried out secret supervision over politically “unreliable” persons and the periodical press, was in charge of places of imprisonment and cases of “schism,” monitored foreign subjects in Russia, identified carriers of “false rumors” and counterfeiters, and dealt with collecting statistical information for his department, illustrating private letters. The III department had its own network of secret agents. In the 40s, it created secret agents abroad to monitor the political Russian emigration.

The III department was not only a body for raising awareness and combating sedition. His responsibilities also included checking the activities of the state apparatus, central and local administration, identifying facts of arbitrariness and corruption and bringing the perpetrators to justice, suppressing abuses in recruitment, and protecting innocent victims as a result of illegal court decisions. It was supposed to monitor the condition of places of detention, consider incoming requests and complaints from the population.

Slide 8

The peasant question was one of the most acute in government policy in the second quarter of the 19th century. The peasantry itself reminded of this with riots that increased with each decade. “Serfdom is a powder keg under the state,” wrote the chief of gendarmes A.H. Benckendorf in one of his annual reports and proposed to begin the gradual elimination of serfdom among the peasants: “Sometime you need to start somewhere, and it’s better to start gradually, carefully, rather than waiting for it to start from below, from the people.” Nicholas I himself admitted that “serfdom is evil” and stated that he “intends to lead the process against slavery.” However, to abolish serfdom in at the moment he considered it still a “great evil.” He saw the danger of this measure in the fact that the destruction of the power of the landowners over the peasants would inevitably affect the autocracy, which relied on it. Characteristic is the statement of Nicholas I about the landowners as his “hundred thousand police chiefs” protecting “order” in the village. The autocracy was afraid that the liberation of the peasants would not take place peacefully and would be accompanied by popular unrest. It also felt resistance to this measure “from the right” on the part of the landowners themselves, who did not want to give up their rights and privileges. Therefore, in the peasant question, it was limited to palliative measures aimed at somewhat softening the severity of social relations in the village.

To discuss the peasant issue, Nicholas I created a total of 9 secret committees. The government was afraid to openly declare its intentions on this extremely sensitive issue. Members of secret committees were even required to sign a non-disclosure agreement. Those who violated it faced severe punishment. The specific results of the activities of the secret committees were very modest: various projects and assumptions were developed, which were usually limited to their discussion, individual decrees were issued, which, however, did not in the least shake the foundations of serfdom. During the reign of Nicholas I, more than a hundred different laws concerning landowner peasants were issued. The decrees were aimed only at some softening of serfdom. Due to their non-binding nature for landowners, they either remained a dead letter or found very limited use, since a lot of bureaucratic obstacles were put in place to their implementation. Thus, decrees were issued that prohibited selling peasants without land or one land on a populated estate without peasants, selling peasants at public auction “with the fragmentation of families,” as well as “satisfying government and private debts,” paying for them with serfs, transferring peasants to category of domestic servants; but these decrees, which seemed obligatory for the landowners, were ignored by them.

On April 2, 1842, a decree on “obligated peasants” was issued, designed to “correct the harmful beginning” of the 1803 decree on “free cultivators” - the alienation of part of the landowners’ land property (peasant allotment land) in favor of the peasants. Nicholas I proceeded from the principle of the inviolability of landownership. He declared the landed property of landowners "forever inviolable in the hands of the nobility" as a guarantee of "future peace." The decree read: “All land, without exception, belongs to the landowner; this is a sacred thing, and no one can touch it.” Based on this, the decree provided for the provision of personal freedom to the peasant at the will of the landowner, and the allotment of land not for ownership, but for use, for which the peasant was obliged (hence the name “obligated peasant”) to perform, by agreement with the landowner, essentially the same corvee and quitrents, which he had previously carried, but with the condition that the landowner could not increase them in the future, just as he could not take away the plots themselves from the peasants or even reduce them. The decree did not establish any specific norm of allotments and duties: everything depended on the will of the landowner, who, according to this decree, released his peasants. In the villages of "obligated peasants" "rural self-government" was introduced, but it was under the control of the landowner. This decree had no practical significance in resolving the peasant question. For 1842 - 1858 Only 27,173 male souls were transferred to the position of “obligated”. gender of peasants on seven landowner estates. Such modest results were due not only to the opposition of the landowners, who met the decree with hostility, but also to the fact that the peasants themselves did not agree to such unfavorable conditions for themselves, which did not give them either land or true freedom.

The government acted more boldly where its measures on the peasant issue did not affect the interests of the Russian nobility itself, namely in the western provinces (Lithuania, Belarus and Right-Bank Ukraine), where the landowners were predominantly Poles. Here the government’s intention was manifested to oppose the nationalist aspirations of the Polish gentry front with the Orthodox Belarusian and Ukrainian peasantry. In 1844, committees were created in the western provinces to develop “inventories,” that is, descriptions of landowners' estates with an accurate recording of peasant plots and duties in favor of the landowner, which could not be changed in the future. Since 1847, inventory reform was first carried out in Right Bank Ukraine, and then in Belarus. It caused discontent among local landowners who opposed the regulation of their rights, as well as numerous unrest among peasants, whose situation did not improve at all.

In 1837 - 1841 reform was carried out in the state village by P. D. Kiselev. This prominent statesman, once a close friend of the Decembrists, was a supporter of moderate reforms. Nicholas I called him his “chief of staff for the peasantry.”

The state village was removed from the jurisdiction of the Ministry of Finance and transferred to the management of the Ministry of State Property, established in 1837, headed by Kiselev. To manage the state village, state property chambers were created in the provinces; state property districts, which included from one to several counties (depending on the number of state peasants in them), were subordinate to them. Peasant volost and rural self-government and a volost court were introduced, which considered minor offenses and property disputes of peasants. The collection of quitrents from the audit soul was preserved, but at the same time the level of profitability of peasant farming from land and non-agricultural trades was taken into account.

The reform in the state village was controversial. On the one hand, it somewhat alleviated land pressure and contributed to the development of entrepreneurship in the wealthy part of the state-owned village, but, on the other, it significantly increased tax oppression and introduced petty bureaucratic guardianship over the peasants. The state village of the Urals, Volga region and Central Russia responded to the reform with mass protests in which over half a million peasants took part. Large military forces were sent to pacify them, even using artillery.

In general, the government's measures to resolve the peasant issue during the reign of Nicholas I yielded insignificant results. The situation of both the landowners and other categories of peasants did not improve, but much was done to preserve the power and privileges of the landowners. Only the shocks of the Crimean War forced the autocracy to seriously prepare for the abolition of serfdom.

Slide 9

In the field economic policy the government turned out to be more consistent and went much further than in matters of social policy. The very processes of the country's economic development forced people to patronize industry, agricultural entrepreneurship, and trade, i.e., ultimately contribute to the development of bourgeois relations. Moreover, the autocracy, not without success, used new phenomena in the economy to its advantage. Military costs and expenses for a growing bureaucracy required new sources of cash revenue. Hence the implementation of incentive measures for entrepreneurs: the adoption of protective tariffs, encouragement of the activities of agricultural and industrial societies, and the organization of exhibitions.

In 1839 - 1843 Minister of Finance E.F. Kankrin carried out monetary reform. Before this, in Russia there was a double monetary account - for banknote rubles and silver rubles, while the rate of banknotes was subject to constant fluctuations. Since 1839, a hard credit ruble was introduced, equal to 1 ruble. silver Over the next four years, it was possible to accumulate the necessary reserves of gold and silver for the reform. The manifesto of June 1, 1843 began the exchange of all banknotes in circulation for state banknotes at the rate of 1 credit ruble for 3 rubles. 50 kopecks banknotes. The Kankrin monetary reform significantly strengthened the country's financial system.

Under Nicoale IThe industrial revolution was ending in Russia. About construction railways you will find out by watching an excerpt from the documentary film “The Romanovs”

Watching a video - slide 10

Slide 11

Under Nicholas IMuch attention was paid to vocational education. Technological, Mining, Forestry, Land Surveying Institutes, etc. were opened in St. Petersburg. A vocational school and an agricultural school operated in Moscow. By the beginning of the reign of Nicholas 1, there were 49 gymnasiums in Russia, and by the end - 77.

The main place in government ideology was occupied by the “Theory of Official Nationality”. Count S.S. played a significant role in its development. Uvarov. He managed to prove to NikolaiIthat the sciences, based on the primordial Russian principles - enlightenment, autocracy and nationality - will become a reliable support for power.

1848 - 1855 marked by a sharp increase in political reaction in Russia. Contemporaries called recent years the reign of Nicholas I "dark seven years". The strengthening of the reaction was manifested primarily in punitive measures in the field of education and the press. In order to more effectively supervise the periodical press, on February 27, 1848, a “temporary” secret committee was established under the chairmanship of A. S. Menshikov. A month later he was replaced by a “permanent” one under the chairmanship of D.P. Buturlin. The committee was called upon to carry out secret supervision over all materials that had already undergone preliminary censorship and appeared in the press. Nicholas I set a task for him: “As I myself do not have time to read all the works of our literature, you will do it for me and report on your comments, and then it will be my job to deal with the guilty.”

A large staff of officials of the Buturlin Committee annually reviewed thousands of book titles and tens of thousands of issues of newspapers and magazines. They even monitored the contents of provincial bulletins - official publications. The Committee also supervised the activities of censorship. Censorship was introduced on foreign literature, arriving in Russia, educational manuals and programs were carefully reviewed, even the annual reports of university rectors published in the press. The Emperor repeatedly expressed his satisfaction with the work of the Committee and admonished it to “continue the work just as successfully.”

The era of “censorship terror” began, when even the well-intentioned newspaper of Grech and Bulgarin, “Northern Bee,” was subject to penalties. Saltykov-Shchedrin was exiled to Vyatka for his story “A Confused Affair.” For his commendable obituary about N.V. Gogol in 1852, I. S. Turgenev was first put in a police station, then exiled under supervision to his Oryol estate. Even M.P. Pogodin then had the idea of ​​submitting an address to the Tsar on behalf of the writers, complaining about unnecessary censorship restrictions. But his fellow writers did not support him, fearing the consequences.

The government took measures to terminate ties between Russian people and Western Europe. Foreigners were actually banned from entering Russia, and Russians were banned from traveling abroad (with the exception of special occasions with the permission of the central authorities). Management was given the right to dismiss subordinates recognized as “unreliable” without explaining the reasons for dismissal; At the same time, complaints from higher officials who were arbitrarily dismissed were not taken into account.

Subjected to severe restrictions higher education. The number of students was reduced (no more than 300 people for each university), supervision of students and professors was strengthened; some of them were fired and replaced by more “reliable” ones; The teaching of state law and philosophy, hated by Nicholas I, was abolished. Rumors spread about the closure of universities, which prompted S. S. Uvarov to write a well-intentioned article in their defense. The article aroused the wrath of Nicholas I. Uvarov was replaced as Minister of Public Education by the extreme obscurantist Prince. P. A. Shirinsky-Shikhmatov, who demanded that professors base all scientific conclusions “not on speculation, but on religious truths.” The famous historian S. M. Solovyov wrote at the beginning of the Crimean War about this time, or rather, timelessness: “We were in grave confusion: on the one hand, our patriotic feeling was terribly offended by the humiliation of Russia, on the other, we were convinced that only a disaster, and precisely an unfortunate war, could bring about a salutary revolution and stop further decay.”

The results of Nicholas's domestic policy I . What is striking is the completely formal attitude of the government and all bureaucrats towards state affairs. There is nothing surprising about this. Ministers and bureaucracy were considered only as executors of the supreme will. Often NicholasIreproached for their reluctance to change. The trouble was the opposite: the emperor took on many innovations without delving into their essence, and tried to personally, but only formally, lead each of them. This desire of the autocrat, even with his excellent memory and enormous capacity for work, concealed the weakness of public administration in the second quarterXIXV. Nikolai's lack of competenceIhad in in this case is by no means decisive.

The danger was that officials, receiving assignments and evaluation of their activities from the monarch, found themselves in the position of blind and unreasoning executors. Such work does not require any special professionalism or interest in it. Moreover, the assessment of what the official did depended little on final result his activities. NikolayINaturally, he could not monitor the daily work of the state apparatus, so he was forced to be satisfied with the reports of ministers, reports of departments, etc. All this led to postscripts, gross deception, and fanfare of reports. Russia began to be ruled not only by the Winter Palace, but also by the bureaucracy, or more precisely, its middle level, since it was not the ministers, but the governors who knew about the true state of affairs in the country. Impunity and mutual responsibility further corrupted the state apparatus.

The real situation was far from brilliant. In 1842, for example, in all official places of the empire, 300 thousand cases were not completed, written out on 3 million sheets of paper.

Nikolai's attemptIbe like Peter in governing the countryIfailed. Nikolai Pavlovich failed to put all classes at the service of Russia. His intention was to subordinate all classes to the power of the monarch and the state apparatus headed by him.

Instead of a state of “common good,” Russia was turning into a state of general lawlessness. The life of the country, permeated not so much by a guiding idea as by all-pervasive espionage and denunciation, became bureaucratized and formalized.

Guided by the slogan: “I don’t need smart people, but loyal subjects,” Nikolai! did not demand from his ministers initiative and professionalism in business, familiarity with advanced ideas, etc. In such hands, the administration of the empire could not help but fall into decay. True, in order for this to become absolutely clear, it took a foreign policy catastrophe, which emphasized the illusory nature of the greatness of the Nicholas system.

Serfdom has long been felt by ruling circles as the main threat to the existing system. On the other hand, serfdom was the main connecting link of the entire Russian state mechanism. It is not surprising that in such conditions, the attempts of the autocracy to abolish or change serfdom looked indecisive and half-hearted, indicating a desire to “ennoble” this barbaric institution rather than to part with it.

Consolidation

1. Frontal survey:

What were the reasons for the transformations carried out under Nicholas?I?

What was Nikolai's attitude?Ito the peasant question? What measures were taken to solve it?

Why, despite the unlimited power of the emperor, NicholasIcould not solve the peasant question, although he understood the harmfulness of maintaining serfdom?

What reforms were carried out under NicholasIin the field of finance?

How did education develop under Nicholas?I?

What is the essence of the theory of “official nationality”?

3.2. Working with the document “From the apology of L.V. Dubelt, manager III Secession in 1839-1856, in defense of domestic foundations"( see appendix)

Questions for the document:

Based on the document, characterize the arguments in favor of the theory of “official nationality” expressed by its supporters.

Why do you think the author of the document wrote it?

4. Homework: paragraph 55, using additional literature, write a biographical sketch about one of the statesmen of the time of NicholasI.

Used literature:

Artemov V.V., Lubchenkov Yu.N. History - textbook. M., 2012

Biography of NicholasI

Nicholas's domestic policyI

Domestic and foreign policy under Nicholas I

Domestic policy of Nicholas I

The years of the reign of Nicholas I are regarded as the “apogee of autocracy.” The government actively fought the revolutionary movement in Russia and Western Europe, mass popular unrest, dealt with advanced and progressive ideas and people. The main goal of the emperor's internal policy was to strengthen and protect the existing system. Realizing the need for broad reforms and fearing a new revolutionary surge, the emperor carried out a number of reforms that did not affect the foundations of the state structure. Hence the inconsistency and duality of the policy of Nicholas I: on the one hand, the broad political reaction, on the other hand, awareness of the need to make concessions to the “spirit of the times.” In general, the policy of Nicholas I was conservative throughout his reign. The main directions of activity were: strengthening autocratic power; further bureaucratization and centralization of the country; work aimed at creating a police state. The key problem remained the peasant question. Understanding the need to abolish serfdom, Nicholas did not set himself the task of eliminating it.

In the second quarter of the 19th century, significant changes occurred in some European countries (general liberalization of the political system, entry of new social strata of society into the arena of political struggle). In Russia, these processes were significantly slowed down: the State Council lost its importance in resolving state issues; the system of ministries was actually replaced by His Imperial Majesty's Own Office (it became a government agency and was divided into departments - I department - the personal office of the emperor, II - codification of laws, III - department was in charge of the political police, IV - managed charitable institutions, etc.

In 1826, the III department of the chancellery was created, associated with the implementation of political investigation. His work was supervised by Count A.Kh. Benckendorf, infinitely devoted to Nicholas I. The country was enveloped in a network of agents and spies. In 1827, a corps of gendarmes was created and several gendarmerie districts were introduced. Thus, for virtually the first time in Russia, an effective police system arose, which made it possible to slow down the revolutionary movement and suppress dissent for a long time.

Upon ascending the throne, Nicholas I declared his intention to ensure the rule of law for the country. For this purpose, work was carried out to codify (streamline) Russian legislation. MM. Speransky, returned from exile, headed the activities of the II department of the chancellery. As a result, the “Complete Collection of Laws of the Russian Empire” appeared in 45 volumes and the “Code of Current Laws” in 15 volumes.

Russia in the second quarter of the 19th century remained an agrarian country. Peasants made up the bulk of the population. It was the peasant question that was the main one and required an immediate solution. But the government limited itself to only half-measures aimed at mitigating serfdom. In 1841, a law was passed prohibiting the sale of peasants individually and without land; in 1843 - landless nobles were deprived of the right to acquire serfs; in 1842 the law on “obligated peasants” was passed, which developed the decree of 1803. A number of decrees of this period regulated relations between landowners and peasants; fixed the size of peasant plots and duties; determined the possible punishment. Thus, serfdom was not abolished, but the slave manifestations of serfdom were eliminated.

In 1837 - 1841 a reform of state peasants was carried out. It improved the legal and financial situation of state peasants, who made up about a third of the population. The created Ministry of State Property was supposed to take care of satisfying the economic and everyday needs of the subordinate peasants. At the same time, the reform increased bureaucratic pressure on the state village and minimized the activities of peasant self-government bodies (they became dependent on the local administration).

The sphere of education and enlightenment has developed quite contradictorily. On the one hand, the progressive development of the country required its improvement and expansion, on the other hand, the government tried in every possible way to establish strict control over it. In 1828, the Charter of lower and secondary educational institutions was approved. He consolidated a closed class system of education (parish schools for the lower strata of the population; district schools for townspeople of non-noble origin; gymnasiums for the children of nobles and officials). In 1835 it was introduced new charter, which stripped universities of much of their autonomy. Strict political control was established, clear regulation of university life was introduced, tuition fees were increased, student enrollment was reduced, and the teaching of state law and philosophy was abolished. The government's increased response to enlightenment and education occurred after the revolutionary upheavals that took place in Western Europe in 1848-1849. Relations with Western Europe were reduced, foreigners were prohibited from entering Russia, and Russians were prohibited from traveling abroad. The era of “censorship terror” has arrived. But life demanded further development of higher education. Despite the punitive measures taken by the government, previously closed educational institutions were restored and new ones appeared, training specialists of a wide profile (technological, construction, land surveying institutes, higher school of law, etc.).

The most important instrument of ideological work with the people was the Orthodox Church. Much attention was paid to the “purity of the Orthodox faith” and maintaining the state importance of the church.

Nicholas' foreign policy I .

The main directions of the foreign policy of the government of Nicholas I were: the fight against the revolutionary movement in Europe, the desire to seize Middle Eastern markets, the annexation of the Caspian coast to Russia and the solution of the eastern question, which meant dominance in Turkish affairs, establishing control in the Bosporus and Dardanelles straits and influence in the Balkans.

Russian-Iranian War 1826-1828 ended with the Peace of Turkmanchay, according to which eastern Armenia joined Russia. Russia also won the war with Turkey in 1828-1829, and according to the Treaty of Adrianople, Anapa, Poti, Akhaltsikhe and Alkhalkalaki went to it. In this situation, Russia's subjugation of the entire Caucasus became possible and inevitable.

The murid movement1 began in the 30s. led by Imam Shamil, who won a number of victories over Russian troops. In the territories of Dagestan and Chechnya, he created a state system - imamat - with a large army. But already at the end of the 40s. Signs of crisis began to appear in Shamil's state system. Tsarism took advantage of the economic and military weakening of the Imamate. The re-equipped and numerically increased Russian army went on the offensive. In 1859, the remnants of Shamil's army were finally defeated.

The annexation of the Caucasus to Russia was completed in 1864.

The contradictions between Russia and European countries after the signing in 1833 by Turkey and Russia of the Unkiyar-Isklessi Treaty, which established a defensive military alliance with the obligation of mutual military defense.

By the middle of the 19th century. The eastern question occupied a very important place in the foreign policy of European countries. France and England sought military and commercial priority in the Mediterranean; Austria - to the expansion of the territory of the Ottoman Empire; Russia - to the complete defeat of Turkey alone, access to the Mediterranean Sea, closing the entrance to the Black Sea to foreign fleets and increasing influence on the Slavic peoples of the Balkans. All this led to the Crimean War (1853-1856), which began with the crossing of Russian troops across the river. Prut and occupation of the territory of Moldavia and Wallachia. In the fall of 1853, the Russian squadron under the command of Admiral P.S. Nakhimova (1802-1855) defeated the Turkish fleet in Sinop Bay. But the European powers did not intend to allow Russia to defeat Turkey. The English and French military squadrons entered the Golden Horn Bay. Russia was now forced to fight against England, France, and the Italian states of Piedmont and Sardinia. Military operations were transferred to Crimea. Russia's main naval base on the Black Sea, Sevastopol, was under siege. After 11 months of defense, Sevastopol fell.

On March 18, 1856, a peace was signed in Paris, according to which Russia ceded part of Bessarabia to Turkey and returned the Kars fortress. Russia was forbidden to have a navy on the Black Sea and to restore Sevastopol as a fortress.

The defeat of Russia showed the deep crisis of the autocratic-serf system, its backwardness from the advanced countries of Europe, urgently dictated the need for radical changes in all areas of life, brought the country out of a state of political immobility, caused a protest of wide sections of society against the existing order, and led to the growth of peasant uprisings. The autocracy was forced to begin self-improvement and self-regulation on the basis of market relations and the freedom of citizens.