Cherkasova Marina Sergeevna

TO THE STUDY OF THE FINANCIAL STATUS OF RUSSIAN MONASTERIES IN THE XVI-XVII CENTURIES (based on official material)

The land and financial problem occupied an important place in the relations between the Russian state and the church in the 16th-17th centuries. In general, there was a steady restriction of the growth of church and monastic land ownership and the tax immunity of large corporate owners. In the monographs of S. M. Kashtanov, this process for the 15th-16th centuries was examined on an exhaustive source base, which consisted mainly of grants and decree letters to monasteries 1. The author traced the stages of the restrictive immunity policy of the Russian state in the first half of the 16th century (revision of monastic tax privileges during mass confirmations of letters granted to monasteries in 1505, 1534 and 1551). The most important government event on the way to the abolition of the Tarkhanov in the early 1580s was their massive revision in 1551. As S. M. Kashtanov found out, 262 letters related to Trinity-Sergiev, Kirillo-Belozersky, Moscow Simonov, Joseph-Volokolamsky, Ferapontov, Spaso-Prilutsky, Arsenyevo- and Kornilyevo-Komelsky, Spaso-Kamenny, Dionysev Glushitsky, Alexander-Kushtsky, Michael-Arkhangelsky Ustyug and Trinity-Gledensky monasteries, as well as Vazhsky, Dvinsky, Novgorod and many other monasteries. The “revision of tarkhanov” (tax exemptions of the church) in May 1551 consisted in the fact that the previous charters granted to the named monasteries were considered by the government of Ivan IV and signed with restrictions that meant exceptions from their tax immunity. Two editions were developed - short and lengthy - of the most restrictive formula. The first included three components, reflecting the main state taxes for monasteries - “besides the Yam money and tax services, and tamgas - then give them”, the second contained larger number components - “including yam money and road services, and tamgas, and payback money, and myta, and pishchal money”2.

However, according to S. M. Kashtanov, the destruction of the former tarkhan privileges of monasteries did not mean the complete elimination of their tax immunity. A number of financial benefits still remained an inalienable “seigneurial right of monasteries.” The consistent implementation of the principles of the May revision of the Tarkhanov of 1551 was prevented by further processes that took place in Russia in the second half of the 16th century: the oprichnina with its division of the country into two parts, the pestilence of the late 1560s, the raids of the Crimean Tatars, the grueling Livonian War and economic crisis of the 1570s - early 1590s. Under these conditions, the government had to hesitate, retreat from a strictly restrictive immunity policy, and agree to one-time tax exemptions for a number of monasteries as the most stable and viable economic organizations.

In addition to the specific historical circumstances of the second half of the 16th century, which made it difficult to consistently carry out financial policy, there were also deeper reasons that had, so to speak, a natural historical origin. They consisted of the far from being overcome economic and political fragmentation of the country. Under these conditions, we can speak, as S. M. Kashtanov does, about variable-corporate immunity law, which, under the influence of all-Russian policies (including financial ones), was just developing towards a general class immunity law.

One of the manifestations of this variable corporate immunity law and the state’s desire to unify it can be considered the three principles of financial policy practiced in the 16th century. The first, tarkhanno-brok, genetically went back to the traditions of appanage princes. It consisted of a universal payment by the literate to the princely treasury of a unified monetary dues covering all other payments. The second represented a modification of the first, when the central government attracted large literate students to the full and differentiated payment of basic state taxes and the service of state duties, but retaining their right to pay them themselves. Compared to the first, more preferential principle, the second meant a further limitation of the financial immunity of monasteries. For the Trinity Monastery, such restrictions on a number of its patrimonial complexes were introduced by charters of 1538, and after the expiration of the general preferential charter of 1544 in 1548, all its possessions were subject to state taxes, of which the most important in the middle of the 16th century were the so-called Yam money. The method of collecting them in 1548 was established in accordance with the third principle of Russian financial policy of the 16th century, when the collection of state taxes was carried out not by the literate himself, but by local agents (city clerks, provincial elders), who received the right to enter the immune estates of monasteries. This, of course, further violated the reserved and financial status of spiritual corporations.

We undertook a special study of the Fodder Book of the Trinity-Sergius Monastery, the results of which support the above-mentioned observations and conclusions of S. M. Kashtanov about the involvement of Russian monasteries already in 1548 in the implementation of basic state taxes. The Trinity Kormovaya Book was compiled in the early 1590s by processing the earlier Kormovaya, which arose in 1549-1551 under Abbot Serapion Kurtsev and under the direct influence of decrees in this regard by Ivan IV and the Stoglavy Cathedral. The Kormovaya Book contains an extensive list of the largest patrimonial complexes of the Sergius Monastery, indicating the salary and salary for each 3. If the former served as a total expression of the owner's income of a given village and were necessary to determine the size of the funeral feed (large, medium or smaller, respectively, with 100, 70, 50 vyty), then the latter, it seems, reflected the taxation of the largest corporate owner of the country. This indicates the involvement of the rural and urban population of the Trinity in 1549-1551 in paying state taxes and serving duties.

Information about soshny salaries in the Trinity Fodder Book coincides with the scribal documentation of the 20-60s of the 16th century (hundreds' extracts for Bezhetsky, Uglich, Rostov, Maloyaroslavets, Kostroma, Moscow districts) and a number of decree documents. This circumstance makes it possible to bring together the information of these sources, independent in origin, over time. It is apparently no coincidence that the references in the Kormovaya Book to “written books”, by which, following S. M. Kashtanov and L. A. Kirichenko4, can be understood as scribe books. In addition, for a number of complexes named in the Feed Book with large salaries, there are letters of complaint and decree on the obligation of the population to pay "pits", perform "city work" and "labour service" (the villages of Nakhabino and Karaulovo, Moscow district, the villages of Popovskoye and Lavrentyevskoye Poshekhonsky district, Filisova settlement, Vladimir district)5. And although the scribal descriptions of the second quarter of the 16th century are unknown to us, the noted coincidence may indicate in favor of the opinion that the large salaries of the Feed Book reflect the involvement of these complexes in the main state taxes and duties.

Thus, by the end of the 40s - early 50s of the 16th century, the government needed a detailed systematization of the salaries of the largest monastery in the country, and the Trinity Spiritual Corporation itself had to know how many salary units (sox) it would have to pay state taxes on. This obligation was recorded in the general charter of Ivan IV addressed to the Trinity abbot Serapion Kurtsev dated September 2, 1550. The monastery had to pay “yam money” and perform “posh service”, but could do this itself, without the intervention of government agents on the ground6.

Granted to the Trinity Monastery in 1550, such a right in the form of an exclusive privilege would later (1550-1570s) extend to a larger number of monasteries. For example, the Kirillo-Belozersky Monastery, according to a number of charters of 1555-1556 and 1564, began to collect and pay taxes to the Great Parish in Moscow7. In 1576, Spaso-Evfimiev and Vladimir Nativity Monasteries, the Suzdal bishop received the right to pay Yamsky money to Moscow themselves. In a series of decree letters to the Kirillo-Belozersky Monastery of 1573-1574, we are talking about its right to collect state taxes from its population (yamsky, notable money, for city, abattoir and yamchuzhnoe business and people who are on duty), moreover, “from the living, and not from empty"9.

The separation of “living” and “empty” arable land since the 1570s was not accidental. It took into account the severe economic crisis in the country that began in the late 1560s. For the Trinity-Sergius Monastery in the years 1569-1571, a general charter was in force on the independent collection and payment of taxes (“in Moscow, and others in Sloboda”) by the corporation from the “living” and non-correction of taxes and duties from the “empty”. This charter was issued in 1569 after the execution of the appanage prince Vladimir Andreevich Staritsky, and in May 1571 it burned in Moscow during the invasion of the Crimean khan Devlet-Girey. It is mentioned in the charter of Ivan IV dated March 20, 1572, which allowed the Troitsk authorities from “living” in the Gorokhovetsky district “to pay tribute and staff themselves in Moscow and in Sloboda”10. A year earlier, two royal letters of grant of similar content were issued: on March 17 - for the entire Trinity estate, and on October 12 - for 18 villages near Moscow, devastated during the Devlet-Girey raid and therefore freed for three years (until September 1, 1574) in general from all government payments and duties 11.

Despite the growing desolation of the country, the state continued its policy of taxing monasteries in the 1570s. Even before the official conciliar act of July 20, 1584, which abolished tarkhans 12, ecclesiastical corporations were involved in paying taxes. According to the income and expenditure books of the Joseph-Volokolamsk monastery of the 1570s, E. I. Kolycheva provided information about the payment of “staffs” to them, money for “Novgorod”, “Pskov”, “Tver”, “Staritsky” carts, “to help for sovereign's bread", "danish money"13. The researcher noted that by introducing new taxes that were not specified in the previous charters of the monasteries, the government was gradually preparing to abolish the tarkhanov. Already in 1581/82, according to E.I. Kolycheva and B.N. Florya, state taxes were systematically paid by the Joseph-Volokolamsk, Kirillo-Belozersky, and Assumption Tikhvin monasteries. E.I. Kolycheva associated the appearance of tax notebooks of the Joseph-Volokolamsk monastery in 1581/82-1590 with such payment and, on their basis, found out that at the time under review the growth of state payments was 4 times faster than the growth of feudal rent in the Volokolamsk monastery14. Table 1 below shows information from the “payment statements” of a number of monasteries (Ryazan Voskresensky Terekhov, Novgorod Nikolo-Vyazhitsky, Pereyaslavsky Fedorovsky, Kostroma Ipatiev, Vologda Spaso-Prilutsky) for the years 1582-1616; published in "Legal Acts". These replies are interesting in two respects: firstly, they indicate the very nomenclature of state payments for monasteries (yamsky, rotary, polonyanichny, bridge money, “for the governor’s food,” “for every yamchu income,” etc.). Secondly, all replies indicate the payment of these taxes by the representatives of the monastery administration themselves (treasurer, solicitors, servants, clerks). This means that at the end of the 16th - beginning of the 17th centuries, many monasteries themselves collected state taxes (along with owner's rent) from their population and delivered them to Moscow (to the Great Parish or to Cheti).

There are several mentions of payment and registration books of 1581/82 for the Trinity-Sergius Monastery (for Derevskaya Pyatina these books have even been preserved), as well as for Dmitrov and Pereyaslav districts 15. In the late 70s - early 80s of the 16th century, legal the foundations of the financial status of the Trinity Monastery were expressed in the last general letter of grant to it from Ivan IV dated April 28, 1578, confirmed by Tsar Fyodor Ivanovich on May 3, 158416. The monastery was obliged to pay taxes from the “living”, but did it itself. The fact that the payment procedure should have been exactly this is evidenced by its violations on the part of money collectors, committed in a number of cities and counties in September 1584, as soon as the tarkhans were abolished. On September 25, 1584, decree letters from Tsar Fyodor Ivanovich were sent out (to Tver, Yaroslavl, Poshekhonye, ​​Dmitrov, Rostov, Kostroma, Pleso, Kashin, Suzdal and other cities), prohibiting local financial authorities from entering the Trinity domains. The monastery was again confirmed of its right “to pay all our income into our treasury ourselves”17.

Further study of the problem of the financial status of Russian monasteries, nomenclature and the very mechanism for paying state taxes by them can be built, in addition to acts, on a more representative source base - these are scribe books and economic documentation of the spiritual corporations themselves. On the eve of the general revision of all Trinity estates in 1592-1594, local (for some counties) descriptions of the monastery's possessions in 1584-1589, after the abolition of the Tarkhanov, were carried out. A scribe book for the Moscow district of 1584-1586 has reached us (scribes - T. Khlopov “and comrades”), a scribe book for the Novotorzhsky district of 1587/88 (scribe - Prince M. Shcherbaty)18. Several more scribe books from the 1580s of the Trinity lands are known from references: in Staritsky district in 1586/87 (scribes - E. Stary and S. Vasiliev), in Tver district in 1586/87 and 1587/88 (scribes - A. Klobukov, A. Grigoriev, Prince M. Shcherbaty) and in Kashinsky district in 1590/91 (payer) "9. Some payment books of the Great Parish are mentioned in Belozersky district (their year is unknown, but payment books were usually compiled based on scribes) 20. Quit records of Nizhny Novgorod clerks D. Alyabyev and S. Sumarokov of 1589-1593 and Balakhninsky posad tselovalniks of the same years are mentioned in the scribe books of the Trinity Monastery of 1593/94 for the Nizhny Novgorod and Balakhninsky districts2." The compilation of all of the listed scribes, payment books, and “tips” can be considered an important milestone in the preparation of a grandiose government description of the Trinity estates in 33 districts of Russia by twelve scribe commissions in 1592-1594.

The total total, expressed in total by these books and recorded in the payroll of the Order of the Great Parish, amounted to 80 1/6 plows. The solution to the problem of consistent levy taxation of the monastery did not end there. In 1598-1599, B.F. Godunov undertook a major financial innovation in relation to him. It consisted, firstly, in the whitening (that is, exemption from taxes) of the monastery arable land (more than 9 plows) and, secondly, in the distribution of peasant and “servant” arable land in the Moscow district according to the category of service plow (800, 1000, 1200 quarters of land of good, average and bad quality, respectively). In general, taxation of the Trinity Monastery within the Russian state was more equal to other forms of feudal property. The whitewashing of the vast Trinity farmland meant providing the monastery with a significant tax break. The state, undoubtedly, was guided by considerations of the speedy restoration, first of all, of the master's sector of the Trinity estate. At the same time, there is free manipulation by the state of the very size of the plow as a salary unit.

In this regard, it is important to take into account the fact of a significant increase in land ownership of the Sergius Monastery in the years 1580-1600 due to the inclusion in its latifundia of lands of different ownership status (secular estates, former local, black-plowed, palace estates). In the payment books of 1598-159923 there are the following headings: 1) “Trinity lands, and now for landowners”; 2) “Trinity lands, and now for the estates.” These headings included records of monastic possessions given to secular feudal lords (only in two cases the Rostov Epiphany Monastery and “Queen Elder Marfa Vladimirovna” were named) as estates or estates “by sovereign decree” or “dachas from the monastery.” Apparently, the government of B.F. Godunov at the end of the 16th century involved the monastic authorities in providing land for part of the ruling class. The provision of Troitsk lands as estates for service people is partly reminiscent of the practice of the Ryazan “nagodchina”, noted in the scientific literature by S. I. Smetanina, and even earlier - by S. V. Rozhdestvensky24. One can see a parallel with Western European forms of conditional holdings of land such as “donatio verbo regis”, “donatio nomine regis” (donation by order or in the name of the king). The saturation of the monastic estate with lands of different origins may have required the financial equalization of their plow status and the introduction of a service, local-patrimonial plow for the Sergius Monastery. Consequently, we encounter the principle of such financial unification in the mentioned sources - Godunov’s decree of 1598 and the payment books of 1598-1599 compiled in pursuance of it.

There is no mass information available about exactly what state taxes and in what quantities were paid from Trinity plows in the 1570-1590s. According to the documentation of the Novgorod Nikolo-Vyazhitsky Monastery, S. M. Kashtanov calculated the amount of state taxes on plows in 1571: yam money and accepts - more than 14 rubles, city and zasechnoye business - 1 ruble 13 altyns, money for bread and quitrent - 11 money, for clerks and zemstvo clerk - 7 altyn 4 money, to help Yamsky hunters - 1 ruble, half a ruble and 5 altyn. S. M. Kashtanov cited monthly salaries for state taxes in 1581/82 - 1583/84 for the Joseph-Volokolamsk Monastery: this money is 25 rubles, polonyanichnye - 13 rubles 15 altyn, yam money - 10 rubles, fodder money - 1 ruble 10 altyn25.

E.I. Kolycheva’s remark regarding the policy of financial unification pursued by the Russian state at the end of the 16th century also deserves attention. At this time, the government collects basic taxes in equal amounts from both the local and monastic plows. In 1588, the amounts of payments from the Moscow and Novgorod plows were practically the same; after 1589, the salaries of the main taxes became stable: for example, the salary of hunting and hunting money was 12 rubles per plow, the salary of fodder money (“for white food”) was 1 ruble 56 money from plow26.

It was possible to discover the only and unique news for the Trinity Monastery about the payment of state taxes by its peasants in 1596 and their relationship with seigneurial rent. In a fragment of the quitrent book of 1595/96 for the Bezhetsky Verkh, it is reported that a quitrent was taken from the village of Khotunina (from two households) in the amount of 20 altyns plus another 4 altyns “for small income.” In the same village, “sovereign taxes” (their composition is not disclosed) were collected for the past 1593-1595 years of only 1.5 rubles, that is, at the rate of half a ruble per year27. Thus, among the monetary obligations of the peasant household, rent for the monastery predominated (72 money per year, or 59 percent), rather than state-centralized rent (50 money, or 41 percent).

XVII century inherited from the 16th century the government's gross inspection and mass signing of monastic grants. As mentioned above, in 1551 one such check made it possible to attract a wide range of monasteries to pay basic state taxes. A new revision of the tarkhanov was started in the summer of 1617 by the Order of the Great Palace. From this department an order was sent to local governors signed by clerk Patrikey Nasonov. They were ordered to take from the archimandrites, abbots and builders of local monasteries their previous and new grants of tarkhan letters. Confiscation of documents occurred both from the clerks of monastic villages and from the spiritual corporations themselves28. The fact that the Trinity-Sergius Monastery actually submitted a set of its letters of grant to government verification is mentioned in the right letter dated November 30, 1618, published and studied by V.I. Koretsky. The reason for her extradition was the robbery by thieves near the village of Cherkizova on the way from Moscow of the monastery servant Karp Yudin, who on August 21, 1618 was carrying a box with grand ducal and royal letters of grant29. Among them was the famous forged letter of Grand Duke Dmitry Ivanovich Donskoy “on taxes and trade duties and not judged and on the kiss of the cross.”

According to S. B. Veselovsky, the revision and signing of monastic documents was carried out by a specially created Detective Prikaz consisting of clerks Semyon Golovin, Ivan Pozdeev, Prokofy Pakhirev, Semyon Bredikhin. During the years 1618-1629, some monasteries were issued several new general grants of tarkhan charters, and their previous charters were also confirmed. In his early work devoted to this revision, S. B. Veselovsky identified a wide range of spiritual corporations that received “new tarkhan” charters 30. These are Dvinsky Mikhailo-Arkhangelsky, Rozhdestvensky Purdyshevsky, Antonev-Siysky, Nikolo-Korelsky, Bogoroditsky Sviyazhsky, Trinity Astrakhan, Ryazan Solotchinsky, Suzdal Vasilievsky, Nikolo-Vyazhitsky, Joseph-Volokolamsk, Kirillo-Belozersky, Trinity-Kalyazin, Tikhvinsky Assumption, Solovetsky, Simonov, Pskov Ioan-Predechansky, Suzdal Pokrovsky, Murom Blagoveshchensk, Kostroma Iparovsky, Nikolo-Ugrashsky, Spaso. -Kamenny, Resurrection Derevyanitsky, Uglich Alekseevsky, Ladoga Vasilyevsky, Cherdynsky Bogoslovsky, Klimets Nikolaevsky monasteries. Certificates of other church institutions were also considered: - Kazan Archdiocese. Novgorod Metropolis. Ryazan and Murom archdiocese, Suzdal bishopric. Kolomna and Kashira bishoprics, Assumption Cathedral of the Moscow Kremlin. Attention was also paid to relatively modest deserts - Vazhskaya Vvedenskaya Uzdrenskaya, Kargopolskaya Vassianova Strokina, Vologda Antonyeva. By referring to the publication of the official material in " Full meeting laws" and "Collection of Certificates of the College of Economy", the list of S. B. Veselovsky can be supplemented with a group of Vazh monasteries - Bogoslovsky, Nikolo-Markushevsky Agapitov, Nikolo-Klonovsky, Shidrovsky Nikolo-Velikoretsky, Vologda Glushitsky Pokrovsky and Kornilyevo-Komelsky, as well as Tikhvin Vvedensky and the Rostov Belogostitsky monasteries.31 It should be noted that in the charter of the Novgorod Metropolis dated August 6, 1625, it was about such Novgorod monasteries as Yuryev, Antonev, Dukhov, Nikolo-Vyazhitsky, Otensky, Klopov32.

S. B. Veselovsky considered the most significant thing in the “new code” of the 1620s to be that all literati, without exception, were obliged to pay yam money and streltsy bread. These taxes were introduced in 1613, and the government of Tsar Mikhail Fedorovich demanded their payment without exception. According to S. B. Veselovsky, the revision of monastic charters in the 1620s meant the actual abolition of the old tax privileges of the church33. There was no exception in this process of unification of the tax immunity of spiritual feudal lords and. the largest of them is the Trinity-Sergius Monastery. General charters establishing the procedure for paying state taxes were issued to him in 1606, 1607 and 1617 (see table 2). In the 20s of the 17th century, he received two general letters of grant - on October 17, 1624 (signed by clerk Prokofy Pakhirev) and on April 11, 1625 (signed by clerk Semyon Bredikhin). The last charter was later given official significance, since its list was entered in copy book No. 52734 (from the original, certified with a red seal), and it was confirmed in 1657, 1680 and 1690 (see table 2). The charter of 1624 did not receive official significance, and there is no list from it in copy book No. 527.

In the monastery inventories and copy books, the general charters of the 1620s were called “new tarkhans.” For example, the inventory of the Spaso-Kamenny Monastery of 1628 mentions “a letter from the Sovereign Tsar and Grand Duke Mikhail Fedorovich of All Russia, issued to the entire monastery estate on all sorts of matters”35. Simultaneously with the granted tarkhans, obedient letters could also be issued, containing instructions to local authorities to comply with the norms of tarkhan acts. In the aforementioned inventory of the Spaso-Kamenny Monastery of 1628, after the entry about the general “Tarkhan new letter” we read: “yes, the letter is obedient to the same letter.” In one of the copy books of the Kirillo-Belozersky Monastery (list of 1638/39) there appears “a new tarkhan and unconvicted three-term and preferential letter signed by clerk Semyon Golovin”36. The general Trinity charters of 1617 and 1625 are also called Tarkhan in copy book No. 52737. In the deed book of the Kornilyevo-Komelsky Monastery published by Yu. S. Vasilyev in 1657, in the list of serf documentation two grants of Tarkhan of Tsar Mikhail Fedorovich are named: one 1620/ 21 years old (according to the clerk Semyon Golovin), the second, “big” one, 1628/29 (secretary Semyon Bredikhin), and both were genuine, since there is an indication of the sovereign’s hanging red seal38. Mentions of general tarkhan letters of the 1620s are also found in the scribal documentation of that time. For example, in the hundredth extract from the Vologda scribe book of S. G. Korobin and clerk F. Stogov of 1628-1630 we find a reference to the sovereign's charter of 1620/21 signed by clerk Semyon Golovin, which, among other things, dealt with customs rights Kornilyevo-Komelsky Monastery for auction in the village of Gryazivitsy (modern Gryazovets)39.

Thus, the “new code”, recorded in the 1620s in a series of general grants to monasteries, was to involve the latter in paying the main state taxes - Yamsky money, Streltsy grain reserves, and the execution of city and prison affairs.

All this had to be paid and fulfilled “according to scribes and watchmen’s books with quarters of arable land with plows of people together.” The very organization of the collection of state taxes and their delivery to the Moscow orders was entirely left to the will of the monastic authorities: “money collectors” and “Yamsky construction workers” were not supposed to enter the monastic estates. Thus, the administrative-reserve status of the latter (“introitus iudicum”), associated with the large volume of administrative, organizational, tax and other powers of the monastic authorities over the dependent population, was not violated. In addition, all general letters of grant contained unified norms of judicial and customs immunity for monasteries (three judicial deadlines for the appearance of accused monastic people in court, submission to the Order of the Great Palace in Moscow, customs and travel privileges), and this precisely fell under the concept of tarkhanov , administrative-judicial and customs-tax privileges.

In accordance with the established procedure, there were some exceptions. They affected, for example, the monasteries of Solvychegodsky and Ustyug districts (Pokrovsky Telegov, Vvedensky Solvychegodsky, Nikolo-Koryazhemsky, Mikhailo-Arkhangelsky, Ioanno-Predtechensky). These corporations “since ancient times” were listed in the black plows, therefore their removal from the limits of general district taxation and the endowment of tax “specialty” in 1629/30 was revised by Tsar Mikhail Fedorovich and Patriarch Filaret. The clerks Prokofy Pakhirev and Semyon Bredikhin indicated this order without the “sovereign's knowledge” when drawing up letters of grant to the named monasteries, which were ordered to be returned to Moscow, to the Ustyug Chet. This should have been done by the Ustyug governor P. Volynsky and the clerk S. Matyushkin40.

The charters of 1622 and 1625 of the Novgorod Metropolis had some features. They reflected the state’s desire to influence the limitation of intra-church immunity. Tsar Mikhail Fedorovich canceled for the Novgorod monasteries (Yuryev, Antonev, Dukhov, Vyazhitsky, Klopov, Otensky) the previous lord's letters about non-payment of church tribute and non-entry of metropolitan tithes. Monasteries were also exempted from levies that had no practical significance already in the 17th century - “vicar and Tiunsky incoming food”, “furnishing”, “smerdovshchina”, “poral money” - the very list of which reflects the early feudal archaism. But the Novgorod Metropolis, represented by its main monasteries, was by no means freed from the state taxes that became universal in the 1620s - yam money, streltsy bread, city police and prison affairs41.

Specific information about the right of monasteries to collect state taxes on their estates themselves has come to us as part of monastery bills, quitrents and general salary books. For the Trinity-Sergius Monastery, such information has been available since the 90s of the 16th century (in fragments of quitrent books of 1595/96). Researchers also have a quitrent book from 1617 and a printed book from 1623, fragments of economic documentation from the 1630s and 1670s, quitrent books from 1696 from two assigned monasteries - Trinity-Alatyr and Trinity-Sviyazh - and, finally, a receipt and expenditure book 1703-170442. Without giving here a detailed analysis of each of these books, we will note only one striking feature common to all of them. This is a sharp disproportion in the vyt standards (and the vyt was used in the estates as a salary unit for the assessment of both owner and state duties) in favor of the seigneurial rent. In Galician villages and hamlets, the monetary obligations of the peasant household in 1617 consisted of 86-88 percent of quitrents for the monastery and only 12-14 percent of state payments. In the estates of Bezhetsky, Yaroslavl and Poshekhonsky districts in 1623, there was a great variety in the povyt rates of monetary quitrent for the corporation, depending on the corvee or quitrent profile of the complexes. But the state tax salaries - 94 dollars - were stable and did not depend on it. Within the vast surroundings of the village of Priseki, peasants performed corvee for the monastery, so the monetary dues here were lower than in other refugee estates - about 74 percent of all monetary obligations of the peasant household (26 percent went to pay state taxes - “for white fodder, for the agricultural work for help and for yam and running money"). In the villages of Molokovo, Akhmatovo, Baskaki, which were of a monetary nature, payments to the lord amounted to 92-94 percent, to the state - 6-8 percent.

The peasants of the Yaroslavl and Poshekhonsky estates of the Trinity were burdened with a large volume of various labor duties for the monastery, so here the size of the monetary burden of the court looked smaller (only half a ruble), but more than 77 percent of them went to the corporation’s treasury, and the remaining 23 percent were considered as sovereign taxes, although and they were collected by the patrimonial administration. By the end of the 17th century, the monetary exploitation of the monastic peasants increased by 3-4 times compared to the 1620s, but even then it was dominated by seigneurial interests. In the estates of the Trinity-Alatyr Monastery, according to the book of 1695/96, monetary collections on the land owner amounted to 88-95 percent of all fees from the yard, and on the state - from 5 to 12 percent. The intensively populated villages of Upper Ichiksa and Evleya made payments only to the monastery treasury and had no monetary obligations to the state. Approximately the same picture was observed in the villages of the Trinity-Sviyazhsky Monastery, but in some of its complexes the highest rates of government payments are found - up to 17-28 percent from the yard.

Thus, the given data from the economic documentation of the Trinity-Sergius Monastery of the 17th century deepens the problem of the financial status of spiritual corporations in Russia posed in the title of the article. They allow us to talk about financial immunity, which in our case was still far from being eliminated in the 17th century, of the Trinity Monastery. By 1700, he had up to 20 thousand peasant and peasant households. And it was not the state, but the seigneurial power that had tax-paying powers in relation to such a large population. The seigneurial system in the field of management and finance had not yet been restructured into a public legal system by the beginning of the 18th century, although the state at that time was already on the threshold of its transformation into an absolutist one. These observations force us to take a slightly different look at the thesis, firmly established in recent historiography (meaning collective works on peasant studies), about the unambiguous predominance in Russia of state-centralized rent over owner-occupied rent, starting from mid-16th century century and in the 17th century43. Apparently, the very relationship between state and seigneurial feudalism in Russia does not look so clear.

* * *

There is also an undoubted financial aspect to the question of the various customs privileges of Russian monasteries in the 17th century, during the initial period of the formation of the all-Russian market. Of the general charters of the 1620s mentioned above, many had customs-immunity sections authorizing the privileges of monasteries in this area. In addition to these sections, from the end of the 16th-17th centuries, many independent grants of taxation and customs documents to large and small monasteries have been preserved44. For the Trinity-Sergius Monastery, from the end of the 16th century, perhaps the main thing became the “Astrakhan plant trade”, associated with the purchase and transportation of large quantities of fish and salt. In 1628/29, among the orders to the Astrakhan governors F. Kurakin and I. Korovin, one was sent according to which, for excess luggage from the Trinity ship, not customs duties were taken, but a fixed quitrent to the Order of the Kazan Palace. The governors of all cities were ordered not to stop that ship, “but to let it pass everywhere without delaying” (in Kazan, Nizhny Novgorod and other cities). It was added that this order was established “for the mercy of the Most Holy Life-Giving Trinity and the Wonderworker Sergius, and other monasteries and all kinds of merchants were not ordered to set him up as a model."45. The Kirillo-Belozersky Monastery also received quite a lot of grants of taxation and customs travel documents from the tsars at the end of the 16th - first third of the 17th century. 46. Actually, "tarhanya" in Kirillov's charters 40 thousand pounds of salt and goods were named, duty-free transported “for monastic use.” Tarkhans of monasteries in the trade sphere remained until the 70s of the 17th century (at Makaryevo-Kalyazin, Simonov, Kornilyevo-Komelsky). Fluctuations in government policy in customs regions throughout the 17th century were traced in their works by I. A. Bulygin and V. N. Zakharov.47 Two decrees of 1672 and 1677 liquidated the customs privileges of monasteries (Trinity-Sergiev was “personally” mentioned) for “low-level planted industries” (Astrakhan. - M. Ch..): “and henceforth no one in those places will be a tarkhan.”48 The later mention of these decrees in Peter’s decree of June 15, 1700 interpreted them as the abolition of all tarkhans in general49. Another direction of the restrictive-immunity policy in the customs sphere was the abolition of monastic rights to collect trade duties at markets in their villages. True, here too there were inconsistencies and deviations from the planned course. Until the beginning of the 18th century, great diversity remained in the customs status of Russian monasteries. It was expressed in different ways of organizing the customs service in trading monastic villages. The first consisted of the wealthiest monastery peasants taking over torzhoks (tamga collection) in large villages. The second was more closely related to the economic interests of the corporations themselves, when they sought to bring the collection of tamga and other duties under their control. As partial compensation to the Trinity Monastery for the abolition of tarkhanov for “low-level planted fisheries” in 1672, in the following year 1673, the right to collect tamga in the villages of Kostroma district was granted50. The corporation succeeded in ousting its own peasants from this highly profitable sphere of economic activity. In 1699-1700, the government of the young reformer Peter I abolished a number of monasteries of their traditional customs rights in villages (Nikolo-Pesnoshsky, Purdyshevsky, Trinity-Sergiev). But even after this abolition, tamga collections for the monastery in this village continued, as evidenced by the income and expenditure book of 1703-1704. Have not found; consistent application and Peter the Great's decree, which banned distillation in monasteries in February 1694 ("personally" it even named the Trinity-Sergius and Savvino-Storozhevsky monasteries)52. At the end of the 17th - beginning of the 18th century, the Trinity Monastery successfully enriched itself through customs taxation of its trading peasants. We see entries about this in the income and expenditure book of 1703-1704: the collection of duties for “walking trade”, “shovel flour for sale”, “small sale fish”, “sale mansion building”, “sale beer and kvass grains”, etc. d.53 In general, throughout the 16th-17th centuries, the principle of centralizing state finances was more or less consistently pursued by limiting and unifying the main tax-paying privileges of spiritual feudal lords. There were many objective difficulties along the way of “integrating” the variable-corporate immunity of monasteries into the all-Russian financial system. The persistent features of economic fragmentation in the first half of the 16th century, strengthened by the extreme circumstances of its second half, then the “turmoil” and its long overcoming can be considered as inhibitory factors on the path to the formation of an all-Russian financial system. And yet, as it seems to us, the state in the 17th century generally coped with the task of attracting the church to taxation, creating a special regime for it. The position of monastic immunity in the 17th century became even more unified than in the 16th century. At the same time, there was still an insufficient demarcation between state and private taxes. From the 17th century, the next 18th century inherited (if we turn to the financial reform of Peter I) the right of the nobles to be in charge of the distribution and collection of taxes from their population. Then this became one of the elements of the emerging class-wide immunity law, formalized by the Charter of the Nobility of 178554.

Table 1
STATE INVESTMENT OF MONASTERIES AT THE END OF THE 16TH - FIRST QUARTER OF THE 17TH CENTURY

	Monastery	Sewn, vytny, obezhny salary or number of yards	Types and amounts of payments and duties	Who paid where and where?
1582		23/96 plow	Polonian money - 3 rubles. 7 al. 7.5 den.
1582	Novgorod Nikolo-Vyazhitsky	2 yards in Novgorod	15 quarters to the barn. land from the yard	Servant P. Grigoriev
1582	He's the same	-	For every pearl income, 3 al. 4 days from the yard	-
1583	He's the same		Poured into the sovereign's granaries in the city of Oreshka - 150 quarters. rye	Servant K. Rebrov
1586/87	Dvinsky Mikhailo-Arkhangelsky	36 doors peasants, 2 doors Bobylsky	Danish, quitrent money and duties - 5 rubles. 8 al. 4.5 den	-
1587	Ryazan Voskresensky Terekhov	11/96 plow	Increase in Polonian money - 18 rubles. 13 al. 2 days	Hegumen Simeon in the Great Parish
1588	He's the same	1/8 plow	Yam money - 2.5 rubles. Polonian money - 8 al. 2 days	Servant Ya. Borisov in the Great Parish
1588	Pereyaslavsky Fedorovsky	3/8 plow	Yamsky and Polonyanichny money - 9 rubles. 20 al. 5 days	Servant V. Pylaev
1589	Kostroma Ipatievsky	11/12 plow	Yamsky hunters for help and runs - 8 rubles. 32 al.	Clerk P. Grigoriev
1590	Ryazan Voskresensky Terekhov	1/8 plow	Yamsky hunters for 6 carts from Moscow to Pereyaslavl-Ryazan - 1 r. 8 al. 2 days	Servant Shemet
1592	He's the same	1/8 plow	Viceroy food - 5 al. 2 days and turning money - 1 rub. 19 al. 4 days	Servant I. Sukhotnin
1592	Spaso-Prilutsky	3 41/96 plow	Hunters for assistance and runs - 34 rubles. 29 al. 5 days White food - 2 rubles. 7 al. 4 days	Elder Theodosius of Bokhtyuzh
1592	He's the same	From the Dvina fishery	Data and quitrent money - Legal entity.	Servant F. Matveev to clerk A. Shchelkalov
1593	He's the same	3 41/96 plow	Help hunters - 34 rubles. 13 al. White food - 2 rubles. 7 al. 4 days	Treasurer Elder Isaiah
1593	Nikolo-Vyazhitsky	-	Bridge surplus money - 14 rubles. 2 al. 4 days	Elder Nifont
1594	He's the same	1 5/6 burn	Yamsky hunters for help and runs - 13 rubles. Novgorod posad hunters -4 rubles. 28 al. 4 days	Treasurer Yakim
1596	Kostroma Ipatievsky	1 49/96 plow	Feed, turning and grain money - 7 rubles. 19 al. 1.5 den.	Servant: F. Mironov in Chetvertnaya, order
1597	He's the same	1 49/96 plow	-	Servant L. Isaev in the Quarter Order
1597	Spaso-Prilutsky		Danish, quitrent money, duties and for Siberian reserves - 11 rubles. 7.5 den.	Elder Misail in the Quarterly order to clerk S. Sumarokov
1598	He's the same	4 1/24 plows	Yamsky hunters for help and food money - 42 rubles. 3 al. 2 days	Treasurer Evfimy
1599	He's the same	4 1/24 plows	For yam cooking and food and food for the sovereign's messengers - 5 rubles.	Treasurer Evfimy
1600	Suzdal Pokrovsky	1/16 plow	Yamsky money - 11 rub. 29 al. 1 day	Servant of A. the Second
1601	Spaso-Prilutsky	From the Dvina fishery	Data and dues - 10 rubles.	Servant P. Nefedov on Thursday. clerks I. Vakhrameev and B. Ivanov
1604	He's the same	3 23/24 plows	Yamsky hunters for help and runs - 39 rubles. 19 al. 2.5 den. Mortgage Murzas for food - 2 rubles. 28 al. 2 days	Treasurer Theodosius
1606	He's the same		For the viceroy's food and for the arrival of duty-bearing people, income and tribute and request, and for funeral black sables and yams and noticeable and squeak money and quitrents from varnishes and hay - 11 rubles. 7.5 days	Servant of F. Omelyanov in the Ustyug Chet to clerk V. Markov
1606	He's the same	from the Dvina field	Danish and quitrent payments - 10 rubles.	Servant of F. Omelyanov in the Great Chet to clerks F. Yanov and A. Ivanov
1607	He's the same	5 dry	For the sovereign's service to military men - 3.5 rubles.	Servant F. Isakov
1608-	He's the same		For dates on horseback and on foot - 50 rubles. and for military people - 96 rubles.	Kelar Iev to the Vologda voivode N.M. Pushkin and clerk R. Voronov
1609	Nikolo-Vyazhitsky		For German food - 31 rubles. 9 al. 4 days	The peasants of that monastery to clerk S. Golovin
1610	Nikolo-Vyazhitsky	40 vyty	Yamsky hunters for runs - 13 rubles. 16 al. 2.5 den. Fishing rent and customs duties - 17 rubles. 4 al. 4 days	Headman P. Ivanov
1616	Kostroma Ipatievsky	1 3/8 plow	Serving people receive a salary of 67 rubles. 22 al. 1 day	Servant S. Vasiliev to clerk S. Golovin
1618	Spaso-Prilutsky	19/96 plows in Solvyche-Godsky district.	Tribute, dues and duties - 11 rubles. 7.5 den. Requested money for military personnel's salary - 3 rubles. 19 al. 5 days	Elder Michael to the elected kissers of the Solvychegodsky district.
1620	He's the same	1/8 plows in the suburban villages of Korovnichye and Vypryagovo	Cossack feed and grain reserves - 2 rubles. 8.5 den.	Servant of S. Konoplev to the Vologda governor V. M. Buturlin
1621	He's the same		The annual salary of a lip businessman is 3 rubles.	Treasurer Akindin to lip kisser P. Nikitin
1624	He's the same	19/96 plows in Solvychegodsky district.	Quirk, tribute and duties - 11 rubles. 7.5 days	Elder Levkei in the Ustyug Chet to clerk M. Smyvalov

table 2
General letters of grant to the Trinity-Sergius Monastery
late 16th - 17th centuries

Certificate and date	Confirmations: king, date, in whose name	Clerk who issued the confirmation
Certificate of Ivan IV	1) c. Fyodor Ivanovich May 3, 1584	A. G. Artsybashev
dated April 28, 1578	archim. And she
	2) c. B.F. Godunov with his son October 9, 1601 Archimandrite. Kirill II	A. G. Artsybashev
	3) c. M. F. Romanov August 31	I. Bolotnikov
	1613 archim. Dionysius and cellarer A. Palitsyn
Certificate of V. I. Shuisky dated May 11, 1606 signed by clerk V. Nelyubov	1) c. M. F. Romanov August 31, 1613 archim. Dionysius	I. Bolotnikov P. Pakhirev
	3) c. M. F. Romanov April 11	S. Bredikhin
	1625 archim. Dionysius and Kel. A. Palitsyn
Certificate of M. F. Romanov dated December 31 1617	1) c. M. F. Romanov October 17, 1624	P. Pakhirev
	archim. Dionysius and Kel. A. Palitsyn
	2) c. M. F. Romanov April 11, 1625 archim. Dionysius	S. Bredikhin
	3) c. Alexey Mikhailovich Archimandrite. Joasaph
-	4) c. Fyodor Alekseevich March 19, 1680 Archimandrite. Vikentnu	S. Kudryavtsev
Diploma c. M. F. Romanov dated October 17, 1624, signed by clerk P. Pakhirev	There was no confirmation
Certificate of M. F. Romanov dated April 11, 1625 signed by clerk S. Bredikhin	1) c. Alexey Mikhailovich May 20, 1657 Archimandrite. Joasaph
	2) c. Fyodor Alekseevich March 19, 1680 Archimandrite. Vincent	S. Kudryavtsev
	3) Tsars Ivan and Peter Alekseevich May 17, 1690 Archimandrite. Vincent	N. Poyarkov

Sources: RGADA. F. 281 (Certificates of the College of Economy), according to Balakhna. Book 409. L. 38 volume-47; Collection of GKE. T. 1. Pg., 1922. No. 402, 483, 529 a, 530; OR RSL. F. 303 (ATSL). Book 527. L. 416 vol. - 423 vol., 437-438 vol., 499-505, 559-563 vol.; Book 536. L. 510-521; Archive of the Russian Academy of Sciences. F. 620 (S. B. Veselovsky). Op. 1. Book. 148. L. 205-210 vol., 213-216 vol.; PSZ. T. I. SPb., 1830. No. 205, 206 (confirmation May 20, 1657); T. II. No. 810, 811 (confirmed March 19, 1680); T. III. No. 1375, 1376 (confirmed May 17, 1690); HP. II. No. 1039; Tebekin D. A. List of immune documents 1584-1610. Part 1 // AE for 1978. M., 1979. No. 544, 665.

NOTES

1. Kashtanov S.M. Essays on Russian diplomacy. M., 1970; Kashtanov S. M. Finance of medieval Rus'. M., 1988.

2 Source base for the study of immunity policy in the 16th century: Kashtanov S. M. Chronological list of immunity documents of the 16th century. Part 1 // AE for 1957. M., 1958. P. 302-376 (No. 1-595); Kashtanov S. M. Chronological list of immunity documents of the 16th century. Part II // AE for 1960. M., 1962. P. 129-200 (No. 596-1139); Kashtanov S. M., N a z a r o v V. D., F l o r ya B. N. Chronological list of immunity documents of the 16th century. Part Ill // AE for 1966. M., 1968. P. 197-253 (No. 1-519); Tebekin D. A. List of immunity certificates 1584-1610. Part I // AE for 1978. M., 1979. P. 191-235 (No. 1-325); Tebekin D. A. List of immunity certificates 1584-1610. Part II // AE for 1979. M., 1981. P. 210-255 (No. 326-714). Gramotchiki are privileged feudal landowners who received charters from the state.

3 Gorskiy A.V. Historical description Holy Trinity Lavra of St. Sergius. M., 1890. Part II. Applications archim. Leonida. No. VI. (The manuscript is stored in the OR RSL. F. 304, I - TSL Collection. Book 821).

4Kashtanov S. M., Kirichenko L. A. On the history of feudal land ownership in the Rostov district in the 16th century. (Two decree letters on city duty for peasants in the village of Gusarnikov) // History and culture of the Rostov land 1992 Rostov, 1993. P. 129; 137 (note 8).

5 ATSL. Book 527. L. 203 vol.-204 vol., 205 vol.-206 vol. 217-218 HP I No. 329,330,333.

6 ATSL. Book 527. L. 278 vol.-281 vol.; Book 637. L. 410. Reproduction of the restrictive signature on the general charter of 1550 and the experience of its scientific reconstruction, see: Kashtanov S.M. General letters of grant to the Trinity-Sergius Monastery in 1550, 1577 and 1578. for all estates (correlation of texts) // Notes of OR GBL. Vol. 28. M., 1966. P. 96-142.

7 HP. II. No. 835, 710, 711; Description of documents of the XIV-XVII centuries. in the books of the Kirill-Belozersky Monastery, stored in the Manuscripts Department of the Russian National Library / Comp. G. P. E n i n. St. Petersburg, 1994. No. 1866; Kashtanov S.M. Finance... P. 200.

8. Kashtanov S. M. General letters of grant... P. 99-100, 127.

9. Kashtanov S. M. Finance... P. 181; HP. II. Ne 985; HP. III. No. 1- 441. Description of documents... No. 1913.

10 Historical archive. M.; L„ 1940. Issue. III. No. 59; HP. II. No. 948.

11. Ibid. No. 52; HP. II. No. 946; Collection of Prince Khilkov. M., 1879. No. 59; HP. II. No. 942. In Khilkov’s “Collection” the date is indicated incorrectly - 1579. Correctly - 1571. See also: Kashtanov S.M. General letters of grant... P. 122-123; Kashtanov S. M. Essays on Russian diplomacy... P. 174-204.

12 Legislative acts of the Russian state of the second half of the 16th - first half of the 7th century. Texts. M., 1986. No. 43. P. 61-63.

13. Kolycheva E.I. Agrarian system of Russia in the 16th century. M„ 1987. pp. 131-132.

14 Ibid. pp. 167-168.

15 RGADA. F. 281 (Certificates of the College of Economics, hereinafter - F. GKE), for Novgorod. No. 8458. L. 7-12; F. 1209 (Local order). Book 258. L. 225, 226 vol.; PCMG. Dept. I. S. 850.

16 RGADA. F. GKE, according to Balakhna. Book 409. L. 38 volume-47; HP. II. No. 1039. See also table. 2.

17. Kashtanov S. M. Copy books of the Trinity-Sergius Monastery of the 16th century. // ZOR GBL. Vol. 18. M., 1956. P. 40; K a sh t a n o v S. M. Essays... P. 185, 206-207; ATSL. Book 519. L. 256-733 vol.

18 PCMG. Dept. I. Moscow section No. 2; ATSL. Book 598; Rubtsov M.V. On materials for the church and everyday history of the Tver region in the 15th-16th centuries. Staritsa, 1905. Issue. II. pp. 33-38.

19 PCMG. Dept. II. pp. 405, 407, 408; RGADA. F. GKE, according to Dmitrov. Book 3875. L. 110; in Tver. Book 12556. L. 56; ATSL. Book 527. L. 404-405.

20 PCMG. Dept. II. pp. 419-420.

21 RGADA F. GKE, according to Vladimir. Book 2048. L. 288 vol., 305.

22 For more details, see: Cherkasova M. S. Land ownership of the Trinity-Sergius Monastery in the XV-XVI centuries. M., 1996. S. 180-191; table 5-6 on p. 229-239.

23 ATSL. Book 569, 570.

24 See: Rozhdestvensky S.V. Serving land tenure in Moscow state XVI V. St. Petersburg, 1897. P. 27; Smetanina S.I. Changes in forms of rent in the second half of the 16th century. // Feudalism in Russia. Anniversary readings dedicated to the 80th anniversary of Academician L. V. Cherepnin. Abstracts of reports and messages. M., 1985. S. 44-46; Cherkasova M.S. Forms of dismembered property in the estate of the Trinity-Sergius Monastery in the XV-XVI centuries. // Ibid. pp. 41-44.

25. Kashtanov S. M. Finance... P. 235.

26 Kolycheva E.I. Agrarian system... P. 166-167.

27 ATSL. Book 637. L. 302-302 vol. About the book 637 see: Ivina L.I. Troitsky collection of materials on the history of land ownership of the Russian state in the 15th-17th centuries. // ZOR GBL. Vol. 27. M., 1965. P. 149-163.

28. Lipinsky M.A. Uglich acts of the 17th century. // Temporary of the Demidov Legal Lyceum. Yaroslavl, 1882. Book. 148. pp. 40-41. No. 45.

29 Koretsky and V.I. Right letter of November 30, 1618 to the Trinity-Sergius Monastery (From the history of monastic land ownership of the XIV-XVI centuries) // ZOR GBL. Vol. 21. M., 1959. P. 173.

30. Veselovsky S.B. On the issue of revision and confirmation of charters of 1620-1630. in Detective orders. M., 1907.

31 PSZ. T. II. St. Petersburg, 1830. No. 681, 769; Collection of GKE. T. II. L., 1929. No. 215, 218, 220, 221, 224, 226; T. I. Applications. No. 541 a; Yaroslavl Provincial Gazette. The part is unofficial. 1851. pp. 279-282, 291-294, 303-304; HP. III. No. 1-316.

32 AI. St. Petersburg, 1841. No. 210, 238.

33. Veselovsky S. B. Feudal land tenure of North-Eastern Rus' in the XIV-XVI centuries. M.; L., 1947. P. 407.

34 ATSL. Book 527. L. 43 vol. (title); L. 559-563 vol. (text). About the book 527 see: And in and L. I. Copy books of the Trinity-Sergius Monastery of the 17th century. // ZOR GBL. Vol. 24. M., 1961. S. 21-22.

35 Monuments of writing in museums of the Vologda region. Catalog guide. Part 4. Issue. 1. Vologda, 1985. P. 196.

36 Description of documents... P. 311. No. 1818.

37 ATSL. Book 527. L. 41, 43 vol.

38 Town on the Moscow road. Historical and local history collection. Vologda, 1994. P. 159 (publication by Yu-S. Vasiliev).

39 Ibid. P. 110 (publication by Yu. S. Vasiliev).

40. Veselovsky S. B. On the issue of revision... P. 25-30; Senigov I.G. Monuments of Zemstvo antiquity. 2nd ed. Pg., 1918. S. 253-254. I thank Yu. S. Vasiliev, who kindly pointed me to the publication of I. G. Senigov.

41 Cherkasova M. S. To the study of monastic immunity on the lands of the Novgorod Metropolis in the 16th-17th centuries. // Public administration and local government in the European North: Historical experience and modernity. Petrozavodsk, 1996. P. 7-9; AAE. T. III. No. 123, 139.

42 ATSL. Book 571, 573, 577, 578, 604, 637; RGADA. F. 237 (Monastery order). On. 1. Part 2. Book. 911; Cherkasova M. S. On state taxation of the Trinity-Sergius Monastery at the end of the 16th-17th centuries. // Current problems of archaeography, source studies and historiography. Materials for the All-Russian scientific conference dedicated to the 50th anniversary of the Victory. Vologda, 1995. pp. 198-202.

43 History of the peasantry of Europe. The era of feudalism. T. II. M., 1986. S. 429-434; History of the peasantry of the USSR. T. II. Peasantry during the period of early and developed feudalism. M., 1990. S. 357, 359; Gorskaya N.A. State duties of monastic peasants in the 17th century. // Society and state of feudal Russia. Collection of articles dedicated to the 70th anniversary of Academician L.V. Cherepnin. M., 1975. S. 317-326.

44 Archive of St. Petersburg IRI RAS. F. 29 (S. B. Veselovsky). No. 1840, 1847, 1882, 1884,1885,1894.1893,1895; PSZ. T. I. No. 81, 318; T. II. No. 676 and many others. etc.

45 AI. St. Petersburg, 1841. T. III. No. 154.

46 Description of documents... No. 1804-1808, 1810-1818.

47 See: Bulygin I.A. The state’s struggle with feudal immunity // Society and the state of feudal Russia. M., 1975. S. 327-333; Zakharov V.N. Customs administration in Russia in the 17th century. // State institutions of Russia XVI-XVIII centuries. M., 1991. P. 57, etc.

48 PSZ St. Petersburg, 1830. T. I. No. 507; T. II. No. 699.

49 Ibid. T. IV. No. 1799.

50 ATSL. Book 556 (Kostroma). L. 234-2355 vol.

51 PSZ. St. Petersburg, 1830. T. III. No. 1721, 1733; T. IV. No. 1762; Arseny, hieromonk. The village of Klementieve, now part of Sergievsky Posad // CHOIDR. 1887. Book. II. Mixture. pp. 39-40.

52. PSZ. St. Petersburg, 1830. T. III. No. 1486. ​​53. RGADA. F-237 (Monastery order). Sp. 3. Book. 911. L. 19,143.152,193, 194 vol. and etc.

54. Kashtanov S. M. Finance... P. 241-242.

Detailed solution to paragraph § 12 on history for 7th grade students, authors N.M. Arsentiev, A.A. Danilov, I.V. Kurukin. 2016

• GDZ working History notebook for grade 7 can be found

What role did the church play in the Russian state in the 16th century? How was her relationship with the authorities?

Church in the Russian state in the 16th century. played a big role. In the 16th century Russia became the only Orthodox power in Europe. The interests of the state and the church did not always coincide. In domestic and foreign policy, the government needed the support of the church, but demanded obedience from its hierarchs. The Russian Orthodox Church retained its land holdings and acquired the status of a patriarchate.

Page 95

How was the Russian Orthodox Church governed in the 15th century? What changes took place in it in the 15th century?

In the 15th century The Russian Orthodox Church was headed by the Metropolitan, and the territorial branches - dioceses - were led by bishops. The main issues were resolved at the Council of Russian Bishops. In the 15th century The Russian Orthodox Church became autocephalous, that is, independent.

Page 97

Remember how the relationship between the emperor and the church was built in the Byzantine Empire.

The Byzantine emperor was considered the head of the church in the empire. The highest church hierarchs were, as it were, ministers of sacred affairs and were obliged to act in accordance with national decrees. The rights of self-government were recognized for the church. However, church councils (the highest body of church authority) in Byzantium met only by decree of the basileus. He also approved the resolutions of these councils and important decisions of church authorities. The emperor regulated internal church life, including issues of interpretation of Holy Scripture and even worship. In ecclesiastical and political terms, such supremacy has become commonly referred to as Caesaropapism, the fusion of ecclesiastical and secular supreme authority under state dominance.

Page 97

What is heresy? Remember how they dealt with heretics in medieval Europe.

For believers: deviation from the norms of the dominant religion, contrary to church dogmas. In medieval Europe, heretics were burned at the stake.

Page 100. Questions and tasks for working with the text of the paragraph

1. What role did the parish church play for the area?

2. What was the basis of the economic power of the church?

The basis of the economic power of the church was land holdings and contributions from parishioners.

3. What is the essence of the dispute between the Josephites and non-possessors? How was this dispute ultimately resolved?

The essence of the dispute between the Josephites and non-covetous people is the issue of the church's ownership of land and relations with the state. This dispute was resolved by subordinating the church to the state.

4. Why was the support of the church important for secular authorities?

Page 100. We think, compare, reflect

1. Find out the location of the monastery closest to your home. Do historical research and find out when it was founded and by whom. Prepare a message (accompanying it electronic presentation) about this monastery and its founder.

Resurrection Monastery

Founded 1849

Historical confession Orthodox (common faith)

Current address Chelyabinsk region, Satkinsky district, Istrut village

Short description

Edinoverchesky Monastery, founded in 1849. Hieromonk John (Vlasiy Gordeev), a former fugitive priest from the Old Believers of the Ufa province, was appointed as the first abbot. It was relatively sparsely populated and not rich, but played an important role in the life of the Ural co-religionists, since 1918 - the place of residence of the co-religionist Bishop of Satkinsky. Closed in 1924, the buildings were occupied by a pioneer camp, later a mental hospital.

In 1991, the buildings were handed over to believers, and reopened in 1993.

Kazan Convent

Founded 1865

Current address Chelyabinsk region, Troitsk, st. Gagarina, 3

Short description

The women's community in Troitsk arose in the middle of the 19th century, officially opened in 1852, located at the chapel in the city cemetery.

Received monastery status in 1865.

At the beginning of the twentieth century. - a populous monastery with an extensive farm.

After the revolution, the buildings were occupied by military units and were finally liquidated in 1927. Restored in 1996.

2. Find in the text of the paragraph examples illustrating the relationship between the church and the laity, as well as the church and the authorities. Analyze these relationships. Draw a conclusion.

Examples of relationships between the church and the laity

The parish church played a big role in the area: all important events in the lives of parishioners took place there - baptisms, weddings, funeral services for the dead, they taught literacy, held gatherings, etc.

Examples of relationships between church and government

“Vasily III patronized Joseph of Volotsky and Daniil, who left his monastery. The Metropolitan allowed Vasily III’s divorce from his first wife and justified the Grand Duke’s reprisals against political opponents.”

The dispute between the Josephites and non-covetous people regarding the church's ownership of land and relations with the state was resolved by the subordination of the church to the state.

The support of the church was important for the secular authorities because the secular authorities did not have a reliable apparatus for governing the country and needed the support of the church.

These relationships were interpenetrating in nature. People deeply believed in God and Orthodoxy was necessary. The church was an integral part of the life of people and the state.

3. What are the names of architectural religious buildings of Orthodox Christians and Muslims?

Architectural religious buildings of Orthodox Christians are called cathedrals, temples, churches. Architectural religious buildings of Muslims are called mosques.

4. Using additional literature and the Internet, collect information about Metropolitan Philip. Based on the information collected, make a report to your classmates. What do you see as the moral feat of this person?

Philip (in the world Kolychev Fedor Stepanovich) (1507 - 1569, Tver) - church leader. Came from a noble background boyar family. He served at the court of Elena Glinskaya and in 1537, after participating in the rebellion of the appanage prince Andrei Staritsky, he fled to the Solovetsky Monastery, where he became a monk.

In 1548 he became abbot and acquired a reputation as an excellent administrator. Under him, many economic structures were built: a network of canals that connected 72 lakes and served water mills, a brick factory, cookhouses, warehouses, etc.

Among the clergy he stood out for his stern, unyielding character. In an effort to rely on church authority, Ivan IV Vasilyevich the Terrible offered to take the throne of Metropolitan Philip, who agreed to this on the condition that Ivan the Terrible abolished the oprichnina. The tsar managed to persuade Philip not to interfere in the oprichnina (“do not interfere in the royal household”), but he received the right to “consult” with the sovereign, which included the possibility of “sorrow” for the disgraced.

The short break in Ivan the Terrible’s reign of terror ended with a new series of murders, and Philip did not remain silent. In the spring of 1568, in the Assumption Cathedral, Philip publicly refused the Tsar's blessing, condemning the oprichnina executions. The commission sent to the Solovetsky Monastery was unable to find materials that proved that Abbot Philip led a vicious life. However, in November 1568, the hierarchs obedient to the tsar at a church council found Philip guilty of “stingy deeds” and deposed him. Sent to captivity in the Tverskoy Otroch-Uspensky Monastery, Philip, refusing to bless the Novgorod oprichnina pogrom, was strangled by M. Skuratov-Belsky. In 1652 he was canonized by the Russian Orthodox Church.

Culture and everyday life of the peoples of Russia in the 16th century.

Material for independent work and project activities of students

Page 100

How to create single state influenced the development of the culture of the peoples of Russia?

In the 16th century The process of forming the culture of a unified Russian state continued. In the context of the annexation of new territories and peoples to Russia, the preservation of their cultural identity became an important task. The creation of a unified state led to huge changes in all spheres of society, including the development of culture. The country was experiencing a cultural upsurge. A unified Russian culture was formed on the basis of the best cultural achievements of all Russian lands, as well as those peoples with whom the Russians had close ties.

Page 101

Name the famous Russian cultural figures of the 14th–15th centuries.

Figures of Russian culture of the 14th–15th centuries.

Literature: Sylvester (priest of the Moscow Annunciation Cathedral), his book “Domostroy” is a generalization of the cultural and everyday way of life of the Russian people.

Afanasy Nikitin (merchant), his book description of the journey “Walking across Three Seas”

A. Kurbsky (military leader, politician) - letters to Ivan the Terrible

Painting: Feofan the Greek, Andrey Rublev, Daniil Cherny

Page 102

Remember what was taught in the mekteb and what in the madrasah?

The mekteb taught children reading, writing, grammar and Islam.

Madrasah is a Muslim theological seminary where Islam was studied.

Page 102

Who is considered the founder of printing in Europe? When was the first printed book created in Europe?

Johann Gensfleisch zur Laden zum Gutenberg (between 1397 and 1400, Mainz - February 3, 1468, Mainz) - German pioneer printer. In the mid-1440s, he created a method of printing with movable type, which had a huge impact not only on European culture, but also on world history.

Page 111. Questions and assignments to the text of the material intended for independent work and project activities of students

1. What were the features of the development of Russian culture in the 16th century?

The creation of a unified state led to huge changes in all spheres of society, including the development of culture. The country was experiencing a cultural upsurge. A unified Russian culture was formed on the basis of the best cultural achievements of all Russian lands, as well as those peoples with whom the Russians had close ties. Cultural works reflected historical events; heroic themes predominated in them (works). But at the same time, interest in man and his inner world became more and more evident.

2. Why were cultural contacts between Russia and other countries important?

Russia's cultural contacts with other countries were important because through these contacts culture was enriched, art developed, and people's lives changed.

3. What united the heroes of epics and epics of different nations?

Heroes of epics and epics of various nations were united by love for the Motherland and interest in their own history.

4. What themes were typical for literary works in the 16th century? List the names of these literary works.

For literary works in the 16th century. themes of justification of tsarist power in Russia were typical.

Titles of literary works: The Legend of the Princes of Vladimir, The Legend of Tsar Constantine, The Legend of Magmet-Saltan, The Story of the Grand Duke of Moscow

5*. Using DIY materials and the Internet, determine what new building material replaced natural stone at this time. From which country was the technology for its production brought to Russia?

Brick has replaced natural stone. The technology for its production was brought to Russia from Byzantium.

Builders from Byzantium brought and revealed the secret of brick production. They arrived together with other masters, scientists and priests in 988 after the baptism of Rus'. The first brick building was built here tithe church in Kyiv. The first brick buildings in Moscow appeared in 1450, and only 25 years later the first brick factory in Russia was built (1475), producing bricks. Before this, bricks were made mainly in monasteries. In 1485, the reconstruction of the Moscow Kremlin began, where brick was used. The construction of the Kremlin walls and temples was supervised by Italian masters.

Page 111. Working with the map

Find on the map the territories (approximate) settlements of the peoples whose heroes of the epic were the Narts.

Territories of (approximate) settlement of peoples whose heroes of the epic were the Narts: Caucasus - Dagestan, Chechnya, Kabardino-Balkaria.

Page 111. We think, compare, reflect

1. How was education organized in schools in the 16th century?

Education in schools of the 16th century. was organized at churches and monasteries. They taught literacy, writing, and arithmetic using church books; textbooks appeared only in the second half of the 16th century.

2. What consequences did the beginning of printing have for the development of culture?

For the development of culture, the beginning of book printing had enormous educational significance. A printed book was much cheaper than a handwritten one and, therefore, more accessible to people.

3. Find out how many years passed from the creation of the first printed book in Europe by I. Guttenberg to the creation by I. Fedorov of the first printed book in Russia.

From the creation of the first printed book in Europe by I. Guttenberg (1450) to the creation by I. Fedorov of the first printed book in Russia (1564), 114 years passed.

4. How is Russian history presented in the Degree Book? How does it explain the reasons? historical events?

Russian history in the “Degree Book” is presented as the process of the ascent of the Russian people along the steps (degrees) of the historical ladder to God. The reasons for historical events in it are explained by God's providence and the wise rule of the princes and sovereign Ivan IV.

5. In what literary work XVI century Is Russian history viewed as part of the world?

Russian history is considered as part of the world in a literary work of the 16th century. "Chronograph" by an unknown author.

6. Name the main idea of ​​Domostroy. Are his ideas relevant in modern life?

The main idea of ​​Domostroy is subordination to royal power, and in the family – to its head, husband, father. His ideas are not relevant in modern life. There is no royal power, and there is equality between men and women.

7. How to strengthen central government influenced the development in Russia in the 16th century. architecture and painting?

The strengthening of central power influenced the development in Russia in the 16th century. architecture and painting were fruitful: construction began in the annexed cities, churches and temples were built in Moscow itself, and civil engineering was developing. In honor of the capture of Kazan, the Intercession Cathedral (St. Basil's Cathedral) was built as a symbol of the unity of the state. Painting is also developing actively, although it is represented, as before, by icon painting and temple painting. This was explained simply: the construction of churches required their painting and decoration with icons.

8. In the everyday life of the peoples of Russia in the 16th century. highlight common and special features. How was the distinctive culture of the various peoples of Russia formed? How did a unified Russian culture develop?

In the everyday life of the peoples of Russia in the 16th century. there are common and special features. What was common was the following: the working routine of life, the presence of rituals, holidays, and everyday life retained the features of the past.

The original culture of the various peoples of Russia was formed on the basis of preserving cultural traditions. A unified Russian culture was formed on the basis of the best cultural achievements of all Russian lands, as well as those peoples with whom the Russians had close ties.

9. Based on the text of the material intended for independent work and project activities, confirm the existence of cultural ties between Russia and European countries.

The existence of cultural ties between Russia and European countries is confirmed by the following: from the second half of the 16th century. a tradition is emerging to train young people abroad. A school for training diplomats and translators was opened under the Ambassadorial Prikaz, to which specialists from abroad were invited. Architects from Italy are invited to build temples and churches.

REPEAT AND Draw CONCLUSIONS

1. What reforms were carried out in Russia in the 16th century? How was government organized?

Reforms of the Chosen One:

Tax policy (increasing the size of the elderly when peasants move from one landowner to another on St. George's Day)

Law and order (tougher penalties for robbers, penalties for bribes)

Limitation of the rights of governors

Administrative and management policy:

The Boyar Duma is the highest authority in the country, all laws are approved by the Boyar Duma,

Final design of the system of central government bodies - orders: Ambassadorial, Petition, Discharge, Local

Military reform

2. What is oprichnina? What was its meaning? What were the consequences of the oprichnina for the history of Russia?

Oprichnina - the allocation of Russian lands into the possession of the sovereign. The oprichnina included lands - part of Moscow, Vyazma, Mozhaisk, Vologda, Kostroma, etc., because they were the richest regions in Russia.

Consequences: the damage caused to Russia by the oprichnina was enormous and led to the economic decline of the country.

3. How did the territory of Russia expand in the 16th century? What foreign policy problems were solved during that period? What foreign policy tasks remain unresolved?

Territory of Russia in the 16th century. expanded mainly in the south and southeast, east. Foreign policy tasks facing Russia in the 16th century: the struggle with the Grand Duchy of Lithuania for Western Russian lands, gaining access to the Baltic Sea and the subjugation of the remnants of the Golden Horde - the Tatar khanates on the southern and eastern borders. The task of subjugating the remnants of the Golden Horde - the Tatar khanates on the southern and eastern borders of Russia - was solved.

The wars with Lithuania ended with the annexation of Chernigov and Novgorod-Seversk lands to Moscow, but were lost after the Livonian War. The foreign policy task of gaining access to the Baltic Sea remained unresolved.

4. What are the results of the reign of Ivan the Terrible for Russia? How did the personality of this ruler influence the fate of Russia?

After the reign of Ivan IV, Russia was in a deplorable state: in the 70-80s. A real economic crisis began, which was expressed in the desolation of cities and villages, the death of a large mass of people, the flight of peasants to the outskirts of the country, and famine. There was discord between the boyars.

The personality of this ruler did not have the best influence on the fate of Russia. During his reign, the unlimited power of the king took shape. Ivan the Terrible cruelly suppressed any disagreement with his opinion, which developed a slave psychology among his subjects. Under such conditions, it was difficult to develop the state based on humanism

5. Is it possible to call Russia at the end of the 16th century. multinational state? How was the process of including various peoples into its composition? What changed in the lives of these peoples after they became part of Russia?

Russia at the end of the 16th century. can be called a multinational state. The process of incorporating various peoples into Russia took place in different ways: the Kazan and Siberian khanates were conquered, the Astrakhan Khanate, and the Nogai Horde entered peacefully.

In the life of these peoples after their entry into Russia, little has changed regarding religion, traditions, and customs, but security has been ensured in the south and southeast, and paths have been opened for direct trade and political contacts with eastern countries.

6. Indicate the most important achievements and features of the culture of Russia in the 16th century. How did the culture of this period differ from the culture Ancient Rus' and culture of the XIV-XV centuries?

Construction began in the annexed cities, churches and temples were built in Moscow itself, and civil construction was developing. In honor of the capture of Kazan, the Intercession Cathedral (St. Basil's Cathedral) was built as a symbol of the unity of the state.

Painting is also developing actively, although it is represented, as before, by icon painting and temple painting. This was explained simply: the construction of churches required their painting and decoration with icons.

Literature and music developed.

Printed books appeared, enlightenment and education developed.

The culture of this period differed from the culture of Ancient Rus' and the culture of the XIV-XV centuries. the emergence of new styles in all areas of culture: architecture, painting, music, literature.

Exercise 1. Among the inventions made by mankind listed below, mark (underline) those thanks to which in the 15th-16th centuries. Great geographical discoveries were made. State their role.

Powder; silk; caravel; porcelain; screw; new energy sources - windmills, coal; compass; firearms; paper; typography; gate

The caravel had high maneuverability, shallow draft, excellent seaworthiness and at the same time was a spacious vessel.
A compass was necessary to determine location and plot a course.
Firearms gave the Europeans a huge advantage over the natives.
Printing contributed to the spread of books and maps in Europe.

Task 2. Contemporaries of the Greats geographical discoveries indicated that every navigator setting off on an expedition had to have with him a set of necessary things. These items are pictured below. Label them and indicate what they were used for.

1. Chronometer (watch) for determining time;2. Crossbow - cold ranged weapon;3. Sword - melee weapon;4. Astrolabe and compass - astronomical instruments for orientation and determining the exact time;5. Geographic map - an image of the earth's surface.

Click to enlarge

Task 3. Choose the correct answer.

The musket was first used: a) in the 15th century. the British; b) in the 16th century. Spaniards; c) in the 17th century. the French; d) in the 18th century. Swiss.

Task 4. Fill the gaps. Which great navigator is this story about?

Life Christopher Columbus full of legends and mysteries. It is known that he was born in 1451 in an Italian city Genoa in the family of a poor weaver. The question of his education remains unclear. Some researchers believe that he studied in the city of Pavia, others that he was a self-taught genius. It is known that in the 70-80s. XV century he was enthusiastically studying geography, studying navigational maps, working on a project to open the shortest sea route from Europe to Asia, hoping to get there through Atlantic ocean.
To implement the plans, money was needed, and Christopher Columbus in search of funds he went to the European royal courts. In Portugal, the “Council of Mathematicians” rejected his project as fantastic, and the English king also found it unrealizable. The Spanish king also refused money, since his advisers stated that “the spherical shape of the Earth would form a mountain in front of the ship, through which it would not be able to sail even with the most favorable wind.” As time went. Finally in 1492 Spanish kings Ferdinand And Isabel signed with Columbus agreement and provided money to organize the expedition.
The hard voyage began. IN 1492 The navigator set foot on the island, which was named San El Salvador, and then two more islands were discovered, which bear the names Cuba And Haiti .
As a result of the next three expeditions, they discovered Puerto Rico, Jamaica, coast South America and Central America . Until the end of his days, the navigator believed that he had discovered a new route to India. The continent he discovered bears the name of another explorer and is called America . In the 19th century, French writer Victor Hugo wrote: “There are unhappy people: Christopher Columbus cannot write his name on his opening..."

This story is about the great navigator Christopher Columbus.

Task 5. Explain the expressions. In what cases were they used?

This is a country where "every peasant was a fisherman, and every nobleman was a captain." This is what they said about Portugal and its inhabitants, the majority of whose occupations were closely connected with the sea.
"This man is a bag of pepper." This was the name of a very rich man. At that time, a bag of pepper was valued more than gold and was a measure of wealth.
“Tired of wearing out their caftans with holes... they sailed to conquer that fabulous metal.” The bulk of the conquerors of the New World were soldiers left out of work after the reconquista, ruined hidalgos, and the poor. They all strove to new lands for gold.
The ship sailed on the “Sea of ​​Darkness.” " Europeans called the Atlantic Ocean the Sea of ​​Darkness.

Task 6. Choose the correct answer.

The price revolution is:
a) a sharp rise in the price of gold and a fall in prices for all other goods; b) a fall in gold prices and an increase in priceseveryoneother goods; c) replacing gold and silver coins with paper money.

Task 7. Fill out the table “Great Geographical Discoveries.”

Causes of the Great Geographical Discoveries	* depletion of precious metals resources in Europe * overpopulation of Mediterranean areas * with the fall of Constantinople, the Ottoman Turks blocked the former trade routes of Europeans with the East * scientific and technological progress in Europe (navigation, weapons, astronomy, printing, cartography, etc.) * desire for wealth and fame
Representatives of which segments of the European population were interested in discovering new lands?	* monarchs * clergy * nobility * merchants * military nobility (those left out of work and without money after the completion of the reconquista).
The goals they pursued	* conquest of new lands and expansion of territories * opening new trade routes * personal enrichment and fame * conversion of new peoples to Christianity
Consequences of the Great Geographical Discoveries	* changing ideas about the world and people * impetus to the development of sciences * expansion of trade and formation of a single world market * the beginning of the creation of colonial empires * emergence of new plant species, including food plants * development of the slave trade * destruction by Europeans of ancient civilizations and peoples, their culture and knowledge.

Task 8. On contour map Draw the routes of the most important expeditions of the 15th - mid-17th centuries in different colors and indicate their years.

Click to enlarge

Task 9. If you replace the numbers with letters according to their place in the Russian alphabet, you will read the statement. Explain its meaning.

GOD, GLORY AND GOLD! - The motto of the discoverers and conquerors of new lands (conquistadors). “God” - the conversion of the natives to Christianity, “Glory” - the conquistadors received titles and fame for their discoveries, “Gold” - the thirst for profit.

Task 10. Write an essay in which you express your opinion on how the principle of “one monarch, one law, one religion” influenced the position of the individual in an absolutist state. Give reasons for your point of view. To answer, use the text of the textbook, work fiction, videos and films.

A very interesting example is youth Queen of England ElizabethI.Born from Henry's second marriageVIIIand Anne Boleyn, she experienced the death of her mother, who was executed at the whim of Henry, from infancyVIII.Despite the fact that she was an English princess, she was removed from the court to the province, where she grew up and was brought up. Since she was not the only contender for the English throne, throughout all these years her life was under threat. Elizabeth, like her predecessors, HenryVIIIand EdwardVI(her half-brother), was a Protestant, but after the death of Edward, her elder sister Maria (from Henry’s first marriage) came to power in EnglandVIII), who was an ardent Catholic. Mary harshly persecuted Protestants, for which she received the nickname Bloody Mary. During her reign, Elizabeth was imprisoned in the Tower and miraculously escaped execution. They demanded that she renounce Protestantism and accept Catholicism. After the death of her sister, with the help of members of the Privy Council close to her, she became Queen of England. In Europe, she was the first to pursue a policy of religious tolerance in her state, despite the fact that she was a Protestant and the state religion was Protestantism.

Task 11. What political and economic consequences did the establishment of absolutism have in European countries?

1. Formation of nations and nation-states;
2. Creation of a state church or subordination of an existing one;
3. Creation of permanent professional armies;
4. Creation of a unified economy (policy, taxes, systems of measures, customs rules, etc.).

Task 12. Express your opinion whether absolutism was different from despotic power, if it was different, then in what way.

Under despotism, the monarch is not only the ruler of his state, but also the master of his subjects. Absolutism contributed to the unity of the state, the formation of a single nation, despotism did not (Persia, Ottoman Empire). Under absolutism, representative institutions and certain civil rights were preserved, which was not the case under despotism. At the same time, the main similarity, the unlimited power of the monarch, took on different forms even in Europe, from classical in France and “soft” in England to despotism in Spain.

Task 13. Analyze the document below and complete the table.

From the charter of the Parisian weavers' workshop.
Every Parisian wool weaver may have in his house two wide looms and one narrow one. Each weaver in his house can have no more than one apprentice, but not less than 4 years of service.
All cloth should be of wool and as good in the beginning as in the middle.
No one from the workshop should start work before sunrise under threat of a fine.
Journeyman weavers must leave work as soon as the first bell tolls for evening prayer, but they must fold their work after the bell rings.

Consider whether there is a connection between guild rules and the form of development of manufacturing production. Write down the answer.

The greatest connection exists with the mixed form of development of manufacturing, when individual elements of the final product were produced by small artisans with a narrow specialization, and assembly was carried out in the entrepreneur’s workshop.

Task 14. The rise in trade is associated with the development of exchanges. Think about the connection between these processes. Why does the development of stock exchanges date back to the 16th century?

In the 16th century, there was a significant increase in the volume of commodity mass and capital associated with the discovery of new lands. All this required an organization where large transactions could take place, which gave impetus to the formation of exchanges where merchants, bankers, suppliers and customers met. The exchanges in turn contributed to the further growth of international and wholesale trade.

Task 15. Fill out the table “Differences between a manufactory and a craft workshop.”

Comparison Questions	Craft workshop	Manufactory
What are the sizes of the enterprises?	Small enterprise size	Large enterprise size
Who worked at the company?	Master (workshop owner) and apprentices	Hired workers
What tools were used?	Old hand looms	Widespread use of new energy sources and improved machines.
Who owned the tools and manufactured products?	To the Master	To the owner of the manufactory
Was there a division of labor?	No	Yes

Task 16. Write an essay on the topic “Buyers and sellers in the market.” Your work should end with the phrase: “It is better to have friends in the market than coins in a chest.” When preparing, use the text and illustrations of the textbook (p. 37, etc.).

Early in the morning our merchant opened his shop in the city market. He traded in fabrics. The shop occupied the entire first floor of the house. He himself did not stand behind the counter, but only looked after his sellers, delivery boys and day laborers, of whom the market was full in the morning and who were just looking for an opportunity to earn an extra penny and took on any job. A stream of people noisily filled the city square. The merchant noticed a nobleman he knew who was trying to raise sheep on his lands. Having greeted each other, the acquaintances got down to business. It turned out that the nobleman needed a lot of fabric for the holiday he was organizing. But, unfortunately, at the moment he was experiencing financial difficulties and could not pay for the fabric right away. After listening to the nobleman, our merchant said: “Okay, I’ll let you borrow the fabric.” The satisfied nobleman said: “They really say, it’s better to have friends in the market than gold in a chest!”

Task 17. At the beginning of the 16th century. In European countries, there were already printing houses that had expensive equipment - machines, fonts, etc. Usually, even in a small printing house, about 30 people worked, and each had his own specialty - typesetter, printer, proofreader, etc. What type of production does the printing house belong to? Explain why. Use a picture to answer.

The printing house is a centralized manufactory with the following features: the entire production process takes place in one room, narrow specialization of labor is used, hired labor is widely used, big number workers, use of expensive equipment.

Task 18. How do you understand the expression “On the stock exchange you can sell and buy wind”? Record the dialogue between the seller and the buyer.

Exchanges often traded contracts for the delivery of goods in the future when the goods themselves were not available. Moreover, payment was made not only in real money, but also in receipts (bills of exchange).
Seller: “I’m selling a batch of pepper!”
Buyer: “When will the goods be available?”
Seller: “In six months, five hundred pounds of choice pepper.”
Buyer: “I agree to buy the entire lot.”
Seller: “How will you pay?”
Buyer: “By bill of exchange.”

Task 19. Which of the following are signs of the emergence of capitalism:

a) development of manufactories; b) Crusades; c) increase in the number of hired workers; d) subsistence farming; e) increase in the number of entrepreneurs?

Task 20. Indicate which of the following segments of the population belonged to the bourgeoisie:

a) merchants; b) bankers; c) hired workers in factories; d) owners of factories.

Task 21. Select from the judgments below those that will help correctly answer the question about the reasons for the development of manufacturing production:

a) the presence of free labor in the person of peasants liberated from serfdom and bankrupt small artisans;
b) the appearance of the first mechanical machines driven by water energy;
c) the development of maritime trade and the growth of cities increased the demand for handicrafts;
d) the influx of gold and silver from the New World provided merchant entrepreneurs with the necessary cash for the organization of manufactories;
e) shop rules interfered with the application technical inventions in craft workshops;
f) the governments of European countries forcibly sent beggars and vagabonds to work in factories.

Task 22. Why do you think the authors of the textbook called the story about the Fugger merchants “The Age of Fuggers”? Suggest your name.

In the 16th century, the leading role in Europe was played by the Habsburg Empire, which united half the continent under its rule and enjoyed the unlimited support of the pope. The Fuggers were creditors to the Habsburgs and popes. "Grey cardinals of the 16th century."

Carefully examine the drawing (p. 46 of the textbook). What conclusions can you draw about the activities of Fugger the merchant and banker?

Taking advantage of the favor of the Habsburgs and popes, the Fuggers had the opportunity to freely expand the network of branches of their trading house in the largest shopping centers in Europe. It is not for nothing that the collapse of the Fuggers coincides with the collapse of the Habsburgs, when in the 17th century the primacy in trade passed to the British and Dutch.

Task 23. What city was it said about in the 16th century that it “absorbed the trade of other cities” and became the “gateway of Europe”:

a) Paris; b) Cologne; c) Antwerp; d) London?

Task 24. Establish a correspondence between the term and its meaning. Enter the letters of your chosen answers in the table.

1	2	3	4
IN	G	B	A

Task 25. The fashion of the Renaissance gave way to Spanish fashion, then France became the trendsetter in Europe. Look at the pictures and write down which direction of European fashion each of them belongs to. Explain the features of the presented fashion trends.

a) Renaissance fashion was characterized by loose outfits, richly decorated with embroidery and jewelry, and the appearance of a beret (Figures 5, 7);
b) Spanish fashion is a tribute to stiffness and severity, a rejection of necklines and open sleeves (Figures 6, 9);
c) Venetian fashion - an outlet and rebellion against Spanish severity, a harbinger of the Baroque (Figure 3);
d) French fashion (Rococo) - pomp, camisoles, vests, wigs, fantastic hairstyles for ladies, crinolines, open neckline, an abundance of lace, flounces and patterns (Figures 1, 2, 4).

Click to enlarge

Task 26. As you know, in the XVI-XVII centuries. There were cookbooks in European countries. If you were asked to write such a book, what menu would you create for one day? peasant family, the family of a poor city dweller, a bourgeois family or a rich aristocratic family?

XVI-XVII centuries.
a) peasant menu: rye or oat bread, lentil soup or porridge, onions, water;
b) the menu of a poor city dweller: lentil soup or porridge (or oatmeal), rye or oatmeal bread, fish, onions, water;
c) the menu of a bourgeois or aristocrat: vegetables, meat, fruits, fish, wine, spices.
XVIII century.
a) and b) did not change significantly, maybe only potatoes came into use;
c) the menu of the wealthy segments of the population was replenished with tea, coffee, chocolate, white bread, and sugar.

Task 27. Read an excerpt from the book by historian N.M. Karamzin (1766-1826) “Letters of a Russian Traveler” and highlight in different colors the features of a medieval city (highlighted in red in the text) and the features inherent in cities of the New Age (highlighted in green in the text). Write a story about the daily life of townspeople in the 17th-18th centuries. To answer, use the textbook text (§ 4-6) and illustrations.

Paris will seem like a most magnificent city when you enter it along the Versailles Road. Huge buildings ahead with tall spires and domes; on the right side the river Seine with picture houses and gardens; on the left, behind the vast green plain, Mount Martres, covered countless windmills... The road is wide, flat, smooth as a table, and at night it is illuminated by lanterns. Zastava is a small house that captivates you with the beauty of its architecture. Through a vast velvet meadow you enter the fields of the Champs Elysees, not without reason called by this attractive name: a forest... with small flowering meadows, with huts scattered in different places, from which in one you will find a coffee house, in the other - a shop. Here on Sundays people walk, music plays, cheerful bourgeois women dance. Poor people, exhausted from six days' work, rest on the fresh grass, drink wine and sing vaudeville.... ...Your gaze strives forward, to where The large, octagonal square is dominated by a statue of Louis XV, surrounded by a white marble balustrade.. Approach her and see in front of you the dense alleys of the glorious Tuileries Garden, adjacent to the magnificent palace: beautiful view... It is no longer the people walking here, as in the Champs Elysees, but the so-called best people, gentlemen and ladies, from whom powder and blush are falling to the ground. Go up to the large terrace, look to the right, left, around: everywhere there are huge buildings, castles, temples - beautiful banks of the Seine, granite bridges crowded with thousands of people, many carriages knocking- look at everything and tell me what Paris is like. It’s not enough to call it the first city in the world, the capital of splendor and magic. Stay here if you don’t want to change your mind; go further, you will see... cramped streets, an offensive mixture of wealth and poverty; near the shiny jeweler's shop there is a pile of rotten apples and herrings; there is dirt everywhere and even blood flowing in streams from the meat aisles, - pinch your nose and close your eyes.
...The streets are all narrow and dark without exception. from huge houses... Woe to the poor pedestrians, especially when it rains! Do you need or knead mud in the middle of the street, or water pouring from the roofs... will not leave you with a dry thread. A carriage is necessary here, at least for us foreigners, and the French are able to miraculously walk through the mud without getting dirty, masterfully jump from rock to rock and hide in benches from galloping carriages.

Task 28. How do you understand the expression “Tell me what you eat and I will tell you who you are”? Look carefully at the pictures and insert the missing information into each caption. keyword, helping to determine the social status of a given family.
The nutrition of Europeans depended on their financial status.

a) dinner in a bourgeois family

b) dinner in a poor family

c) dinner in a noble aristocratic family

Solution homework in general history for 7th grade.
Ready-made answers to the tasks of the workbook for grade 7 "History of Modern Times. 1500-1800", authors Yudovskaya A. Ya. and Vanyushkina L. M.
The page contains answers to chapter 1 of the notebook "The World at the Beginning of Modern Times. Great Geographical Discoveries. Renaissance. Reformation.", which includes six paragraphs. You can find solved tasks, completed outline maps, tables and crossword puzzles.

Task No. 1.
Among the inventions made by mankind listed below, mark (underline) those thanks to which in the 15th-16th centuries. Great geographical discoveries were made. State their role.
Answer to the task:
Powder; silk; caravel; porcelain; screw; new energy sources: windmills, coal; compass; firearms; paper; typography; gate
The caravel had high maneuverability, shallow draft, excellent seaworthiness and had sufficient carrying capacity. A compass was necessary to determine location and plot a course. Firearms gave the Europeans a huge advantage over the natives.
Printing contributed to the spread of books and maps in Europe.

Task No. 2.
Contemporaries of the Great Geographical Discoveries pointed out that every navigator going on an expedition had to have a set of necessary things with him. These items are pictured below. Label them and indicate what they were used for.
Answer to the task:
1. Chronometer (watch) for determining time;
2. Crossbow - cold ranged weapon;
3. Sword - melee weapon;
4. Astrolabe and compass - astronomical instruments for orientation and determining the exact time;
5. Geographic map - an image of the earth's surface.
Task No. 3.
Choose the correct answer. The musket was first used:
Answer: b) in the 16th century by the Spaniards.

Task No. 4.
Fill the gaps. Which great navigator is this story about?
Completed text:
The life of Christopher Columbus is full of legends and mysteries. It is known that he was born in 1451 in the Italian city of Genoa in the family of a poor weaver. The question of his education remains unclear. Some researchers believe that he studied in the city of Pavia, others that he was a self-taught genius. It is known that in the 70-80s. XV century he was enthusiastically studying geography, studying navigational maps, and working on a project to open the shortest sea route from Europe to Asia, hoping to get there through the Atlantic Ocean.
To implement his plans, money was needed, and Christopher Columbus went to the European royal courts in search of funds. In Portugal, the “Council of Mathematicians” rejected his project as fantastic, and the English king also found it unrealizable. The Spanish king also refused money, since his advisers stated that “the spherical shape of the Earth would form a mountain in front of the ship, through which it would not be able to sail even with the most favorable wind.” As time went. Finally, in 1492, the Spanish kings Ferdinand and Isabella signed an agreement with Columbus and provided him with money to organize the expedition. The hard voyage began.
In 1492, the navigator set foot on the island, which was named San Salvador, and then two more islands were discovered, which are called Cuba and Haiti.
As a result of the next three expeditions, Puerto Rico, Jamaica, and the coast of South America and Central America were discovered. Until the end of his days, the navigator believed that he had discovered a new route to India. The continent he discovered bears the name of another explorer and is called America. In the 19th century, French writer Victor Hugo wrote: “There are unfortunate people: Christopher Columbus cannot write his name on his discovery...”

Task No. 5.
Explain the expressions: “This is a country where “every peasant was a fisherman, and every nobleman was a captain”, “This man is a bag of pepper”, “The charter of wearing caftans with holes... sailed to conquer that fabulous metal”, “The ship sailed on “ sea ​​of ​​darkness." In what cases were they used?
Explanation:
This is a country where "every peasant was a fisherman, and every nobleman was a captain." This is what they said about Portugal and its inhabitants, the majority of whose occupations were closely connected with the sea.
"This man is a bag of pepper." This was the name of a very rich man. At that time, a bag of pepper was valued more than gold and was a measure of wealth. “Tired of wearing out their caftans with holes... they sailed to conquer that fabulous metal.” The bulk of the conquerors of the New World were soldiers left out of work after the reconquista, ruined hidalgos, and the poor. They all strove to new lands for gold.
The ship sailed on the “Sea of ​​Darkness.” Europeans called the Atlantic Ocean the “Sea of ​​Darkness.”

Task No. 6.
Choose the correct answer. The price revolution is:
The correct answer is: b) a fall in gold prices and an increase in the prices of all other goods.

Task No. 7.
Fill out the table “Great Geographical Discoveries.”
Causes of the Great Geographical Discoveries. Representatives of which segments of the European population were interested in discovering new lands and the goals they pursued. Consequences of the Great Geographical Discoveries.
Task No. 8.
On the contour map, mark the routes of the most important expeditions of the 15th - mid-17th centuries in different colors, and indicate their years.

Task No. 9.
If you replace the numbers with letters according to their place in the Russian alphabet, you will read the statement. Explain its meaning.
GOD, GLORY AND GOLD! The motto of the discoverers and conquerors of new lands (conquistadors). “God” - conversion of the natives to Christianity, “Glory” - receiving titles and fame for their discoveries, “Gold” - thirst for profit.

Task No. 11.
What political and economic consequences did the establishment of absolutism have in European countries?
1. Formation of nations and nation-states.
2. Creation of a state church or subordination of an existing one.
3. Creation of permanent professional armies.
4. Creation of a unified economy (policy, taxes, systems of measures, customs rules, etc.)

Task No. 12.
Express your opinion whether absolutism was different from despotic power, if it was different, then in what way.
Under despotism, the monarch is not only the ruler of his state, but also the master of his subjects. Absolutism contributed to the unity of the state and the formation of a single nation, despotism did not (examples of Persia and Ottoman Empire). Under absolutism, representative institutions and certain civil rights were preserved, which was not the case under despotism. At the same time, the main similarity - the unlimited power of the monarch - takes on different forms even in Europe, from classical in France and “soft” in England to despotism in Spain.

Task No. 13.
Analyze the document below and complete the table. Which provisions of the guild charter had a positive effect on the development of production in the 13th-14th centuries, and which negatively in the 15th century.
From the charter of the Parisian weavers' workshop.
Every Parisian wool weaver may have in his house two wide looms and one narrow one. Each weaver in his house can have no more than one apprentice, but not less than 4 years of service.
All cloth should be of wool and as good in the beginning as in the middle.
No one from the workshop should start work before sunrise under threat of a fine.
Journeyman weavers must leave work as soon as the first bell tolls for evening prayer, but they must fold their work after the bell rings.

Provisions of the guild charter that positively influenced the development of production in the 13th and 14th centuries:
1) production limitation
2) legal status of artisans
3) product quality requirements
4) requirements for the qualifications of artisans

Provisions of the guild charter that negatively influenced the development of production in the 15th and 16th centuries:
1) production limitation
2) legal status of workers
3) strict market regulation

Consider whether there is a connection between guild rules and the form of development of manufacturing production. Write down the answer.
The greatest connection exists with the mixed form of development of manufacturing, when individual elements of the final product were produced by small artisans with a narrow specialization, and assembly was carried out in the entrepreneur’s workshop.

Task No. 14.
The rise in trade is associated with the development of exchanges. Think about the connection between these processes. Why does the development of stock exchanges date back to the 16th century?
Answer to the question:
In the 16th century, there was a significant increase in the volume of commodity mass and capital associated with the discovery of new lands. All this required an organization where large wholesale transactions could take place, which gave impetus to the formation of exchanges where merchants, bankers, suppliers and customers met. Exchanges also contributed to the growth of international and wholesale trade.

Task No. 15.
Fill out the table “Differences between a manufactory and a craft workshop.”
What was the size of the enterprise, who worked, what tools were used, who owned the products, and was there a division of labor?
Task No. 16.
Write an essay on the topic “Buyers and sellers in the market.” Your work should end with the phrase: “It is better to have friends in the market than coins in a chest.” When preparing, use the text and illustrations of the textbook (p. 37, etc.).
Early in the morning our merchant opened his shop in the city market. The shop selling fabrics occupied the entire first floor of the house. He himself did not stand7 behind the counter, but only looked after his sellers, delivery boys and day laborers, of whom the market was full in the morning and who were just looking for an opportunity to earn an extra penny and took on any work. A stream of people noisily filled the city square. The merchant noticed a nobleman he knew who was trying to raise sheep on his lands. Having greeted each other, the acquaintances got down to business. It turned out that the nobleman needed a lot of fabric for the holiday that he was organizing. But, unfortunately, at the moment he was experiencing financial difficulties and could not pay for the fabric right away. After listening to the nobleman, our merchant said: “Okay, I’ll let you borrow the fabric.” The satisfied nobleman said: “They really say, it’s better to have friends in the market than gold in a chest!”

Task No. 17.
At the beginning of the 16th century. In European countries, there were already printing houses that had expensive equipment - machines, fonts, etc. Usually, even in a small printing house, about 30 people worked, and each had his own specialty - typesetter, printer, proofreader, etc. What type of production does the printing house belong to? Explain why. Use a picture to answer.
Solution to the task:
The printing house is a centralized manufactory with the following characteristics: the entire production process takes place in one room, narrow specialization of labor, widespread use of hired labor, a large number of workers, and the use of expensive equipment.

Task No. 18.
How do you understand the expression “On the stock exchange you can sell and buy wind”? Record the dialogue between the seller and the buyer.
Answer to the question:
Exchanges often traded contracts for the delivery of goods in the future, when the goods themselves were not available. Moreover, payment was made not only in real money, but also in receipts (bills of exchange). Seller: “I’m selling a batch of peppers that will arrive in six months!” Buyer: “I’m buying, but I’ll pay with a bill of exchange.”

Task No. 19.
Which of the following are signs of the emergence of capitalism:
Answers:
a) development of manufactures
c) an increase in the number of hired workers
e) an increase in the number of entrepreneurs.

Task No. 20.
Indicate which of the following segments of the population belonged to the bourgeoisie:
Answers:
a) merchants
b) bankers
d) owners of factories

Task No. 21.
Select from the judgments below those that will help correctly answer the question about the reasons for the development of manufacturing production (Answers: a, c, d, e):
a) the presence of free labor in the person of peasants liberated from serfdom and bankrupt small artisans:
b) the appearance of the first mechanical machines driven by energy &dy; e*
c) the development of maritime trade and the growth of cities increased the demand for handicrafts;
d) the influx of gold and silver from the New World provided merchants and entrepreneurs with the necessary funds to organize manufactories:
e) guild rules prevented the use of technical inventions in craft workshops:
f) the governments of European countries forcibly sent beggars and vagabonds to work in factories.

Task No. 22.
Why do you think the authors of the textbook called the story about the Fugger merchants “The Age of Fuggers”? Suggest your name.
Answer to the question:
In the 16th century, the leading role in Europe was played by the Habsburg Empire, which united half the continent under its rule and enjoyed the unlimited support of the pope. The Fuggers were creditors to the Habsburgs and popes. "Grey cardinals of the 16th century."

Carefully examine the drawing (p. 46 of the textbook). What conclusions can you draw about the activities of Fugger the merchant and banker?
Answer to the question:
Taking advantage of the favor of the Habsburgs and popes, the Fuggers had the opportunity to freely expand the network of branches of their trading house in the largest shopping centers in Europe. By the way, the collapse of the Fuggers coincides with the collapse of the Habsburgs, when in the 17th century Spain lost its dominant position in Europe, and primacy in trade passed to England and Holland.

Task No. 23.
What city was it said about in the 16th century that it “absorbed the trade of other cities” and became the “gateway of Europe”:
Answer: c) Antwerp

Task No. 24.
Establish a correspondence between the term and its meaning. Enter the letters of the answers you have chosen in the table.1. Farmer A. Dutch currency
2. Farmer B. Noble title in France
3. Chevalier V. Peasant entrepreneur using hired labor and equipment.
4. Gulden G. A person who farmed out the collection of any duty or tax
D. Tax that in France the state collected from peasants
Answer to the task: 1-c, 2-d, 3-b, 4-a

Task No. 25.
The fashion of the Renaissance gave way to Spanish fashion, then France became the trendsetter in Europe. Look at the pictures and write down which direction of European fashion each of them belongs to. Explain the features of the presented fashion trends.
a) Renaissance fashion was characterized by loose outfits, richly decorated with embroidery and jewelry, and the appearance of a beret (Figures 5, 7);
b) Spanish fashion is a tribute to stiffness and severity, a rejection of necklines and open sleeves (Figures 6, 9);
c) Venetian fashion - an outlet and rebellion against Spanish severity, a harbinger of the Baroque (Figure 3)
d) French fashion (Rococo) - pomp, camisoles, vests, wigs, fantastic hairstyles for ladies, crinolines, open neckline, an abundance of lace, flounces and patterns (Figures 1, 2, 4, 8).

Task No. 26.
As you know, in the XVI-XVII centuries. There were cookbooks in European countries. If you were asked to write such a book, what menu would you create for one day for a peasant family, a poor city dweller's family, a bourgeois family, or a rich aristocratic family?
Answer to the question:
16-17 centuries, a) peasant menu: rye or oat bread, lentil stew or porridge, onions, water; menu of a poor city dweller: lentil soup or porridge (or oatmeal), rye or oatmeal bread, fish, onions, water; c) the menu of a bourgeois or aristocrat: vegetables, meat, fruits, fish, wine, spices. 18 century. a) and b) did not change significantly, maybe only potatoes began to come into use; c) the menu of the wealthy segments of the population was supplemented with tea, coffee, chocolate, white bread, and sugar.

Task No. 27.
Read an excerpt from the book by historian N.M. Karamzin (1766-1826) “Letters of a Russian Traveler” and underline with different colors the features of a medieval city in the text (in red) and the features inherent in cities of the New Age (in green). Write a story about the daily life of townspeople in the 17th-18th centuries. To answer, use the textbook text (§ 4-6) and illustrations.

Paris will seem like a most magnificent city when you enter it along the Versailles Road. Huge buildings ahead with tall spires and domes; on the right side is the river Seine With picture houses and gardens ; on the left, behind the vast green plain, Mount Martres, covered with countless windmills... The road is wide, level, smooth as a table, and at night it is illuminated by lanterns. Zastava is a small house that captivates you with its beautiful architecture. Through a vast velvet meadow you enter the Champs Elysees, not without reason called by this attractive name: a forest... with small flowering meadows, with huts scattered in different places, of which in one you will find a coffee house, in the other - a shop. Here on Sundays people walk, music plays, cheerful bourgeois women dance. Poor people, exhausted from six days' work, relax in the fresh water, drink wine and sing vaudeville...
...Your gaze strives forward, to where A large, octagonal square is dominated by a statue of Louis 15, surrounded by a white marble balustrade. . Approach her and see in front of you the dense alleys of the glorious Tuileries salo, adjacent to the magnificent palace : beautiful view... It is no longer the people walking here, as in the Champs Elysees, but the so-called best people, gentlemen and ladies, from whom powder and blush are falling to the ground . Go up to the large terrace, look to the right, left, around: There are huge buildings everywhere, buildings, buildings - the beautiful banks of the Seine, granite bridges crowded with thousands of people, many carriages crowded together - look at everything and tell me what Paris is like. It’s not enough to call it the first city in the world, the capital of splendor and magic. Stay here if you don’t want to change your mind; go further, you will see... cramped streets, an offensive mixture of wealth and poverty; near the jeweler’s shiny store there is a pile of rotten apples and herrings; there is dirt everywhere and even blood flowing in streams from the meat aisles , - pinch your nose and close your eyes.
...The streets are all narrow and dark without exception. from huge houses... Woe to the poor pedestrians, especially when it rains! Do you need or knead mud in the middle of the street, or water pouring from the roofs ... will not leave you with a dry thread. A carriage is necessary here, at least for us foreigners, and the French are able to miraculously walk through the mud without getting dirty, masterfully jumping from stone to stone and hiding in benches from galloping carriages.

Task No. 28.
How do you understand the expression “Tell me what you eat and I will tell you who you are”? Carefully examine the drawings and insert into each caption the missing keyword that helps determine the social status of this family.

The nutrition of Europeans depends on their financial status.
a) dinner in a bourgeois family
b) dinner in a poor family
c) dinner in a noble aristocratic family
Test tasks for § 1-6.

Task No. 1.

Choose the correct answer.
1.1. The largest European city by the beginning of the 17th century. became: c) London
1.2 Place of transactions between bankers, merchants, and merchants in the 16th-17th centuries: c) stock exchange
1.3. Funds invested in production to make a profit: c) capital
1.4. Author of the essay “On Mining and Metallurgy in Twelve Books”: c) George Agricola
1.5. The main features of the New Age in the 16th-17th centuries. - This:
c) development of manufacturing production
e) growth of trade and commodity-money economy
g) numerical growth of the bourgeoisie and strengthening of entrepreneurial activity
h) the growing influence of cities in the economic life of Europe.

Task No. 2.
Do you agree with the following statements?
2.1.1522 - the beginning of the first expedition of Christopher Columbus to find new routes to India (no).
2.2. Stuarts - French royal dynasty(No).
2.3. Residence is the place of permanent residence of the head of state (yes).

Task No. 3.
Match the date with the event. Enter the letters of the answers you have chosen in the table.1. 1492 A. Beginning of Magellan's expedition
2. 1497 B. Beginning of the Vasco da Gama expedition
3. 1519 B. Beginning of the expedition of Christopher Columbus
4. 1600
Answer to the task: 1-c, 2-b, 3-a, 4

Task No. 4.
Who are we talking about?
He was born in 1643 and ascended the throne when he was not yet five years old. Government was concentrated in the hands of his mother and Cardinal Mazarin...

We are talking about the King of France, Louis 14 de Bourbon, nicknamed the Sun King.

Task No. 5.
Group according to certain characteristics.
a) Francis I; b) Henry VIII; c) parliament; d) Louis XIV; e) Estates General; f) James I Stuart.
Option A (Monarchs-representative power): A, B, D, E - C, E
Option B (France - England): A, D, D - B, C, E

Task No. 6.
A task with a detailed answer.
Read the text of the document and answer the questions.
Colbert to the mayor and echevins of Auxerre
The king ordered the transfer of the lace and twill manufactory from London to your city, where they were established. But the inhabitants of Auxerre have hitherto neglected to send their children to the houses where these manufactories were founded, in order that their children might be educated there...
I am convinced that if you impose a fine on them, and on the other hand, give rewards to those who fulfill their duties, and grant them exemption from taxes, as has been decreed, then you ... will prove to the people that this is theirs. genuine interest...
6.1. What do you think, for what purpose did the powerful Louis XIV personally deal with such a “base” problem as the establishment of manufactories?
6.2. What conclusion about the nature of state power and the dominant economic doctrine can be done based on the analysis of this text.
6.3. What judgment about human rights in France can be formulated based on the given source?

6.1. “When you work for the state, you work for yourself. The good of one is the glory of another" (Louis XIV).
6.2. At Louis XIV in France, absolutism reached its peak, and the economy was dominated by the idea of ​​mercantilism, of which Colbert was a staunch supporter.
6.3. “There are no rights of subjects, only duties” (Louis XIV).

The rise of grand ducal power.

The creation of a single state with a center in Moscow meant that now there was one ruler in Rus' - the only Grand Duke, a representative of the Moscow Rurik dynasty. Ivan III tried in every possible way to emphasize his special position.

In 1467, the first wife of Ivan III, Princess Maria of Tver, died. In 1472, he married the niece of the last Byzantine emperor, Sophia Paleologus. As we know, the Byzantine state no longer existed. Therefore, by marrying a Greek princess, the Moscow prince became, as it were, the successor of the Byzantine dynasty. He made the double-headed eagle the emblem of his state - a symbol of the Byzantine Empire.

Seal of Ivan III (view from both sides) with the first image of the coat of arms of Russia in the form of a double-headed eagle. Ivan III accepted a new title - sovereign of all Rus'. He proclaimed himself an autocrat, thereby emphasizing that he holds the land himself, i.e., does not submit to any other power (meaning, first of all, the power of the Horde khans). At ceremonial receptions, Ivan III began to appear with a scepter and orb - symbols of supreme rule. His head was crowned with a grand ducal crown - the Monomakh cap, and he surrounded himself with a lush courtyard. The court ranks of equerry and bedmaster appeared. In court ceremonies, Ivan III began to be called the title of Tsar in the Byzantine manner. The ritual of kissing the sovereign's hand is introduced.

Government bodies.

With the emergence of a unified state in Moscow, central authorities are formed. At the head of the state was the Grand Duke, sovereign and autocrat of all Rus'. Only he had the right to make laws, Boyar. The artist negotiates with other states, declares war, makes peace, mints coins. He led the most significant military campaigns.

Grand Duke“held advice” with the Boyar Duma, which consisted of representatives of ancient boyar families. With the inclusion of new lands into the Moscow state, the princes of previously independent principalities also began to enter the Boyar Duma. The Boyar Duma consisted of representatives of two Duma ranks: boyars and okolnichy, who were appointed by the Grand Duke. The size of the Duma was small: 10-12 boyars, 5-6 okolnichy.

There were two national institutions that carried out the grand ducal orders: the palace and the treasury. The palace, headed by a butler, was initially in charge of the lands of the Grand Duke - the palace. Then the butlers began to consider land disputes and held court. After the annexation of new lands to the Moscow state or the liquidation of appanage principalities, local palaces were created to manage these lands: Novgorod, Tver, Nizhny Novgorod, etc. The treasury was headed by the treasurer. He controlled the collection of taxes and customs duties (duties). The treasury housed the state seal and the state archive. The treasury also dealt with foreign policy issues.

The entire territory of the country was divided into counties. The boundaries of the districts coincided with the boundaries of the former appanage principalities, and therefore they were all of different sizes. Counties were divided into smaller units: volosts and camps. The Grand Duke sent his governors to the district, and volostels to the camps and volosts. They collected taxes, monitored the execution of princely decrees, carried out justice and reprisals. The governors and volosts did not receive a salary for their work. They kept court fees and a certain portion of taxes for themselves. This procedure for maintaining officials at the expense of the local population was called feeding.
Within the Moscow state, appanages continued to exist, which were allocated only to the brothers and sons of the Grand Duke. But the rights of the appanage princes were greatly curtailed, and they were subordinate to the Grand Duke in everything.

People were appointed to all positions depending on the nobility of the family and what positions their ancestors held. This order was called localism. The essence of localism was as follows: the earlier the rulers of certain principalities entered the service of the Moscow prince, the more honorable positions they received. Moreover, these places were assigned to their direct descendants. Localism prevented people of humble origin, but gifted people, from advancing in public service.

In 1497, Ivan III published the Code of Laws - the first set of laws of a unified state. It contained all the laws that existed in the Moscow Principality. But now they became mandatory throughout the entire territory of the Russian state. In addition, the Code of Laws enshrined important changes that occurred in the distribution of land property and in the relationship between landowners and peasants.

Transformations in the army.

Changes in land ownership. The creation of a unified state was accompanied by an increase in the number of troops. It was possible to ensure its combat effectiveness in only one way - to provide the soldiers with land holdings during their service. When the vast Novgorod and Tver lands fell into the hands of Ivan III, he began to resettle (“place”) the people who were in his service on them. Such people, placed on new lands, began to be called landowners, and their possessions - estates.

Unlike a patrimony, an estate is a conditional holding, that is, the land was given to a person under the condition of his serving the Moscow prince and was not passed on by inheritance. The landowner also had no right to sell or donate his land. Land holdings were small and could not be compared with the huge boyar estates.

Instead of squads, a single military organization was created - the Moscow army, the basis of which was the landowners. At the request of the Grand Duke, they had to appear for service armed, on horseback, and also bring with them a certain number of armed people from among their slaves or peasants - “horsed, crowded and armed.”

The emergence of local land ownership and its rapid growth were associated with the desire of the Moscow princes to increase the layer of people on whom they could rely. The welfare of the landowners and the size of their holdings depended entirely on the sovereign. Therefore, they were interested in strengthening his power and in the existence of a single state.

A significant part land holdings in the Moscow state were boyar estates. Boyar families owned their lands for hundreds of years. Their ancestors received these possessions for their service from the first Vladimir or Moscow princes. Many princes and boyars of the former independent principalities also retained their lands. The votchinniki were less dependent on the Moscow prince than the landowners, and did not always agree with his policies.

There was an increase in church land ownership. Monasteries, metropolitans, and bishops intensively bought up the lands of patrimonial owners and received them as payment for debts. But most often the church received land as a gift. People of that time believed that by donating property to the church, they could atone for their sins and avoid hell.

Restriction of freedom of peasants.

The emergence of the Cossacks. The creation of a unified state initially improved the situation of the peasants. The cessation of strife and hostilities on the territory of the country led to the rise of peasant farms. The bans on the transfer of peasants from one principality to another lost their force.

Remember what duties peasants in Rus' traditionally bore.

From the second half of the 15th century, arable farming with three-field crop rotation was finally established throughout the territory of the Moscow State. With this farming system, the peasant divided the field into three plots. He sown the first plot with spring crops, the second with winter crops, and the third plot rested fallow, i.e., remained unsown. Three-field farming did not bring quick and rich harvests, but it ensured stable yields over a long period of time. In addition, such a system did not require collective labor and made it possible to take good care of the land.

With the spread of three-field farming, the range of grain grown changed. Rye became the most common winter crop, and spring fields were sown mainly with oats. The plantings of wheat, barley, and millet have decreased noticeably. Buckwheat, which has valuable nutritional properties, has become quite widespread. Agricultural tools have improved. In some places the plow replaced the plow.
Many peasants at first did not realize that the land on which they farmed had become an estate. After all, the owner of the land still the state remained in the person of the Grand Duke.

However, an attack on the rights of peasants soon began. The landowners were interested in forcing the peasants to work on their land with the help of the law. After all, previously peasants were free to leave one land owner for another whenever they wanted. In large boyar and monastic estates, peasants lived more freely than in small estates, the owners of which constantly needed money for life and for military needs. Meeting the wishes of the landowners, Ivan III established in the Code of Laws of 1497 a uniform period for the transfer of peasants for the entire country: a week before St. George’s Day in the autumn (November 26) and a week after. At the same time, leaving the landowner, the peasant had to pay him an old fee - payment for living on the land. The amount for an elderly person at the end of the 15th - beginning of the 16th century was approximately 1 ruble per person. At that time, with this money you could buy a good horse, 100 pounds of rye or 7 pounds of honey.

Find out what 1 pood is equal to in kilograms.

Introduction to St. George's Day was the first legislative restriction of peasant freedom. The peasants who lived on the lands of landowners and patrimonial owners began to be called possessory peasants.

In the first half of the 16th century, the local system covered almost all the counties of the country. Only in Russian Pomerania (the lands along the shores of the White Sea, Lake Onega, along the Northern Dvina, Pechora, Kama and Vyatka) on vast state (black) lands lived mainly black-sown, i.e. personally free, peasants. The peasants who lived on lands that belonged to the Grand Duke himself were called palace peasants. In their position they were close to the Black Sowings.

From the second half of the 15th century, fugitive peasants and former residents of the towns, who called themselves “free people” - Cossacks, began to accumulate behind the line of guard fortifications on the southern and southeastern outskirts of the Russian state. Cossacks settled mainly along the banks large rivers- Don, Dnieper, Volga, Yaik (now the Ural River), Terek - and their tributaries. The most important matters were discussed at the general gathering (meeting) of the Cossacks. The community was headed by elected atamans and elders.

Thus, during the formation of the Russian unified state, the power of the Grand Duke of Moscow began to increase significantly. The Grand Duke relied on service people, distributing land grants to them as payment for their service. With the increase in the number of estates, peasant freedom is limited and peasants are tied to the land.

Testing your knowledge

1. How and why did the nature of princely power change in the first half of the 16th century?
2. Tell us about the political structure of the Russian state in the first half of the 16th century. Based on the materials in the paragraph, make a comparative table of the changes that have occurred in the control system by this time.
3. What changes have occurred in the land tenure system? Establish a connection between the political processes that took place in Rus' and changes in the land tenure system.
4. What do you see as the reasons for limiting peasant freedom? Based on the painting by S. V. Ivanov “St. George’s Day” compose an oral story about the restriction of freedom of peasants.
5. What categories of the Russian peasantry appeared at this time?