Option No. 167758
When completing tasks with a short answer, enter in the answer field the number that corresponds to the number of the correct answer, or a number, a word, a sequence of letters (words) or numbers. The answer should be written without spaces or any additional characters. The answers to tasks 1-19 are a sequence of numbers, a number or a word (phrase). The names of Russian sovereigns should be written only in letters.
If the option is set by the teacher, you can enter or upload answers to the tasks with a detailed answer into the system. The teacher will see the results of the short answer assignments and will be able to grade the uploaded answers to the long answer assignments. The points given by the teacher will be displayed in your statistics.
Version for printing and copying in MS Word
Who was at the head of the Russian troops that won a victory on the ice of Lake Peipus?
1) Dmitry Donskoy
2) Alexander Nevsky
3) Svyatoslav Igorevich
4) Ivan Kalita
Answer:
A new phenomenon in the economy Russia XVII V. became
1) the emergence of manufactories
2) the emergence of factories
3) the appearance of factories
4) development of workshop production
Answer:
Which of the following events led to the church schism in the 17th century?
1) the establishment of the patriarchate in Russia
2) secularization of church lands
3) the reform of Patriarch Nikon
4) confrontation between the Josephites and non-possessors
Answer:
In honor of the birth of an heir Basil III was built in Moscow
1) Church of the Intercession on the Moat
2) Church of the Deposition of the Robe
3) Church of the Intercession in Fili
4) Church of the Ascension in Kolomenskoye
Answer:
Read an excerpt from the work of Adam Olearius “Description of a Journey to Muscovy” and name the prince in question.
“The Grand Duke ... completely destroyed idolatry in his country and demanded from his subjects that they accept the Greek faith. According to the Russian chronicle and other sources, it is much more reliable that this happened around 988, when the brothers Vasily and Constantine were emperors in the east, and Otto III was emperors in the west. The Russian prince ... about this time, after many victories, took away from both of these brothers the city located on Pontus and called ... Chersonese; then, when they became friends, [the prince] received their sister Anna as his wife and, having adopted the Christian faith, returned the aforementioned city back to them.
1) Oleg Prophetic
2) Svyatoslav Igorevich
3) Vladimir the Red Sun
4) Yaroslav the Wise
Answer:
Manifesto on the granting of liberty and freedom Russian nobility was published
1) Peter I
2) Elizabeth Petrovna
3) Peter III
4) Catherine II
Answer:
Under Empress Elizabeth Petrovna
1) the “Letter of Letters to Cities” was published
2) the landlords received the right to create noble assemblies
3) the state took away from the church land with serfs
4) domestic customs duties have been abolished
Answer:
What was one of the reasons palace coup 1801?
1) restoration of the right of monasteries to land ownership
2) the desire of the old noble aristocracy to restore lost political positions
3) participation of Russia in the sections of the Commonwealth
4) aggravation of the Eastern question in Russia's foreign policy
Answer:
Read an excerpt from the memoirs "Notes" and indicate the name of their author.
“Never thinking of preparing for this kind of service, I had only the most superficial idea about it, but the desire to be useful to our new sovereign did not allow me to evade accepting the position he had educated, to which his high confidence called me. It was decided to establish a corps of gendarmes under my command (...) The Third Branch of His Imperial Majesty's own Chancellery, established at that time, represented the center of this new administration under my command (...) "
1) A. A. Arakcheev
2) P. A. Shuvalov
3) A. H. Benkendorf
4) N. P. Ignatiev
Answer:
What event economic history Russia happened in the second half of the 19th century?
1) the introduction of banknotes
2) creation of the Noble Bank
3) construction of the Trans-Siberian railway
4) monetary reform E.F. Kancrina
Answer:
As a result of the military reforms of Emperor Alexander II
1) canceled recruitment
2) created a guard
3) regiments of the "new system" were created
4) the entire army has been transferred to a free recruitment system
Answer:
Read an extract from a historical document and indicate the year of its creation.
“Having called on God for help, We decided to give the cause of changing the position of serfs the best executive movement.
By virtue of the aforementioned new provisions, serfs will in due course receive the full rights of free rural inhabitants.
The landlords, while retaining the right of ownership to all the lands belonging to them, provide the peasants for the established duties for permanent use with their estate settlement, and moreover, to ensure their life and fulfill their obligations to the Government, the amount of field land and other lands specified in the regulations.
Using this land allotment, the peasants are obliged for this to perform in favor of the landowners the duties specified in the regulations. In this state, which is transitional, the peasants are called temporarily liable.
Answer:
In the 19th century expedition to New Guinea
1) P. P. Semyonov-Tyan-Shansky
2) N. N. Miklukho-Maclay
3) V. I. Bering
4) N. M. Przhevalsky
Answer:
Answer:
What was one of the results of the Soviet-Finnish war of 1939-1940?
1) territorial losses of the USSR
2) measures of the Soviet leadership to strengthen the country's defense
3) entry of the USSR into the League of Nations
4) establishment of allied relations between the USSR and the USA
Answer:
In which direction was Operation Bagration carried out in June 1944?
1) Leningrad
2) Belarusian
3) Kiev
4) Chisinau
Answer:
Read an excerpt from the memoirs of Marshal of the Soviet Union A. M. Vasilevsky and indicate which year the described events refer to.
"Military campaign Armed Forces The USSR in the Far East was crowned with a brilliant victory. Its results are difficult to overestimate. Officially, the campaign lasted 24 days. The enemy strike forces were utterly defeated. The Japanese militarists lost their springboards for aggression and their main supply bases for raw materials and weapons in China, Korea and South Sakhalin. The collapse of the Kwantung Army hastened the surrender of Japan as a whole.
The end of the war in the Far East saved hundreds of thousands of American and British soldiers from death, saved millions of Japanese citizens from innumerable victims and suffering, and prevented further extermination and plunder by the Japanese invaders of the peoples of East and Southeast Asia.
Answer:
Soviet troops were brought into Afghanistan when the leader of the USSR was
1) M. S. Gorbachev
2) I. V. Stalin
3) L. I. Brezhnev
4) N. S. Khrushchev
Answer:
What was one of the main causes of the political crisis in the USSR in the late 1970s and early 1980s?
1) cancellation of the 6th article of the Constitution on the leading role of the party, the formation of a multi-party system
2) conflict between the legislative and executive powers
3) armed interethnic conflicts
4) lack of rotation of senior party and state cadres, gerontocracy
Answer:
Who from domestic writers was a Nobel Prize winner?
1) I. G. Ehrenburg
2) M. A. Bulgakov
3) M. A. Sholokhov
4) S. V. Mikhalkov
Answer:
1) resignation of B. N. Yeltsin from the post of President of the Russian Federation
2) the seizure of a school in Beslan by terrorists
3) creation of the Commonwealth of Independent States
4) start of voucher privatization
Answer:
Arrange in chronological order historical events. Write down the numbers that indicate historical events in correct sequence in reply.
1) the proclamation of a course towards the "liquidation of the kulaks as a class"
2) adoption of the Decree on Land
3) A. N. Kosygin's reforms
4) adoption of the law on individual labor activity
5) liquidation of branch ministries and creation of economic councils
Answer:
Which three of the following concepts characterize the government system of the Novgorod Republic? Write down the numbers under which they are indicated in the table.
1) council of all the earth
2) posadnik
4) Zemsky Sobor
5) thousand
6) butler
Answer:
Match events national history and the names of the leaders of the USSR, during whose leadership these events took place: for each position in the first column, select the corresponding position in the second column.
| A | B | IN | G |
Answer:
Below is a list of terms. All of them, with the exception of two, belong to the Soviet political system of the 1930s. or describe it.
1) SNK; 2) Gulag; 3) repression; 4) Cheka; 5) publicity; 6) cult of personality
Find and write down the serial numbers of terms related to another historical period.
Answer:
The process of reviewing cases fabricated in Stalin's time against Soviet citizens is called
Answer:
Fill in the empty cells of the table using the data presented in the list below. For each cell marked with letters, select the number of the required element.
Missing items
1) Louis XIII
2) Louis XIV
4) the adoption of the Manifesto on the freedom of the nobility
5) foundation of Moscow University
6) establishment of the Holy Synod
Write down the numbers in response, arranging them in the order corresponding to the letters:
| A | B | IN | G | D | E |
Answer:
Read an excerpt from the annals.
“And Vladimir began to reign in Kiev alone, and set up idols on a hill outside the tower courtyard: a wooden Perun with a silver head and a golden mustache, and Khors, Dazhbog, and Stribog, and Simargl, and Mokosh. And they sacrificed to them, calling them gods, and brought their sons and daughters, and sacrificed to demons, and defiled the earth with their sacrifices. And the Russian land and that hill were defiled with blood. But the most good God did not want the death of sinners, and on that hill now stands the church of St. Basil, as we will tell about it later. Now let's go back to the previous one.
Vladimir planted Dobrynya, his uncle, in Novgorod. And, having come to Novgorod, Dobrynya placed an idol over the Volkhov River, and the Novgorodians offered sacrifices to him as to a god.
Using the passage, choose three correct statements from the list below. Write down in response the numbers under which they are indicated.
1) Prince Vladimir ascended the throne in Kyiv, according to the will of his father Svyatoslav
2) the chronicle speaks of the "pagan reform" of Prince Vladimir
4) Khors, Dazhdbog and others - pagan gods borrowed by Prince Vladimir from Scandinavia
5) the god of thunder and lightning Perun was the patron of warriors before the introduction of Christianity in Rus'
6) Novgorod was on the famous ancient route "from the Varangians to the Greeks"
Answer:
Indicate the name of the city indicated on the diagram by the number "1".
Answer:
Consider the scheme of events of one of the periods of the Great Patriotic War and complete the task
Indicate the name of the city, indicated on the diagram by the number "2", in the area of \u200b\u200bwhich the troops of the two fronts of the Red Army united.
Answer:
Consider the scheme of events of one of the periods of the Great Patriotic War and complete the task
Indicate the name of the period during the war, which began with the events indicated in the diagram.
Answer:
Consider the scheme of events of one of the periods of the Great Patriotic War and complete the task
What judgments related to the events indicated in the diagram are correct? Choose three sentences from the six offered. Write down the numbers under which they are indicated in the table.
1) The diagram shows fighting until the end of 1943
2) The events indicated in the diagram were the first offensive of the Red Army during the Great Patriotic War.
3) The diagram shows the military operations of the Red Army during Operation Uranus.
4) A participant in the events indicated in the diagram was K.K. Rokossovsky.
5) More than 2 million German soldiers turned out to be in the encirclement ring indicated on the diagram.
6) The events indicated by the arrows on the diagram began in November 1942.
Answer:
Look at the picture and do the task
What statements about this image are correct?
Choose two sentences from the five offered. Write down the numbers under which they are indicated in the table.
1) During the period of the Olympics, the symbols of which are shown in the image, Soviet Union led by N. S. Khrushchev.
2) The Olympics, the symbols of which are shown in the image, became the second Olympics held on the territory of the USSR.
3) This image shows the symbols of the Winter Olympic Games held in Moscow.
4) The US team did not take part in the Olympics, the symbols of which are shown in the image.
5) The USSR boycotted the next Olympic Games, which were held in the USA after the Moscow Olympics.
Answer:
Which of the photographs below shows the cultural figures who were most popular during the preparation and holding of the Olympic Games, the symbols of which are presented above? In the answer, write down the two numbers under which they are indicated.
Answer:
From an 18th century document
In what year did the events described in the test take place? What city did they originate in? The death of which sovereign is mentioned in the document?
Solutions to tasks with a detailed answer are not checked automatically.
On the next page, you will be asked to check them yourself.
From an 18th century document
“The same year, April, on the 27th day, the sovereign tsar reposed and Grand Duke. At the same time, his brother, the sovereign’s lesser tsarevich and Grand Duke Peter Alekseevich, was elected to the Muscovite state as tsar ... past his greater brother, Tsarevich John Alekseevich ... And the cross to him, sovereign, was kissed by the boyars and okolniki, and duma, and stolniks, and solicitors ...
On the 15th day of the same year in May, there was confusion in the Muscovite state. Archers of all orders, and an elected regiment, and soldiers came to the city of the Kremlin at 11 o'clock with banners and drums, with muskets, with spears, with reeds, and on the run to the city they shouted, as if Ivan and Afanasy Kirillovich Naryshkin Tsarevich Ivan Alekseevich was strangled. And there were no initial people with them. And having run to the Kremlin, archers and soldiers ran to the Red and Bed porches in the royal mansions and forcibly from the top, from the sovereign's choir, from the sovereign tsar and Grand Duke Peter Alekseevich, boyars and okolnichi, and duma, and stewards were thrown from the porch to the ground , and on the ground they chopped with reeds and stabbed with spears ... "
On the 15th day of the same year in May, there was confusion in the Muscovite state. Archers of all orders, and an elected regiment, and soldiers came to the city of the Kremlin at 11 o'clock with banners and drums, with muskets, with spears, with reeds, and on the run to the city they shouted, as if Ivan and Afanasy Kirillovich Naryshkin Tsarevich Ivan Alekseevich was strangled. And there were no initial people with them. And having run to the Kremlin, archers and soldiers ran to the Red and Bed porches in the royal mansions and forcibly from the top, from the sovereign's choir, from the sovereign tsar and Grand Duke Peter Alekseevich, boyars and okolnichi, and duma, and stewards were thrown from the porch to the ground , and on the ground they chopped with reeds and stabbed with spears ... "
Using the text of the document and knowledge of history, answer who was the victim of the rebellion? What major changes have occurred in the structures of the Supreme Power under the influence of the events that have taken place? Who really began to rule the country after the settlement of issues of power?
On April 6 of the same year, the famous Five-State Oath was proclaimed, which determined the main directions for the further activity of the government3.
The radical coup that completely changed the entire socio-political system of Japan did not take place in one year, although it is commonly called the coup of 1868. In 1868, only the final deposition of the shogun took place. Its beginning must be attributed to the time when the daine (feudal princes) began to openly show disobedience to the shogun for the first time, i.e. by the end of the 50s. The end of it happened only by 1889, when the new political system of Japan was completed by the approval of the constitution.
Thus, with the fall of the Tokugawa shogunate, power in the country passes to the emperor, and the name of the shogun disappears from Japanese history.
The revolution of 1867-1868, which cleared the way for Japan's capitalist development, was unfinished. The bourgeoisie in this period had not yet matured as a revolutionary force, so the overthrow of feudal power took place under the leadership of the advanced part of the nobility and under the slogan of the restoration of imperial power.
1868 marked the beginning of a series of reforms that led to fundamental changes in the economy, politics and social relations. They were bourgeois in nature and contributed to the transformation of Japan from a feudal country into a capitalist one.
The reforms were carried out under the slogan "a rich country - a strong army." In this case, any means were used, both traditionally Japanese and borrowed European ones.
At the beginning of the Meiji era, an important role in the entire political life of the country was played by a group of young statesmen who came from noble noble families. They occupied the most responsible positions in the leadership of the country and formed the basic principles of state policy at that time. These are Kido Takamasa, Okubo Tosimito, Saigo Takamori, Iwakura Tonomi and others.
Young politicians agreed to lead the coming reforms because they well understood that their power could only be effective and lasting if they were able to solve the complex problems that had accumulated over many decades of the Tokugawa era. Therefore, they decided to improve society through reforms. Under the conditions of the complete collapse of the policy of isolation and the intensified political and economic expansion on the part of the capitalist West, Japan faced an additional complex and acute problem of maintaining its state independence. And the Meiji leaders already understood quite well that under these conditions they could not limit themselves to only minor internal reforms. The only way to resist the pressure of the West is the rapid rise of Japan.
Thus, the new international situation has become an additional stimulus for the policy of transformation.
The role of the West, the world capitalist system in the introduction of the bourgeois structure in Japan was enormous.
Immediately after the events of 1867-1868. Numerous specialized missions were sent abroad, which were instructed to study the organization and technology of industrial production and banking in the USA, shipbuilding in England, medicine and military affairs in Germany, etc.
The statesmen of "renovating" Japan faced an alternative: either fidelity to tradition or bourgeois transformations. They made a compromise decision - to carry out bourgeois reforms, taking into account national characteristics, “... in order to open the state to the spirit of the new time ...”4.
“In 1870, an era of fundamental reforms began, which changed the structure of Japanese state and public life in accordance with European forms,” recalled I. Lauterer, an eyewitness of those events.
An urgent measure was the reform of the state system, which was carried out from January to May 1868. Bakufu was liquidated, and the capital was moved to the city of Edo, which was renamed Tokyo.
On May 17, 1868, the "Seitase" government decree was issued, which is sometimes called the "first constitution of the Meiji government"6. It provided for the creation, under the auspices of the emperor, of a state council (dajokan), vested with legislative, executive and judicial powers. This decree indicated that all responsible posts in the government should be given to the highest court nobility and daina; middle and lower positions should be given to samurai.
These activities were aimed at the implementation of the main task of the new government - the centralization government controlled, the unification of the country under the rule of an absolute monarchy.
The post of chairman of the state council was taken by the chairman of the court nobility, Sanjo Sanetomi. Subordinate to this body was an advisory council consisting of the upper and lower chambers, the office of the chairman, and five departments: Shinto Religious Affairs, Finance, Military, Foreign Affairs, and Justice.
The responsibilities of the upper chamber included the development, revision and publication of laws, the exercise of the highest judicial power, the appointment of senior officials and the solution of all political issues. The emperor also took part in the work of the upper chamber.
The lower chamber, created in accordance with the emperor's oath, was a purely advisory body to the government. It consisted of representatives of principalities, cities and prefectures appointed by the government for an unlimited term.
Thus, the formation of a new political system took place.
Emperor Mutsuhito himself did not have the full power of state power. The government bureaucracy enjoyed unlimited rights in solving state affairs. In fact, the state apparatus was in the hands of representatives of only 4% of the total number of houses of the nobility and samurai. These were mainly people from the principalities of Satsuma and Choshu. The government of Japan in those years can rightly be called the government of "clan factions".
On April 5, 1868, a government decree proclaimed a return to the ancient principle of Shintoism - "the unity of ritual administration and government." The religious rite in the imperial court was supposed to demonstrate the direct connection between religion and politics.
In the field of domestic policy, the main goal was to eliminate the separatism of the principalities and unite the country around the emperor. But the first decrees proclaimed by the new government in 1868-1868 did not yet solve the main task - the political unification of Japan, since the country's armed forces and economic resources continued to remain in the hands of the feudal princes. In 1868, the government confiscated "... the possessions of 22 of the 273 principalities that existed in the country, and subjugated eight cities ..." 7 previously under the control of the shogunate. The power of the new government almost did not extend to the lands of the other principalities.
The problem of abolishing the feudal principalities became one of the most important tasks of the government. However, the distribution of the prerogatives of the central government on the territory of the principalities was carried out gradually and very carefully. In May 1868, local bodies of the Meiji government were created in each principality, acting as intermediaries between the central government and the local administration. At the end of 1868 government representatives were appointed to each principality. The candidate for the post of Commissioner was nominated by the Daine himself from among the representatives of the local class bureaucracy, but was subject to approval by the central government.
The implementation of these measures, which were aimed at strengthening the central government, strengthening the financial base of the country, the government began with negotiations with the princes and the most influential advisers.
The government managed to enlist the support of the leading principalities in the implementation of the planned activities. An agreement was reached that the three principalities - Choshu, Satsuma and Tosa - would send significant contingents of their troops at the disposal of the Tokyo government as the main replenishment of the imperial armies being created.
In March 1869, the feudal princes of the Satsuma, Choshu, Hizen, and Tosa clans issued a joint address declaring their renunciation of all rights to the principalities and urging other princes to follow suit.
This was followed by a government decree inviting the feudal lords who had not yet renounced their rights to principalities to do so. In this way, the central government formally succeeded in extending its power to the territories of all the principalities. The feudal princes were left in charge of their former possessions as hereditary governors (tikhanji) with the payment of a state pension to them.
The so-called return of the daine's letters of commendation to the emperor, carried out in 1869, was only the first step towards the elimination of feudal fragmentation. Daimyos, in fact, as before, remained the lords of the principalities due to rooted feudal traditions.
The decisive blow to feudal separatism was dealt only in August 1871, when the principalities were completely destroyed and prefectures (“haykhan tiken”) were created instead. The country was formed 72 prefectures (KEN) and three metropolitan prefectures (FU): Tokyo, Kyoto and Osaka.
The liquidation of the domination of the Daine dealt a new strong blow to the feudal system. The administrative system was restructured in accordance with the interests of the capitalist economy.
In an effort to preserve the privileges of the nobility, the government established a cash pension for the daimyo, approximately equal to 10% of the former gross income of their estates. The size of the pension established “... 318,428 daina and samurai, were as follows: 16 people received 70 thousand or more yen per year; 8 people - from 5 to 70 thousand; 15 people - from 30 to 50 thousand; 80 people - from 10 to 30 thousand; 74 people - from 5 to 10 thousand; 393 people - from 1 to 5 thousand; 15,484 people - from 100 to 1 thousand; 175,474 people - from 25 to 100 yen; 127,184 people – less than 25 yen”8.
In 1878, the state council (dajokan) was divided into three departments: the central chamber (sein), the right chamber (UIN) and the left chamber (sain), which was supposed to play the role of a representative body.
The supreme power was concentrated in the central chamber. The right chamber performed mainly administrative functions.
The positions of heads of departments, which had previously been filled almost exclusively by princes or kuge (imperial court nobility), now passed to representatives of the lower samurai. This was the essence of the reorganization. The lower samurai after the liquidation of the principalities openly took power into their own hands.
The left chamber was exclusively an advisory body; its members were appointed by the emperor.
Thus, as a result of the reform, large feudal property was destroyed, the country was unified in accordance with the interests of the development of the capitalist economy.
In March 1872, three new estates were established (instead of the previous four - samurai, peasants, artisans and merchants): the highest nobility (kazoku), which included former daine and kuge; nobility (shizoku) - samurai; common people (heimin) - the rest of the population. According to the 1887 census, “3,400 people belonged to the nobility, 1.9 million to the shizoku estate, and 36.2 million to the people, which in total amounted to 38.1 million.”9
In fact, the samurai did not lose its privileged position. The cadres of officials were replenished mainly from among the samurai. The equality of all classes was proclaimed. “All the inhabitants of Japan are now subject to the same laws, all people are allowed to engage in any profession, including all branches of trade and industry,”10 wrote T. Bogdanovich in 1905. A series of acts was also carried out to destroy the regulation of life. Marriages between people of different classes were allowed. The common people were given the right to have surnames.
Thus, this whole complex of reforms led to the destruction of the feudal class system, opened the way for the development of capitalism.
Samurai aspired to modernize the country according to the European model.
At the same time, the reforms of the government were half-hearted. The leaders of the new Japan, striving for their country to take a prominent place among the colonial powers, focused on strengthening the country's military power.
The nobility were given officer posts in the newly created army: representatives of the Choshu principality in the ground forces, representatives of the Satsuma principality in the navy. However, otherwise, the army was created on the basis of universal conscription.
In February 1870, the government issued an order to mobilize people of the samurai class between the ages of 17 and 35 into the army and requisitioned weapons and military materials in the principalities. “In April 1871, a 10,000-strong imperial guard was created from the selected troops of the principalities of Choshu, Satsuma and Tosa”11.
The government, with great care, gradually reorganized its armed forces on modern way. At first, compulsory military service was introduced as an experiment only in five prefectures, the law on universal military service was issued only in December 1872.
According to this law, all male citizens who have reached the age of 20 were subject to conscription into regular troops, reserves or territorial troops. The whole country was divided into six military regions with offices in the cities of Tokyo, Sendai, Nagoya, Osaka, Hiroshima and Kumamoto.
Despite the fact that the new Japanese army was created according to the European model, it inherited many features of the old feudal military. The basis of ideological propaganda in the army was the samurai code of honor "Bushido", Shintoism with its ancestor cult and belief in the divine origin of the emperor, paternalism ("the officer is the father of the soldier").
By 1883, the size of the Japanese army was brought to 200,00012.
Created in 1870 Navy Japan.
In 1871, the Japanese government decided to send a large diplomatic delegation (the so-called Iwakura mission) to the United States and European countries in order to acquaint these countries with Japan's achievements and begin preliminary negotiations on the revision of unequal treaties.
However, the US government not only rejected Iwakura's proposals, but also made new demands, in the frequency of granting Americans the right to freely travel throughout Japan and conduct trade there, own real estate, while fully preserving the right of extraterritoriality (according to the treaties, foreigners could live and trade in Japan only in ports open to trade).
Having not achieved any results in the USA, the Japanese delegation went to Europe, where they visited England, France, Belgium, Holland and Germany. But these trips were also unsuccessful.
Thus, Japan's first attempt to renegotiate unequal treaties with the Western powers was not successful. However, the Iwakura mission for the first time officially demonstrated to all countries Japan's persistent desire to restore its independence.
Japan continued to carry out transformations within the country. She took measures to develop transport and create modern means of communication - mail, telegraph, telephone. In 1872, with the help of English specialists, the first telegraph line Tokyo-Yokohama, and in 1873 - the Tokyo-Nagasaki line. The construction of railways began with funds received from a foreign loan. In 1872, the first Tokyo-Yokohama railway in Japan was laid, with a length of 28.8 km. Then, “the Osaka-Kobe (32.5 km) lines in 1874 and the Kyoto-Osaka (38.5 km) lines in 1877” were built.
More intensive railway construction began in 1882 as a result of attracting private capital in 1881. The Japanese railway company Nihon Tetsudo was created, which received generous government subsidies and loans. “By 1890, a network of railways with a total length of 2200 km was created”14.
During 1887-1889. Four private railway companies appeared, which, together with the Nihon Tetsudo company, owned most of all the country's railways.
In the financial sector, the new government is also carrying out a number of important events. In 1871, a single financial system for the whole country was introduced. But this measure did not allow all financial problems.
The government, due to financial difficulties, was forced to capitalize on the pensions of the samurai. In 1873, it invited all Daina and Samurai to voluntarily capitalize their pensions, undertaking to pay them a certain amount in the amount of a pension for several years - half in cash, half in government bonds.
In August 1876, a forced "capitalization of pensions" was carried out, i.e. “... replacing them with a one-time state compensation in the amount of a 5-14-year amount of pensions payable by the government partly in cash, partly in government bonds of 5-7% per annum, depending on the size of the pension”15. Under this law, the payment of compensation finally ceased in 1882.
As a result of the capitalization of pensions, the total amount of lump-sum government compensation for dainyo and samurai reached 173,185 thousand yen16.
The huge sums of money received from the state treasury by former dainyo and samurai of the highest ranks in exchange for canceled pensions were invested partly in industry and agriculture, and mainly in the so-called "national banks" (ginko kokuru). In fact, these tanks were not state-owned, but private. The task of the "national banks" was to finance commercial enterprises, establish a system of money circulation, etc.
In July 1873, Ono and Mitsui's commercial affairs established the first such bank in Tokyo with a capital of 2.5 million yen. Following the Tokyo bank, "national banks" arose in Osaka, Yokogamo and Niigata.
The government in 1876 revised the previously adopted provision on "national banks". The latter were granted even greater independence in the field of issuing banknotes; the guarantee fund was reduced. The obligation to exchange banknotes of these banks for gold was replaced by the obligation to exchange banknotes for government treasury notes.
The reform of the banking system gave the former nobility a wide opportunity to create banks, the main capital of which would consist of loan bonds received in exchange for pensions, to turn these bonds into banknotes, etc.
This reform was carried out in the interests of the former dainyo and high samurai, with the aim of turning them into moneylenders and bankers with the help of the government, as well as in the interests of the big bourgeoisie.
In 1880, the Minister of Finance, Matsukata Masayoshi, launched a monetary reform that was in the interests of the same big bourgeoisie. The government decided to withdraw from circulation, non-exchangeable paper money and banknotes, redeeming and replacing them with new, full-fledged money. The reform helped strengthen the credit and monetary system, encourage exports, limit imports, and accumulate funds for further strengthening the army and navy.
The accumulation of funds was carried out by increasing certain categories of direct taxes, as well as a significant increase in indirect taxes. In 1880, the sake tax was more than doubled. In 1882, the government again increased the tax on sake, introduced a stamp duty, taxed rice traders and stock exchange intermediaries. In 1885 a new tax was imposed on soybean oil and confectionery. The amount of local taxes in 1879 was determined at 24 million yen, and in 1882 at 35 million yen17. “In 1873-1885. taxes accounted for 92.6% of the total state revenues”18. The government created a special currency Yokohama Bank, which developed active in foreign markets. Also an important link in the implementation of the financial reform was the organization by the government in 1882 of the Japanese Bank (“Nihon Ginko”), which was granted the monopoly right to issue new banknotes. The resulting excess of government revenues over expenditures, an increase in the gold reserve fund, allowed the government to withdraw about a third of paper money from circulation.
Thus, as a result of the financial reform, the government managed to solve the problem of accumulating the state budget, stabilize and strengthen the monetary system.
Events 1868-1867 did not improve the situation of the bulk of the country's peasant population. The government was convinced that without agrarian reforms it was impossible to stop the rise popular movement. A serious reason for the agrarian reforms was also the need to create a solid financial base.
The purpose of the agrarian reform was to get the funds necessary for the modernization of industry and the strengthening of the army into the state treasury.
The first step in this direction was the abandonment of the Dainyo from their possessions. Further, in February 1872, the ban on the sale of land, established back in 1643, was lifted. In the same month, the government decided to conduct a cadastre and secure private ownership of land by those who actually owned it, by issuing certificates of land ownership (tiken). All land in the state was divided into private and government (plots in respect of which it was impossible to establish the owner).
The reform had a progressive significance, which consisted in the fact that it abolished the land monopoly of the feudal class and introduced the bourgeois principle of private ownership of land.
In 1873, a law was passed to change the land tax. The government's Land Tax Reform Notice dated July 28, 1873, stated that "all previous regulations regarding receipts from plots of land and fields are repealed, and as soon as the survey confirming the right of ownership is completed, a new land tax will be established at a rate of 5 percent of land value.
Thus, numerous feudal taxes and duties were replaced by a single tax of 3% of the value of the land, regardless of the crop. Instead of kokudak (pay with rice), the new tax was paid in cash. Due to the extremely high price set by the government for land, it accounted for almost 50% of the gross income of the peasant household. This led to enslavement and the loss of land by the peasant.
Land tax revenues accounted for almost 80% of the country's state budget. As a result of the half-hearted agrarian reform, which preserved landownership, and the high land tax, conditions did not develop for the formation of strong independent peasant farms of the capitalist type. The land plots received by the bulk of the peasantry, as a rule, were small in size. The reform activated the process of class differentiation. The ever-increasing number of tenants, who until recently were owners, were opposed to the rich village elite, which retained the features of semi-feudal landownership.
An important result of the Meiji agrarian reform was the creation of a labor market, a condition necessary for the development of capitalism.
The government set a course for the development of modern industry, creating state-owned enterprises and encouraging private initiative in every possible way. It set about building the first military arsenals, factories and railways, ironworks and shipbuilding factories, large paper-spinning, silk-winding, weaving, match factories, glass, cement, breweries and other factories, a significant part of which it transferred to private entrepreneurs.
The development of Japan's industry was largely connected with military-strategic tasks, with the problem of modernizing the army and navy. The basis of the modern military industry was the enterprises built in the Tokutawa era. In 1870, a military arsenal in Tokyo came into operation, created on the basis of the Sekiguchi military factory, which belonged to the shogunate. The shogunal ironworks and shipyards at Yokosuka were used to create a major naval base. With the help of foreign specialists, these enterprises were reconstructed and expanded.
Mining enterprises were expanded, many of which had previously been at the disposal of the shogunate and principalities, in particular the gold and silver mines on Sado Island, the copper mines in Kosaka, and the iron mines in Kamaishi.
The government took every possible measure to encourage the development of private industry. It built modern industrial enterprises, which were to serve as a model of capitalist entrepreneurship. For example, “... In 1872, the government, with the help of French specialists, founded a silk-winding factory-school in Tomioka (Gumma Prefecture) to teach new methods of silk-winding”20. Cement and glass factories in Shinagawa, printing houses and other enterprises were built with state funds.
The construction of so-called exemplary enterprises with state funds also pursued the goal of organizing their own production of those goods that were imported from abroad, and increasing the government's foreign exchange funds by increasing the export of Japanese goods.
To direct the construction of government enterprises and manage them in 1870, the Department of Industry (kobusho) was created, using the achievements of Western science and technology. “There were about 750 foreign specialists in the service of the Department of Industry”21.
The protectionist policy of the government contributed to the accumulation of capital in the hands of the big bourgeoisie of the merchant houses of Mitsui, Konoike, Shimada, and others.
State protectionism in the first decade of capitalist Japan manifested itself most clearly in the organization of the large shipping company Mitsubishi. Mitsubishi was founded with the help of the government by a samurai from Tosa-Iwasaki Yataro. Beginning in 1875, the government paid Mitsubishi an annual subsidy of 25,000 yen22.
The policy of state protectionism in the first years of the new regime was also carried out in relation to the private capitalist textile industry. So, in 1871, the cotton buyer Kasina founded "with the help of the government his spinning mill in Tokyo"23. The state provided great assistance to private entrepreneurs in other industries.
Thus, all the activities of the first governments of the new Japan in the 70-80s. of the last century (Arikugawa, Iwakura, Sanjo) was aimed at creating conditions for accelerating the industrial development of the country in order to compensate for its relatively belated transition to a new society and reduce the distance that separated Japan from the level of development of the large capitalist states of the West.
At the end of 1880, the government set a course for the further strengthening and development of Japanese capitalism and the military base of the state. The state saw the means of achieving this goal not only in stabilizing the exchange rate, but also in transferring state enterprises to the big bourgeoisie.
State enterprises played a large role in the development of large-scale capitalist industry. But soon the situation changed. Private entrepreneurs began to invest their capital in industry. In addition, state-owned enterprises did not justify the network as a source of increasing state revenues. Financially, government factories, with the exception of some exemplary textile factories that worked for export, turned out to be unprofitable. The state treasury could not withstand the additional costs of maintaining unprofitable government enterprises. Therefore, the government decided to move to a policy of encouraging private capitalist industry and transferring state enterprises to private individuals.
Thus, by the 80s of the nineteenth century. Japan created the economic prerequisites for the rapid growth of large-scale private capitalist industry.
This change in the government's industrial policy was marked by the issuance of the Law on the Transfer of Factories (kojo harai-sage gaisoku) of November 5, 1880. In the preamble to this law, the government explains the reasons for its policy as follows: well organized and working at full capacity; therefore the government renounces its ownership of the factories, which are to be run by the people.”24
Non-military industries were transferred first. The government began to gradually hand over mining enterprises and shipyards to private individuals. The government sold the Ashio copper mines to the Furukawa firm, the country's largest shipyard in Nagasaki, the Ikuno silver mines and the Hokkaido coal mines to the Mitsubishi firm on very favorable terms.
The result of the protectionist policy of the state was the uneven and one-sided development of industry with a predominance of light industry, mainly the textile industry. The cotton industry developed most rapidly. Japanese researchers called this industry "key industry" ("kii sangyo"), meaning that it was the first industry established in Japan. This, in particular, is evidenced by “... the growth in the number of cotton spindles during 1877-1897. from 8 thousand to 970 thousand, and cotton yarn products - from 2 thousand to 401 thousand kan"25.
In the second half of the 1980s, an industrial boom took place in Japan. At that time, such large joint-stock companies as Kanegafuchi boseki, Tokyo boseki, Setsu boseki, Ozaki boseki, Naigaimen and others appeared in the textile industry, uniting in Japan's first cartel organization Boseki rengokai. . "From 1885 to 1890. the number of paper mills increased from 20 to 30.
Thus, all these reforms were progressive in their meaning for Japan, because they contributed to the development of capitalist relations in the country. The position of the bourgeoisie in the ruling noble-bourgeois bloc was strengthened. At the same time, the samurai, with the exception of the privileged feudal nobility, who occupied high positions in the state apparatus, found it difficult to find a place for themselves in the new socio-political system. Dissatisfaction with the reforms, the desire to turn back historical development at any cost and return to the old order has become a characteristic position of a significant part of the samurai.
Carrying out bourgeois transformations, the liquidation of feudal principalities, the dissolution of samurai squads in connection with the introduction of universal military service - all this led to the fact that a significant part of the lower samurai was knocked out of the normal life rut. The state apparatus in the center and in the localities, although it consisted almost exclusively of samurai, still could not provide jobs for all of them.
As a result of this, the unsettled part of the samurai, as well as part of the higher nobility, began to show more and more dissatisfaction with the bourgeois transformations, turned into opponents of the new system.
Part of the samurai began to resort to terrorist acts against prominent statesmen, to organize conspiracies and armed uprisings.
In February 1877, a samurai uprising broke out in the principality of Satsuma, led by Takamori Saigo, in which several tens of thousands of people took part. Saigo's troops, after several months of bloody battles with the government army, were defeated in September 1877. For the bourgeois government, the defeat of the samurai served not only to strengthen its positions, but was also used as proof of the legitimacy and necessity of bourgeois reforms.
The peasants were also dissatisfied with their position. The scope of the peasant movement instilled the most serious fears in the government. Thus, “in 1868 there were 17 uprisings, in 1879 - 48, in 1870 - 31, in 1873 - 36"27. Moreover, out of more than 30 peasant uprisings that took place in 1873, 12 broke out in connection with the law on universal military service28.
The agrarian reform in the form in which it was carried out did not solve most of the social problems of the countryside and did not satisfy the needs of the vast majority of landowners. This reform further worsened the position of the peasants, intensified the process of social stratification in the countryside, increased the category of completely unstable people, potential farm laborers and workers. Due to these circumstances, the peasants rise to fight. Their speeches were of a spontaneous nature, but there was a very real and justified set of reasons behind them.
Thus, the revolution of 1867-1868, which cleared the way for the capitalist development of Japan, was unfinished. The bourgeoisie in this period has not yet matured as a revolutionary force, the overthrow of feudal power takes place under the slogan of the advanced part of the nobility and under the slogan of the restoration of imperial power. A significant part of the reforms was carried out in the form of a compromise with the feudal class. Some of its most active figures took leading positions in the state apparatus and the army.
At the same time, fundamental social and economic transformations were carried out: a centralized state was created, feudal estates were abolished, and a land reform was carried out. Many dissatisfied with the reforms participated in the 70s. Х1Х century in samurai rebellions. The government, aiming to overcome economic and military backwardness, pursued a protectionist policy, helped to form a layer of privileged bourgeoisie, created an army to seize external sources of raw materials and the market, since the domestic market remained narrow.
The incompleteness of the revolutionary events of 1867-1868. in Japan manifested itself in all the reforms carried out by the noble-bourgeois bloc. It was determined by the dual position of the bourgeoisie, which did not fight for completeness of power, but tried to satisfy its ally - the feudal lords - with concessions and push back, prevent the revolutionary actions of the masses, dissatisfied with the limited reforms.
Nevertheless, bourgeois revolution became the most important frontier separating feudal Japan from the period of the country's capitalist development, although burdened by many feudal remnants. The unification of the country contributed to the formation of the Japanese bourgeois nation and the creation of an independent national state.
§ 2. The Ottoman Empire from the Tanzimat reforms to the adoption of the "Midhat Constitution"
The year 1839 opened a new era in the transformative policy of the supreme power of the empire. A prominent statesman, Mustafa Reshid Pasha, prepared and Sultan Abdulmejid approved the Gulhane Act, which had a fundamental difference from previous innovations29.
The Gulhane Act opened a whole series of transformations in the field of law, economics, public education, which received the general name tanzimat (from the Arabic word "tanzim" - streamlining).
Much attention was paid by the initiators of the Gulhane Act to the implementation of its provision on the inviolability of life, property and honor of all citizens. For this purpose, a criminal code was adopted, a commercial code was developed, the State Council and provincial constitutional councils were established - majilis from representatives of the Muslim and non-Muslim communities. All these measures contributed to a certain limitation of arbitrariness and lawlessness in the actions of the administration, to a decrease in cases of confiscation of property. However, they did not affect the autocratic power of the Sultan in any way and therefore could not radically change the existing order. The Turkish ruling elite retained a monopoly on all the most important civil and military posts.
In an effort to improve the country's economy, Mustafa Reshid Pasha turned to the revision of the tax system. Extraordinary taxes and corvée were abolished, and the collection of the poll tax from non-Muslims, the jizya, was streamlined. At the same time, the attempt of the Porte to abolish the tax-paying system, ruinous for National economy, ended in failure. The same fate befell the projects of organizing a number of metal-working, textile and paper enterprises, measures to improve agriculture, and attempts to improve finances.
In 1853, in connection with the Crimean War, Mustafa Reshid Pasha's reform activities were interrupted.
In 1856, the second period of the Tanzimat began. Its main provisions were contained in the Hatt-i-Humayun of 1856, which was a broad program of internal transformations30.
During the Tanzimat period, the structure of state governments underwent significant changes. In the process of implementing the reforms, new bodies were created that corresponded to the needs of the time: the Council of Ministers, ministries, general imperial and special councils (Mejlis), as well as self-government. In order to collegially discuss issues of state administration, various special advisory bodies were created at the highest departments of civil and military administration. Were created following tips: financial, accounting, police department, postal and telegraph supervision, admiralty, agriculture, industry, indirect taxes31. Under Abdul-Mejid 1, the most important tasks of the domestic and foreign policy of the state were actually decided by the Council of Ministers, but due to the established practice, its decisions were formally approved by the Sultan.
The Supreme Council of the Tanzimat held the highest position in rank and authority compared to other councils. The Council had the right to consider bills on all matters that it considered worthy of attention, as well as to accept and consider proposals directly submitted to it by official and unofficial persons.
It is necessary to note the reform of the provincial administration. Most of the Ottoman provinces were ruled by pashas (governors or wali) who were appointed by the central government.
The Tanzimat sought to limit the powers of the provincial government by subjecting the governors to strict law. The provincial administration was or reorganized in such a way that the military functions of the governors were transferred to the muhafiz (custodian), financial - to the defterdar (treasurer)32. They reported on the results of their activities to the Porte.
In 1864, a law was passed that established a new administrative division of the Ottoman Empire. The country was divided into vilayets (regions), sanjaks (districts), kazas (districts), nakhiye (volosts). These administrative divisions were established along the lines of the French administrative division.
At the head of each of these administrative units were placed, respectively: wali, mupasatif, kaymakam, mudir. In the villages, the headman, the mukhtar, was the representative of power.
Such a system was supposed to ensure both a strict centralization of power and government control over the activities of the provincial administration, primarily the wali.
The law of 1864 deprived the wali of judicial power, as well as the right to personally manage the finances, which consisted of the amount of taxes. The finances of the vilayet became in charge of a special treasurer - the defterdar, appointed by the Porte.
The new law also provided for the creation of pri vals and lower heads of administrative units of advisory councils - mejlis.
Members of the Majlis were elected from the population and had to belong to the so-called "nominal" people - large landowners, local rich people, etc.
In the 1960s and 1970s, the Porte took the path of limiting the self-government of non-Muslim religious communities. The religious and secular functions of the communities were separated. Already in 1856, the Porte developed a series of measures designed to revise the privileges of the communities under the pretext that they no longer corresponded to new ideas.
Hatt-i-Humayun of 1856 confirmed the rights and benefits enjoyed by non-Muslim religious communities. At the same time, he provided for serious changes in their structure. The leadership of the communities, which consisted of the highest spiritual dignitaries headed by the patriarchs, was freed from the functions of secular government. They were to deal exclusively with ecclesiastical affairs.
As before, the Turkish monarch remained the focus secular power(as a sultan) and spiritual (as a caliph). True, spiritual power was practically, according to a long-established tradition, in the hands of Sheikh-ul-Islam and his apparatus. Nevertheless, the spiritual power of the Sultan was also very significant, since he appointed and dismissed the Sheikh-ul-Islams. In the eyes of millions of Sunni Muslims around the world, the spiritual authority of the Caliph was very high.
A special article emphasized that the State Council should not interfere in the affairs of the executive branch, that its task was solely to discuss issues defined by the regulations. The Council has only to enforce the relevant laws and regulations.
After Crimean War reforms continued in the central executive bodies - ministries. New ministries were established - justice, education, public works, waqfs.
In general, the reforms in the central apparatus of power were insufficient and ineffective.
The reforms affected the army and navy.
By the law of June 22, 1869, the Turkish army was reorganized along the lines of the French. “The new law established the division of the army into four parts: permanent (nizan), on indefinite leave (ihtiut), reserve (redif) and regional troops (mustahfyz)”35. A new order was adopted for recruiting the army by drawing lots (and not by recruiting) from Muslims subject to conscription. The service life was determined at 20 years.
Abdul-Aziz paid much attention to the creation of a new navy in Turkey.
The reform program outlined in Hatt-i-Humayun in 1856 was supposed to contribute to the formation and development of bourgeois institutions and institutions in Ottoman Empire, which at the same time was to create legal and economic conditions for expanding the trade and economic expansion of European capital in it. At the same time, being fixed in Article 9 of the Paris Peace Treaty, Hatt-i-Humayun of 1856 acquired the character of the Party's international obligation, which the Western powers used as a legal basis for the implementation of their economic and political claims in Sultan's Turkey.
The "classic" off-road and archaic vehicles of the Sultan's Turkey slowed down the trade and economic expansion of the West towards it.
The Ottoman government was aware of the need to improve communications. In 1866, a special government commission was established to develop road construction projects in the empire. True, as practice has shown, the activities of this commission were reduced mainly to the repair of the streets of Istanbul. Therefore, in the vilayets, road construction issues were in the hands of local authorities. Much attention was paid to road construction, for example, in the Danube vilayet in the second half of the 1960s, when Midhat Pasha was the governor. Under him, about 3 thousand km of roads were laid in the vilayet and 420 bridges were built36. At that time, foreign capital also played a significant role in the construction of dirt roads: “French companies built roads in those years that connected Beirut and Damascus, and in Western Anatolia Bursa with Mudanya”37. The condition of roads in a number of areas of the Ottoman Empire, however, improved somewhat.
In the second half of the XIX century. the Ottoman state was not yet able to independently build and operate railways.
The Turkish government was forced to abandon its original intentions to build railways on its own. Railway construction in the Ottoman Empire in the 50-70s of the XIX century. (as well as later) was carried out mainly by foreign concessionaires.
The British were the first to take up railway construction. In 1856, an English company received a concession for the construction of the 130-kilometer Izmir-Atsdyn railway. Another English joint-stock company in 1863 acquired a concession for the construction of the Izmir-Kasata railway line (93 km).
By the 70s, the length of all the railways of the empire was only 1600 km38. All of them were relatively small railway lines. Their main purpose was to provide a reliable connection between the Ottoman ports and the hinterland and thereby create conditions for expanding the marketing of European products and the export of agricultural raw materials from the country.
The Tanzimat reforms, despite all their inconsistency and limited nature, nevertheless managed to create conditions for a certain rise in the economic life of the Ottoman Empire. During the reform period, there was a significant increase in agricultural production. An indirect proof of this is the increase in the total amount of ashar collected throughout the country. During the period from 1848 to 1876. revenues to the state treasury from this item of income increased almost 4 times, rising from 194.8 million to 743.6 million kurush.
The balance of the country's foreign trade at the time under review was already chronically deficient. In 1863-1872. the value of imports exceeded the value of exports by an average of 27 million tons annually40. The empire's foreign trade deficit was covered by foreign loans and increased the country's general economic and financial dependence on European capital.
In the second half of the 19th century, in the Ottoman Empire, separate geographical zones of the predominant economic influence any foreign power. But at the same time, the mutual struggle, trade and economic competition of the Western countries became more and more clear, tendencies were outlined for the regrouping of their forces and changes in the established, primarily, spheres of economic influence.
On the one hand, the world market stimulated the development in the Ottoman Empire of the structure and volume of production in isolation from the needs historically established in the Ottoman society, and on the other hand, under its influence, the population of the countries formed a new structure and set of needs without a corresponding internal production base. The resulting disproportions, or "scissors" in the development of the spheres of production and consumption meant that the Ottoman economy was gradually losing the ability to reproduce on its own basis. The economic independence of the Ottoman Empire was undermined.
After the Crimean War, the Turkish reformers sought to provide a financial basis for the ongoing reforms in the country, continued to restructure the financial and tax system of the empire. In the spirit of the Tanzimat reforms, new financial institutions were created, efforts were made to streamline the collection of traditional taxes from the population and new ones were introduced.
But the fiscal policy of the Porte after the Crimean War still "worked" mainly for the withdrawal of the product produced by the taxable population of the country.
The central government sought to drain funds from the vilayets, bled them dry and offered little in return.
Despite the remaining flaws of the Ottoman tax system, the general revival of the economic life of the empire in the 1950s and 1960s ensured a significant increase in tax revenues to the state treasury. The total amount of state revenue from 1857 to 1871 almost doubled - from 1038 million to 1920 million kurush41. However, the growth in revenues of the Ottoman government at that time clearly did not correspond to the dynamics of its expenditures.
The high degree of financial exploitation of the Ottoman Empire by European loan capital, and the general crisis situation in the world economy in the mid-70s, undoubtedly, were those external economic factors that led the empire to bankruptcy. But besides these external reasons, there were also internal reasons. This is, first of all, that the budget of the empire was formed mainly at the expense of taxes collected from the rural population, and was, therefore, very vulnerable and unstable.
The financial bankruptcy of the Porte was a natural result of the involvement of the empire, with its agrarian, low-productivity economy and backward feudal state, into the system of international capitalist credit.
The budget of the Ottoman Empire at this time became chronically in deficit.
After the first foreign loans received by the Porte during the years of the Crimean War, the Ottoman government was forced to turn again to external sources of financing. Prior to its bankruptcy in 1875, the Porte managed to conclude agreements on another 15 external loans. As a result, "by 1875 the amount of loans reached 242 million lire"42.
The external debt of the country grew very rapidly. If in 1854 it was 75 million francs, and in 1863 - 200 million francs, then in 1874 it was already 1 billion. francs43.
In October 1875, the Turkish government was forced to announce its inability to repay the internal debt in the required amount. The Turkish government's official announcement of Turkey's bankruptcy indicated that over the next five years, settlements on foreign and domestic debts would be halved. However, in 1876 payments on the public debt were suspended altogether. The Ottoman Empire went bankrupt.
The growth of the state debt of the Ottoman Empire caused increased attention of European creditors to the state of its finances. Objectively, they were interested in modernizing the country's financial system, in the transition of the Porte from medieval to bourgeois norms in the organization and implementation of both its general financial policy and the specific practice of financial transactions. Otherwise, the exploitation of the Ottoman Empire through the export of loan capital would have been extremely difficult.
Both internal and external circumstances prompted Porto to establish in 1863 on the basis of the English Ottoman Bank that had existed in the country since 1856, a central state bank, designed to modernize the financial management of the Ottoman Empire. The concession for the organization of this bank, called the "Imperial Ottoman Bank", was initially issued for a period of 30 years to English and French financiers (then it was extended for another 50 years). Under the terms of the concession, the duties of this new bank included servicing all operations related to accounting for financial receipts to the state treasury, as well as making the necessary payments from it by order of the Minister of Finance. The bank had the exclusive right to issue banknotes valid throughout the empire. Therefore, beginning in 1863, many foreign loans were made with the direct assistance and participation of the Imperial Ottoman Bank.
Being formally state-owned, this bank actually belonged to English and French, and since 1875 also to Austrian capital.
Traditionally, Ottoman land law divided land into three main categories.
1. Miri - state. It included the bulk of the land of the country. The right of supreme ownership of these lands belonged to the state.
2. Mulk - “private”. These are unconditional feudal land grants.
3. Waqf - land, the income from which was received by religious institutions or for social and charitable needs43.
In December 1857, the Sheikh-ul-Islam issued a decision, approved by the High Council of Justice, on the rules for the transfer of lands to Miri men and women who died childless, and to expand the circle of persons entitled to receive their lands on the condition of paying tapu (a document on the right to own earth of peace). “It was decided, first of all, to transfer such plots to the father or mother of the deceased free of charge. If there were none, then a certain order of transfer of the put on by tapu was established”44.
Regulations for the expansion of the circle of heirs were included in the Land Law of 1858.
On February 25, 1858, this decree was extended to the lands of Miri, the income from which was dedicated to waqfs (the so-called "untrue"). “From now on, untrue waqfs began to be called sultan waqfs with orderly documentation”45.
The innovations of 1839-1858 concerning agrarian relations were preparations for the agrarian law of 1858.
The primary preparation of the law was entrusted to a special temporary commission. All previous land laws since the time of Suleiman Qanuni and all fatwas of Sheikh-ul-Islams related to issues of land ownership were considered. On April 21, 1858, the project was presented to the Council of the Tanzimat, then submitted for approval by the Sheikh-ul-Islam and the Grand Vizier. After the approval of the Sultan, the law was finally approved on June 6, 1858. The Land Law dealt with the right regime of ownership of the lands of the world, including those that were at the disposal of the waqfs. The property of the mulk was only mentioned, since the possession of this property was regulated by Sharia law. “In Art. 1, five categories of lands were named that existed in the state in accordance with the traditional Ottoman classification: 1) lands of the mulk (memluk), 2) state (miriye), 3) vakfs (mevkufe), 4) public (mutrake), 5) empty ( mevat)”.46
The land law was distinguished by conservatism.
It was impossible to use the land as one wanted, for example, to engage in the manufacture of bricks on one's own plot. It was forbidden to bury the dead on this earth. Without the permission of the official, it was impossible to plant trees, plant gardens.
Land under the law of 1858 was allowed to be transferred free of charge or sold for a conditional price only with the permission of the appropriate government official.
At the same time, the ability of the landowner to dispose of the allotment expanded. He could lease his allotment and take a loan for it or give the land as a pledge.
Although the rights of peasants to land under the law of 1858 were expanded, the right to property did not become complete. The supreme right of ownership remained with the state, feudal restrictions on the use and disposal of the lands of the Miri were preserved.
Due to the increased demand, mainly external, for Turkish agricultural products, ciftliks began to become more widespread. In the socio-economic sense, chiftlik is “... a concrete historical manifestation of the general objective process of development of the forms of state land ownership and private land ownership. Chiflitkchi land ownership is a new advanced form of land ownership, characteristic of the period of decay of Ottoman feudalism...”47.
Ciftliks in those times were a progressive factor in socio-economic relations in agriculture, and, consequently, in Turkey as a whole.
If we talk about the evolution of tax policy during the years of the Tanzimat, it took 15 years after the publication of Hatt-i-Humayun before a new decree was adopted on the procedure for handing over the ashar from the auction and collecting it directly by the state (June 5, 1871).
“The first section of this resolution considered in detail the procedure for organizing auctions for the delivery of ashar at the mercy of persons who offered the price set by the administration, the procedure for collecting ashar by tax-farmers depending on the crop, etc.”48. There was no word in the resolution about the abolition of the ransom.
So, in the 60-70s, in such an important issue as the taxation of peasants, there were no changes, not a single, even insignificant reform was carried out.
On the main issue - the ownership of Miriya land and part of the waqf lands - the new legislation retained the basic norms of Sharia law and, above all, state ownership of these lands. Thus, the obstacles that prevented the involvement of most of the country's cultivated lands in commodity-money circulation and in the process of capitalist development were not removed.
The new laws created more stable conditions for the ownership of state land, mainly for large landowners. Thanks to these laws, the latter secured for themselves the right to own the lands that they illegally seized before and during the liquidation of the military-feudal system.
The new agrarian legislation did not in the least alleviate the position of the peasants, did not weaken their dependence on large owners - secular and spiritual; even minimal changes in the tax system were not carried out.
Thus, the promise of Hatt-i-Humayun to remove all obstacles to the development of agriculture was not fulfilled. The new agrarian legislation did not satisfy the needs of the development of agriculture, the interests of both large landowners and the broad peasant masses, Turks and non-Turks. Therefore, the struggle for further reforms in agrarian legislation continued for many decades after the Tanzimat.
In general, the transformations of the Tanzimat period indicate that the supporters of the reforms did not limit themselves to declarative promises, but energetically and systematically tried to implement the principles of the Gulhane Hatt and reorganize the state structure of Ottoman society.
The Tanzimat reforms were closely connected with each other and with the main idea of the hatt, they developed and concretized it.
The transformations of Mustafa Reshid Pasha, which were aimed at promoting the capitalist development of the Ottoman state, were aimed mainly at reforming public administration, law, education, and much less - the economy. The listed transformations were necessary, since the development of capitalist relations in the country was hindered by the traditional medieval state structure, backward legal norms, lack of modern education, the dominance of feudal ideology.
Since the Tanzimat reforms to some extent contradicted traditions and Sharia, and also affected the material and social interests of officials, the clergy and other feudal elements, their implementation required great efforts and often proved to be ineffective.
The reforms of the Tanzimat, for all their progressiveness, assumed the strengthening of the oppression by Turkey of the Christian subjects of the Porte.
The ground for bourgeois reforms in European countries and in the Ottoman Empire was different in terms of the level of socio-economic development and the dominant ideologies. There were serious factors in the Ottoman Empire that hindered the success of the reforms.
The Tanzimat reforms did not justify the hopes placed on them, however, and the successes achieved were of great importance for the further historical development of the state.
Mustafa Reshid, better than other statesmen of his time, understood the need for transformation to preserve the empire. His contribution to the formation of bourgeois institutions is significant. Innovations created a number of necessary conditions for the development of capitalist relations, led to a noticeable liberalization of the state regime and ideological shifts.
However, the reforms proved to be ineffective. The transformations of the Tanzimat were carried out by a relatively small group of statesmen who considered them inevitable and necessary. Most of the bureaucracy and officials opposed the reforms. Some of them believed that the reforms would not benefit the state and at the same time undermine its traditional foundations laid down in the Middle Ages, others violated the laws of the Tanzimat because their implementation was detrimental to their material well-being. The appointment of state salaries, streamlining the collection of taxes, limiting autocracy deprived officials of profitable gifts (baksheesh) and the possibility of extortion.
The consequence of the administrative reforms was a noticeable growth of civil bureaucracy. She had a wide influence on the course of transformations. The old military-feudal bureaucracy hindered the transformations.
In the early 1950s, the disappointment of the Ottoman government as a result of the reforms was associated with the inflation that had manifested itself by that time, a chronic deficit in fiscal affairs, and economic depression. This prompted many dignitaries to speak in favor of abandoning further reforms. Lack of strict accountability in finance, keeping the principles of tax policy almost unchanged medieval state, negligence and abuse interfered with ordering in the financial area.
Due to the fact that in the collection of taxes, the abuses of government officials not only persisted, but even intensified, broad sections of the population were also dissatisfied with the reforms, identifying them with abuses. In the 1940s and 1950s there were frequent uprisings that broke out in various parts of the Ottoman Empire. They continued into the 60s and 70s.
The Tanzimat reforms were ideologically incompatible with Sharia law. This resulted in explosions of Muslim fanaticism in the 40s of the 19th century, accompanied by the murders of Christians.
All this hindered the development of capitalism and the local bourgeoisie, which could lead the implementation of reforms. The struggle of bourgeois institutions against feudal traditions under the conditions of the Ottoman Empire required many decades.
Thus, both Japan and Turkey are developing in the period under review under the influence of an external factor. The unequal treaties they concluded with European countries and the United States contributed to the involvement of these two states in the world capitalist system. However, the Japanese government coped with this task more successfully and was able to join the capitalist system through reforms earlier than the Ottoman Empire with its backward, predominantly agrarian economy.
The beginning of reforms in Japan was associated with the fall of the old regime - the regime of the Tokugawa shogunate and with the restoration of imperial power. The reforms in the Empire of Japan turned out to be successful because the old political elite was replaced by a new elite representing new forces - samurai and bourgeois circles. In the Ottoman state, the reform process was a natural phenomenon that began in the 1920s and 1930s. Х1Х century The Tanzimat reforms were a continuation of the reforms of Selim III and Mahmud II. But this process failed, because in Turkey, unlike Japan, the old regime remained.
If the administrative reforms carried out in Japan contributed to the destruction of a major feudal property, the unification of the country in accordance with the interests of the development of the capitalist economy, then in the Ottoman Empire these transformations were insignificant and superficial, the reforms did not abolish the old feudal forms, and therefore had no effect.
The Ottoman government did not take any measures to resolve the estate issue, while in Japan all the feudal estates were destroyed, which opened the way for the development of capitalism.
Active actions were taken by the reformers of both sides in the transformation of the army and navy. They took as a model the army of a European character. But the power of the Turkish army was significantly weakened as a result of the Crimean War, and it took years for it to restore its lost strength. In addition, in Turkey, unlike Japan, there was no universal military service.
The Japanese government introduced a unified financial system, capitalized samurai pensions, as a result of which it received funds that it invested in the development of agriculture and industry. The Ottoman government was forced to look for funds abroad, resorting to foreign loans, which it could not repay. All the money went to them to pay the growing debts, and not to develop the economy. Türkiye has become bankrupt, it had nothing to replenish the state budget. In Japan, a successful monetary reform solved the problem of the accumulation of the country's budget, stabilized and strengthened the monetary system.
Japanese trade in the Meiji era had an active trade balance, growth in turnover, which also contributed to the inclusion of this system in the world capitalist system. The balance of Ottoman trade was in deficit, which led to its lagging behind Japan in the process of transition to capitalism.
In area agricultural policy Japanese authorities carried out activities in order to obtain financial resources for the development of industry, while the reformers of the Tanzimat era did not pay much attention to the development of industrial facilities, considering agriculture a priority. In Japan, as a result of reforms, it was possible to eliminate the land monopoly of the feudal class, to replace numerous taxes and duties with a single tax. The result of Japanese agrarian reforms was the creation of a labor market necessary for the development of capitalism. Agrarian measures in the Ottoman Empire did not remove obstacles to the development of agriculture. Instead of equal taxation, the leaders of the Tanzimat received abuse and corruption. The Land Law of 1858 did not give full ownership of land to those who cultivated the land. Chiftliks, which arose even before the Tanzimat reforms, remained the only progressive phenomenon of that time, but on the other hand, they doubled the oppression of the peasant population.
If we talk about the social consequences of agrarian reforms, then neither in Turkey nor in Japan did these reforms improve the situation of the peasants. Other segments of the population of these countries were not satisfied with the reforms being carried out. The reaction to the reformist policy of governments: there were numerous uprisings, riots, national liberation struggle of the Balkan peoples.
The reforms carried out both in the Ottoman Empire and in Japan by a small group of statesmen were of a bourgeois nature. Their goal was to turn the country from feudal to capitalist, to preserve the country's independence from Western states. However, these transformations achieved real positive results only in Japan, in the Ottoman state they failed, since religious features were not taken into account, national character, measures were not taken for the development of industry, the formation of the local bourgeoisie.
Thus, as a result of the reforms, Japan entered the capitalist, bourgeois path of development, and in the Ottoman Empire, these reforms only laid the foundation for the transition from feudal to bourgeois institutions. Therefore, one should not evaluate the tanzimat only negatively, since it was of great importance for the further development of the state and its formation on the capitalist path of development.
Chapter II. The history of the adoption of the first constitutions of Asian states
§1. Japanese Liberal Opposition in the Struggle for the Establishment of a Constitutional Regime
After the Meiji Restoration, it became more and more urgent to create a political structure fundamentally different from the previous one, which could ensure the normal functioning of the entire social organism in the new conditions. An ideological struggle, still unusual for Japan, unfolded to determine the place and role of each social group in the hierarchy of society. This process required new political organizations and methods.
The "Meiji coup" satisfied the political ambitions of only a small part of the nobility, primarily in southwestern Japan. The main part of the population received nothing from him. Therefore, dissatisfaction with the new regime, which did not justify their hopes, quickly grew in different segments of the population. The vigorous measures taken shortly after the coup to intensive development and modernization of the country also caused a far from unambiguous reaction in society. All this stimulated the growth of political activity in the 70-80s. Criticism of the regime was carried out both from the left and from the right.
Some large feudal lords were dissatisfied with the predominant role of representatives of important principalities in determining the policy of the country. They demanded "genuine progress and change", meaning by it, however, only a more "fair", from their point of view, division of power, i.e. "their wider participation in the government of the country" 1. Part of the samurai, really affected by the changes taking place in the country, came out with demands for the restoration of their old privileges. With this camp, which criticized the regime from the right, the authorities quickly agreed.
More dangerous for the authorities were the forces that criticized the regime from the left. They had a much broader social basis and greater opportunities to influence the course of the evolution of society. But this camp was characterized by extreme heterogeneity and during the period under review its composition gradually changed. Therefore, it was very difficult to realize all the potentialities inherent in it.
Open claims against the Meiji regime on the left at first sounded mainly from among the new rural elite, associated with entrepreneurship, trade and usury. These were the demands of rural samurai (gosi), who turned into landlords, as well as other rural rich (drive), who often resorted to the labor of hired workers. They believed that they could achieve their goals only if such a representative body of power was created, in the work of which they hoped to participate.
In the late 1970s and, especially since the beginning of the 1980s, when the gosi and the drive, satisfied with some concessions from the authorities (in particular, a reduction in land tax), took the side of the regime, the voices of the discontented part of the growing urban bourgeoisie sounded more and more insistently in the opposition camp. as well as peasants and workers. Their claims, of course, turned out to be more radical and, for the most part, completely unacceptable to the ruling circles.
All these opposition currents, very different in their social essence and ideas about the content of the necessary changes, received in Japan the general name of the Movement for Freedom and People's Rights (Jiyu minken undo). This movement was a natural reaction to the "Meiji coup" of different sections of the population, who tried in their own way to determine the possible nature of the new society. In essence, it turned out to be the main driving force behind the evolution of society, since it was thanks to its activity that such important elements of the new society as the system of political parties and parliamentarism were laid.
By the mid-1970s, the political opposition movement could no longer confine itself to debating clubs and unions, disputes in newspapers and magazines. There was a need for new organizational forms, and in 1874 the first political associations were created: the Society of Patriots (Aikokuto) and the Society for Determining Purposes in Life (Risshisha), which declared the need to introduce constitutional government in Japan. The government has found it useful to go along in order to turn their opponents into allies. To this end, at the beginning of 1877, it decided to reduce the land tax from 3 to 2.5% of the value of the land2. This was met with satisfaction by the landlords and wealthy peasant landowners. But the determined opposition demanded not only economic, but also political guarantees of its position. In this regard, in the summer of 1877, when government troops fought fierce battles with the rebellious samurai in Satsuma, large landowners sent a petition to the emperor, seeking his consent to the creation of parliament. In response to this, the government in 1878 announced that from 1880 it would allow a system of deliberative assemblies in prefectures and cities, i.e. in essence, it agreed to the expansion of the rights of participation of the opposition layers of the nobility and the bourgeoisie in solving local affairs.
However, this also did not satisfy the opposition. She sought to participate in solving not only local, but also national affairs. Its political organizations continued to insist on the introduction of a parliamentary form of government. And the authorities, fearing that their stubbornness might lead to deepening differences with these circles, made promises in 1881 to create a parliament in ten years, in 1890. On October 12, 1881, a royal decree was issued solemnly confirming this promise. The text of the decree stated that "having inherited the throne occupied ... by the dynasty for more than 2500 years, and rightly exercising ... the fullness of the power transferred to us by our ancestors, we have long meant to gradually introduce a constitutional form of government with the aim that our successors on the throne were guided by the established law "3. With this goal in mind" ... we established in the 8th year of Meiji (1876) the Senate and in the 11th year of Meiji the provincial assembly, thus laying the foundation for major reforms; moreover, we believe that these actions of ours should from the very beginning convince you, our subjects, of our determination in this regard. Further, the authorities announced that in Meiji 1823 (1890) they would open a parliament in order to implement the announced decision in practice.
The Meiji leaders intended to use the time remaining until that date to carefully prepare for the new conditions for the political administration of the country. As a result of this act, those influential circles that could realistically count on participation in the work of the new government body began to gradually move away from the movement and prepare for activities in the conditions of parliamentarism. The process of their self-organization began, the development of the main goals and principles of policy, which they intended to protect and carry out within the framework of parliament.
In the early 80s. in the country there was a significant rise in the peasant movement due to a sharp deterioration in the position of the peasantry. The main demands of the peasants were reduced to the cancellation of the debt, their struggle was directed against the landowners and usurers. Small and part of the middle landowners expressed their dissatisfaction with the fact that, as a result of deflation, the size of the land tax had actually become much higher than before 1881. The samurai, who had not yet found a firm place in the new capitalist society, showed particular concern, since in November 1882 the payment of converted pensions had to stop. The landowners and the petty and middle bourgeoisie were indignant at the fact that huge government subsidies and subsidies were given not to them, but to the big bourgeoisie.
It was in this atmosphere of public petition and discontent that Japan's first political parties arose.
In October 1881, the first political party in Japan, Rikken Jiyuto (Constitutional Liberal Party), or simply Jiuto, was created on the basis of the "Establishment of Parliament", headed by Itagaki Taisuku. It united the liberal landowners, the rural bourgeoisie and the intelligentsia. A small part of the large urban industrial bourgeoisie joined the party.
The party leadership received support from the Mitsui firm, which occupied a leading position in the silk industry in Japan, and therefore was closely associated with the Japanese landowners and the rural bourgeoisie.
The party program was rather short:
"1. Our party strives to achieve freedom, to ensure to everyone his rights, to achieve happiness for all and to reform society.
We will fight for the introduction of the best constitutional system.
Our party strives to achieve its goals in full unity with those who share our principles and set themselves the same tasks.
Unlike other parties, the program of the Liberal Party did not mention the monarchy in a single word. This testified to the relatively radical moods of its members. The ideas of freedom, equality and fraternity, formulated in a deliberately vague form (Article 1), nevertheless, attracted fairly wide sections to the party.
In March 1882, a second political party was organized - "Rikken Kaishinto" ("Constitutional Reform and Progress Party"), or simply Kaishinto, led by Akuma Shigenobu. It mainly expressed the interests of the big commercial and financial bourgeoisie, but united heterogeneous elements: the big and middle urban bourgeoisie, big bourgeois landowners, as well as representatives of the moderately liberal intelligentsia. The leadership of Kaishinto was closely associated with the Mitsubishi company.
The party program said:
"We, loyal subjects of the emperor, have united, setting ourselves the following goals:
Setting the task of internal political reforms, to achieve the expansion of political rights.
Eliminate the intervention of the central authorities, create a solid foundation for local government.
Expand voting rights as society develops.
Conduct as few political negotiations as possible with foreign countries, as many trade relations with them as possible.
Seek to have a monetary system based on a hard metal currency"6.
In essence, this was a program for the immediate immediate tasks of the development of Japanese capitalism, all the main provisions of which were subsequently gradually and steadily implemented.
To counteract both parties, in March 1882, the government created the "Rikken teiseito" (Constitutional-Imperial Party), or simply teiseito, which included mainly officials. Fukuchi Genichiro was considered the head of the teiseito, but the actual leaders were Ito Hirobumi, Inoue Kaoru and other members of the government. The party program stated that:
"... 3. The general leadership of the supreme power ... belongs to the emperor. Power is exercised on the basis of the constitutional system.
4. It is necessary to establish a bicameral parliament.
5. It is necessary to introduce unlimited suffrage ...
7. The Emperor enjoys the right to approve or cancel the decisions of Parliament...
10. Public freedom is the freedom of assembly and expression public opinion that does not violate the order and security of the country ... "7.
However, the teiseito was unable to attract any significant number of supporters into its ranks and did not play any role in the political arena.
Of the socialist organizations of that time, the largest was the "Toyo shakaito" ("Eastern Socialist Party"), created in May 1882. The party's program stated that its goal was the happiness of the masses8.
"Toyo shakaito" united the peasant poor of the Matsuura coalfield in Kyushu and under the slogans of "equality" and "happiness of the masses" understood the confiscation of land surpluses from the landlords and kulaks and their equal distribution among the peasants.
The party was subjected to police repression and in June 1882 was dissolved.
Thus, in Japan in the 80s, there were actually only two parties - kaishinto and jiyuto.
In November 1882, Chairman Jiyuto Itagaki and Vice Chairman Goto Shojiro went on a business trip abroad with the authorization of the mission to study the parliamentary systems of France and other European countries. The trip caused dissatisfaction among some party members and a lot of noise in the press, accusing Itagaki and Jiyuto of having links with the government and Mitsui's firm, which provided financial assistance when organizing a trip.
At the same time, the liberal party began preparations for a coup d'etat to carry out some bourgeois-democratic transformations. The Jiyuto leadership aimed to create a constitutional monarchy; representatives of the middle landlord-bourgeois strata were to play a leading role in the government and in parliament. The jiyuto did not have a detailed political program and did not put forward any projects for resolving the agrarian issue. The maximum demand in this area was the demand to grant a moratorium on peasant debts and to reduce the land tax.
In the future, the leadership of the liberal party decided on a wider use of the peasant movement in order to come to power. It intended, however, to seize power, to immediately suppress this movement.
Having an extensive network of newspapers, jiyuto led, despite the repression, a fairly wide anti-government propaganda. "Jiyuto created a network of sports clubs that had sports grounds, that is, young people underwent military sports training. Separate conspiratorial groups were preparing terrorist acts against members of the government"9.
In November 1882, the so-called events took place in the city of Fukushima (Nagano Prefecture). Here, a group of jiyuto members led by Kono Hironako were arrested; they were accused of planning a coup d'état. The main material of the accusation was the "oath" of the members of the group, recorded during the investigation from the words of the arrested.
The most important points of the "oath" are as follows:
"1. Our Party strives to overthrow the hated" despotic government in power and to establish a truly consolidated state system.
The members of our party are ready to sacrifice their lives in order to achieve this goal.
in March 1883, a conference of the jiyuto party of the seven districts of the Hokuriku region was held. The meeting was very stormy, all the speakers said that the existing situation can only be changed by force.
A few days after the conference, the authorities made arrests among its participants. In particular, the Fentyugumi (Heavenly Retribution) group, led by Akai Kageaki, was arrested. its task was the physical elimination of all members of the government.
The failure of the group of Kono and Akai, who failed to prepare their speeches and link them with the actions of the peasantry, showed the need to rely on a broader social base. The Jiyuto leadership decided to change tactics. In March 1884, after the return of Itagaki and Goto from abroad, a jiyuto congress was held in Tokyo, at which there was a turn in the policy of the party; many participants in the congress called for active action and the use of the peasant movement.
However, the party as a whole was against the slogan of overthrowing the monarchy and had no agrarian program. Jiyuto supported only the everyday demands of the peasantry for the annulment or postponement of debts, for tax cuts, and so on. Jiyuto did not connect these agrarian demands with her slogans of changing the government, winning the "natural rights of man", and therefore the slogans of the party remained abstract and meaningless to the peasant.
Organizational preparation for the general performance was carried out very carefully. The party's plan was to destroy the government when it arrived in full force at Honjo station on the occasion of the opening of a new railway line.
Unexpectedly, the opening ceremony of the railway was postponed. However, the ordinary mass of peasants, attracted by the conspirators, on May 16, 1884 raised an uprising that was not successful.
In September 1884, events took place on Mount Kata in Itagaki Prefecture. In the city of Shimodate in the same prefecture, there were 16 revolutionary jiyuto members11. The central leadership of the jiyuto instructed this group to prepare for a terrorist act against government officials, which they first intended to carry out on July 19, 1884 in Tokyo, and then at the end of August at Utsunomiya station, where some members of the government were supposed to arrive. But the leadership of the liberal party, fearing failure, at the decisive moment withdrew support from the group and moved away from it.
The police attacked the trail of the group, the latter decided to temporarily go to the mountains and wage guerrilla warfare. The police squad, sent the next day to pursue, was resisted. This caused a stir in Tokyo. The Ministry of the Interior set up an emergency guard in Ibaraki Prefecture and "... sent a company of gendarmes to the Mount Kata region"12. The members of the group immediately entered into a fight with the police, as a result of which almost all the partisans died.
The current activities of left-wing groups frightened the leaders of the liberal party. After the failure of the speech on Mount Kata, on October 29, 1884, a party congress was held in the city of Osaka, which decided to dissolve the party (even earlier, in September 1883, the kaishinto dissolved itself).
But it was a tactical move. The formal dissolution of the party did not mean its refusal to continue the struggle. Two days after the dissolution, events began in the area of the city of Chichibu (Saitana Prefecture), during which for the first time it was possible to combine the struggle of the party with the movement of the peasant masses in an organized manner. These events were the culmination point of the Movement for Freedom and People's Rights.
The armed uprising in Chichibu began on December 1, 1884, a month ahead of schedule. It was very large: about 10 thousand people took part in it"13.
Although the uprising turned out to be isolated, in itself it had an organization unusual for a peasant uprising: an offensive plan was worked out, detachments led by commanders were created in advance, and economic supplies were established for the detachments. However, the uprising was put down.
The connection between the peasant movement and the liberal movement, which was especially clearly revealed during the events in Chichibu, caused confusion in ruling circles Japan. Throughout the country, especially in the central region, the entire police and detective apparatus was put on its feet. The police managed to get on the trail of other fighting groups, which consisted of members of the disbanded jiyuto.
As a result of arrests and brutal police terror, the radical wing of Jiyu minken undo was defeated. The reasons for the defeat of the movement for freedom and people's rights, which began to acquire the character of a bourgeois-democratic movement in 1882-1884. and reached its highest rise in 1884, mainly as follows: the workers did not participate in the movement, the poorest and part of the middle peasantry began to be organized in the movement only at its last stage - 1884, the party had no agrarian program, the big bourgeoisie stood aside from movement.
All this taken together predetermined the defeat of democratic tendencies in the movement, yet had a great positive value. It prevented the government from raising the land tax and made it necessary to prepare for the introduction of the Constitution and the Parliament.
In 1883, immediately after the return of a government delegation led by Ito Hirobumi from a trip abroad, the drafting of a Japanese constitution began, designed to strengthen the monarchical system in the country. “A limited group of people participated in the drafting of the project: Ito Hirobumi, Inoue Kaoru, Ito Miyoshi and Koneko Kentaro”14. The work was shrouded in secrecy and proceeded in the country villa of Ito, where, with the exception of the consultant of the German law professor Reisler, known for his reactionary views, no one was allowed.
The government was in a hurry to take measures to strengthen the monarchical system, before the opening of parliament, which many ministers portrayed almost like a revolutionary convention during the French Revolution. Huge tracts of land in Hokkaido, former communal forests and grasslands throughout the country, passed into the possession of the crown. “The emperor became the largest landowner: in 1882 he owned 1,000 tyo of land, and by 1890 already 365,000 tyo”15. part of government shares in a Japanese bank was registered as the property of the imperial family. In July 1884, a law was published introducing five titles of the highest nobility (prince, marquis, count, viscount, baron). These titles were awarded to more than 500 persons of the highest nobility (kazoku)16. Thus, the monarchical bureaucracy was significantly increased and strengthened, from which the Chamber of Peers subsequently began to be completed.
There was a reorganization of the government structure. In December 1885, the dadjokan was abolished and instead a cabinet of ministers was created on the European model, uniting 10 ministries. The post of Minister of Custodian of the Imperial Seal was established, who became the emperor's closest adviser on all political issues. The first cabinet of ministers was led by Ito Hirobumi. However, these measures to strengthen the bureaucratic machine could not satisfy the broad sections of Japanese society. At the end of the 1980s, the Movement for Freedom and People's Rights began to revive again, which now proceeded in the form of a campaign for the speedy adoption of a constitution and for the abolition of unequal treaties. By October 1887, the movement took shape in the Daido sen danketsu organization (“General agreement”, more precisely: “unity in big things, differences in small things”).
"General consent" united representatives of the liberal landowners and the bourgeoisie. It included members of the disbanded Jiyuto and Kaishinto parties.
At the head of Daido sen danketsu was Count Goto Shojiro.
Goto gathered around the “General Accord” almost all political parties and groups, to one degree or another dissatisfied with the policies of the government.
In 1888, the preparation of the draft constitution was completed. In order to avoid a broad discussion of the project in the constituent assembly or parliament, at the beginning of 1888 a special body was created - the secret council. It initially consisted of 12 councillors, most of whom belonged to the top feudal bureaucracy of the Satsuma, Choshu, Tosa, and Hizen domains. At the head of the council was Ito Hirobumi, who therefore resigned from the post of prime minister. In this narrow bureaucratic body, preparations were to be completed for the enactment of a constitution that would completely secure the ruling monarchical bureaucracy from any encroachments on the part of the leading parliament to take a real part in the government of the country.
For about half a year, the Privy Council was engaged in an article-by-article discussion of the project, which took place in the strictest secrecy. In November 1888, the constitution was read by the emperor in the palace in the presence of members of the government, senior dignitaries and foreign representatives. This, on the one hand, emphasized the absolute power of the Japanese monarch, and on the other hand, the authority of the emperor prevented the possibility of any speeches against certain provisions of the constitution. On February 11, 1889, the constitution was published.
Here is how Hugo Vandenberg, who was traveling around Japan at that time, writes about this event: “The crowning of the great edifice of reforms was completed by the proclamation of a representative form of government. February 11, 1889, ... of which the Prussian constitution served as a model”18.
The "Constitution of the Great Japanese Empire" (Dong Nippon teikoku kempo) went down in history as the "Meiji Constitution".
§ 2. Development of the constitutional movement in the Ottoman Empire
The Tanzimat reforms of the late 50s - early 70s, continuing the line of reforms of the previous period, led to some positive changes in the political, administrative, economic and cultural life of the country. And yet, the results achieved did not meet the needs of the development of a huge state. This discrepancy led to a gradual increase in discontent in various social strata. The young Turkish intelligentsia became a spokesman for this discontent and a propagandist of new political ideas and concepts. It was among the intelligentsia that the ideas of transforming the Ottoman Empire into a constitutional monarchy first appeared and were formulated.
The first attempt to change the existing situation in the country was made as early as September 1959, when the Porte became aware of the preparation of a speech against Sultan Abdul Mejid. But its participants were immediately captured and sentenced to various terms of exile. This event entered the history of Turkey under the name of the "Kuleli Incident" of 1859. The constitutional movement originated in the mid-60s of the XIX century and played an important role in the socio-political and cultural life of the Ottoman Empire for quite a long period - until the dispersal of the first Turkish parliament.
The starting point of the Turkish movement was June 1965, when a secret society known as the "Society of New Ottomans" was established in Istanbul. "In a short time, the number of members of the society reached 245; they were divided into groups of 7 people each"21. The leaders and ideologists of the society were prominent representatives of the young Turkish intelligentsia. Among them were the outstanding writer and publicist Namyk Kemal, well-known writers and publicists Zia Bey and Ali Suavi. Among the members of the society there were also many people from wealthy families, the Istanbul aristocracy. The society included many major civil and military officials. One of the largest Turkish dignitaries of that time, Ahmed Midhat Pasha, was also secretly connected with him. The "new Ottomans" began to recruit supporters among the educated part of the army and navy officers, teachers of the new secular school, officials, writers and artists. Describing the social composition of society as a whole, we can say that the majority of them were young Turkish intelligentsia, mostly feudal-bureaucratic in origin.
Some Turkish researchers believe that the society did not have a political program in the modern sense of the word, that it was only an organization of politically inclined youth and limited itself to criticizing the actions of the government. Another part of Turkish historians believes "... that the society had a program that set the task of proclaiming a constitutional monarchy"22. Unfortunately, there is no information about what the original program of the "new Ottomans" was. A document that to some extent characterizes the political orientation of society in late 1865 - early 1866 is a letter from the Egyptian prince Mustafa Fazyl Pasha to Sultan Abdul Aziz. The "new Ottomans" agreed with the reform program outlined in the letter.
"This program demanded the elimination of the arbitrariness of officials, the development of handicrafts, trade and agriculture, the strengthening of the country's financial position and the elimination of foreign interference in its internal affairs"23. At the same time, all hopes were pinned on the liberal sultan, surrounded by dignitaries honest and devoted to the interests of the state. The author's reasoning contained a hint of constitutional government, but did not speak about it directly.
The members of the "Society of New Ottomans" were united by dissatisfaction with the external and internal politics government. They all agreed that the government of Grand Vizier Ali Pasha should be eliminated. However, the "new Ottomans" did not have a unanimous opinion on the measures that should be taken to change the policy of the government.
It is possible that some constitutional projects already existed at the beginning of the society's activity. Indirect evidence can be the fact that the "new Ottomans" adopted as the organizational basis of society the charter of the Carbonari, who fought in the first half of the 19th century for the destruction of the feudal-absolutist regimes in the Italian countries, actively opposed the restoration of the Bourbon dynasty in France and took an active part in the July revolution of 1830.
But the clear demand for a constitutional monarchy became part of the political platform of society only after the spring of 1867. I.E. Petrosyan and Yu.A. Petrosyan cites in his work the fact that "in May 1867" Namyk Kemal told one of his acquaintances, Abdurrahman Hasan Bey, that he talked with Jean Pietri, who talked to him about the constitution for two hours ... finally convinced that a constitution can be introduced in our country too"24.
In the spring of 1867, a group of members of the society, including its most significant ideologues, emigrated to Europe. The decision to emigrate was made in response to repressive measures against the government opposition press, with which the leaders of the secret society were closely connected. At the same time, a group of members of the society made an unsuccessful attempt at a conspiracy against Ali Pasha's government. Many conspirators were arrested. The "New Ottomans" who emigrated to Europe, with the financial support of Mustafa Fazyl Pasha, began to publish their own newspapers, which promoted the goals and objectives of the "Society of New Ottomans". In the propaganda activities of the "new Ottomans" abroad, the newspapers "Mukhyer", published by Ali Suavi in London in 1867 - 1868, and the newspaper "Hurriyet" ("Freedom"), which was published by Namyk Kemal and Ziya Bey in 1869, played an important role. -1870s in London, and then Zia Bay in Geneva, "Hurriyet" became in the full sense of the word the organ of the "Society of New Ottomans", the most significant of the editions of the Turkish free press of the 60s of the XIX century. It was on the pages of this newspaper that such important political demands and goals of the "new Ottomans" as the transformation of the Ottoman Empire into a constitutional monarchy and the convening of the Chamber of Deputies were formulated.
"Hurriyet" criticized Porto for the failures of the Tanzimat reforms, advocated limiting the rights of the Sultan and the responsibility of the Porte before the law, formulated the idea of the need to separate the legislative and executive powers, sought to theoretically substantiate the principle of compatibility of the ideas of constitutionalism with the norms of the Koran and Sharia"25.
Emigration played a very significant role in shaping the ideological and political views of the "new Ottomans". Here they were able to closely get acquainted with the progressive literature of France, in particular with the works of Rousseau and Voltaire, Montesquieu and Hugo, Molière and Lamartine. A number of works by these outstanding French thinkers and writers were translated by Namyk Kamal and Ziya Bey into Turkish, which undoubtedly played an important role in the social and political life of Turkish society at that time. In particular, the study by representatives of the Turkish intelligentsia of the works of Rousseau and Montesquieu, which contained sharp criticism of absolutism and promoted the ideas of a constitutional monarchy, was of great importance.
In the early 1970s, the Porte tried to liquidate the activities of the "new Ottomans", enabling their leaders to return to their homeland. In 1871-1872. some emigration figures returned to Istanbul. In June 1872, Namyk Kemal began publishing the newspaper "Ibret" ("Instruction"), which soon became a distributor of the ideas of constitutionalism. In March 1873, the government banned the publication of Ibret, and its editor was exiled to the island of Cyprus. At the same time, a number of other journalists and publicists from among the supporters of the "new Ottomans" were expelled from the capital. However, it was no longer possible to stop the spread of their ideas among the Turkish intelligentsia. This set the stage for the political struggle for constitutional reform.
The constitutional movement arose as a result of the search for a way out of the most difficult economic and political crisis, which had long been engulfed by the Ottoman Empire and which became especially aggravated in 1875-1876. the empire was on the verge of disaster: its economic situation deteriorated sharply due to drought and crop failure: in the fall of 1875, the Turkish government announced partial financial bankruptcy: there were liberation uprisings in Bulgaria, Bosnia and Herzegovina; the threat of interference by European powers in the affairs of the Ottoman Empire becomes more and more real. In European capitals, politicians and the press were animatedly discussing the "Eastern question" that had once again risen to the order of the day.
In such an environment, anti-government demonstrations began in Istanbul. The movement against Sultan Abdulaziz and the policies of the Grand Vizier Mahmud Nadim Pasha grew day by day. He was headed along with Midhat Pasha, i.e. representatives of the ruling elite, who understood the danger that threatened the regime as a whole, and saw the need for reforms, which was completely impossible under the reigning sultan.
The foreign policy situation fueled the mood of discontent in the country. On January 31, 1876, the Porte was presented with a draft reform, authored by the Minister of Foreign Affairs of Austria-Hungary, Andrássy (the "Berlin Memorandum"). On February 13, the Turkish government agreed in principle to carry out reforms.
Dissatisfaction with the Sultan matured by April 1876 already decisively in all sections of the population of the capital. “The Sultan was accused of having amassed a personal fortune estimated at 15 million lira, not appropriating anything for the people’s “needs and not being interested in state affairs.”25 It was at this time that open demonstrations of protest began. shipyards, demanding the issuance of their wages.They were supported by the workers of the mint and arsenal.Thus, the social support of the anti-government opposition at this stage in the development of the constitutional movement was quite wide in the capital.
On May 10, 1876, a large demonstration of software (students of the Madrasah) took place in Istanbul, "... which Prince Yusuf Izzeddin has, so that he informs the Sultan of their demand to replace the Grand Vizier and Sheikh-ul-Islam"27. These software requirements were met by the Sultan. Khairullah Efendi was appointed to the post of Sheikh-ul-Islam, and Mehmed Rustu Pasha took the place of the Grand Vizier.
It was by no means accidental that the anti-government protests of May 1876 turned into a new one for the Turkish capital. political struggle, one of the most important slogans of which was the demand for the proclamation of a constitution. Undoubtedly, most of the participants in the mass demonstrations - software, artisans and merchants - had a very vague idea of the nature and content of the constitutional reform.
New social forces were directed to the struggle for the first Turkish constitution, the appearance of which in the political arena was by no means caused by the "Eastern crisis" of the 70s.
The constitutional movement was a consequence of the socio-political development of the Turkish society itself. The international situation played the role of a catalyst; it determined the tactics of the first Turkish constitutionalists.
The forces fighting for the proclamation of the constitution were extremely heterogeneous in political and social relations The goals pursued by them were also very different. The most radical group in the constitutional movement was the young Turkish intelligentsia. Its leaders, especially Midhat Pasha, sought to ensure the economic and cultural progress of the country through constitutional reforms, hatched idealistic projects for creating a single "Ottoman nation" from various ethnic groups of the population as part of the reform of the empire. Other goals were set by a part of the higher bureaucracy that joined the constitutional movement. For her, the constitution was only a means of preserving feudal norms and orders. This group was ready to go for the introduction of a constitutional form of government that would not affect the social and political foundations of the empire. The forces behind this grouping were stronger and more numerous.
The constitutionalist camp did not have any clear program of practical action.
At the first stage of the struggle for the constitution (March - May 1876), the most important action of the constitutionalists was the release of the "Manifesto of Muslim Patriots"; in March it was sent to a number of major statesmen of the European powers. This document stated that "the establishment of a parliamentary system in Turkey would not only allow a radical solution of the 'Eastern question', but also ensure the economic and cultural progress of the country"28. the authors of the "Manifesto" called for support for the Turkish constitutionalists. Midhat Pasha and his associates began to prepare anti-government demonstrations in the capital. When the danger arose that the mass demonstrations might get out of control of their organizers, the leaders of the constitutionalists preferred the path of a palace coup. On the night of May 30, 1876, a group of conspirators, in which Midhat Pasha was active, deposed Sultan Abdul Aziz. The hopes of the constitutionalists to get the new sultan, Murad V, to promulgate a constitution did not come true. Yet the question of the constitution became a subject of discussion in the highest governmental spheres.
At the second stage (June - September 1876), the reformers managed to achieve a decision on the preparation of a draft constitution. This success was due to two factors: broad public support and the aggravation of the country's foreign policy situation. In the summer of 1876 the question of promulgating a constitution was the subject of the most heated discussions; associated with it were discussed in the pages of many metropolitan newspapers. Supporters of the constitution were supported by such popular newspapers as "Sabah" and "Vakyt".
By the autumn of 1876, the country's foreign policy situation had again become critical for the Ottoman Empire (the war with Serbia and Montenegro, the increased threat of intervention by the great powers, the forthcoming convening of an international conference in Istanbul to resolve the issue of reforms in the Balkan provinces). The combination of the above internal and external facts forced Sultan Abdul Hamid II, who succeeded Murad V on the throne in August, to agree to discuss the draft constitution prepared by Midhat Pasha.
At the third stage (September - December 1876), the center of gravity was shifted to the development of a draft constitution acceptable to various groups. The Sultan and his entourage sought to make the draft of the future constitution acceptable to themselves. A notable feature of this stage was the increased influence on the course of events. In September, supporters of the constitution became more active in the capital. They sought to convince the new sultan that the plans for legislative reorganization were widely supported by the public. For example, Namyk Kemal appeared in the Ittihad newspaper with a series of articles in which he defended the ideas of a constitutional monarchy and a parliamentary regime.
“Created by the decree of the Sultan, the commission for the drafting of the constitution consisted of 28 people - 16 high-ranking officials, 10 representatives of the highest Muslim clergy and two generals”29.
The Sultan and his inner circle were convinced that a commission of this composition would either reject the idea of constitutional reform altogether, or adopt a project that would ensure the preservation of the unlimited power of the monarch. However, the constitutional ideas were so popular that the chairman of the commission, Midhat Pasha, and a group of his like-minded people managed to win the support of the majority of the commission members in the process of discussing the draft. However, Midhat Pasha failed to carry out his own project in the commission, which was the most radical of those submitted for discussion, that it provided for a real limitation of the power of the sultan by significantly expanding the functions and rights of the cabinet of ministers, as well as certain legislative rights of the future parliament. Opponents of limiting the power of the Sultan opposed the project of Said Bey, the first secretary of Abdul-Hamid II, to the project of the leader of the constitutionalists. “In this document, attention was focused on the inviolability of the principle of inviolability of the unlimited supreme rights of the Sultan in the conditions of the parliamentary regime”30.
The work of the commission proceeded in an atmosphere of very heated discussions. Members of the commission studied not only projects; they had at their disposal hundreds of documents characterizing the constitutional-monarchical form of government. When developing the final version of the draft constitution, the main provisions of a number of existing constitutions of European countries, in particular French, Belgian and German, were taken into account.
The commission completed its work on November 20, 1876. Midhat Pasha handed over the text of the draft constitution to Abdul Hamid II. The Sultan expressed dissatisfaction with the project, saying that it needs to be reworked, mainly in terms of the rights of the monarch. In early December, the draft constitution was discussed in the Cabinet of Ministers at the request of the Sultan. As a result, all provisions that limited the rights of the Sultan were removed from the project. Yet the Sultan and his entourage continued to maneuver, hoping that they would be able to avoid the proclamation of the constitution.
At that moment, foreign policy circumstances had a decisive influence on the course of events. The scales began to tilt towards the constitutionalists. On December 11, 1876, a meeting of representatives of European powers began in Istanbul with the participation of a Turkish delegate to consider the project for the autonomy of Bulgaria, Bosnia and Herzegovina, which was supposed to be implemented under international control. Thus, it became clear that at the forthcoming conference of the powers at the end of December with the participation of Turkish representatives, the latter would inevitably, unless some exceptional measures were taken, agree to the intervention of the European powers in the affairs of the empire, legalized by international agreement.
In the desire to oppose the convening and holding of the Istanbul Conference by proclaiming a constitution, both supporters and opponents of the constitution were united.
But the same means was used in this case for different purposes. For Midhat Pasha and other leaders of the constitutionalists, it was important "... to avert the threat of foreign interference, and then to ensure the implementation of the provisions of the constitution"31. The Sultan and the feudal-clerical circles supporting him also hoped “... to disrupt the work of the conference, but in the future, their plans included, choosing a good moment, to strike at the constitutionalists”32.
When it became clear that the proclamation of the constitution could not be avoided, Abdul Hamid II and his associates insisted on the inclusion of an addition to article 113 in its text, giving the sultan an unlimited right to expel persons objectionable to him from the country. This was a very serious defeat for the constitutionalists.
... ”,“ forbidden ”,“ indifferent ”, etc. 1 Features of other types of norms, including their structure, are considered in par. 4 crust chapters. 1Cherdantsev L.F. Theory of Government and Rights. Lecture course. Ekaterinburg, 1996. S. 83-84; General theory rights / Ed. A.S. Pigolkin. M., 1995. S. 157-158.1 The name "disposition" as a special one for "punitive" norms of criminal and administrative law is quite ...
That, at least, to point out the problems that should be solved by the political leadership in certain circumstances and in a certain sequence, so that the transition goes smoothly and culminates in the establishment of a stable form of the state. The democratization of countries with totalitarian regimes has its own characteristics, since authoritarianism and totalitarianism differ in many respects from each other. In contrast...
Theological theory, the creator of everything on Earth, including the state, is God, but it is impossible to penetrate the mystery of the divine plan, to comprehend the nature and essence of the state. Without affecting the scientific nature of this premise based on agnosticism, we note that theological theory did not reject the need for the creation and functioning of an earthly state, ensuring proper law and order. ...
But also in other countries. And not only in the early and middle stages of the existence and development of human civilization, but also in all subsequent centuries and years. Considerable attention is paid to the study of the forms of the state in modern domestic and foreign literature. Of course, among contemporary authors, as well as among their ancient predecessors, there is no single view and idea ...
King Kemchin of Korea gathered with Mun, Prince of Korea, and they made a peace treaty.
And that Korean land lies on a spit, and on three sides it is streamlined by the sea, and on the fourth, from the Midnight country, a boundary is laid with the Chinese kingdom.
And that land is divided into two states, on the Noon side the princes rule, both with the boyars and with the best people, and in the Midnight side of the Kemchine kingdom, from otchich and dedich.
And between those two countries there was enmity and setuga and non-peace the great seventy years: from the summer of 7456, as Kemirsey-king sat in the kingdom of Korea, and until this summer, until 7526.
And in the summer of 7458, King Kemirsey came from his own from the Midnight country to the Midday country, and the war was strong on the Korean people from the Korean people. And in the Midday side, princes and boyars and all sorts of people taught to ask for help from the American Germans, and the tsar sent Kimersey to the Chinese tsar, and even to the Muscovite state. And there was that war for three years, and many kingdoms fought at that time: the Americans and the British stood for the Midnight Koreans, and Chinese eager people stood for the Midnight Koreans, and all sorts of Russian service people from the Moscow state.
And in the summer of 7461, having sentenced those great powers among themselves, the war was stopped, and a straight line was laid between the two Korean states along the Sun. Tsar Kemirsei and the Korean boyars gave the wool that they, without referring to the big powers, would not go to war with their neighbor. And from those places there was no war in the Korean land, but there was no peace either, because in those states on both sides there was no faith in the other side, and they looked for any dashing deed from each other and were going to fight every day. And there was fear and non-peace in the land of Korea from the king Kemirsey and under his son Kemchinyr, even to the unuk of Kemirseev, to Kemchiney.
The same Kemchinei king, as he sat down on the kingdom of Korea after his father, and began to strengthen his power and did a lot of great fiery garb. And with that big outfit he threatened to shoot as far as the American land, for their previous non-corrections to him. And there was fear throughout the land of God. But the Lord our God, do not want the final death of your creation, and forgiving us all our sins, soften the heart of Kemchine. And there was a meeting between both sovereigns at the Korean border, and Kemchinei from the midnight country came himself, and vouched for Prince Mun at the border and he was in good health and crossed the border, and the kings of Korea did not go beyond that border for sixty and six years from the summer of 7461, from the Great Korean War. And Tsar Kimersey gave his word to live in the world and to gather about all sorts of business with ambassadors. And all Christians and all pagans who were reputed under Heaven had joy about that peaceful decree.
Immediately after the end of the war, the life of the population of the USSR began to improve dramatically. In 1946 a 20% increase in the wages of workers and engineering and technical workers (ITR) working at enterprises and construction sites in the Urals, Siberia and the Far East.
In the same year 20% salary increase people with higher and secondary special education(ITR, workers of science, education and medicine). The importance of academic degrees and titles is rising. The salary of a professor, doctor of sciences is increased from 1,600 to 5,000 rubles, an associate professor, a candidate of sciences - from 1,200 to 3,200 rubles, a rector of a university from 2,500 to 8,000 rubles. In research institutes academic degree Candidate of Sciences began to add 1,000 rubles to the official salary, and Doctors of Sciences - 2,500 rubles. At the same time, the salary of the union minister was 5,000 rubles, and the secretary of the district party committee - 1,500 rubles. Stalin, as Chairman of the Council of Ministers of the USSR, had a salary of 10 thousand rubles
. Scientists in the USSR of that time also had additional income, sometimes several times higher than their salary. Therefore, they were the richest and at the same time the most respected part of Soviet society. The card system, which allowed many people to be saved from starvation during the war, caused severe psychological discomfort after the war. The assortment of foodstuffs, which were sold by cards, was extremely poor. For example, in bakeries there were only 2 varieties of rye and wheat bread, which were sold by weight in accordance with the norm indicated in the cut-off coupon. The choice of other food products was also small. At the same time, commercial stores had such an abundance of products
, which any modern super-markets could envy. But the prices in these stores were beyond the reach of the majority of the population, and products were purchased there only for the festive table. After the abolition of the card system, all this abundance turned out to be in ordinary grocery stores at quite reasonable prices. For example, the price of cakes that were previously sold decreased from 30 to 3 rubles. More than 3 times
market prices for products fell. 
March 1, 1949 - 1951 there are further price cuts, averaging 20% per year. Each decline was perceived as a national holiday. When March 1, 1952
the next price reduction did not happen, people had a feeling of disappointment. However, on April 1 of the same year, the price reduction did take place. The last price cut took place after Stalin's death on April 1, 1953.
During the post-war period, food prices and the most popular industrial goods fell on average by more than 2 times. So eight post-war years The life of the Soviet people improved noticeably every year. For the entire known history of mankind in any country similar precedents were not observed.
(
)
The standard of living of the population of the USSR in the mid-1950s can be assessed by studying the materials of studies of the budgets of families of workers, employees and collective farmers, which were conducted by the Central Statistical Office (CSO) of the USSR from 1935 to 1958 (these materials, which in the USSR were classified "secret", published on the website istmat.info). Budgets were studied in families belonging to 9 groups of the population: collective farmers, state farm workers, industrial workers, industrial engineers, industrial employees, teachers elementary school, teachers high school, doctors and nurses. The wealthiest part of the population, which included employees of defense industry enterprises, design organizations, scientific institutions, university professors, artel workers and the military, unfortunately, did not come into the view of the CSO. Of the study groups listed above, doctors had the highest income. Each member of their families had 800 rubles of monthly income. Of the urban population, the employees of industry had the lowest income - 525 rubles per month accounted for each family member. The rural population had a per capita monthly income of 350 rubles. At the same time, if the workers of state farms had this income in explicit monetary form, then the collective farmers received it when calculating the cost of their own products consumed in the family at state prices.
Food consumption was in all groups of the population, including the rural, approximately at the same level 200-210 rubles per month per family member. Only in the families of doctors, the cost of a food basket reached 250 rubles due to the greater consumption of butter, meat products, eggs, fish and fruits, while reducing bread and potatoes. Rural residents consumed the most bread, potatoes, eggs and milk, but significantly less butter, fish, sugar and confectionery. It should be noted that the amount of 200 rubles spent on food was not directly related to family income or a limited choice of products, but was determined by family traditions. In my family, which in 1955 consisted of four people, including two schoolchildren, the monthly income per person was 1,200 rubles. The choice of products in the Leningrad grocery stores was much wider than in modern supermarkets. Nevertheless, our family's expenses for food, including school breakfasts and lunches in departmental canteens with parents, did not exceed 800 rubles a month.
Food was very cheap in departmental canteens. Lunch in the student canteen, including soup with meat, a main course with meat and compote or tea with a pie, cost about 2 rubles. Free bread was always on the tables. Therefore, in the days before the scholarship was given, some students living on their own bought tea for 20 kopecks and ate bread with mustard and tea. By the way, salt, pepper and mustard were also always on the tables. A scholarship at the institute where I studied, starting from 1955, was 290 rubles (with excellent grades - 390 rubles). 40 rubles from nonresident students went to pay for the hostel. The remaining 250 rubles (7,500 modern rubles) was enough for a normal student life in a big city. At the same time, as a rule, nonresident students did not receive help from home and did not earn extra money in their free time.
A few words about Leningrad grocery stores that time. The fish department was the most diverse. Several varieties of red and black caviar were displayed in large bowls. A full range of hot and cold smoked white fish, red fish from chum salmon to salmon, smoked eels and marinated lampreys, herring in jars and barrels. Live fish from rivers and inland waters was delivered immediately after being caught in special tank trucks with the inscription "fish". There was no frozen fish. It only appeared in the early 1960s. There was a lot of canned fish, of which I remember gobies in tomato, the ubiquitous crabs for 4 rubles per can, and the favorite product of students living in a hostel - cod liver. Beef and lamb were divided into four categories with different prices, depending on the part of the carcass. In the department of semi-finished products, langets, entrecotes, schnitzels and escalopes were presented. The variety of sausages was much wider than now, and I still remember their taste. Now only in Finland you can try sausage, reminiscent of the Soviet one from those times. It should be said that the taste of boiled sausages changed already in the early 60s, when Khrushchev ordered to add soy to sausages. This prescription was ignored only in the Baltic republics, where back in the 70s it was possible to buy a normal doctor's sausage.
(
)
Provision of the population with industrial goods in the mid-50s was quite high. For example, in working families, more than 3 pairs of shoes were purchased annually for each person. The quality and variety of exclusively domestically produced consumer goods (clothing, shoes, dishes, toys, furniture and other household goods) was much higher than in subsequent years. The fact is that the main part of these goods was produced not by state enterprises, but by artels. Moreover, the products of artels were sold in ordinary state stores. As soon as new fashion trends appeared, they were instantly tracked, and within a few months, fashion products appeared in abundance on store shelves. For example, in the mid-50s, a youth fashion arose for shoes with a thick white rubber sole in imitation of the extremely popular rock and roll singer of those years. Elvis Presley. I bought these locally made shoes at a regular department store in the fall of 1955, along with another fashionable item - a tie with a brightly colored picture. The only product that was not always available for purchase was popular records. However, I had records in 1955, bought in a regular store, of almost all the then popular American jazz musicians and singers, such as Duke Ellington, Benny Goodman, Louis Armstrong, Ella Fitzgerald, Glenn Miller.
Only records Elvis Presley
, illegally made on used x-ray film (as they said then "on the bones") had to be bought by hand. I do not remember that period of imported goods. Both clothes and shoes were produced in small batches and featured a wide variety of models. In addition, the manufacture of clothing and footwear for individual orders was widespread in numerous sewing and knitting ateliers, in shoe workshops that are part of the industrial cooperation. There were many tailors and shoemakers who worked individually. Fabrics were the hottest commodity at that time. I still m-nude the names of such fabrics popular at that time as drape, cheviot, boston, crepe de chine.
I can illustrate the life of the population of the USSR in 1955 on the example of his family. The family consisted of 4 people. Father, 50 years old, head of the department of the design institute. Mother, 45 years old, engineer-geologist of Lenmetrostroy. Son, 18 years old, high school graduate. Son, 10 years old, student. The family's income consisted of three parts: official salary (2,200 rubles for father and 1,400 rubles for mother), a quarterly bonus for fulfilling the plan, usually 60% of the salary, and a separate bonus for extra work. Whether my mother received such a bonus, I don’t know, but my father received it about once a year, and in 1955 this bonus amounted to 6,000 rubles. In other years, it was about the same value. I remember how my father, having received this award, laid out a lot of hundred-ruble bills on the dining table in the form of solitaire cards, and then we had a festive dinner. On average, the monthly income of our family was 4,800 rubles, or 1,200 rubles per person. Of this amount, 550 rubles were deducted for taxes, party and trade union dues. 800 rubles were spent on food. 150 rubles were spent on housing and utilities (water, heating, electricity, gas, telephone). 500 rubles were spent on clothes, shoes, transport, entertainment. Thus, the regular monthly expenses of our family of 4 amounted to 2000 rubles. Unspent money remained 2,800 rubles a month, or 33,600 rubles (a million modern rubles) a year. Our family income was closer to the middle than the upper. Thus, private sector workers (artels), who accounted for more than 5% of the urban population, had higher incomes.. The officers of the army, the Ministry of Internal Affairs, the Ministry of State Security had high salaries. For example, an ordinary army lieutenant, a platoon commander, had a monthly income of 2,600-3,600 rubles, depending on the place and specifics of the service. At the same time, military income was not taxed. To illustrate the income of workers in the defense industry, I will give only an example of a young family I know well, who worked in the experimental design bureau of the Ministry of Aviation Industry. Husband, 25 years old, senior engineer with a salary of 1,400 rubles and a monthly income, taking into account various bonuses and travel allowances, of 2,500 rubles. Wife, 24 years old, senior technician with a salary of 900 rubles and a monthly income of 1,500 rubles. In general, the monthly income of a family of two was 4,000 rubles. About 15 thousand rubles of unspent money remained a year. I believe that a significant part of urban families had the opportunity to save annually 5-10 thousand rubles (150-300 thousand modern rubles).
Of the expensive goods, cars should be singled out. The range of cars was small, but there were no problems with their acquisition
. In Leningrad in a large department store Apraksin Yard was a car dealership. I remember that in 1955 cars were put up for free sale there: Moskvich-400 for 9,000 rubles (economy class), Pobeda for 16,000 rubles (business class) and ZIM (later Chaika) for 40,000 rubles (representative class). Our family savings were enough to purchase any of the cars listed above, including ZIM. And the Moskvich car was generally available to the majority of the population. However, there was no real demand for cars. At that time, cars were seen as expensive toys that created a lot of maintenance and maintenance problems. My uncle had a Moskvich car, in which he traveled out of town only a few times a year. My uncle bought this car back in 1949 only because he could build a garage in the courtyard of his house in the premises of the former stables. At work, my father was offered to buy a decommissioned American Jeep, a military SUV of that time, for only 1,500 rubles. The father refused the car, as there was nowhere to keep it.
Name some prices in 1955
: rye bread - 1 rub. / kg, roll - 1.5 rub. / 0.5 kg, meat - 12.5-18 rub. / kg, live fish (carp) - 5 rub. / kg, sturgeon caviar - 180 rub. / kg, lunch in the dining room - 2-3 rubles, dinner in a restaurant with wine for two - 25 rubles, leather shoes - 150 - 250 rubles, a 3-speed bicycle Tourist - 900 rubles, an IZH-49 motorcycle with a 350 cc engine. cm - 2500 rubles, a ticket to the cinema - 0.5-1 rubles, a ticket to the theater or to a concert - 3-10 rubles. 
The material standard of living of the population of the USSR in the mid-1950s was higher than in the United States, the richest country of that time, and higher than in modern America, not to mention modern Russia. Besides, benefits were provided to the population of the USSR
, unthinkable for any other countries in the world:
- dairy chain, which provided free meals for infants up to 2 years of age;
- a wide network of preschool institutions(children's nurseries and kindergartens) with a minimum payment for the maintenance of children - 30-40 rubles per month, and for collective farmers free of charge;
- summer rest children in pioneer camps for a small fee or free of charge;
- children's music schools allowing children to receive a musical education and to identify musical talents at an early stage;
- children's sports schools, including boarding schools;
- free groups extended day in schools;
- Pioneer Houses and Pioneer Palaces providing leisure for children free of charge;
- Houses of Culture and Palaces of Culture providing leisure for adults;
- sports societies providing physical education of the population;
- a wide network of sanatoriums, rest houses, tourist bases, providing treatment and recreation free of charge or for a small fee, accessible to all segments of the population;
- the widest opportunities for obtaining free education and advanced training for all segments of the population in daytime, evening or correspondence form;
- guaranteed housing and employment, maximum social protection, complete confidence in the future.
(
)
The vast majority of citizens of modern Russia, from liberals to communists, are convinced that the population of the USSR has always lived much worse than in Western countries. No one suspects that it was under Stalin and only thanks to Stalin that the Soviet people in the middle of the last century lived much better materially and morally than in any other country of that time and better than in the modern USA, let alone -rya already about modern Russia. And then the evil Khrushchev came and ruined everything. And after 1960, the inhabitants of the USSR imperceptibly found themselves in a completely different country and after some time forgot how they lived before. It is in this new country and all those negative features appeared that are considered organically inherent in the socialist system. It was this pseudo-socialist country, completely unlike the former Soviet Union, that collapsed under the weight of accumulated problems in 1991, and Gorbachev only accelerated this process, acting in the style of Khrushchev.
No. 7. From the course of lectures by V.O. Klyuchevsky.
“... The Russian church schism is the separation of a significant part of the Russian Orthodox community from the dominant Orthodox Church. This division began in the reign of Alexei Mikhailovich as a result of the church innovations of Patriarch Nikon and continues to this day. The schismatics consider themselves the same Orthodox Christians as we consider ourselves... If the Old Believers do not disagree with us in dogmas, in the foundations of the dogma, then, one wonders, why did the church division occur, why did a significant part of the Russian church society find itself outside the fence of the Russian ruling churches..."
C1. When did it happen church schism? Who initiated the reforms?
C2. Who was the main opponent of reforming the church? How did the king treat church reforms?
SZ. What did not suit the opponents in reforming the church? List at least three positions.
No. 8. From a historical document.
“The same year, April, on the 27th day, the sovereign tsar and Grand Duke Fyodor Alekseevich of all Great and Small and White Russia, autocrat, reposed. At the same time, they elected his brother Tsar Menshov Tsarevich and Grand Duke Pyotr Alekseevich as Tsar of the Moscow State ... past his greater brother Tsarevich John Alekseevich ... solicitors...
On the 15th day of the same year in May, there was confusion in the Muscovite state. The archers of all orders, and the elected regiment, and the soldiers came to the city of the Kremlin at 11 o'clock with banners and drums, with muskets, with spears, with a reed, and on the run to the city they shouted that Ivan and Afanasy Kirillovich Naryshkin strangled the prince John Alekseevich. And there were no initial people with them. And running to the Kremlin, archers and soldiers
they ran to the Red and Bed porch in the royal mansions and forcibly from above, from the sovereign's choir, from the sovereign tsar and Grand Duke Peter Alekseevich himself, boyars and roundabouts, and duma, and stolniks were thrown from the porch to the ground, and on the ground they chopped with reeds and stabbed spears..."
C1. In what year did the events described in the text take place? Which
Was the city the setting?
C2. Who was in the performance? What was the main reason for the unrest? Who was the victim of the performance? List at least three positions.
SZ. Representatives of what boyar family organized this performance? Who began to officially reign as a result of the events described? Who became the actual ruler? List at least three positions.
No. 9.C7. IN domestic science there is a judgment that the reason for the election of Mikhail Romanov to the Russian throne was that the boyars, who played a major role in Zemsky Cathedral 1613, they believed that "Mikhail is young, he has not yet reached his mind and will be convenient for us."
What other judgment about the reasons for the election of Mikhail Romanov to the Russian throne do you know? Which one do you think is more convincing? List at least three facts. Propositions of judgments. Which can serve as arguments for your chosen point of view.
On the reasons for choosing Mikhail Romanov to the Russian throne:
Arguments:
- for the nobility–
- for the Cossacks
- for the peasantry, townspeople
No. 10.С6. Name the main phenomena and processes of the socio-economic development of Russia in the 17th century.
New phenomena in the economy:
No. 11.С5. Compare two forms of land ownership - patrimony and estate. Indicate what was common (at least two common features), and what was different (at least three differences)
Are common:
Differences:
No. 12.С6. In the middle of the 17th century, under the leadership of Patriarch Nikon, reforms were carried out in the Russian Orthodox Church.
What proposals for reforms, different from the position of Patriarch Nikon, were made at that time? Name two sentences. What were the consequences of Nikon's church reforms? List at least three consequences.
Offers other than Nikon's positions:
Consequences:
No. 13.С5. Compare the positions of Patriarch Nikon and Archpriest Avvakum on the issue of the goals and content of church reforms, Ser. 17th century. What was common in them, and what was different.
Differences:
No. 14.С4. Name at least three reforms of the Russian Orthodox Church in the middle of the 17th century and at least three consequences of the transformations carried out by Patriarch Nikon.
Three goals of the ROC reforms:
Two consequences of the transformations:
No. 15.С4. Name at least four features of the state-political development of Russia in the second half of the 17th century, indicating the transition to an absolute monarchy. Give at least three provisions of the "Council Code" of 1649.
No. 16.С4. Name at least three changes in the position of the peasantry and townspeople after the adoption of the Council Code. Give at least three provisions that characterize the significance of this document.
Changes in the position of the peasantry and townspeople after the adoption of the Council Code:
Provisions characterizing the significance of the Cathedral Code:
Topic number 6. Russia in the 18th century
