The transition from class representative monarchy to absolutism. From estate-representative monarchy to absolutism

INTRODUCTION

CONCLUSION

Introduction.
There has long been a tradition of calling the council of boyars the boyar duma. The word “boyar” appears in ancient sources when describing the earliest events of Russian history: “the prophetic Oleg” put a boyar in charge of Smolensk after the conquest of the city; Svyatoslav refused to convert to Christianity due to the squad’s rejection of the new faith, and at the same time, Vladimir Svyatoslavovich’s decision to convert the people to Christianity was made with the approval of the boyars; the boyars also signed the prince’s most ancient international treaties (with Byzantium, for example). They are mentioned by chroniclers everywhere, in all Russian lands: from Novgorod to Ryazan, Chernigov, Kyiv.
Nevertheless, scientists still cannot accurately determine the etymology of the words “boyars”, “boyar duma”. The noun “duma” is associated with the verb “dumati”, which in modern Russian means to think, to think, and in ancient Russian it had the additional meaning of “to consult”, especially “to discuss government affairs” or any other serious problems. One of the functions of the prince was to confer with his boyars, and “thinker” became a kind of common epithet for one of the boyars who was a member of the council 1 .
Such a boyar council of the best people of each land, together with the prince, decided on the highest zemstvo issues; it could only be in one eldest city on earth. Although there were councils of elders in the suburbs, they did not exercise political power, but only judicial and administrative power.
The people who make up the council are often called a squad in chronicles. Under the Kiev prince at the end of the 10th century. we meet the government class or circle of people who serve as the prince's closest government employees. These people are sometimes called boyars, sometimes the prince’s squad and make up his usual council, with whom he thinks about various matters, about the organization of the land.
In general, speaking about the functions of the Boyar Duma, its composition and real influence on power, it is necessary to refer to specific periods of time, since its situation cannot be characterized as a whole. In accordance with certain time frames, the position of the Boyar Duma in relation to power either strengthened or weakened. Thus, we can conditionally distinguish four periods of relations between the Boyar Duma and the supreme power.
In the first period (XIV and XV centuries), the activities of the Duma coincided with the actions of the princely authorities. This is connected with the rise of the Moscow principality, the increase in wealth of which also led to the strengthening of the Moscow boyars, since it was they who provided constant support for the actions of the princes. As a result, with the advent of the service boyars, only their highest stratum (introduced boyars), as well as princes who had lost their appanages, received the right to enter the Boyar Duma.
The second period (XVI century) is the struggle between the autocratic government and the boyars. On at this stage the prince (tsar) destroys the appanages, turning the boyars into service people, thus, he ceases to need their support to strengthen his power. The boyars, on the contrary, were interested in expanding their influence on state affairs. At this time, the composition of the Boyar Duma was expanded by a number of court positions. From the first half of the 16th century. The Duma also includes less noble feudal lords - okolnichi, as well as representatives of the local service nobility - Duma nobles and the top of the service bureaucracy - Duma clerks. Initially, there were four Duma clerks in the Duma - for ambassadorial, discharge, local affairs and affairs of the Kazan order 3.
The third period (first half of the 17th century) - normalization of relations between the Boyar Duma and the Tsar. They developed without mutual encroachments on the exclusive appropriation of supreme power 4 . The powers of the Duma and the Tsar at this stage often overlap. The Boyar Duma resolved the most important state affairs (Article 98 of the Code of Law of 1550 considered the verdict of the Boyar Duma a necessary element of legislation) 5 .
The fourth period (second half of the 17th century) - strengthening of the tsar's power, and at the same time a sharp loss of positions in the management of the Boyar Duma. The special position of the boyars was sharply limited at the end of the century, and then completely eliminated. Localism is abolished.
Thus, we can assert that as absolutist tendencies strengthen, the importance of the Boyar Duma steadily declines until it completely disappears.
Hence, the goal of this work is formed: to observe the process of strengthening the power of the Boyar Duma in the supreme system of government during the formation of an estate-representative monarchy and the sharp loss of all privileges and powers as a result of the establishment of absolutism.
Objectives of this coursework:
1) consider the process of formation of the boyars as an estate, as well as the process of formation of the Boyar Duma.
2) analyze what the significance of the Boyar Duma was in the 15th-16th centuries.
3) consider the role of the boyars in political life during the Time of Troubles.
4) identify patterns of gradual weakening of the role of the Boyar Duma in the conditions of the emergence of absolutist tendencies.

We already find evidence of the existence of a special government class or circle of people, such as the boyars, who, in turn, were the closest government advisers to the prince, in the most ancient monuments of our history. Nevertheless, scientists are still arguing about the very origin of the word “boyar”, as well as about their powers and rights, since there are no documents in which this would be specifically recorded. But in general, referring to the available sources, we can assert that, starting from Vladimir the Saint up to Vasily Shuisky, and later, under the tsars of the new Romanov dynasty, the boyars were the people closest to the prince (tsar), with whom he resolved issues of state importance. But in different periods, the functions and powers of the boyars either expanded or, on the contrary, narrowed. At the same time, their political role also changed.
The emergence of the boyars dates back to the collapse of tribal unions in the 6th-9th centuries, when the preconditions for the formation of the state were created.
Initially, the boyars served under a contract and enjoyed the right to transfer from one prince to another. The principle of freedom of choice of the overlord was formulated as follows: “And the boyars and servants of the border passed (the princes) freely”, and “whoever serves whom the prince, no matter where he lives, should go with the prince whom he serves.” However, this right of free passage gradually began to be limited, and under Ivan III it was completely destroyed, although formally boyar service to the Moscow sovereign continued to be voluntary. 6 For the first time, as far as is known, the practice of forcing boyars to renounce their right of departure was carried out in 1474, on one of the most famous boyar-princes, Danil Dmitrievich Kholmsky, who was convicted of some guilt unknown to us, and was taken into custody , then he is forgiven and forced to give himself a sign of the cross, like the cursed letters that were given to princes during the time of the Dark 7. In addition, the “cross-kissing” records of non-transition were confirmed by a significant number of guarantors. And going abroad (to Lithuania, for example) was now completely considered treason.
Speaking specifically about the Boyar Duma, it should be noted that it, in turn, was a continuation of the previously existing Princely Duma. This transformation took place directly during the 14th – early 15th centuries, already in the new historical conditions of the Moscow kingdom.
The Princely Duma was a permanent council under the prince, which included his closest associates. Conferences of Russian princes with this authority go back to the very root of Russian state life. Meetings of this kind, indications of which we find from the first pages of the ancient Russian chronicle, continue in an unbroken chain throughout the entire appanage period. 8
The composition of the Princely Duma was as uncertain as its competence, but custom required that the prince hold advice only with old and experienced people, and violation of such a rule entailed criticism from, so to speak, public opinion 9. In addition to the boyars, representatives of the clergy often participated in the princely dumas, but their participation was not constant. Princely dumas operated in all the principalities of Kievan Rus. At the end of the 10th century. Under the Kiev prince there was a circle of people who served as the prince's closest collaborators. These people were called either boyars or squads. They were part of the permanent composition of the prince's council for military and zemstvo administration. Since the adoption of Christianity, in addition to other advisers, new ones have appeared next to the prince, in the person of bishops. And during the reign of Vladimir the Saint, another third element was noticed in the composition of the Duma. When a question arose that went beyond the ordinary affairs of the princely administration, the city elders also acted as advisers to the prince along with the boyars. 10
The elders of the city, or people, are a class that had not legal, but political significance. This term itself causes very diverse interpretations among scientists. Some see them as the oldest citizens, with whom Prince Vladimir the Holy often consulted on the most important issues (seating them next to the boyars). Others see in them the most eminent representatives of noble military families in Kyiv, who, due to their old age and experience, had an advantage over other citizens. Others think that these are the ancient heads of the East Slavic tribes, who retained their importance even under the princes, becoming part of their squads. Finally, some see the city elders as simply urban homeowners, wealthy owners from the non-service class. eleven
The elders did not belong to either the boyars or the gridi 12, and obviously these were sotsky, tenth and deliberate people. Sotskys and tens are commanders of units of a city regiment, hundreds, dozens, at their head was a thousand - the commander of a thousand. In the XI, XII centuries. after Vladimir, there are no city elders in the chronicle - this is a sign that these places began to be replaced by the appointment of the prince by people from his squad. But, at the same time, when the expression “city elders” or “human elders” disappears, “the best men” appear at the head of the urban population; These are usually the horse guides of the city meeting. Obviously, " the best people“- this is the urban, industrial nobility, from which military elders were previously chosen - thousand, sotsky, ten. Thus, the “city elders” (10th century) are the military administration of the city. And the “best people” (11th, 12th centuries) are the upper class, from which the city’s elders formerly came. That is why, in the chronicles, “the best people” usually act as intermediaries between the prince and the city council, as representatives and, together, horse handlers of veche gatherings. 13
The city nobility of the “best men” from whom the former foreman emerged, after the death of Vladimir the Saint, is increasingly removed from princely affairs. And in the middle of the 11th century, it became a significant structure within the veche, which, after the death of Yaroslav I, became more and more active. At the same time, the government council under the prince becomes purely boyar, service.
Meanwhile, the Duma and the Assembly during this period turned out to be two competing political forces. These institutions now differ from each other not so much in governmental functions as in socio-political interests. 14
In the XI-XII centuries. in the functioning of the Duma one can distinguish between the inner circle and the wider assembly. The inner circle included the leading members of the princely squad (front men), as well as the thousand. So the internal council included from 3 to 5 people, and this composition was permanent. His powers included consideration of most current issues in the field of legislation and management. But to discuss these issues, a broad meeting of the Duma was convened, involving not only members of the princely squad, but also boyars from outside. The latter came, as a rule, from the families of former leaders of clans and tribes, as well as from the new trading aristocracy. The “city elders” were also invited there. 15
In the 12th century. these two groups mixed under the common name “boyars”. Most likely, the right to participate in an extended meeting of the Duma was granted to all boyars; moreover, there is no reliable evidence that a certain number of Duma members was limited by law. What is noteworthy is that during this period of time, unlike the princes, the boyars did not form an internally closed layer, and thanks to service in the princely squad, access to the boyars, theoretically, was open to anyone capable person. At the same time, the boyar had no obligation to serve the prince, so he could freely leave one prince and go to the service of another. And the land plot that was given to him for his service became his personal property and did not entail strict obligations to perform service. 16 This order existed, as noted earlier, until Ivan III.
Thus, we can imagine the political organization of the Russian principalities in the pre-Mongol period as a combination of three elements of government: monarchical (prince), aristocratic (Princely Duma) and democratic (veche). 17
The Boyar Duma of the period under review was represented by a council consisting of the top of the princely squad and other nobles, known as boyars, and was called the Princely Duma.
Characterizing the position of the boyars, it should be said that until the reign of Ivan III, the boyar, regardless of whether he served the prince or was a member of the princely council, was not his vassal during this period of history.

1.2. Boyar Duma in the 14th and early 16th centuries. Localism system.
Previously, we found out that the emergence of the Boyar Duma, as such, we observe only in the XIV-XV centuries, during the strengthening of Moscow over other principalities and lands during the period of feudal fragmentation.
The process of creating a Russian centralized state was basically completed at the turn of the 16th and 17th centuries. By this time, a system of strong central government was gradually formed in the united Muscovite Rus', based on a unified all-Russian legislation and a management apparatus that ensured the implementation of laws. 18 Beginning with the reign of Ivan III, the boyars’ departures from the prince ceased. Power increasingly became a source of property. The form of address of boyars and princes to the sovereign is approved: “I am your slave” - unthinkable for the relationship between overlord and vassal.
Also, characterizing the boyars in the 16th century, it should be noted that the term “boyars” acquires a new meaning. So, in the XIV - mid-XV centuries. A boyar is, firstly, a person of noble origin and significant in the service of his ancestors. Secondly, this is a man of mature age, the owner of fiefdoms, who has urban residence in the capital of the principality. He may or may not be a member of the prince's council, but the nature of his service - military and administrative - corresponds to his origin and status. His relationship with the prince is individual in nature, although it is inscribed in the context of the service-family ties of the entire boyars. During this period of time there were relatively many boyars. In the 16th century boyar - a member of the council under the Grand Duke, to whom this rank was “affected” officially. Among all the persons who rightfully took part in the meetings of this council, the boyars occupied first place; their number (at any given moment) was limited. 19
In Moscow, for a long time, thanks to the wealth of the Moscow princes and other reasons, a large boyars gathered: since the time of Ivan Kalita, eminent boyars came here from the south and west, and little by little, more servants crowded around the Moscow grand-ducal table than any other Russian princes. 20 From the second half of the 15th century. The composition of the boyars is changing again, there is an influx of new servants to the Moscow court. This was one of the consequences of the unification of lands under the Moscow Principality. A new pedigree order was established, according to which the position in the Moscow service was determined. The distribution took place as follows: 1) the descendant of the great princes became higher than the descendant of the appanages; 2) a sovereign descendant of an appanage prince - superior to a simple boyar; 3) Moscow grand-ducal boyar - higher than the service prince and appanage boyar 21.
So, in Moscow, thanks to this routine, the Moscow boyars are divided into several hierarchical layers. The upper layer was formed by the descendants of the former Russian and Lithuanian Grand Dukes. The second layer consisted of the descendants of significant appanage princes, who also included some of the noblest families of the ancient Moscow boyars. The third and subsequent categories were made up of the secondary Moscow boyars and the offspring of small appanage princes, along with boyars from such principalities as Tver, Rostov and others. 22
Among the more noble families who became the head of the Moscow boyars, in the 16th century. the view of its governmental significance as its inherited right, received from its ancestors, regardless of the sovereign, was established. This view ultimately became the basis for the formation of service relations called “localism.”
Localism is the order of service relations between boyar families, which developed in Moscow in the 15th-16th centuries. and based on the fatherland, that is, the relations of the serving person and clan in the service to other persons and clans inherited from the ancestors. 23
Parochial arithmetic was incredibly complicated even in relation to close relatives and was expressed in such intricate formulations as “the son of the first brother is the son of the fourth uncle a mile away,” that is, equal in position. The parochial account became much more complex when there was a dispute between two different aristocratic families. In this case, all historical precedents, records of appointments, family memories were brought up about who, how and in what place sat under such and such a Grand Duke or Tsar. Frequent local disputes were a real scourge of that time, especially dangerous during the war.
Even seats at meetings of the Boyar Duma were occupied in a strict order of honor. The clerk of the Ambassadorial Prikaz, G. Kotoshikhin, described how the Duma people sat down on benches along the walls of the chamber: “the boyars under the boyars, who are lower in breed than whom, and not those who are higher and in the same rank, the okolnichy under the boyars against the same; under the okolnichy, the Duma nobles are therefore Well, by their breed, and not by their service, the Duma clerks stand, and at other times the tsar orders them to sit" 24. Membership in the Boyar Duma was traditionally reserved for aristocratic families, and upon reaching a certain age, one or another well-born person was introduced into the circle of boyars. Over time, the composition of the nobility changed several times. The offspring of appanage princes suffered especially during the periods of the Oprichnina and the Time of Troubles. This procedure for appointment to the Duma without taking into account personal merits and abilities led to sad results. Kotoshikhin wrote that when the Tsar tells the Boyar Duma to think about some matter, “some boyars, having set their rules, do not answer anything, because the Tsar favors many of the boyars not according to their intelligence, but because of their great breed, and many of them literate people who are not scholars or students" 25.
But no matter what, it was practically impossible to get into the ranks of the aristocrats of that time. This was possible only in rare cases, for example, if the prince (tsar) took a not very noble noblewoman as his wife and thus elevated her entire relatives, or for exceptional feats. The latter case includes the rise of Dmitry Pozharsky and Kozma Minin. But, despite their numerous merits, it was nevertheless difficult for such people to get along among noble aristocratic families, since the latter did not accept them into their circles and in every possible way found fault and infringed on them in everything.
Thus, in the middle of the 15th century, changes occurred in the relationship between the prince and the Boyar Duma. Until this time, the basis of the relationship between them was an agreement. The boyar served the prince, and the latter, in turn, undertook to “feed” him. But then the composition of the Moscow boyars changes, in which, meanwhile, a huge part of the noble people who left their principalities were concentrated. At the same time, the attitude of the boyars towards the prince is changing. It is expressed in the customs of localism. In the 16th century the word “boyar” transforms its meaning, and now the boyar, first of all, is a member of the council under the Grand Duke, to whom this rank was “confirmed” officially.

1.3. Composition and functions of the Boyar Duma in the 16th century. The position of the boyars during the reign of Ivan the Terrible.
By the end of the 16th century. we see the Boyar Duma already in a new composition, although we can observe changes in the composition of this body throughout its existence. One of the reasons for this in the XV-XVII centuries. there was localism.
Strife, wars, royal disfavour towards some and the promotion of others led to the fact that less influential and aristocratic representatives of the boyar dignitaries, recorded in the rank books, ended up in the Boyar Duma. People who came to power as a result of a quiet coup or unrest and who are distinguished by their personal devotion to the sovereign acquire special favor and influence in the Duma. This is how the rank of Duma nobility arose, in many ways ahead of the conservative boyars who did not want change and did not appreciate the zeal of the new servants. 26
There is a stratification into palace people close to the sovereign and Duma boyars in terms of fulfilling duties and receiving royal privileges. Many boyars simultaneously performed the functions of both, which gave rise to duplication of responsibilities, which in turn created the preconditions for corruption.
The core of the Boyar Duma increasingly consists of chiefs of orders. From each order, one person was allocated to the Duma (with the exception of the Ambassadorial Order, from which three people were allocated).
Thus, the composition of the Duma ranks gradually developed; it included: boyars, okolnichy, treasurers, printers, Duma nobles and Duma clerks, who had the right to participate in meetings of the Boyar Duma and in the work of Duma commissions. They occupied the highest palace positions, participated in diplomatic negotiations, and resolved local disputes. All Duma titles existed until the creation of the Senate in 1711. 27
Boyars in the 17th century - all feudal landowners for the population dependent on them. This title gave the right to participate in Duma meetings. The neighbor, or room boyar, was a special confidant of the king and had the right of access to the royal chambers. The boyars headed the main branches of government (paths), hence the name - good boyar. Their number included: the stablemaster (the head of the Stables Department); falconer (head of falconry); gunsmith (head of the Armory), etc. 28
Okolnichy is also a court rank and position in the Russian state of that period. The initial functions of the okolnichy were: arrangement and support of the prince’s travel, participation in the reception and negotiations with foreign ambassadors. The rank was first mentioned in 1284. In the XIV-XVIII centuries. Okolnichy was a member of the boyar duma and was the second most important rank in the duma (after the boyar). 29
Printers played a significant role. Initially, these were treasurers who were in charge of financial matters and stamped the most important government documents. Subsequently, they become the custodians of the royal archive.
Duma nobles - in the XVI-XVIII centuries. third after (the boyars and okolnichy) Duma rank. Duma nobles participated in meetings of the Boyar Duma, in the work of its commissions, administered orders, performed court and military duties, were appointed governors in cities, along with Duma clerks were the support of the tsarist power in the fight against the boyar aristocracy in the Duma. Mostly they came from noble families, and their number was not large.
At the turn of the XV-XVI centuries. clerks penetrate into the Boyar Duma. In the Old Russian state, they were the personal servants of the prince and often unfree. Their powers included: storage of the princely treasury, office work. Hence their original name - clerks. With the formation in the XIV-XV centuries. orders (departments), there was a need for a large number of literate, unborn service people who became assistants to the boyars - the heads of the orders. In the 16th century clerks also play a prominent role in local government, being assistants to governors in all matters except leading the army, and concentrating financial management in their hands. With the growth of the state apparatus, the number of clerks also increased. At the beginning of the 17th century. there were 55 of them, in 1676 - 103 in orders and 35 in counties 30. In the XV-XVI centuries. they are members of the Boyar Duma, where they enjoy equal voting rights with other members of the Duma in deciding matters, although they stood and did not sit.
Despite the fact that the Duma clerks were the lowest rank of the Duma, it was they who drew up and edited draft decisions of the Boyar Duma and the most important royal decrees, were in charge of the Duma's paperwork, they were the ones who usually acted as speakers at Duma meetings on the affairs of their orders, gave information and presented opinions for wording of Duma verdicts. In addition, they were the heads of four most important orders: the Discharge, Ambassadorial, Local and Kazan Palaces. For their service, clerks were rewarded with money and estates. But in spite of everything, they were perceived by the boyars and nobles as “mongrel”.
Meetings in the Duma were rarely held in full, which, according to information contained in the “discharge list”, in different time numbered from 20 to 60 people. Thus, decisions could be made by two people sitting on a given day.
The limited composition of the medieval Duma did not allow the princes to openly involve their humble favorites in governing the state; he could only “hold back” or speed up the appointment of a new boyar.
At the same time, in the second half of the 16th century. More and more contradictions are brewing in the state. One of them was of a political nature, and consisted in the fact that the sovereign, who had full power, had to act through the aristocratic administration. Under Ivan the Terrible, this contradiction intensified. Until the middle of the 16th century. The boyars still recognized the “autocracy” of the prince, who, in turn, shared their concept of family honor.
After the death of Elena Glinskaya, mother of Ivan IV, a sharp struggle for power between boyar groups begins. Political instability, increased local disputes and uncontrolled distribution of land led to a weakening of power, a decline in its prestige, the arbitrariness of governors and the “impoverishment of the nobility.” This led to growing contradictions between the boyars and the service class, and between the common people and the ruling aristocracy.
In January 1547, Ivan took the title of Tsar. But in reality, boyar rule continued, dissatisfaction with the authorities intensified. And in the summer of 1547, an uprising broke out in Moscow. The Boyar Duma hardly managed to calm down the townspeople and service people who took part in the performance. As a result of what happened, there was a change in the political course and the beginning of a policy of reforms carried out by the tsar’s new advisers. They turned out to be people who had not previously been associated with management. This group was called the “Chosen Rada”.
The Tsar, together with his advisers, carried out a number of reforms, the beginning of which was the convening in 1549 of the first Zemsky Sobor in the history of the country, consisting of the Boyar Duma, court circles, the top of the clergy, nobility and merchants. In his speech to the participants of the cathedral, the tsar accused the boyars of abuses committed before he reached “royal age.” But in the end he called on everyone to mutual forgiveness. Thus, a course was set to achieve agreement between various groups at the top of Russian society and their unification around the central government.
By the end of the 50s. The king's relationship with his advisers changes dramatically. Ivan the Terrible accuses Adashev and Sylvester, who were part of the “Chosen Rada,” of actually seizing power. And, defending the principle of autocracy as the basis of state power and order, Ivan IV rebuffs this attempt and decides on a coup d'etat, called the oprichnina.
Through this reform, many boyars were deprived of their landholdings and scattered along the outskirts of the state, where they turned into ordinary service landowners. Along with this, disgrace, exile and executions continued. Thus, there was a complete defeat of the appanage aristocracy, “the political significance of the class was irrevocably destroyed” 31. At the same time, there was a reshuffling of land ownership rights. Through the oprichnina, old land relations, bequeathed by allotment time, are eliminated; the government of Ivan the Terrible established an order that firmly links land ownership with compulsory service. 32
But in the end, the oprichnina policy did not lead to a strengthening of central power, but rather weakened it. The boyars were also not destroyed, only personal changes took place in the composition of the ruling stratum, who raised unprincipled people to the very top, ready to commit any crime for the sake of personal interests. The rest, for the most part, were eliminated or destroyed.
Thus, in the 16th century. Two contradictions are flaring up in the country: political and social. The first was that, having full power, the sovereign had to act through the aristocratic administration. And the social thing was that, under the pressure of military needs, the interests of the industrial and agricultural class were systematically sacrificed to the interests of service landowners who were not directly involved in the productive activities of the country 33 .
As a result, both of these contradictions, developing in the 16th century, led to a state crisis, the expression of which was the Time of Troubles.

2. Boyar Duma in the Time of Troubles.
2.1. The beginning of the Troubles. Her reasons. Change in the position of the boyars.
The deepest crisis that covered all spheres of life of Russian society at the beginning of the 17th century. and which resulted in a period of bloody socio-political conflicts, the struggle for national independence and national survival, was called “The Troubles” by contemporaries. During these turbulent years, social activity of all classes and classes of society in the center and locally increases sharply. All social forces of the country were in one way or another involved in rapidly changing events. The political struggle was especially acute: for example, during the Time of Troubles, 14 people laid claim to the Russian throne, 8 of whom ruled the country. 34
Scientists explain in different ways the causes and nature of the events that took place in the 17th century. So, S.M. Solovyov believed that the first cause of the Troubles was “the bad state of folk morals
etc.................

Practical lesson No. 4. terms: Estates-representative monarchy- a form of government that provides for the participation of class representatives in governing the state and drawing up laws. Absolute monarchy (from Latin absolutus - unconditional)- a type of monarchical form of government, in which the entirety of state (legislative, executive, judicial), and sometimes spiritual (religious) power is legally and actually in the hands of the monarch. Split

A church schism was originally considered to be any falling away from the Church of a group of believers. Schism of the Christian Church- the church schism of 1054, after which the Church was finally divided into Roman Catholic and Orthodox. Reiters(German Reiter - “horseman”, short for German Schwarze Reiter - “black horsemen”) - mercenary horse regiments in Europe and Russia in the 16th-17th centuries. The name "Black Riders" was originally used to refer to mounted mercenaries from southern Germany who appeared during the Schmalkaldic War between German Catholics and Protestants. Old Believers, Old Orthodoxy- a set of religious movements and organizations in line with the Russian Orthodox tradition, rejecting the church reform undertaken in the 1650s - 1660s by Patriarch Nikon and Tsar Alexei Mikhailovich, the purpose of which was to unify the liturgical rite of the Russian Church with the Greek Church and, above all, with the Church of Constantinople.

Formation absolute monarchy in Russia in the 2nd half. XVII century

1. The transition from an estate-representative monarchy to an absolute one. Features of the formation of an absolute monarchy in Russia.

An estate-representative monarchy is a type of power where the monarch, in leading the country, relies primarily on estate-representative institutions. These representative institutions express the interests of all free classes of society. An estate-representative monarchy in Russia began to take shape already in the 15th century. during the period of completion of the political process of unification of Rus'. Then, under the sovereign of all Rus' Ivan III, the Boyar Duma acted as a permanent advisory body in the system of supreme power.

In its most complete form, the estate-representative monarchy took shape in Russia in the middle of the 16th century, when, along with the Boyar Duma, the system government controlled A new political structure begins to operate - Zemsky Sobors, which became the dictate of the time along with the reforms of the mid-16th century.

A period of transformations began, called the “reforms of the 50s.” XVI century

Researchers highlight the following specific features Russian estate-representative monarchy of the 16th - 18th - 17th centuries:

1. Zemsky councils were convened at the will of the tsar, and therefore not periodically, but as needed;

2. They had no legal status and did not have the right of legislative initiative; their right is to discuss and make decisions on those issues that are put before the Council by the Tsar;

3. There was no elective election of deputies-representatives to the Councils. As representatives from the estates, mainly persons from local self-government were invited: heads and elected local noble and townspeople societies: zemstvo judges, provincial and townsman elders, favorite heads, kissers; from peasant communities - village elders.

From the second half of the 17th century. the transition to absolutism began. Absolutism is an unlimited monarchy in which all political power belongs to one person.

By the first quarter of the 18th century. refers to the final approval and formalization of absolutism in Russia. It is associated with the radical transformations of the entire political system of the state undertaken by Peter I.

Provincial reform of 1708-1710. changed the system of local government. Local self-government was abolished, and at the head of all administrative-territorial units were placed persons performing state service and receiving salaries for it - governors, provincial commissioners, district and volost governors.

Features of the formation of an absolute monarchy in Russia.

By the end of the 17th century. In Russia, an absolute monarchy begins to take shape, which did not arise immediately after the formation of a centralized state and the establishment of an autocratic system, because autocracy is not absolutism.

An absolute monarchy is characterized by the presence of a strong, extensive professional bureaucratic apparatus, a strong standing army, and the elimination of all class-representative bodies and institutions. These signs are also inherent in Russian absolutism. However, it also had its own significant features:

Absolute monarchy in Europe took shape under the conditions of the development of capitalist relations and the abolition of old feudal institutions (especially serfdom), and absolutism in Russia coincided with the development of serfdom;

The social basis of Western European absolutism was the alliance of the nobility with the cities (free, imperial), and Russian absolutism relied mainly on the serf-dominated nobility, the service class.

The establishment of an absolute monarchy in Russia was accompanied by widespread expansion of the state, its invasion into all spheres of public, corporate and private life. Expansionist aspirations were expressed primarily in the desire to expand their territory and access to the seas.

WITH 1708 Mr. Peter began to rebuild the old authorities and management and replace them with new ones. As a result, by the end of the first quarter of the 18th century. The following system of government and management bodies has emerged.

IN 1711 a new supreme body of executive and judicial power was created - the Senate, which also had significant legislative functions. It was fundamentally different from its predecessor, the Boyar Duma.

IN 1708 - 1709 gg. The restructuring of local authorities and administration began. The country was divided into 8 provinces, differing in territory and population.

Features of the absolute monarchy in Russia:

the establishment of serfdom, instead of the development of capitalism and the abolition of old feudal institutions (as was the case in Europe);

in Europe, the support of the monarch was the alliance of the nobility and the cities, in Russia - the feudal nobility and the service class.

From October 1721 Peter I is given the title of emperor for his victory in the Northern War and Russia becomes an empire.

The absolute monarchy was overthrown as a result of the February bourgeois-democratic revolution of 1917.

Ticket 26

Estates-representative monarchy - “Autocracy with a boyar duma and a boyar aristocracy” - monarchy in which the power of the monarch is limited. The limitation of the monarch's power is associated with the development of commodity-money relations, which undermined the foundations of a closed, natural economy. Political centralization arose, an estate-representative monarchy was organized - a form in which the power of the head of state is limited by estate-representative bodies ( Cathedral, Parliament, Estates General, Diet, etc.)

In Russia, the estate-representative monarchy arose in the 16th century during the reign of Ivan IV the Terrible, against the background of other progressive reforms of this politician in the field of law and government. The convening of the Zemsky Sobor in 1549 can be considered the beginning of the existence of this form of government in Russia. Subsequently, with the transition to a mercenary army and the elimination of appanages, it transformed into an absolute monarchy.

Absolute monarchy- a monarchy in which class privileges continue to exist, however, there are no feudal estates, a vassal-feudal system, and in some cases (England, France) there is no serfdom.

Under absolutism, the state reaches the highest degree of centralization, an extensive bureaucratic apparatus, a standing army and police are created; The activities of class representation bodies, as a rule, continue.

In Russia, absolutism existed in the 18th - early 20th centuries. From a formal legal point of view, under absolutism, the fullness of legislative and executive power is concentrated in the hands of the head of state - the monarch; he independently sets taxes and manages public finances.

The social support of absolutism is the nobility. The justification for absolutism was the thesis of the divine origin of supreme power. Magnificent and sophisticated palace etiquette served to exalt the person of the sovereign.

At the first stage, absolutism was progressive in nature: it fought against the separatism of the feudal nobility, subordinated the church to the state, eliminated the remnants of feudal fragmentation, and introduced uniform laws. The absolute monarchy was characterized by a policy of protectionism and mercantilism, which promoted the development of the national economy and the commercial and industrial bourgeoisie. New economic resources were used by absolutism to strengthen the military power of the state and wage wars of conquest.

In general, the absolutist system of government strengthened the sense of state community among representatives of various classes and social groups, thereby contributing to the formation of a nation.

Orlov's addition:

In the process of centralization, the basis was, first of all, patriotism (the association “against” is weaker than the association “for”). Feats of arms (+ Battle of Kulikovo) were in support of patriotism; in addition, the role of religion was strong.

Second half of the 17th century. Characterized by significant changes in state system, transforming in the direction of absolutism.

(During the reign of Alexei Mikhailovich)

an almost 3-fold increase in the number of the Boyar Duma due to an increase in the proportion of Duma nobles and clerks;

(from 35 people in 1638 to 94 in 1700)

Attempts to free the Duma from current affairs with the help of the State Chamber under Alexei Mikhailovich and the Execution Chamber under Fyodor Alekseevich;

(Fyodor Mikhailovich created the Execution Chamber in 1680, which heard controversial cases of all orders and accepted petitions. In addition, he ordered the Duma to meet regularly and outlined the order of reports from all central departments about it)

Preparation in 1681 of a kind of “table of ranks”, which consisted of 35 degrees - viceroyal titles that brought together the hierarchy of the state apparatus;

(hierarchy of the sovereign's court, army and higher state apparatus)

abolition of localism by the Zemsky Sobor in 1682;

(burning of all local documents on the initiative of V.V. Golitsin)

local government reform

(over 250 districts were formed, headed by governors who replaced the elders, as a result, reducing abuse in tax collection and centralizing the government of the country)

military reform

(the foundations of the recursion recruitment system were laid, the first military regulations appeared)

Change of the royal title after the annexation of Ukraine: instead of “Sovereign, Tsar and Grand Duke of All Rus'” the title “Great Sovereign, Tsar and Grand Duke of All Great, White and Little Russia autocrat” began to be used;

the victorious outcome of secular power in the fight against Patriarch Nikon;

(when Nikon became patriarch in 1652, he demanded that the tsar and the people swear allegiance and obedience to him. A conflict broke out, and as a result, Nikon renounced the patriarchate in 1658. At the Moscow Council of 1666-1667, the primacy of the tsar over the patriarch, as well as independence, was approved spiritual power from secular)

a course to curtail the activities of zemstvo councils: the council announced for 1683 did not take place;

(the council did not take place due to the resumption of hostilities with the Polish-Lithuanian Commonwealth)

the evolution of orders towards their swelling and self-reproduction;

(initially, orders were created as needed, their internal structure was uniform. The gradual increase in bureaucratization, the increase in the role of officials, the local government apparatus grew. This caused a wild growth of officials, whose posts were even inherited. It was impossible to resolve this issue even by reducing salaries)

termination of awards to Duma ranks in 1694;

gradual establishment from 1680 of autocracy in orders;

The desire to regulate the activities of orders: the order of Secret Affairs and the Accounting Order under Alexei Mikhailovich;

(the order of Secret Affairs was not subordinate to the boyar duma, it was created to control the activities of other orders, the Accounting order - control of finances. In addition, the establishment of a uniform service time)

Establishment of serfdom: the Council Code of 1649, decrees of the 1650s on the search for runaway peasants and slaves, unification of detective norms by decree of 1698.

(the transition to absolutism in general is associated with the completion of the formalization of serfdom. Fines were introduced for harboring runaway peasants. BUT the landowner peasants retained some personal rights: owning property, making transactions, plaintiffs and defendants in court, could become hired workers. In general, peasants could transferred, exchanged, sold, like land or a building)

	\|	next lecture ==>

An estate-representative monarchy is a type of power where the monarch, in leading the country, relies primarily on estate-representative institutions that exist in the vertical of central power. These representative institutions express the interests of all free classes of society. An estate-representative monarchy in Russia began to take shape already in the 15th century. during the period of completion of the political process of unification of Rus'. Then, under the sovereign of all Rus' Ivan III, the Boyar Duma acted as a permanent advisory body in the system of supreme power.
The Boyar Duma represented and expressed the interests of large landowners and performed two functions: it provided support for the power of a single monarch-sovereign of all Rus' and contributed to overcoming the elements and tendencies of feudal fragmentation and separatism.
In its most complete form, the estate-representative monarchy took shape in Russia in the middle of the 16th century, when, along with the Boyar Duma, a new political structure began to operate in the system of public administration - Zemsky Councils, which became the dictate of the time along with the reforms of the mid-16th century.
A period of transformations began, called the “reforms of the 50s.” XVI century Historians identify six reforms: public administration, local government, military, judicial, tax and church.
The reform of public administration became central, as a result of which the following vertical of supreme power took shape in the country:
- a tsar in whose activities the elements of autocracy became more and more clearly intensified, that is, a power that is ready to cooperate with representatives of all free classes of society, but does not consider it possible to put up with the class privileges of the boyars.
Researchers identify the following specific features of the Russian class-representative monarchy of the 16th - 18th - 17th centuries:

1. Zemsky councils were convened at the will of the tsar, and therefore not periodically, but as needed;
2. They had no legal status and did not have the right of legislative initiative; their right is to discuss and make decisions on those issues that are put before the Council by the Tsar;
3. There was no elective election of deputies-representatives to the Councils. As representatives from the estates, mainly persons from local self-government were invited: heads and elected local noble and townspeople societies: zemstvo judges, provincial and townsman elders, favorite heads, kissers; from peasant communities - village elders.

The class struggle of the peasants and townspeople largely determined the evolution of the state system in Russia. From the second half of the 17th century. the transition to absolutism began. Absolutism is an unlimited monarchy in which all political power belongs to one person.
The establishment of absolutism was accompanied by the gradual withering away of medieval representative institutions, which during the period of the estate-representative monarchy acted along with royal power, as well as the weakening of the role of the church in government. Boyar Duma during the 17th century. turned from a legislative and advisory body into an advisory body under the king. The boyars no longer opposed themselves to the autocracy, did not try to put pressure on the monarch or challenge his decisions. Under Alexei Mikhailovich (1645-1676), more than half of the Duma was composed of nobles.
By the first quarter of the 18th century. refers to the final approval and formalization of absolutism in Russia. It is associated with the radical transformations of the entire political system of the state undertaken by Peter I.
As a result of the public administration reform, a new vertical of central institutions emerged: the emperor - the Senate as an executive and administrative body - the collegiums as national executive bodies in charge of the most important areas of public administration. The activities of the Senate and collegiums were regulated by strict legal norms and job descriptions. In this vertical of power, the principle of subordination of lower institutions to higher ones was clearly implemented, and they were confined to the emperor.
Provincial reform of 1708-1710. changed the system of local government. Local self-government was abolished, and at the head of all administrative-territorial units were placed persons performing state service and receiving salaries for it - governors, provincial commissioners, district and volost governors. The principle of interaction between these local authorities is the same - subordination from bottom to top.
Administrative transformations completed the establishment of an absolute monarchy in political system Russia, Peter I's acceptance of the title of emperor was not only an external expression, but also a confirmation of the absolutism that had become established in Russia.

Public Administration Reform

In the first quarter of the 18th century. The transition to absolutism was accelerated by the Northern War and was completed. It was during Peter’s reign that the regular army and the bureaucratic apparatus of government were created, and both the actual and legal formalization of absolutism took place.

An absolute monarchy is characterized by the highest degree of centralization, a developed bureaucratic apparatus completely dependent on the monarch, and a strong regular army. These signs were also inherent in Russian absolutism.

The army, in addition to its main internal function of suppressing popular unrest and uprisings, also performed other functions. Since the time of Peter the Great it has been widely used in government as a coercive force. The practice of sending military commands to places to force the administration to better implement government orders and instructions has become widespread. But sometimes central institutions were placed in the same position, for example, even the activities of the Senate in the first years of its creation were under the control of guards officers. Officers and soldiers were also involved in the census, collection of taxes and arrears. Along with the army, to suppress its political opponents, absolutism also used punitive bodies specially created for this purpose - the Preobrazhensky Order, the Secret Chancellery.

In the first quarter of the 18th century. The second pillar of the absolute monarchy also arises - the bureaucratic apparatus of public administration.

Bodies of central government inherited from the past (Boyar Duma, orders) are liquidated, a new system of state institutions appears.

The peculiarity of Russian absolutism was that it coincided with the development of serfdom, while in most European countries the absolute monarchy developed under the conditions of the development of capitalist relations and the abolition of serfdom.

The old form of government: the Tsar with the Boyar Duma - orders - local administration in the districts, did not meet the new tasks either in providing military needs with material resources, or in collecting monetary taxes from the population. Orders often duplicated each other's functions, creating confusion in management and slowness in decision-making. The counties were of different sizes - from dwarf counties to giant counties, which made it impossible to effectively use their administration to collect taxes. The Boyar Duma, with its traditions of unhurried discussion of affairs, representation of the noble nobility, is not always competent in government affairs, also did not meet Peter’s requirements.

The establishment of an absolute monarchy in Russia was accompanied by widespread expansion of the state, its invasion into all spheres of public, corporate and private life. Peter I pursued a policy of further enslavement of the peasants, which took its most severe forms at the end of the 18th century. Finally, the strengthening of the role of the state was manifested in detailed, thorough regulation of the rights and responsibilities of individual classes and social groups. Along with this, the legal consolidation of the ruling class took place, and the nobility class was formed from different feudal strata.

The state, formed at the beginning of the 18th century, is called a police state not only because it was during this period that a professional police force was created, but also because the state sought to intervene in all aspects of life, regulating them.

Administrative changes were also facilitated by the transfer of the capital to St. Petersburg. The king wanted to have the necessary control levers at hand, which he often created anew, guided by immediate needs. As in all his other undertakings, Peter did not take into account Russian traditions during the reform of state power and widely transferred to Russian soil the structures and methods of management known to him from his Western European voyages. Without a clear plan for administrative reforms, the tsar probably still presented the desired image of the state apparatus. This is a strictly centralized and bureaucratic apparatus, clearly and quickly executing the decrees of the sovereign, and within the limits of its competence showing reasonable initiative. This is something very similar to an army, where each officer, executing the general order of the commander-in-chief, independently solves his own private and specific tasks. As we will see, Peter’s state machine was far from such an ideal, which was only visible as a trend, albeit a clearly expressed one.

In the first quarter of the 18th century. a whole set of reforms was carried out related to the restructuring of central and local authorities and administration, areas of culture and everyday life, and a radical reorganization of the armed forces was also taking place. Almost all of these changes took place during the reign of Peter I and had enormous progressive significance.

Let's consider reforms higher authorities power and administration that took place in the first quarter of the 18th century, which are usually divided into three stages:

Stage I - 1699 – 1710 - partial transformations;

Stage II - 1710 – 1719 - liquidation of the previous central authorities and administration, creation of the Senate, emergence of a new capital;

Stage III - 1719 – 1725 - formation of new sectoral management bodies, implementation of the second regional reform, church government and financial and tax reform.

In its most complete form, the estate-representative monarchy took shape in Russia in the middle of the 16th century, when, along with the Boyar Duma, a new political structure began to operate in the system of public administration - Zemsky Councils, which became the dictate of the time along with the reforms of the mid-16th century.

A period of transformations began, called the “reforms of the 50s.” XVI century Historians identify six reforms: public administration, local government, military, judicial, tax and church.

The reform of public administration became central, as a result of which the following vertical of supreme power took shape in the country:

tsar, in whose activities the elements of autocracy became more and more clearly intensified, i.e. such a power that is ready to cooperate with representatives of all free classes of society, but does not consider it possible to put up with the class privileges of the boyars.

Researchers identify the following specific features of the Russian class-representative monarchy of the 16th - 18th - 17th centuries:

1. Zemsky councils were convened at the will of the tsar, and therefore not periodically, but as needed;
2. They had no legal status and did not have the right of legislative initiative; their right is to discuss and make decisions on those issues that are put before the Council by the Tsar;
3. There was no elective election of deputies-representatives to the Councils. As representatives from the estates, mainly persons from local self-government were invited: heads and elected local noble and townspeople societies: zemstvo judges, provincial and townsman elders, favorite heads, kissers; from peasant communities - village elders.

The establishment of absolutism was accompanied by the gradual withering away of medieval representative institutions, which during the period of the estate-representative monarchy acted along with royal power, as well as the weakening of the role of the church in government. Boyar Duma during the 17th century. turned from a legislative and advisory body into an advisory body under the king. The boyars no longer opposed themselves to the autocracy, did not try to put pressure on the monarch or challenge his decisions. Under Alexei Mikhailovich (1645 - 1676), more than half of the Duma was composed of nobles.

As a result of the public administration reform, a new vertical of central institutions emerged: the emperor - the Senate as an executive and administrative body - the collegiums as national executive bodies in charge of the most important areas of public administration. The activities of the Senate and collegiums were regulated by strict legal norms and job descriptions. In this vertical of power, the principle of subordination of lower institutions to higher ones was clearly implemented, and they were confined to the emperor.

Provincial reform 1708 - 1710 changed the system of local government. Local self-government was abolished, and at the head of all administrative-territorial units were placed persons performing state service and receiving salaries for it - governors, provincial commissioners, district and volost governors. The principle of interaction between these local authorities is the same - subordination from bottom to top.

russia monarchy people's movement

Administrative transformations completed the formalization of the absolute monarchy in the political system of Russia. Peter I's acceptance of the title of emperor was not only an external expression, but also a confirmation of the absolutism established in Russia.