How more people is able to respond to the historical and universal, the wider his nature, the richer his life and the more capable such a person is for progress and development.

F. M. Dostoevsky

Stolypin's agrarian reform, which began in 1906, was conditioned by the realities that were taking place in the Russian Empire. The country was faced with massive popular unrest, during which it became absolutely obvious that the people did not want to live as before. Moreover, the state itself could not govern the country, based on the old principles. The economic component of the development of the empire was in decline. This was especially true in the agrarian complex, where there was a clear decline. As a result, political events, as well as economic events, prompted Pyotr Arkadyevich Stolypin to start implementing reforms.

Background and reasons

One of the main reasons that prompted the Russian Empire to start a massive change in state structure were based on the fact that a large number of ordinary people expressed their dissatisfaction with the government. If until that time the expression of dissatisfaction was reduced to one-time peaceful actions, then by 1906 these actions became much larger and bloody. As a result, it became clear that Russia was struggling not only with obvious economic problems, but also with an obvious revolutionary upsurge.

Obviously, any victory of the state over the revolution is based not on physical strength, but on spiritual strength. A strong-willed state itself should stand at the head of the reforms.

Pyotr Arkadyevich Stolypin

One of the landmark events that prompted the Russian government to start reforms as soon as possible happened on August 12, 1906. On this day in St. Petersburg on Aptekarsky Island there was a terrorist attack. In this place of the capital lived Stolypin, who by this time served as chairman of the government. As a result of the thundering explosion, 27 people were killed and 32 people were injured. Among the wounded were Stolypin's daughter and son. The Prime Minister himself miraculously did not suffer. As a result, the country adopted a law on courts-martial, where all cases relating to terrorist attacks were considered in an expedited manner, within 48 hours.

The explosion once again showed Stolypin that the people wanted fundamental changes within the country. These changes had to be given to people in the shortest possible time. That is why Stolypin's agrarian reform was accelerated, a project that began to advance with giant strides.

The essence of the reform

• The first block called on the citizens of the country to calm down, and also informed about the state of emergency in many parts of the country. Because of the terrorist attacks in a number of regions of Russia, a state of emergency and courts-martial were forced to be introduced.
• The second block announced the convocation of the State Duma, during which it was planned to create and implement a set of agrarian reforms within the country.

Stolypin clearly understood that the implementation of agrarian reforms alone would not make it possible to calm the population and would not allow the Russian Empire to make a qualitative leap in its development. Therefore, along with changes in agriculture, the Prime Minister spoke about the need to adopt laws on religion, equality among citizens, and reform the system local government, about the rights and life of workers, the need to introduce compulsory primary education, the introduction of income tax, an increase in teachers' salaries, and so on. In a word, everything that was subsequently implemented by Soviet power was one of the stages of the Stolypin reform.

Of course, it is extremely difficult to start changes of this magnitude in the country. That is why Stolypin decided to start with agrarian reform. This was due to a number of factors:

• The main driving force of evolution is the peasant. So it was always and in all countries, so it was in those days in the Russian Empire. Therefore, in order to remove the revolutionary tension, it was necessary to appeal to the bulk of the dissatisfied, offering them qualitative changes in the country.
• The peasants actively expressed their position that the landed estates should be redistributed. Often the landowners kept the best lands for themselves, allocating unfertile plots to the peasants.

The first stage of the reform

Stolypin's agrarian reform began with an attempt to destroy the community. Until that moment, the peasants in the villages lived in communities. These were special territorial formations where people lived as a single team, performing common collective tasks. If you try to give a simpler definition, then the communities are very similar to the collective farms, which were later implemented by the Soviet government. The problem of the communities was that the peasants lived in a close-knit group. They worked for a single purpose for the landlords. The peasants, as a rule, did not have their own large allotments, and they were not particularly worried about the final result of their work.

November 9, 1906 Government Russian Empire issued a decree that allowed peasants to freely leave the community. Leaving the community was free. At the same time, the peasant retained all his property, as well as the lands that were allocated to him. At the same time, if the land was allocated for different areas, then the peasant could demand that the lands be united into a single allotment. Leaving the community, the peasant received land in the form of a cut or farm.

Stolypin's agrarian reform map.

Cut this is a plot of land that was allocated to a peasant leaving the community, with the peasant retaining his yard in the village.

Farm this is a land plot that was allocated to a peasant leaving the community, with the resettlement of this peasant from the village to his own plot.

On the one hand, this approach made it possible to implement reforms within the country aimed at changing the peasant economy. However, on the other hand, the landlord economy remained untouched.

The essence of Stolypin's agrarian reform, as conceived by the creator himself, boiled down to the following advantages that the country received:

• The peasants who lived in the community were massively influenced by the revolutionaries. Peasants who live on separate farms are much less accessible to revolutionaries.
• A person who has received the land at his disposal, and who depends on this land, is directly interested in the final result. As a result, a person will think not about revolution, but about how to increase his harvest and his profit.
• Divert attention from the desire of ordinary people to divide the landlords' land. Stolypin advocated the inviolability of private property, therefore, with the help of his reforms, he tried not only to preserve the landowners' lands, but also to provide the peasants with what they really needed.

To some extent, Stolypin's agrarian reform was similar to the creation of advanced farms. A huge number of small and medium landowners should have appeared in the country, who would not depend directly on the state, but independently sought to develop their sector. This approach found expression in the words of Stolypin himself, who often confirmed that the country in its development focuses on "strong" and "strong" landowners.

At the initial stage of the development of the reform, few people enjoyed the right to leave the community. In fact, only wealthy peasants and the poor left the community. Wealthy peasants left because they had everything for independent work, and they could now work not for the community, but for themselves. The poor, on the other hand, went out in order to receive compensation money, thereby raising their financial situation. The poor, as a rule, having lived for some time away from the community and having lost their money, returned back to the community. That is why, at the initial stage of development, very few people left the community for advanced agricultural holdings.

Official statistics show that only 10% of all the resulting agricultural holdings could claim the title of a successful farm. Only these 10% of farms used modern equipment, fertilizer, modern methods of working on the land, and so on. In the end, only these 10% of farms worked economically profitable. All other farms that were formed in the course of Stolypin's agrarian reform turned out to be unprofitable. This is due to the fact that the vast majority of people leaving the community were poor people who were not interested in the development of the agrarian complex. These figures characterize the first months of the work of Stolypin's plans.

Resettlement policy as an important stage of reform

One of the significant problems of the Russian Empire at that time was the so-called land famine. This concept means that the eastern part of Russia was extremely little developed. As a result, the vast majority of land in these regions was undeveloped. Therefore, Stolypin's agrarian reform set one of the tasks of resettling peasants from the western provinces to the eastern ones. In particular, it was said that the peasants should move beyond the Urals. First of all, these changes were to affect those peasants who did not own their own land.

The so-called landless were to move beyond the Urals, where they were to establish their own farms. This process was absolutely voluntary and the government did not force any of the peasants to move to the eastern regions of the forced. Moreover, the resettlement policy was based on providing the peasants who decide to move beyond the Urals with maximum benefits and good living conditions. As a result, a person who agreed to such a resettlement received the following concessions from the government:

• Peasant farming was exempted from any taxes for 5 years.
• The peasant received land as his property. Land was provided at the rate of: 15 hectares for a farm, as well as 45 hectares for each family member.
• Each migrant received a cash loan on a preferential basis. The value of this court depended on the region of resettlement, and in some regions reached up to 400 rubles. This is a huge amount of money for the Russian Empire. In any region, 200 rubles were given out free of charge, and the rest of the money was in the form of a loan.
• All men of the resulting farm were exempted from military service.

The significant advantages that the state guaranteed to the peasants led to the fact that in the first years of the implementation of the agrarian reform, a large number of people moved from the western provinces to the eastern ones. However, despite such interest of the population in this program, the number of immigrants decreased every year. Moreover, every year the percentage of people who returned back to the southern and western provinces increased. Most a prime example is an indicator of the resettlement of people in Siberia. In the period from 1906 to 1914, more than 3 million people moved to Siberia. However, the problem was that the government was not ready for such a mass resettlement and did not have time to prepare normal conditions for people to live in a particular region. As a result, people came to a new place of residence without any amenities and no devices for a comfortable stay. As a result, about 17% of people returned to their former place of residence only from Siberia.

Despite this, Stolypin's agrarian reform in terms of resettling people gave positive results. Here, positive results should not be seen in terms of the number of people who have moved and returned. The main indicator of the effectiveness of this reform is the development of new lands. If we talk about the same Siberia, the resettlement of people led to the fact that 30 million acres of land, which had previously been empty, was developed in this region. An even more important advantage was that the new farms were completely cut off from the communities. A person independently came with his family and independently raised his farm. He had no public interests, no neighboring interests. He knew that there was a specific piece of land that belonged to him and that should feed him. That is why the performance indicators of the agrarian reform in the eastern regions of Russia are somewhat higher than in the western regions. And this is despite the fact that the western regions and western provinces are traditionally more funded and traditionally more fertile with cultivated land. It was in the east that it was possible to achieve the creation of strong farms.

The main results of the reform

Stolypin's agrarian reform was of great importance for the Russian Empire. This is the first time a country has begun to implement such a scale of change within the country. Positive shifts were evident, but in order for the historical process to give positive dynamics, it needs time. It is no coincidence that Stolypin himself said:

Give the country 20 years of inner and outer peace and you will not recognize Russia.

Stolypin Pyotr Arkadievich

It really was so, but, unfortunately, Russia did not have 20 years of silence.

If we talk about the results of the agrarian reform, then its main results, which were achieved by the state over 7 years, can be summarized as follows:

• The sown areas throughout the country were increased by 10%.
• In some regions, where peasants left the community en masse, the area under crops was increased up to 150%.
• Grain exports have been increased, accounting for 25% of all world grain exports. In harvest years, this figure increased to 35 - 40%.
• The purchase of agricultural equipment has increased 3.5 times over the years of reforms.
• The volume of fertilizers used increased by 2.5 times.
• The growth of industry in the country was taking colossal steps + 8.8% per year, the Russian Empire in this regard came out on top in the world.

These are far from complete indicators of the reform in the Russian Empire in terms of agriculture, but even these figures show that the reform had a clear positive trend and a clear positive result for the country. At the same time, it was not possible to achieve the full implementation of the tasks that Stolypin set for the country. The country failed to fully implement farms. This was due to the fact that the traditions of collective farming among the peasants were very strong. And the peasants found a way out for themselves in the creation of cooperatives. In addition, artels were created everywhere. The first artel was created in 1907.

Artel it is an association of a group of persons who characterize one profession, for the joint work of these persons with the achievement overall results, with the achievement of common income and with shared responsibility for the final result.

As a result, we can say that Stolypin's agrarian reform was one of the stages in the mass reform of Russia. This reform was supposed to radically change the country, transferring it to the ranks of one of the leading world powers, not only in the military sense, but also in the economic sense. The main task of these reforms was to destroy the peasant communities by creating powerful farms. The government wanted to see strong owners of the land, in which not only landowners, but also private farms would be expressed.

Zabelin Vladimir Mikhailovich, candidate historical sciences, Professor, Head of the Department of History and Theory of State and Law, NOU VPO "North Caucasian Social Institute", Stavropol [email protected]

To the problem of withdrawing peasants from the community

Annotation. The article considers the exit of the peasants of the Blagodarnensky district of the Stavropol province from the community according to the Stolypin agrarian reform. Specific examples are given, options for using land by peasants after receiving it in ownership are considered.

Key words: peasants, owners, rural community, communal lands, redistribution of land.

State reforms always attract the attention of researchers. The study of the Stolypin agrarian reform remains relevant for historians and economists. In the article, we will consider, using the example of the Blagodarnensky district of the Stavropol province, how the peasants left the community, strengthening the allotment lands for themselves. Decree of 15 November. it was supplemented by the permission to pledge allotment lands in the Peasants' Bank, both to individual peasants and to societies and partnerships. After additions Decree of November 9, 1906 was approved as a law on June 14, 1910. "On changes in some resolutions on peasant land ownership." The land management of the peasants was finally normalized by the Law of May 29, 1911, which regulated the methods of using plots. It gave the right to distribute communal lands for farms and cuts by a simple majority of votes, and not by two-thirds, as before. In April 1907 The Committee on Land Management Affairs issued a resolution on the opening in May 1907. land management commission in the Stavropol province. However, only in May 1910. five county land management commissions were formed. allotment land. Of these, in 1910 to personal land ownership 5027 peasant households were transferred from 66161 dessiatins of land, which in percentage terms amounted to 15 total to the number of registered householders. In 1911. the number of householders who finally passed to personal land ownership amounted to 6861 households, from 94181 dess. land, or 20%. Next, consider how the exit of peasants from the community was covered in separate settlements Blagodarnensky district of the Stavropol province in the periodical press of that period. In the village of Burlatsky, back in

1908 the rural society carried out an early redistribution of the land, spreading out all the arable land for 2060 males in small unequal strips in six places. At the end of the year, they left the community according to the law on November 9, 1906. ten householders, and then their number began to increase. from communal to household ownership of land, strengthening allotments and all lands into the personal property of householders. So the agricultural society began to consist of owners. In 1910. a group of 66 people applied to the county land management commission with a petition to allocate their land through the strip to cut-off plots, where they expected to start a more cultural economy, as crop failures and crop failures recent years undermined their well-being. According to contemporaries, there were different situations in the village with the exit from the community. There were doubts and fears among the peasants: “the experiments of the neighbors of the pipe workers showed that you can’t brew beer with our huge heterogeneous communities ... slovenly manners of using the land. rejected. Influential people can rent for nothing ... referring to the inconvenience of the fragmentation of small strips. ”In the county village of Blagodarny, many peasants, having received land as property, immediately sold it. Therefore, in the dacha of the land allotment, lands with an area of ​​​​50,200 dessiatines appeared, dug in ditches. The land was bought up mainly by local wealthy grateful people, who immediately began to rent it out and under the assemblage. The peasants who sold the land were often quickly left without money. Fellow villagers noted that “community members look at these squandered “landowners” with contempt. But to those owners who, having received allotments, did not sell them, but continue to cultivate them themselves, the community is quite friendly and benevolent. They do not harbor any malice towards them, but only wait for how the individual farm will differ from the communal one.

The peasants of the village of Sotnikovsky noted that the access to cuts in their village went in several directions. One part passed into the category of owners with the sole purpose of breaking the jackpot from the land and putting an end to agriculture forever. The third category of owners sells land on the basis of buying larger areas in the places of resettlement with the proceeds than those that were at their disposal. The last group of owners remains in their places and sits rather firmly. Not only on their own land, but they also buy their land from dreamers and settlers. This group attracted attention. Since 1911. they began a new cultivation of the land, began to plow deeper, brought black fallow. In 1912. half of the village went to cuts. The rest of the Sotnikovites settled on the following thought: “All the community members decided to strengthen their allotments as personal property, but they are not allocated for cuts, but use the land on the basis of common share ownership, while maintaining the common cleanup, with the formation of black steam, winter, spring and grass wedge. Then, these same peasants are planning to buy several thousand lands on a comradely basis, with the help of a peasant bank. The press has not managed without materials revealing the abuses of officials of land management commissions. Here is what was reported about the activities of those in the village of Sotnikovsky: “In the early spring of this year (Z.V. 1912), a surveyor Ya.M. Artemiev for the production of works on the allocation of cut-off plots to the owners. The owners reached out to Artemyev with a statement about the release of the cut. The land surveyor seemed to the peasants a sympathetic, intelligent and good person. He promised each owner to cut a piece of land where he wished. He demanded only a written statement from each person indicating the desired place. In view of this, the peasants with great eagerness hurried to the village clerks with requests for the speedy preparation of these statements. It is desirable for everyone to indicate a good, convenient place for the site. Without saying a word, they paid the clerks 50 kopecks each. and a full ruble per application. Applications were submitted by these owners to the land surveyor rarely during the day. More were sent late in the evening or early in the morning, and without fail with an appendix: a sack of flour, a pot of cow's butter, a few pounds of mutton, lard, cut goose, ducks, chickens, several dozen eggs, cream, milk, baked bread, and even a live goat.

This kind of order continued until August 15. The local merchant I.T. Novikov, who bought more than 225 shower plots for himself from our owners. From that time on, a crowd of owners crowded daily at the land surveyor's apartment, a hot feast and revelry to the sound of a gramophone raged. In such an environment, Artemyev spent spring and summer, and none of the owners, except for only one Novikov, did not assign cut-off plots. Novikov also built the entire plan for 225 shower allotments. He cut off the earth itself. Good and convenient in everything, on both sides of the Buffalo River and not far from the village. From the ordinary owners, he tried to satisfy with cutting cuts 1520 miles from the water and the village. , as the time is coming to plow and sow grain for 1913. The land surveyor hesitates and vaguely announces that the plots are there ... but it’s impossible to plow and sow them yet, the plans, they say, are not over. Some of the owners resigned themselves, while others, seeing that they were deceived and, not wanting to stay for next year without sowing, filed a petition with the head of the province with a complaint against the land surveyor. Incidentally, the owners are petitioning for the provision of all

of the land assigned to Novikov as a land surveyor. Obviously, in connection with this petition, on September 20, an indispensable member of the county land management commission arrived from Blagodarny. He interrogated four complainants and left without doing anything definite. The time for sowing is already passing, and the peasants are sitting idle, remaining next year without winter crops. According to the calculation, it comes out to about twenty rubles from the allocated allotment soul ... ”On October 23, at an emergency meeting of the Blagodarnensk district land management commission, a decision was made to remove surveyor Artemyev from work and replace him with surveyor Dulin.

Provincial periodical press in 1915. began to publish on its pages reports on individual villages on the sale of fortified lands by peasants, and the cost of transactions. For example:

“In the village of Mirny, the sale of fortified land began forever from 1911 at the following prices: for one allotment, a measure of 6 acres and 160 square meters. soot In 1911 they paid 250 rubles, in 1912. 300 rubles, in 1913 400 rubles, in 1914 and 1915. 500 rubles each sold their allotments mostly poor people, burdened with debts, which for the most part went to the sale of workers. The buyers were both their wealthy peasants and the newcomers "Taurians".

“In the village of Alekseevsky, the sale of permanent allotments began only in 1913, since in 1911 and 1912. there were no fortifications. Prices for one put on a measure of 6 with a floor. state tithes existed as follows: in 1913. 400 rubles, in 1914 550r. and in current year 600r. the poor peasants and Russian subjects of the Germans sold their allotments, and the last of the 70 households sold everything to Mr. Kashchenko and went to America. The buyers were also their wealthy peasants and 10 householders who arrived from the Taurida province, and especially Kashchenko. The exit from the community often took place with the resistance of the peasant community. In the village of Petrovsky, such a situation was created in which the owners could not live in the village, they were not even given water. March 20, 1911 the village meeting decided: “not to give the owners stone, sand and clay, and if anyone gives one from the community members, to impose a fine of 25 rubles.” At the same time, it was decided to take payment from the owners for grazing on public land: for cattle 5 rubles, for sheep 3 rubles. S. Fastikov and P. Pavlovsky agitated the peasants for making such a decision, for which they were arrested for three months. There are cases when political agitators persuaded peasants not to leave the community. Such campaigning in the village of Kistinsky was carried out by the local peasant T.I. Korelin, while handing out leaflets of the Stavropol Committee of the Socialist Revolutionary Party. Thus, the withdrawal of peasants from the community in the Blagodarnensky district of the Stavropol province took place with different consequences and different public perceptions.

Links to sources 1. Overview of the Stavropol province for 1910 / According to the Stavropol provincial statistical committee. Stavropol: Printing house of the Stavropol provincial government, 1911. 178p.2. Overview of the Stavropol province for 1911 / According to the Stavropol provincial statistical committee. Stavropol: Printing house of the Stavropol provincial government, 1912. 128p.3.S. Burlatskoe // Ibid., 1912. No. 345 (May 27). C.3.4. Exit from the community // North Caucasian Territory. 1912. No. 424 (September 1). S.1.5.S. Sotnikovskoe // Ibid., No. 342 (May 24). WITH. 3.6 Owner. At feeding // Ibid., No. 449 (October 5). С.3.7.С.Blagodarnoe // North Caucasian Territory. 1912. 478 (November 9). WITH. 3.

8. Cut results // North Caucasian Territory. No. 191 (September 3). WITH. 3.9. New // North Caucasian Territory. 1915. No. 209 (September 26). C.3.10. State Archive of the Stavropol Territory (GASK), F. 101, Op.5, D. 535.

Verification testing on the topic

"World War I. Revolution in Russia in 1917

Option 1

1. When did Stolypin start reforming the PA?

A) prosperous

B) the poor

c) poor and wealthy

5. Define the concept of "farm":

B) priests

d) all of the above

Option 2

A) Constituent Assembly

c) Provisional Government

D) Council of State

^ 22. What was the name of the first Soviet government?

A) All-Russian Central Executive Committee b) SNK c) Cheka

^ 26. When was the first Soviet Constitution adopted?

Option 1

^ 1. When did Stolypin start reforming the PA?

A) in 1906 b) in 1907 c) in 1908

3. What sections of the peasants actively left the community?

A) prosperous

B) the poor

B) poor and wealthy

^ 5. Define the concept of "farm":

A) a piece of land that a peasant could receive when leaving the community, with the transfer of a house and outbuildings to it

B) a piece of land that a peasant could take when leaving the community, but he could leave his house and buildings in the old place in the village

C) this is the house of a peasant, which he built far from the village

^ 7. What are the causes of World War I?

A) the desire of the leading world powers to redraw the map of the world in their own interests

B) the desire of the governments of the countries participating in the war to distract their peoples from the revolutionary struggle

C) the desire of the participating countries to take away colonies from the largest colonial power, Great Britain

^ 9. What was the main outcome of the 1914 military campaign?

A) the signing of a separate peace by Germany and England

B) Germany failed to implement its plan for a blitzkrieg

C) Alsace and Lorraine were returned to France

^ 11. When did the February 1917 revolution start in Petrograd?

13. What are the main results of the February Revolution?

A) the monarchy fell b) dual power arose

C) the democratization of the country began d) the Constituent Assembly was convened

^ 15. What is the meaning of Order #1?

A) the establishment of dictatorships in the proletariat

B) the democratization of the army began

C) was svidirovannaya 1st 9th donation Duma

^ 17. What was the main reason for the April crisis of the Provisional Government?

A) Milyukov's note on the continuation of the war

B) Lenin's speech at the First Congress of Soviets

C) a breakthrough on the front of General Brusilov

^ 19. When was the II Congress of Soviets held?

21. What document was the basis of the Decree on Land?

A) 240 proposals of the poorest peasants

B) 242 local peasant orders to the First Congress of Soviets

C) declaration of the rights of the peoples of Russia

^ 23. Representatives of which political parties were included in the first Soviet government?

A) representatives of only leftist parties

B) representatives of the Bolsheviks and the Left Social Revolutionaries

C) representatives only of the Socialist-Revolutionaries and Bolsheviks

^ 25. What is the fate of the Constituent Assembly?

A) it was dissolved by the Bolsheviks

B) it continued to work during the month of January

C) it was reorganized into a coalition government

A) persons using hired labor

B) former members of the tsarist police

B) priests

D) all of the above

Option 2

^ 2. What refers to the provisions of Stolypin's agrarian reform?

A) the withdrawal of peasants from the community with land

B) the resettlement of peasants to new lands beyond the Urals

C) the allocation of part of the landed estates to the peasants

D) providing each peasant with a sum of money in the amount of 50 rubles

^ 4. What are the results of Stolypin's agrarian reform?

A) the development of market relations in the countryside intensified

B) the process of social stratification of the peasantry began

C) the main social problems in the village were smoothed out

^ 6. When did World War I start?

8. Why did the Russian army fail during the First World War?

A) poor supply of the army with weapons and shells

B) there was a scattered action of the fronts

c) England and France violated the treaty of alliance

^ 10. What are the results of the First World War for Russia?

A) the internal political and economic situation in the country has deteriorated sharply

B) Russia achieved the goals for which it participated in the war

C) during the war in Russia, the First Russian Revolution will take place

^ 12. What events caused the riots in February 1917 in Petrograd?

A) demonstration of women in honor of International Women's Day

B) dismissal from the Putilov factory of 30,000 strikers

C) performance of the soldiers of the Petrograd garrison

^ 14. What two authorities appeared in Petrograd during the February Revolution?

A) Constituent Assembly

B) Petrograd Soviet of Workers' and Soldiers' Deputies

B) provisional government

D) Council of State

^ 16. What changes did the Declaration of the Provisional Government, adopted on March 3, 1917, bring into the life of Russia?

A) introduced broad civil rights and freedoms

B) provided the peasants with land

C) brought Russia out of World War I

18: When was Russia declared a republic?

^ 20. What Decrees did the II Congress of Soviets adopt?

A) a decree on peace, on land, on power

B) decree on the creation of the Cheka, the All-Russian Central Executive Committee, the Council of People's Commissars

B) a decree on the separation of church and state

22. What was the name of the first Soviet government?

A) All-Russian Central Executive Committee b) SNK c) Cheka

24. When did the work of the Constituent Assembly take place?

26. When was the first Soviet Constitution adopted?

A) in 1917 b) in 1918 c) in 1919

28. In what form was Soviet power established?

A) in the form of the dictatorship of the proletariat

B) in the form of the dictatorship of the bourgeoisie

c) in the form of an alliance of workers and peasants

DURING THE CLASSES

THEME UPDATE

“The main wealth and power of the state is not in the treasury and state property, but in the growing rich and strong population.

P.A.Stolypin

Teacher actions	Student activities
“Blitz Poll” 1. What is a peasant community? 2. What role did the community play in the life of the peasantry? 3. What shortcomings of communal farming appeared at the beginning of the 20th century? 4. What amount of land was necessary for a peasant economy for a normal existence? 5. How many acres of land accounted for an average of one farm? 6. What is agrarian overpopulation and what consequences did it have for the Russian village? 7. How effectively were the landed estates used? 8. How did the peasants see the solution to the issue of land scarcity? 9. What are the main problems of the agricultural sector. Thus, the main problem of the Russian economy was the problem of modernization of the agricultural sector, and this problem required an early resolution.	Frontal responses from the spot
Lesson plan message: 1.Goals of the reform 2.Main activities and implementation of the reform. 3. Results and significance of the reform.
Guess how the epigraph reflects the need to reform the agrarian sector of the economy from the point of view of Stolypin?	Monologic responses of reasoning
Who is he - P.A. Stolypin? His name has always caused and causes controversy, and draws us into the cycle of passionate assessments. By the way, an interesting fact, the former President of Russia B.N. Yeltsin named three great reformers of Russia: Peter I, Alexander II, P.A. Stolypin. November 2006 marked the 100th anniversary of the agrarian reform of P.A. Stolypin. Why did the path of reforms fail, and why was its fate so tragic? Why P.A. Stolypin remained a reformer - a loner? Is the topic relevant today? We will try to reflect on these questions after studying this topic.	Autobiographical note of Stolypin P.A. (portrait on the board), information prepared by the student
Understanding the complexity of the situation in the country, Stolypin proposed to solve two interrelated problems. The first was to end the revolution as soon as possible, i.e. in “calming the country”, and the second was to carry out systemic reforms. There was a constant threat of a new outbreak of popular unrest in the country, and the authorities sought to suppress these waves by force. opinion. And yet, under the prevailing conditions, the possibility of carrying out economic and political reforms was realized.	Working with documents (§ 7, p. 55). Assignment: Based on the statements of Stolypin, determine the goals of the reform. Oral responses of students, recording conclusions in a notebook
An important part of the peasant reform was the abolition of estate restrictions on peasants and the granting of individual peasants the right to buy land. The government could no longer ignore the demands of the peasantry to solve the problems of agrarian overpopulation and lack of land. Task for group work: Analyzing the text of the documents, formulate how Stolypin intended to solve the issue of land scarcity. Enter your assumptions into the diagram	1.Group work with the document Handout #1 and #2 Filling in the logic diagram 2. Argumentation of the introduced facts 3. Comparison of the resulting variants of student schemes with the teacher's version. (See visual materials. Scheme No. 1)
Pay attention to the terms introduced in the diagram and illustrating the topic of the lesson. Name them. Write them down in a notebook. The government and the king were interested in reforming the agrarian issue. They understood that the solution to the problem of peasant land shortage, defuses the revolutionary situation in the country, so actively helped Stolypin at first. I bring to your attention a diagram illustrating this interest. On August 12, 1906, a decree was issued on the transfer of agricultural specific lands (the property of the imperial family) to the Peasants' Bank; August 27 - on the procedure for the sale of state lands; September 19 - on the procedure for selling state lands to peasants in Altai (the property of the emperor) ... these decisions created a national land fund. with state assistance to peasant farms, incl. and settlers, with peasant cooperation. For joint processing and marketing of products, the economies of Siberia were united in artels and cooperatives (flax-growing, dairy, butter-making).	Working with concepts. Write the definition in a notebook - reform, agrarian reform, cut, farm, resettlement policy. Work according to the scheme. (individual answers) Determine which of the activities caused the most concern on the part of the government and why?, The main activities of the agrarian reform P.A. Stolypin.
From the history of the solution of the agrarian question in Russia, You are familiar with the name Witte S.Yu. and his vision of resolving this issue. Let's compare the activities of two statesmen \(current control)	A comparison table is projected onto the board, Reformist ideas of S.Yu. Witte and P.A. Stolypin in the agrarian question. group work 1 Highlight the common features 2Highlight ideas that contribute to the modernization of the agricultural sector 3 Define the ideas that determine the attitude of the ruling class to the modernization of the agricultural sector.
Let's move on to the third point of the lesson plan. 1 It is necessary to analyze the results and significance of the agrarian reform. 2Express your attitude, assumption about the meaning of the reform 3. You will get the opportunity to check your correctness when working at home over 7 Final word of the teacher: Why did the reformist path fail? It is clear with all evidence that Stolypin wanted to transform the economy outside of democracy, without affecting the autocratic system and its basis - landownership, the centralized bureaucratic system. The name of Stolypin has always caused controversy. This name immediately draws into the cycle of passionate mutually exclusive assessments. None of the political figures of tsarism in the early twentieth century. cannot be compared with him in the devoted and enthusiastic memory of his admirers and the concentrated hatred of his opponents. "The period of the Stolypin reaction", the gallows - "Stolypin ties", on the one hand, and "a fighter for the good of Russia, a man "worthy to sit on the royal throne" - on the other." Stolypin's career lasted only 5 years, but this time was full of grandiose plans. Stolypin was called the Russian Bismarck. And if we look at historical events eyewitnesses that you and I are, then it will seem to us that history repeats itself. Just like in the beginning of the 20th century. Today Russia is solving difficult questions: which way to go, how to develop its economy, build a new democratic state. Often Russia faces difficult elections. And it is very important to remember the lessons of history and avoid the mistakes that were made by Russia during the time of P.A. Stolypin.	Presentation 2. (slide 2-9) 1Students formulate and write in notebook results of the reform. 2. Polemic answers. 3. Work with statistical data. Handout #4
Summarizing. Grading. Homework in groups: 1. Having worked through the material 7, determine your attitude to the opinion of Stolypin's contemporaries about his state activities Pyotr Arkadyevich Stolypin is one of the major reformers in the history of Russia. The assessment of P.A. Stolypin as a politician is contradictory: “stronghold of strength, power and legality”, “hero of thoughts”, “Nikolaev lackey”, “pogromist” - such epithets were awarded to a major reformer of the early twentieth century 2. As an epigraph to the lesson reflects the nature of Stolypin's reforms. Write an essay.	Consolidation of what has been learned Control of the degree of assimilation of the material. Fixing homework.

Work form	Teacher actions	Student work
Individually:	Distribution of preemptive tasks; consultations and recommendations for the implementation	Preparing a message Creating a presentation, working with reference literature, Internet resources
In a group:	Determination of the principle of division into groups (colored signal sheets, names ..). Preparation of handouts, control over the even distribution of the amount of work in the group, creating a situation of competition between them.	Work according to logical schemes, public speaking, fixing the results of work in a notebook, exchange information, defend their opinion, participate in discussions.
Frontal:	Models a problem situation, provides differentiation of the issues under discussion, analyzes the answers of students. Creates a situation of discussion,	Participate in discussions and defend own opinion, learn ethics dialogue, outline the main ideas.

CURRENT CONTROL

Control Form No. 1

Form for issue to students No. 1

Form for issue to students No. 1

QUESTION What or who is it about?
		A piece of land received by peasants when they leave the community, leaving the estate in the village.
		On January 1, 1907, he was appointed a member of the Council of State; from January 1, 1908, Secretary of State H.I.V. On September 1, 1911, he was mortally wounded by former Okhrana agent D. Bogrov at the Kiev Opera House.
	land tenure and land use transformation

Control Form No. 1

QUESTION What or who is it about?
	count, Russian statesman, Minister of Finance of Russia (1892-1903),	A plot of land received by peasants upon leaving the community, leaving the estate in the village
decree on granting peasants the same civil rights as other estates
residence in sparsely populated outlying areas - Siberia, Far moving of the rural population of the central regions of Russia to the permanent East as a means of internal colonization		No. 6 On January 1, 1907, he was appointed a member of the Council of State; from January 1, 1908, Secretary of State H.I.V. On September 1, 1911, he was mortally wounded by former Okhrana agent D. Bogrov at the Kiev Opera House.
Resettlement policy	decree on permission for peasants to leave the community for farms and cuts	Stolypin
Emperor of All Russia, Tsar of Poland and Grand Duke Finnish (October 20 (November 1), 1894 - March 2 (March 15), 1917).	Transformation of the land tenure and land use system
Nicholas ll	agrarian reform	adoption by the Duma of the law "On amendments and additions to certain resolutions on peasant land ownership", which approved the decree of November 9, 1906.

FINAL CONTROL

Option 1

1. When P.A. Stolypin?

A) in 1906 b) c. 1907 c) in 1908

2What refers to the provisions of Stolypin's agrarian reform?

a) the exit of peasants from the community with land b) the resettlement of peasants to new lands beyond the Urals

c) the allocation of part of the landed estates to the peasants

d) providing each peasant with a sum of money in the amount of 50

3. What sections of the peasants actively left the community?

a) prosperous

b) the poor c) the poor and the wealthy

4What are the results of Stolypin's agrarian reform? .

5. Define the concept of "farm":

a) a piece of land that a peasant could receive when leaving the community, with the transfer of a house and outbuildings to it

b) a piece of land that a peasant could take when leaving the community, but he could leave his house and buildings in the old place in the village

c) this is the house of a peasant, which he built far from the village

6) What is the result of the Stolypin reform:

a) It ended in complete failure everywhere except Siberia, where land was allocated to settlers during the reform years.

b) It led to a complete restructuring of all agriculture.

c) The peasants received land in private ownership (with the right to sell), which led to the creation of a new layer of rich peasant farmers (kulaks) in the village.

Option 2

a) Claim land for private ownership.

b) Leave the community, but without land.

c) Take communal land on lease.

2) What, according to P.A. Stolypin, was the main reason for the disorder of agriculture in Russia?

a) In the existence of landownership.

b) In a sharp stratification of the peasants into kulaks and farm laborers.

c) In the preservation of the peasant community.

3) When was the main decree on agrarian reform by P.A. Stolypin adopted?

a) November 9, 1906.

b) November 10, 1907

c) March 14, 1911

4) What impact did the agrarian reform of P.A. Stolypin have on the landowners?

a) Liquidation of landed estates.

b) Allowed a significant increase in landownership at the expense of the peasants.

c) Preservation of landownership.

5) What are the results of Stolypin's agrarian reform? .

and the development of market relations in the countryside intensified

b) the process of social stratification of the peasantry began

c) the main social problems in the village were smoothed out

6) Under the cut was meant

a) Wooden housing

b) Settlement outside the community

c) a piece of land that a peasant could take when leaving the community, but he could leave his house and buildings in the old place in the village

To work in a group

HANDOUT MATERIAL №_1__

Reform Program of P.A. Stolypin. Volume 1. Documents and materials. M.: "Russian political encyclopedia", 2002

Uninhabited, but habitable lands of the Altai region

The Cabinet of His Imperial Majesty is transferred, as soon as resettlement plots are formed on them, to the property of the treasury and are placed at the disposal of the Main Directorate of Land Management and Agriculture, for the placement of settlers. The rights to the subsoil of the aforementioned lands are reserved by the Cabinet on the grounds current law specified

(Summary of laws, vol. IX, Special app., ed. 1902, Full cross. Siberia, art. 126).

II. The transfer of the lands of the Altai District of the Cabinet of His Imperial Majesty into the ownership of the treasury is carried out on the basis of the following rules:

1. The following apply to resettlement areas: 1) free lands; 2) ob-rochnye articles, as the termination of the lease agreements for them, and 3) land surpluses remaining for the Cabinet from the land arrangement of old-timers.

2. The composition of resettlement areas cannot include: 1) valuable, protective and water protection forest dachas; 2) land and forests allotted or needed for allotment to office and private mining enterprises, factories, plants and other industrial establishments, as well as for the development of minerals, for agricultural schools, churches, schools and experimental and demonstration institutions; 3) lands intended for afforestation and other state or public needs; 4) land occupied by valuable structures, buildings or gardens, or representing land that does not meet the usual conditions of a peasant economy.

For group work

HANDOUT MATERIAL №_2__

Speech by P.A. Stolypin on the organization of the life of peasants and on the right to property, delivered in the State Duma on May 10, 1907.

History of Russia in the 20th century, edited by A.N. Sakharova and others.

M., AST, 2001. S. 88-89.

Would the land question give him or not the opportunity to arrange for the peasants in his localities?

Figures can give an answer to this, and the figures, gentlemen, are as follows: if not only privately owned, but even all the land without the slightest exception, even the land currently located under the cities, would be given to the peasants, who now own allotment land, then at that time time, as in the Vologda province, together with the currently available 147 acres per yard ..., in 14 provinces they would not have got even 15, and in Poltava there would have been only 9 ..., in 10 provinces ... with the smallest allotment, i.e. e. 7 acres per yard.

The total division of all lands can hardly satisfy the land need in the field; it will be necessary to resort to the same means that the government proposes, that is, to resettlement; we will have to give up the idea of ​​allocating land to the entire working people...

For group work

HANDOUT MATERIAL №_3__

Wealthy peasants and middle peasants who are able to run a household without a community, with the help of a family or by hiring additional labor - farm laborers. As Stolypin said: "The bet is not on the poor and drunk, but on the strong and strong."

HANDOUT #4_

Using the data from the last census, calculate the numerical data given in % ratio. Use Internet resources.

The beginning of the creation of farms (by 1915 - 10% of all peasant farms) The growth of agricultural labor productivity (by 1915 the gross grain harvest increased 1.7 times), the improvement of agricultural technology (the use of machines, fertilizers). Growth in exports of bread The community was not destroyed. 25% of peasant farms came out of it, mostly the wealthy and the poorest. The property stratification of the peasants increased, and the proletarianization of the countryside accelerated. The peasantry as a whole had a negative attitude towards private owners (arson, poisoning). To the contradiction between the peasantry as a whole and the landlords was added the contradiction between the prosperous and the poorest peasants. More than 3 million peasants moved beyond the Urals. 30 million acres of virgin lands have been reclaimed.

empire Russianempire in earlyXXcentury. Agricultural legislation Russianempire start XX ...

UMK 1 Educational and methodological complex for 1st year students Moscow - 2009

Training and metodology complex

to someone educationalsubject(see... ideology. Official title states: ... Russianempire in the second half of the 19th century. Legal status press in Russianempire in earlyXXcentury. Agricultural legislation Russianempire start XX ...

Tutorial

national relations. Educational allowance. St. Petersburg, 1999 INTRODUCTION XXcentury SUBJECT Name Russianempire in earlyXXcentury, just like...

sociology and psychology of national relations textbook SPb 1999

Tutorial

national relations. Educational allowance. St. Petersburg, 1999 INTRODUCTION XXcentury marked not ... . IN SEARCH SUBJECT 1.1. About borders subject area Name this chapter is far away ... still at the stage of existence Russianempire in earlyXXcentury, just like...

The “great reforms” of the 60s–70s of the 19th century, despite their incompleteness, created conditions for Russia for a “post-reform leap” towards a market economy.
economy. The country lived on their reserve until the beginning of the 20th century. During this time, there was a restructuring of the economy from agrarian to agro-industrial.
and the transformation of Russia into a medium-developed country with the highest
the pace of development of industry (10 percent growth per year) and agriculture
households (6 percent). At the same time, the post-reform modernization of the economy was accompanied by the impoverishment of a significant part of the population, especially
peasantry.

Despite accelerated economic modernization, Russia remained
peasant country. According to the first All-Russian census of 1897, 93 million people belonged to the peasant class.
(74 percent). Of these, seven million people permanently lived in cities,
where they made up 43 percent of the population. In rural areas in 50 provinces European Russia 81.4 million peasants lived, but of them only 69.4 million, or 74 percent, were engaged in agriculture. Another 12 million considered their main occupation commercial and industrial
or other activity, that is, they ceased to be peasant farmers.
By 1905, already 17 million peasants were not engaged in agricultural
labor.

By the end of the 19th century, the peasant question in Russia acquired an extraordinary
sharpness. The efforts of the industrializing ministers (N. Kh. Bunge, I. A. Vyshegradsky, and especially S. Yu. Witte) ran into the archaic organization of the agrarian sector of the economy, which could not compensate for the country's growing budget expenditures and held back the development of industry due to low
purchasing power of the majority of the rural population. Significant
treasury funds went to eliminate the consequences of crop failures, arrears grew
on various taxes and duties of the peasants, therefore the main agrarian problem in the government was the question of land.

At first glance, this contradicted the successes achieved by the Russian
village by the beginning of the twentieth century: Russia ranked first in the world in terms of total
produced agricultural products. She gave 50 percent of all
world harvest of rye, about 20 percent of wheat, in total a quarter of the world
grain harvest and a quarter of its world exports. Net average annual yields (gross yields minus seeds) of bread and potatoes increased by 85 percent from the 1870s to the early 20th century. Net fees per capita increased from 3 to 3.7 quarters (1 quarter - 8 pounds). Sugar harvests grew even faster
beets, flax, all industrial crops. The number and productivity of livestock increased. The role of the peasant economy in the agricultural
production of the country, reaching at the beginning of the twentieth century 88 percent of the gross
bread and 78 percent of marketable grain (in the 60s of the XIX century - 68 percent).

What, then, caused concern to the Russian government? Case
in the fact that the development of agricultural production proceeded at the expense of entrepreneurial landlord farms and the prosperous part of the peasantry.
At the beginning of the 20th century, there were about two million of these out of the 12 million existing peasant households. It was they who produced 30-40 percent of the gross grain harvest and up to 50 percent of all marketable products.
agriculture, concentrating 80-90 percent of private (“purchasable”) peasant lands and almost half of the leased ones. Later they became
call fists, but by the end of the 19th century the word "fist" referred only
to rural moneylenders. Most wealthy households were
in Novorossia, Ciscaucasia, Trans-Volga, Siberia. In wealthy peasant
farms concentrated almost all improved agricultural tools and mechanisms, the production and import of which
in Russia at the end of the 19th - beginning of the 20th century increased with phenomenal speed, strong owners actively bought landowners' lands, applied fertilizers, and employed hired labor. The yield in such farms was one and a half to two times higher.

The situation in the central agricultural region was different. Here the stratum of wealthy peasants was very small. In the materials of government commissions that studied the situation in the countryside of the central provinces, they spoke of the "impoverishment of the countryside", "the decline of peasant farms",
expressed in the depletion of the soil, in the transition from the three-field system of agriculture to an even more archaic two-field system, a reduction in the number of livestock, and the destruction of forests. main reason"impoverishment of the center" was called the lack of land for most of the peasant households and the striped allotment
lands fragmented due to population growth into small plots located 8–15 versts from villages. Under customary law
the land and property of the family in the Great Russian village after the death of the head of the family was divided equally among all the sons - in contrast to Western Europe and Japan, where only the eldest son inherited the plot of land (this created more favorable conditions for the emergence in the village
sustainable farms that accumulate wealth from generation to generation).
As a result, half of the peasants of the central provinces in the twentieth century had land
plots below the subsistence standard, because they did not have the means to buy land. The forced sale by the poor of part of their output led to
to the degradation of the majority of peasant households in the central provinces of Russia.
The stratum of landless peasants increased in the villages.

The conservation of archaic forms of agriculture was largely
associated with the preservation of the peasant community. The community was a land
economic union, the most important function of which was the distribution
and the use of allotments, and the administrative-fiscal unit. Periodic redistribution of land, the special nature of allotment land ownership and land use (forced crop rotation, striped land, "far land"),
mutual responsibility (until 1904), communal regulation of the entire peasant
life determined the development of the peasant economy. Being a kind of institution of social protection, contributing to the survival of the impoverished part of the village, the community actually prevented wealthy peasants from developing their economy on the basis of new forms of agriculture, practically excluding them from
the possibility of becoming independent owners-owners.

In the ruling spheres of the country, the question of granting individual peasants
the right to withdraw from the community was first set by the Minister of Finance S. Yu. Witte in 1898. In 1902, Nicholas II created a special meeting
on the needs of the agricultural industry under the leadership of S. Yu. Witte. The main result of his activities was the proposal to allow free
exit from the community by everyone who, after leaving it, could create their own farms on the basis of private ownership of land. Parallel
since the beginning of the 20th century, the same issue has been considered in three ministries: finance,
internal affairs and agriculture. The outbreak of the revolution, mass peasant uprisings in the autumn of 1905 accelerated the implementation of the agrarian reform.

S.Yu. Witte, becoming the first prime minister in the history of Russia on October 19, 1905, drew up and on November 3, 1905 signed with Nicholas II the Manifesto on the abolition of the collection of redemption payments from peasants (from January 1, 1907). This document radically changed the order of allotment land tenure: peasants
became full owners of their allotments. By April 1906, Witte's cabinet had developed a program of transformations in the Russian countryside,
the main provisions of which formed the basis of the agrarian reform, which received
the name of Stolypinskaya. P. A. Stolypin, becoming minister on April 26, 1906
Internal Affairs, and from July 8 of the same year, simultaneously Chairman of the Council
ministers, gave the reform an economic, political and social character. The prime minister was a representative of an old noble family, a large landowner and a zealous owner who knew agriculture and its problems did not
hearsay. He proved himself to be an experienced and strong-willed administrator on
posts of the Kovno district (since 1889), and then - the provincial leader
nobility (1899). In 1902, he was appointed to the post of Grodno, and a year later Saratov governor. His decisive actions in the Saratov province, aimed at suppressing revolutionary movement, caused the approval of right-wing conservative bureaucratic and landlord circles. With another
side, being a graduate of St. Petersburg University, he declared himself
as a supporter of the modernization of the peasant economy, had a reputation, if not
liberal, then a person not alien to cooperation with liberal circles, which
nourished the hopes of the liberal opposition.

Stolypin set as his goal the abolition of all class restrictions and the rise
well-being of the entire peasantry of Russia. Realizing that this cannot be achieved in a short time, he considered the creation of
in the village of a wide layer of peasant proprietors (from the prosperous part of the village
and strong middle peasants). Stolypin gave the individualization of the peasant
land tenure of a political nature, advocated the active intervention of the state in the restructuring of the countryside through administrative measures. Stolypin argued the need to create a strong conservative power base from wealthy peasant proprietors who would respect someone else's property.
property, pay taxes regularly, will become the basis of law and order in the countryside,
bring social peace. On the other hand, independent strong peasant farms will be a model for other peasants, a hotbed of advanced methods of agriculture and agricultural technology. The government expected that the revival of the countryside based on the restructuring of land relations and the growth of agricultural productivity would become the basis for the overall economic recovery.
countries. “The earth is the guarantee of our strength in the future, the earth is Russia”, - in these
the words of P. A. Stolypin expressed the paramount importance of the issue of land for
the future of the country. To carry out reform under the condition of peace and tranquility
in the country, Stolypin set aside 20 years, but the real course of events limited it
a term of eight years (1906–1914).

The main content of the Stolypin agrarian reform was to allow peasants to leave the community, to carry out land management to eliminate striped land, to "plant" private peasant land ownership by providing peasants with preferential state
mortgage loan through the Peasant Land Bank and the resettlement of peasants with the support of the state to the outskirts of the empire.

The first step towards reform was the abolition of existing restrictions
civil rights for persons of the peasant class. Decree of October 5, 1906
gave peasants the same rights as other estates upon admission to
public service and educational establishments. The peasants were given
the right to freely obtain passports and choose a place of residence. Canceled
corporal punishment by the verdict of volost peasant courts, etc. If a
Previously, a peasant could leave the community only on condition that redemption payments were paid, but now he was given the right to freely leave the community, though without land.

The main state act of the reform was the decree of November 9, 1906,
allowing peasants to leave the community and strengthen the land in personal ownership. Since the Manifesto of November 3, 1905 abolished redemption payments, now the peasant could leave the community with the land for free. Allotment of land plots to natives of communities was carried out on the following conditions.

1. The peasant could receive his field plots in the same form in which they
used, i.e. 5–10–15 bands or more (sometimes up to 100). In this case, he used pastures, forests, hayfields and watering holes together with community members.

2. The peasant could, with the consent of the community, reduce all these strips into one cut, i.e.
e. in one area. Sometimes an amount of land was added to the cut, equal to its share
in grassland pastures.

3. With the consent of the community, a peasant could receive a farm, which included a complete cut with the addition of a farm plot and the transfer of houses and buildings there, while in the first two cases the farmstead remained in the village. The allotment of plots to "allocated" was called the strengthening of the land in personal property, and they themselves
the separated peasants - "fortified".

4. Instead of a land plot, the society could offer money to a peasant leaving the community for the land due to him at its market value.

In the first case, it was necessary to obtain the permission of a simple majority
rural gathering, and in the second and third cases - the consent of two-thirds of the peasant gathering. For those who left the community, the land plots that had been in their use since the last redistribution were strengthened. If those who left the community had surpluses that appeared due to a change in the size and composition of the family, then a fee was paid for them, determined by the average
ransom payments forty years ago. Within a month from the date of submission
the statements of the "separate" about the withdrawal of the society should have drawn up a "sentence"
with a description of the fortified areas. If the society for some reason refused to do this, the “allotment” was formalized by a decree of the zemstvo chief and approved by the district congress of zemstvo chiefs. If within 30 days there was no refusal to register with an explanation of the reasons (refusal
could be appealed in court), then it was considered that the request of the “separate” was satisfied. An important component of the decree was the provision regarding the replacement of family property for all property of the peasant household with the personal property of the householder.

In 1908-1909, the government carried out a series of measures aimed at creating
more favorable conditions for the formation of farms and cuts, the formation
a layer of peasants who owned plots of the correct configuration, most meeting the requirements of rational management. In March 1909, with the aim
to speed up the land management process, special “Provisional Rules” were issued, providing for the “opening up” of farms and cutting off entire villages. The law of July 14, 1910 approved the decree of November 9, 1906 and made some additions and changes to it. Firstly, the procedure for the exit of peasants was simplified
from those communities where there were no land redistributions after 1861. In these communities
it was not necessary to obtain permission from the village assembly, but only required to submit an application. Secondly, that part of the decree was strengthened, which concerned the allocation of a farm and a cut: now those wishing to leave the community needed the consent of only one-fifth of the gathering, and the peasants remaining in the community could
demand (in order to improve land use) the allocation of all "strengtheners" for cutting.

The widespread opinion that from the beginning of the reform the peasants who left the commune became private landowners is not correct. Peasant personal property (former allotment) differed from private ownership of land. "Fortified peasants" could sell their allotments only
persons assigned to the rural society. Buyers of their land could buy
no more than six full allotments (this did not mean the land of six households, but only
norm of six male souls). By imposing these restrictions, the government aimed to keep the former allotment lands in the hands of the peasantry, who provided Russia with agricultural products. P. A. Stolypin believed that the law should impose "restrictions on the land, and not on its owner ... Allotment
land cannot be alienated to a person of a different class; allotment land cannot
be pledged otherwise than in the Peasants' Bank; it cannot be sold for
personal debts, it cannot be bequeathed except according to custom.

In total, 3 million 373 thousand applications were submitted in 1907-1915
(36.7 percent of households) about leaving the community and fixing the land in personal
own. Approximately a quarter (26.6 percent) of the applicants received the consent of the gatherings, and some of the “strengtheners” (1 million 232 thousand) left the community
on applications to the relevant authorities. Many withdrew their applications as a result of the resistance of rural gatherings. In fact, 2,478,000 community householders (26.9 percent) left the community. Motives for leaving
communities were different. First of all, the owners came out, who were at opposite social poles of the village - the most prosperous owners,
those who had land surpluses and were still striving to buy land, and the rural poor, who could not cultivate the plots on their own. Among those who
left the community, 914 thousand immediately sold their allotments in order to resettle
to Siberia, move to the city or buy land through the Peasants' Bank. Only for
during the reform, the peasants sold 4.1 million acres, i.e., about
a quarter of the allotment fund, which has passed into personal possession. 1.2 million "fortified" people acted as sellers - 40 percent of all those who left
communities.

One of the main motives for leaving the community was the desire of "strong householders" to organize independent farms on farms and cuts. Total
on allotment lands, one and a half million separate district farms were formed - about 300 thousand farms and 1.2 million cuts. Number of natives
of the communities was especially large in the Novorossiysk provinces (up to 60 percent),
on the territory of right-bank Ukraine (up to half) and in a number of central provinces: Samara (49%), Kursk (44%), Oryol (39%), Moscow (31%), Saratov (28%), i.e. the largest was output in areas high development capitalism and in those small land
areas where average allotments did not provide a living wage. In the remaining provinces of the black earth center, about a quarter of households left the community. In the majority of non-Chernozem provinces, the share of “allocated” was small (on average 10 percent), while in the northern and Ural provinces it was
was only four or six percent. The stability of the community in the non-chernozem center and the Urals was largely due to the fact that the vast majority of the peasants here were, as sociologists say, internal migrants. They constantly went to work in industrial
enterprises, returning to the village for the time of field work. Allotment had only
consumer character, fed a family that permanently lived in the village. The community in this case performed its function of social protection.

The number of applications for withdrawal from the community, having reached a peak in 1910, began to decline. The fact is that, for the "fortified" people, if they did not move to farms and cut off and did not sell the land, all the "charms" of communal farming and land use were preserved (striped land, distant land, dependence on
communal crop rotation and land sharing). On the other hand, redistribution became difficult and even impossible in the community itself, difficulties arose with cattle pasture, and so on. As a result of this, the urgent
the task of the government was land management, which was carried out under
the leadership of P. A. Stolypin’s closest assistant, A. V. Krivoshein, who headed the Main Directorate of Land Management and Agriculture from 1908 to 1915. At first, land management was conceived as the next stage after the strengthening
registration of district farms, then as parallel and, finally, as barely
Is it not a paramount act that affirmed the peasants' right of ownership of the land. Land management was carried out with the aim of improving land use not only of peasants who left the communities, but also of entire communities, groups remaining in the community
householders and individual yards, including with the formation of individual plots - cuts. If individual land management eliminated the shortcomings of communal land use, then group management changed the situation in their economy, regardless of whether they left the community or not (the division of land between villages and parts of villages, the breakdown of communal lands in order to transfer
to a multi-field economy, the expansion of a strip of allotment land
with adjoining properties, etc.). To carry out land management, detachments of land surveyors and land management commissions (county and provincial) were created. The commissions were created for the first time in Russia as collegiate bodies headed by representatives of the administration, but with the introduction of representatives
peasant societies and zemstvos, the latter being the majority. It was
made to better take into account local conditions. Land management work was carried out by commissions exclusively with the voluntary consent of the peasants.

The Law “On Land Management” adopted on May 29, 1911, which incorporated all
the main provisions of both the law of June 14, 1910, and the rules of 1908-1910, simplified the transition to precinct land tenure and registration of ownership
right . Now the documents received during the allocation of a cut or a farm were recognized as certifying the right of ownership of the land, and at the same time, a special application was not required to leave the community and strengthen one's share of allotment land. Peasants of unlimited communities were considered automatically
transferred to personal property and could apply for certification certificates directly to land management commissions, bypassing rural gatherings. For the transition to cuts by the whole society, only a simple majority of the gathering was required.
Each land management commission was given the right, in the course of the general land management of the communities, to single out individual owners and, without the consent of the village assembly,
if she believed that such allocations would not violate the interests of the communities. Besides,
it was established that allotment land, if land purchased from private owners joins it upon leaving the community, becomes private property, which is fully covered by the right to own, use and dispose. This made it possible for any householder who received
into personal ownership of your allotment by strengthening and land management, buying
at least a quarter of a tithe of private land, to declare the former allotment as private property, which had a high price on the land market. After 1911
the land fund of privately owned land began to increase at the expense of personal,
i.e., the former allotment, land.

Land management began with the filing of petitions by peasants to change
land use conditions; then a land management project was drawn up, which was accepted by the population; further, in accordance with this project, land surveying was carried out. By 1915, 6.2 million applications had been submitted to land management commissions. This means that changing conditions
almost two-thirds of peasant householders living in the provinces of European Russia with various historically established types of land use wished for land use. By 1916, in the course of land management, 1 million 234 thousand farms and cut-off plots were created. It is important to emphasize that
the reform was not limited only to the formation of farms and cuts, but provided
peasants a wide range of choice of economic conditions. The number of individual and group applications were almost equal (49 percent and 51 percent).
The latter prevailed in the central provinces and in the Volga region - where there was
communal land use is developed. The petitions of the peasants for land management, reflecting their intention to change the conditions of management, were a sure sign of the adequacy of the reform to the mood of the peasantry, as well as an indicator
the capacity of the potential of the transformations being undertaken.

The growing flow of petitions was also quite unexpected for the reformers themselves, who did not count on such impressive results. Significant efforts have been made by the Government and despite budgetary constraints
in the country, the number of surveyors only at land management commissions increased from six hundred in 1907 to six and a half thousand in 1914, that is, 11 times over
seven years. Nevertheless, by 1916, land management projects were drawn up
only for 50 percent of applicants, land surveying was carried out for
44 percent, and finalized for only 34 percent. As a result, 2.4 million household farmers improved their land use. However, to judge
about successes only in terms of the number of finally approved projects would be
wrong. The number of deployments made speaks mainly about how
the work of land management commissions was organized and carried out. Recognizing
that the "will of the peasants" to change the traditional way of life far exceeded the government's ability to manage land, let's try to look at the results of the reformers in a comparative historical context. In Sweden, for example, where land management began in the 19th century and lasted for about 80 years,
by 1913, 18.5 million hectares had been developed - an average of 2.3 million
hectares per decade. In Russia, in seven years (1907–1913), land management was
two million peasant households on an area of ​​17.1 million acres (1 acre = 1.1 hectares). Without dwelling on the factors that influenced land management,
note that the efforts of land surveyors were aimed at ensuring that all allocated areas more or less meet the technical requirements, and the process of their
allocation was carried out as far as possible by way of a voluntary agreement.

A number of other government measures also met the goals of the reform - the creation of agronomic meetings at provincial land management commissions, the arrangement of agricultural warehouses, the development of agricultural education, the construction of elevators, the support of various types of cooperation,
handicraft production, the organization of benefits for immigrants and people from farms and cuts.

One of the most important measures of the reform was the activity of the State Peasant Land Bank. This bank was founded in 1882
for issuing long-term loans to peasants secured by land purchased from private owners. The term of loans issued by the bank was originally set
from 24.5 to 34.5 years; since 1894 - from 13 to 55.5 years old (13, 18, 28 years old, 41 years old, 55.5 years old).
The loan was not to exceed 80–90 percent of the valuation of the land being purchased.
The loan interest was 7.5–8.5 percent per annum. Unlike other mortgage banks that issued non-purpose loans, the loan of the Peasant Land
bank had a strictly defined purpose - only for the purchase of land. Facilities
to issue loans, the Bank accumulated by issuing mortgage bonds (certificates of the Peasant Bank) and sold them through the State Bank on the stock market.

At the beginning of its activity, in accordance with the government
By the policy of conservation of communal-estate institutions, the Bank created the most favorable conditions for the purchase of land by societies or partnerships.
In 1895, on the initiative of the Minister of Finance S. Yu. Witte, the Peasant Bank (the only mortgage bank in the Russian Empire) was given
the right to buy land sold by the nobles, to create their own land
fund, and then sell this land to the peasants. When acquiring land, the Bank took into account
interests and sellers - nobles, and buyers - peasants. In the first case, the bank
was supposed to prevent the transition of noble lands into the hands of speculators at low prices, which intensified due to the agricultural crisis
and to help the nobility liquidate their property as profitably as possible. In the second, to help the peasants buy land plots that would
respond to their abilities and needs. If necessary, the bank could also launch wider activities to set up peasants who bought plots from its fund, up to setting up settlements and increasing the area of ​​​​convenient
agricultural land. Until 1906 by peasants from the land reserve
bank bought 670.1 thousand acres of land, and in total with the assistance of the bank
nine million acres of land were acquired (62.4 percent of the increase in private peasant land ownership in 1882–1905).

From the beginning of the Stolypin reform, the Peasants' Bank was entrusted with the task of "providing broader assistance to the peasants both by issuing
loans for the purchase of land, and the strengthening of the land acquisition operation through
own funds of the Bank". Thus, the Peasants' Bank was supposed to contribute to "a firm planting among the peasant population of the sole
ownership of land as the basis for the transformation of the economic structure of rural Russia. In order to increase the land fund of the bank, a
part of the specific and state lands and restrictions on the acquisition of privately owned lands for their further sale to peasants were lifted. At the same time there were
the payments of borrowers of the Peasants' Bank were lowered and the issuance of loans under
pledge of allotment lands. If before the Peasants' Bank preferred
collective buyers of land, since 1906, the main goal of the Bank's activities in line with the entire agrarian reform was the planting of stable individual farms. By acquiring land individually, the peasants had to pay only 10 percent of the loan. In fellow purchases (and communal) loan assistance
limited to 80 percent. Landless and landless peasants, not
those who had the funds to make additional payments to loans issued in the amount of 90 percent of the special assessment were allowed to issue loans in the full amount of the assessment.
However, this was more of an exception. According to the administration of the Peasant
bank, the payment of a part of the purchase price of the land acquired by the peasants had a kind of "educational" value, as it strengthened the feeling of ownership in the peasant buyers. “It is necessary that the buyer, before turning into the owner of the purchased land, cover a certain part of the purchased
prices ... Having paid for the land from labor savings, the peasant is imbued with the consciousness that this land is his inalienable property, and, as it were, becomes related to it.

When buying land from private owners, the Bank was very careful in its purchases.
estates and carefully weighed the suitability of the land for further sale.
When buying noble lands, the whole set was taken into account
agricultural conditions of the estate: its distance from the nearest shopping center, the suitability of the land for division into plots and the formation of peasant farms, etc. The transformation of the Peasants' Bank into the largest
buyer of land in the country, no doubt influenced the fluctuations in land prices.
In 1906–1907, during the period of mass sales of landed estates, the bank did not
allowed the depreciation of sold privately owned estates. He was
artificial rise in the sale value of land was prevented when demand
on it from the side of the peasants rose. In addition, the active role of the Peasants' Bank prevented the purchase of land for nothing by various kinds of speculators.
On average, the prices for land purchased by peasants from the bank were 23 percent lower than in the land market.

"The planting and development of small landownership in the conditions of sole proprietorship
property, the independent labor of the landowner on his plot, demarcated and arranged within permanent boundaries" - these are the principles that have become
the basis of the activities of the Peasants' Bank in the sale of land to peasants from
own land reserve in 1906-1916. This event, called "liquidation of the bank's land reserve", was carried out in close cooperation with land management commissions. Land demarcation work was carried out by seconded employees at the disposal of local bank branches
land surveyors of land management commissions and boundary technicians from the
staff members of bank branches. In addition, in cases of need, private land surveyors were recruited for free hire. By 1915, the Bank's branches had 106 surveyors, 40 assistant surveyors
and 146 boundary technicians. During the preparation of land for sale in accordance
with the requirements of land management, a study of soil conditions was carried out
and land reclamation work was carried out: the construction of wells, the construction of reservoirs with dams and bridges, and the drainage of swamps.

During 1906-1915, 3.7 million acres (60.4 percent of the land reserve) were sold to peasants from the bank's land reserve. Among buyers
The banking land was dominated by individual farmers, who accounted for 78.7 percent of the total amount of land sold by the bank. More than half of the land
of the land reserve of the bank was sold in cuts (54.9 percent), and one fourth
part - farmsteads (23.8 percent). By 1915, 7.7 thousand farms and 14.3 thousand cuts were formed on the lands of the bank. For the farmers, additional benefits were introduced - a loan was issued to them for the full cost of the land, and the “otrubniks” had to pay five percent in cash at once. Stimulating
the formation of farms and cuts, the bank not only provided them with benefits in issuing loans, but if the buyer did not have free money for an immediate deposit payment, he leased the plot to him for up to three years. Thus the peasant
given the opportunity to "get up and collect the money."

Gradually, a certain “turn” began to brew among the peasantry.
towards private land ownership. After all, the bank did not impose its land on anyone, on the contrary, buyers were admitted with careful selection. Refusals of the local population from the purchase of banking plots during the years of the revolution
(1905–1907) eventually became a rare occurrence. If in the first two years from the beginning of the Stolypin reform, the sale of a fully prepared estate dragged on for many months and sometimes required the call of immigrants from other
provinces, then in the future the sections were sorted out in a few weeks. In compiling the list of buyers of the land, the bank sometimes had to resort to lottery among numerous applicants who met the established requirements to select future owners.

At first, buyers - individual farmers of banking land avoided
sell their allotment shares and estates, holding them with the caution inherent in a peasant, just in case. Maintaining a connection with the allotment gave hope that if the attempt to strengthen the economy in the new conditions was unsuccessful,
then it will be possible to return to the old place. Three or four years after the start
reforms, having looked around at the acquired plot, the peasants, if possible,
tried to get rid of the allotment and turn the proceeds from the sale into
business establishment in the new location.

The daredevils, who were not afraid of either the novelty of separate landownership, or
intimidation (and even the “red rooster”), no ridicule from neighbors, appeared on the ground
the first workers of conditions of independent land use previously unknown to the economic consciousness of the people. By their example, the peasantry for the first time saw that it was possible not only to exist, but also to live well. Peasants who settled
on banking lands, they said that they "saw the light."

In addition to loans for the purchase of land from the bank's reserves, the bank issued loans for the purchase of land under transactions concluded by peasants with its participation (by 1916, 126.1 thousand rubles, secured by 5,722.1 thousand acres) and loans secured by land previously purchased peasants without the participation of a bank (14.4 thousand rubles under
a pledge of 552.4 thousand acres). The Peasants' Bank assisted such borrowers in the transition from comradely land ownership to sole proprietorship. In this case, the peasants left the partnership and the allocation
on a farm or a cut of the land share corresponding to them. The householder who left the partnership became the sole borrower of the bank.

Loans secured by allotment lands were issued for only certain purposes: 1) to pay for the allotments left by the peasants moving to new lands; 2) to replenish that part of the purchase price for land acquired with the assistance of the Peasants' Bank, which was not covered by a bank loan issued against the security of the purchased land; 3) to cover the costs caused by
improved land use; 4) upon transition from communal ownership to household ownership; 5) when dividing societies into separate settlements and farms, etc.
They did not receive wide distribution (10 thousand loans in the amount of 11 million rubles). In total, from 1906 to 1916, the bank issued 352.7 thousand loans.
in the amount of 1.071 million rubles, as a result of which the property of the peasants
10.013 million acres of land were transferred. The administration of the bank, evaluating the buyers of banking lands, noticed that “the vast majority of them
represents not those village beans who solicit whatever
no matter what, seize a piece of "official" land in the hope that later it would be all the same
forgive, and strong farmers, although they did not have a large income,
but imbued with a firm determination to earn it with their own hands.

Assessing the role of the Peasants' Bank in the mobilization of land ownership in the late 19th - early 20th centuries, one cannot but take into account the remark of the famous economist of the early 20th century B.D.
in the selection of buyers, free mobilization has undoubted advantages
compared with the transfer of land from hand to hand in the form of a state-legal
act to meet consumer needs. Mobilization process
through the Peasants' Bank led to the transfer of land from the hands of bad owners
(landlords) not into the hands of every random peasant, but into the hands of those who took
answer to national economy for its proper use." So
Thus, the Peasant Land Bank played an important role in the process of restructuring land relations during the period of the Stolypin reform. Of course it is
was only the beginning of that enormous work, which was not destined to end. The valuable experience of the Peasants' Bank can undoubtedly be used in
reconstruction of the modern village.

Few of the problems of pre-revolutionary history are so acute
disputes like the Stolypin agrarian reform. Controversy surrounding transformations
is so politicized that in our days the attitude towards it has become almost a matter of faith - either it is accepted or rejected. The author of these lines belongs
among those historians who believe that, despite the inevitable
the scale of innovation costs, Stolypin's reform marked the beginning of radical changes in the life of the Russian village, created prospects for
from the global crisis in which the country's agriculture was.

General summary for the Empire of the results of the development of data from the first general census
population produced on January 28, 1897. SPb., 1905. T. 1.

Izmestieva T. F. Russia in the European market system. Late XIX - early XX century.
M., 1991. S. 38.

The data is given according to the books: Agriculture Russia at the beginning of the 20th century / Ed.
N. P. Oganovsky. M., 1923; Nifontov A. S. Grain production in Russia in the second
half of the 19th century. M., 1974;. Anfimov A. M. Peasant economy of the European
Russia. 1881–1904 M., 1980.

PSZ III. T. XXVI. No. 28528. Decree of November 9, 1906, which bore the modest title “On additions to the State Duma and the State Council: 1906–1911. M., 1991. S. 177. For details, see: Proskuryakova N.A. Land banks of the Russian Empire. M., 2002.
pp. 333–351.

PSZ III. T. XXVI. No. 23468.

Overview of the activities of the Peasant Land Bank for 1906-1910. SPb., 1911. S. 24.

There. S. 18.

Overview of the activities of the Peasant Land Bank for 1906-1910. S. 44.

Brutskus B.D. Agrarian issue and agrarian policy. Pg., 1922, pp. 109–110.