In this video lesson, everyone will be able to get an idea of ​​the topic “Russian Economy in the 17th Century” from the 10th grade school history course. The teacher will talk about the development of the economy in our country, about the discussion that is going on in this regard in historical circles. Students will become familiar with contradictory trends in the economy (the final enslavement of peasants) and parallel positive reforms that repeat the European model of development.

Topic: Russia inXVII century

Lesson: Economic development of Russia inXVII century

1. Preliminary remarks

The main problems of socio-economic development of Russia in the 17th century. have always been the focus of attention of domestic historians. Particularly controversial was and remains the question of the time of the birth of capitalism in Russia. There are three main points of view on this matter:

1) Some authors (S. Strumilin, D. Makovsky) argue that the genesis of capitalist relations in Russia began in the second half of the 16th century, since it was during this period that a noticeable increase in commodity production was observed;

2) Other historians (M. Nechkina, V. Buganov) say that the formation of bourgeois relations in Russia should be dated to the mid-17th century, since it was during this period that the all-Russian market was formed and the first capitalist manufactories emerged;

3) Still others (N. Pavlenko) believe that the genesis of capitalist relations in Russia began only in the second half of the 18th century, since it was then that one of the main signs of capitalism emerged - the dominance of wage labor.

2. Economic development of Russia

Agriculture

In the seventeenth century. Russia still remained a predominantly agrarian country, where agriculture was the main sector of the economy, and peasants made up the vast majority of the country's population. Agriculture, as in previous centuries, developed mainly in an extensive way, due to plowing and inclusion of new territories in crop rotation, mainly in the Volga region, the “wild field” and Siberia. Basically, the traditional three-field farming system was preserved, when one third of the wedge was sown with spring crops, the other with winter crops, and the third remained fallow. The arable land was cultivated mainly with a plow and a harrow, and a plow with an iron share was used much less frequently. The main agricultural crops remained rye, wheat, oats, barley and buckwheat.

Peasant and landowner farms still retained their semi-subsistence character; their connection with the market was minimal and irregular. The main form of dependence of the landowner (serf) peasants on the feudal lords was still rent in kind, and cash rent and corvee had not yet taken a leading position in the country, but the defining trend of the country's socio-economic development in that period was not the crisis, but the strengthening of the feudal-serf system systems. This trend was most clearly manifested:

1) in the significant growth of feudal land ownership and the attack of the feudal state on the rights, freedom and lands of the black-sown peasantry;

2) in the formation and development of the corvee economic system.

Rice. 1. Moscow in the 17th century.

The main features of the corvee economy were:

1) dominance of subsistence farming;

2) endowment of the direct producer (peasant) with the means of production (land) and the establishment of land dependence of the peasant on the feudal lord;

3) the establishment of the legal and personal dependence of the peasants on the feudal lord and the legal registration by the state of a regime of serfdom based on non-economic coercion;

4) low, routine state of farming technology and culture.

Rice. 2. Wedding feast in the boyar's house ()

Industry

The main form of industrial production in Russia remained small handicraft industry in the form of:

1) peasant crafts, which served the peasants themselves and partly their feudal lords; 2) patrimonial craft, which served the feudal lord and his servants;

3) urban crafts, which are slowly but steadily developing into small-scale production, directly related to the market.

Manufacturing production was practically undeveloped. For the entire country, according to historians (N. Pavlenko, V. Buganov), there were only a few dozen manufactories that belonged either to the treasury or to foreigners.

It must be said that there has been a discussion in the literature about the nature of these manufactories for quite some time. Some authors (M. Nechkina, V. Buganov) argued that they were bourgeois in nature, since in terms of the level of development of technology and production technologies they were no different from Western European manufactories. Other authors (N. Pavlenko) rightly pointed out that to determine the nature of manufactories, it is necessary to study not the level of development of their equipment and technologies, but the nature of production relations.

According to most historians, three main features are required for manufacturing production:

1) large production;

2) production based on the use of manual labor;

3) production based on the division of labor.

If at least one of these signs is absent, then such production has nothing to do with manufacture, but is a simple (merchant or craft) cooperation that has no formal significance.

If all three signs of manufacture are present, then it is necessary to assess the presence of the fourth sign - the presence of hired labor. If wage labor is used in manufacturing, then it is directly related to the genesis of capitalism. If the forced labor of serfs is used in the manufactory, then such a manufactory has nothing to do with the genesis of capitalism.

According to a number of modern authors (N. Pavlenko), Russian manufactories, which initially arose as manufactories of the bourgeois type, very soon found themselves suppressed by the prevailing feudal-serf relations and turned into serf-owned manufactories.

Rice. 3. Sloboda in the 17th century.

The beginning of the formation of the All-Russian market

In Soviet historical science it has traditionally been argued that in the 17th century. Russia has entered a new period of its development, which was expressed in the formation and development of the all-Russian market. At the same time, a direct parallel was almost always drawn between the formation of the all-Russian market and the genesis of bourgeois relations, since V. Lenin argued that the leaders and owners of this market were “capitalist merchants.” In fact, this statement is a gross methodological error, since merchant capital has no formational significance and can serve different socio-economic formations. Therefore, the formation of the all-Russian market took place exclusively on the basis of the dominance of small-scale production.

The external manifestation of the formation and development of the all-Russian market was:

1) Deepening the specialization of various regions of the country. For example, the centers of commercial grain production were Voronezh, Saratov and Kazan, the centers of the linen industry were Moscow, Novgorod, Pskov, Yaroslavl, Kostroma and Vologda, the centers of iron mining and metal processing were Tula, Serpukhov and Veliky Ustyug.

2) The formation of wholesale fair trade and the emergence of the first all-Russian fairs - Arkhangelsk, Irbit, Makaryevsk and Svensk.

3) Protectionist policy of the Russian government and support for domestic producers. In particular, after numerous petitions from merchants (1627, 1635, 1637, 1645, 1646, 1648) who complained about the dominance of foreigners in Moscow and other cities, in 1649, under the pretext of executing “their king Charles,” they were expelled from the country all English merchants who were banned from retail trade throughout the country. Then, in 1653, at the proposal of the head of the Ambassadorial Prikaz, A.L. Ordin-Nashchekin, the “Trade Charter” was adopted, which unified all customs duties, establishing a single ruble duty on foreign goods. Finally, in 1667, at the instigation of the same A. Ordin-Nashchekin, the “New Trade Charter” was adopted, which completely prohibited all foreign merchants from retail trade on the territory of the entire Russian state, even in the border regions.

At the same time, it is necessary to especially emphasize the fact that internal customs duties were still maintained throughout the entire territory of the country (a legacy of the appanage period), which were abolished only in 1754, under Elizabeth Petrovna!

List of literature for studying the topic "Russian Economy in the 17th century":

1. Buganov V.I. The evolution of feudalism in Russia. Socio-economic problems. - M., 1980

2. Makovsky D.V. Development of commodity-money relations in agriculture of the Russian state in the 16th century. - S., 1963

3. Milov L.V. Great Russian plowman and features of the Russian historical process. - M., 1998

4. Pavlenko N.I. The transition from feudalism to capitalism in Russia. - M., 1969

5. Sakharov A. N. Russian village of the 17th century. Based on materials from the patriarchal household. - M., 1966

6. Tikhonov Yu. A. Landowner peasants in Russia: feudal rent in the 17th - early 18th centuries. - M., 1974

In this video lesson, everyone will be able to get an idea of ​​the topic “Russian Economy in the 17th Century” from the 10th grade school history course. The teacher will talk about the development of the economy in our country, about the discussion that is going on in this regard in historical circles. Students will become familiar with contradictory trends in the economy (the final enslavement of peasants) and parallel positive reforms that repeat the European model of development.

Topic: Russia inXVII century

Lesson: Economic development of Russia inXVII century

1. Preliminary remarks

The main problems of socio-economic development of Russia in the 17th century. have always been the focus of attention of domestic historians. Particularly controversial was and remains the question of the time of the birth of capitalism in Russia. There are three main points of view on this matter:

1) Some authors (S. Strumilin, D. Makovsky) argue that the genesis of capitalist relations in Russia began in the second half of the 16th century, since it was during this period that a noticeable increase in commodity production was observed;

2) Other historians (M. Nechkina, V. Buganov) say that the formation of bourgeois relations in Russia should be dated to the mid-17th century, since it was during this period that the all-Russian market was formed and the first capitalist manufactories emerged;

3) Still others (N. Pavlenko) believe that the genesis of capitalist relations in Russia began only in the second half of the 18th century, since it was then that one of the main signs of capitalism emerged - the dominance of wage labor.

2. Economic development of Russia

Agriculture

In the seventeenth century. Russia still remained a predominantly agrarian country, where agriculture was the main sector of the economy, and peasants made up the vast majority of the country's population. Agriculture, as in previous centuries, developed mainly in an extensive way, due to plowing and inclusion of new territories in crop rotation, mainly in the Volga region, the “wild field” and Siberia. Basically, the traditional three-field farming system was preserved, when one third of the wedge was sown with spring crops, the other with winter crops, and the third remained fallow. The arable land was cultivated mainly with a plow and a harrow, and a plow with an iron share was used much less frequently. The main agricultural crops remained rye, wheat, oats, barley and buckwheat.

Peasant and landowner farms still retained their semi-subsistence character; their connection with the market was minimal and irregular. The main form of dependence of the landowner (serf) peasants on the feudal lords was still rent in kind, and cash rent and corvee had not yet taken a leading position in the country, but the defining trend of the country's socio-economic development in that period was not the crisis, but the strengthening of the feudal-serf system systems. This trend was most clearly manifested:

1) in the significant growth of feudal land ownership and the attack of the feudal state on the rights, freedom and lands of the black-sown peasantry;

2) in the formation and development of the corvee economic system.

Rice. 1. Moscow in the 17th century.

The main features of the corvee economy were:

1) dominance of subsistence farming;

2) endowment of the direct producer (peasant) with the means of production (land) and the establishment of land dependence of the peasant on the feudal lord;

3) the establishment of the legal and personal dependence of the peasants on the feudal lord and the legal registration by the state of a regime of serfdom based on non-economic coercion;

4) low, routine state of farming technology and culture.

Rice. 2. Wedding feast in the boyar's house ()

Industry

The main form of industrial production in Russia remained small handicraft industry in the form of:

1) peasant crafts, which served the peasants themselves and partly their feudal lords; 2) patrimonial craft, which served the feudal lord and his servants;

3) urban crafts, which are slowly but steadily developing into small-scale production, directly related to the market.

Manufacturing production was practically undeveloped. For the entire country, according to historians (N. Pavlenko, V. Buganov), there were only a few dozen manufactories that belonged either to the treasury or to foreigners.

It must be said that there has been a discussion in the literature about the nature of these manufactories for quite some time. Some authors (M. Nechkina, V. Buganov) argued that they were bourgeois in nature, since in terms of the level of development of technology and production technologies they were no different from Western European manufactories. Other authors (N. Pavlenko) rightly pointed out that to determine the nature of manufactories, it is necessary to study not the level of development of their equipment and technologies, but the nature of production relations.

According to most historians, three main features are required for manufacturing production:

1) large production;

2) production based on the use of manual labor;

3) production based on the division of labor.

If at least one of these signs is absent, then such production has nothing to do with manufacture, but is a simple (merchant or craft) cooperation that has no formal significance.

If all three signs of manufacture are present, then it is necessary to assess the presence of the fourth sign - the presence of hired labor. If wage labor is used in manufacturing, then it is directly related to the genesis of capitalism. If the forced labor of serfs is used in the manufactory, then such a manufactory has nothing to do with the genesis of capitalism.

According to a number of modern authors (N. Pavlenko), Russian manufactories, which initially arose as manufactories of the bourgeois type, very soon found themselves suppressed by the prevailing feudal-serf relations and turned into serf-owned manufactories.

Rice. 3. Sloboda in the 17th century.

The beginning of the formation of the All-Russian market

In Soviet historical science it has traditionally been argued that in the 17th century. Russia has entered a new period of its development, which was expressed in the formation and development of the all-Russian market. At the same time, a direct parallel was almost always drawn between the formation of the all-Russian market and the genesis of bourgeois relations, since V. Lenin argued that the leaders and owners of this market were “capitalist merchants.” In fact, this statement is a gross methodological error, since merchant capital has no formational significance and can serve different socio-economic formations. Therefore, the formation of the all-Russian market took place exclusively on the basis of the dominance of small-scale production.

The external manifestation of the formation and development of the all-Russian market was:

1) Deepening the specialization of various regions of the country. For example, the centers of commercial grain production were Voronezh, Saratov and Kazan, the centers of the linen industry were Moscow, Novgorod, Pskov, Yaroslavl, Kostroma and Vologda, the centers of iron mining and metal processing were Tula, Serpukhov and Veliky Ustyug.

2) The formation of wholesale fair trade and the emergence of the first all-Russian fairs - Arkhangelsk, Irbit, Makaryevsk and Svensk.

3) Protectionist policy of the Russian government and support for domestic producers. In particular, after numerous petitions from merchants (1627, 1635, 1637, 1645, 1646, 1648) who complained about the dominance of foreigners in Moscow and other cities, in 1649, under the pretext of executing “their king Charles,” they were expelled from the country all English merchants who were banned from retail trade throughout the country. Then, in 1653, at the proposal of the head of the Ambassadorial Prikaz, A.L. Ordin-Nashchekin, the “Trade Charter” was adopted, which unified all customs duties, establishing a single ruble duty on foreign goods. Finally, in 1667, at the instigation of the same A. Ordin-Nashchekin, the “New Trade Charter” was adopted, which completely prohibited all foreign merchants from retail trade on the territory of the entire Russian state, even in the border regions.

At the same time, it is necessary to especially emphasize the fact that internal customs duties were still maintained throughout the entire territory of the country (a legacy of the appanage period), which were abolished only in 1754, under Elizabeth Petrovna!

List of literature for studying the topic "Russian Economy in the 17th century":

1. Buganov V.I. The evolution of feudalism in Russia. Socio-economic problems. - M., 1980

2. Makovsky D.V. Development of commodity-money relations in agriculture of the Russian state in the 16th century. - S., 1963

3. Milov L.V. Great Russian plowman and features of the Russian historical process. - M., 1998

4. Pavlenko N.I. The transition from feudalism to capitalism in Russia. - M., 1969

5. Sakharov A. N. Russian village of the 17th century. Based on materials from the patriarchal household. - M., 1966

6. Tikhonov Yu. A. Landowner peasants in Russia: feudal rent in the 17th - early 18th centuries. - M., 1974

16. Socio-economic development of Russia in the 17th century.

The paths of development of the state after the Time of Troubles were determined by the tasks of restoring the country. The restoration process after the Troubles took approximately three decades and was completed by the middle of the century.

The territory of Russia in the 17th century. compared to the 16th century, it expanded to include new lands of Siberia, the Southern Urals and Left Bank Ukraine, and the further development of the Wild Field. The territory of the country was divided into counties, the number of which reached 250. The counties, in turn, were divided into volosts and camps, the center of which was the village. In a number of lands, especially those that were recently included in Russia, the previous administrative system was maintained. According to the number of inhabitants, Russia within the borders of the 17th century. ranked fourth among European countries. In the 17th century, the position of Muscovite Rus' was in many respects better than that of European states. The 17th century for Europe is the time of the bloody Thirty Years' War, which brought ruin, hunger and extinction to peoples (the result of the war, for example, in Germany was a reduction in the population from 18 million to 4 million).

Economic development.

In the 17th century The foundation of the country's economy, as before, was agriculture, which was of a subsistence nature. The growth of agricultural production was achieved through the development of new lands, that is extensive way. By the middle of the 17th century. the devastation and devastation of the times of unrest were overcome. But there was something to restore - in 14 districts of the center of the country in the 40s, the plowed land was only 42% of what was previously cultivated, and the number of the peasant population, fleeing the horrors of timelessness, also decreased. The economy recovered slowly in the conditions of the preservation of traditional forms of farming, the sharply continental climate and low soil fertility in the Non-Black Earth Region, the most developed part of the country.

Agriculture remained the leading sector of the economy. The main tools of labor were a plow, a plow, a harrow, and a sickle. Three-field farming prevailed, but undercutting also remained, especially in the north of the country. They sowed rye, oats, wheat, barley, buckwheat, peas, and flax and hemp among industrial crops. The yield was sam-3, in the south - sam-4. The economy was still subsistence in nature. Under these conditions, an increase in production volumes was achieved through the involvement of new lands in economic circulation. Black Earth Region, Middle Volga Region, Siberia.

At the same time, the growth of territory and differences in natural conditions gave rise to economic specialization of the country's regions.

It was with specialization that such an important process in the economy of the period under review as the development of commodity-money relations was associated. Specialization was observed not only in agriculture, but also in crafts. In the 17th century Small-scale production is spreading, that is, the production of products not to order, but to the market. Pomorie specialized in the creation of wooden products, Pskov, Novgorod, Smolensk made linen fabrics, salt making developed in the North, etc.

Thus, the role of the merchants in the life of the country increased. Fairs that constantly gathered became of great importance: Makaryevskaya near Nizhny Novgorod, Svenskaya fair in the Bryansk region, Irbitskaya in Siberia, a fair in Arkhangelsk, etc., where merchants carried out large-scale wholesale and retail trade.

Along with the development of domestic trade, foreign trade also grew. Until the middle of the century, foreign merchants extracted huge benefits from foreign trade, exporting timber, furs, hemp, potash, etc. from Russia. Suffice it to say that the English fleet was built from Russian timber, and the ropes for its ships were made from Russian hemp. Arkhangelsk was the center of Russian trade with Western Europe. There were English and Dutch trading yards here. Close ties were established with the countries of the East through Astrakhan, where the Indian and Persian trading yards were located.

The Russian government supported the growing merchant class. In 1667, the New Trade Charter was published, developing the provisions of the Trade Charter of 1653. The New Trade Charter increased duties on foreign goods. Foreign merchants had the right to conduct wholesale trade only in border trading centers.

In the 17th century The exchange of goods between individual regions of the country expanded significantly, which indicated the beginning of the formation of an all-Russian market. The merging of individual lands into a single economic system began. Growing economic ties strengthened the country's political unity.

On the basis of small-scale production, large enterprises are formed, based on the division of labor and handcraft techniques - manufactories. Unlike Western Europe, where the formation of manufacturing production took place in the privately owned sector, as capital accumulated among the owners, in Russia the initiator of the creation of manufactories was the state. In the 17th century There were approximately 30 manufactories in Russia. The first state-owned manufactories arose in the 16th century.

(Pushkarsky Dvor. Mint). In the 17th century metallurgical plants were built in the Urals and in the Tula region, tanneries in Yaroslavl and Kazan, and the Khamovny (textile) yard in Moscow.

The Nitsinsky copper smelter in the Urals, built in 1631, is usually considered the first privately owned manufactory.

Since there were no free workers in the country, the state began to assign, and later (1721) allowed, the purchase of peasants to factories. The assigned peasants had to work off their taxes to the state at a factory or plant at certain prices. The state provided assistance to enterprise owners with land, timber, and money. Manufactories founded with the support of the state later received the name “possession” (from the Latin word “possession” - possession).

Social development.

According to Vernadsky, to restore the country, the government needed a very large amount of money. To do this, it was necessary to restore old taxes and introduce a number of new ones.

All classes were obliged to serve the state and differed only in the nature of the duties assigned to them. The population was divided into service people and tax people.

At the head of the service class were about a hundred boyar families - descendants of the former Great and appanage princes. They occupied the highest positions in military and civil administration, but during the 17th century they were gradually replaced by people from the middle service strata. There was a merger of boyars and nobles into one class of “state servants.” In terms of its social and ethnic roots, it was distinguished by noticeable diversity: initially, access to public service was open to all free people. As the state organization took shape, the service class acquired an increasingly closed character.

The ability of the nobles to fulfill their military duties depended on the supply of labor on their estates and on the transfer of peasants from one owner to another. In addition, the spontaneous mass migration of peasants to new lands (Ukraine, Wild Steppe, Siberia) led to disruptions in the tax system. The government saw the stabilization of the situation in the attachment of peasants to the land, that is, in enslavement 2. Attachment to the land did not mean the enslavement of the peasants; they were still considered free people and could complain about the oppression of the landowners in court. However, the power of the landowners over the peasants gradually increased. More favorable was the position of the state and palace peasants, who did not obey the landowners.

The rural peasant population consisted of two main categories. Peasants who lived on the lands of estates and estates were called possessory or privately owned. They bore taxes (a set of duties) in favor of the state and their feudal lord. The landowner received the right to speak in court on behalf of his peasants; he also had the right of patrimonial court over the population of his estate. The state reserved the right to trial only for the most serious crimes. Monastic peasants occupied a place close to privately owned peasants.

Another large category of the peasant population was the black-sowing peasantry. They lived on the outskirts of the country (Pomeranian North, Ural, Siberia, South), united into communities. Black-footed peasants did not have the right to leave their lands unless they found replacements. They bore taxes for the benefit of the state. Their situation was easier than that of privately owned ones. “Black lands” could be sold, mortgaged, and inherited.

The middle position between the black-sown and privately owned peasants was occupied by palace peasants, who served the economic needs of the royal court. They had self-government and obeyed palace clerks.

Attachment to the tax also affected other classes, and certain categories of the townsfolk population were assigned locally. The nobles in Russia were no more free than the peasants and townspeople; they were bound by the obligation of lifelong service. Each social group was assigned a specific place in the national structure. Using flexible tactics, the central government managed to consolidate the Cossacks in the structure of the state. Moscow recognized the Cossacks’ right to self-government, to own land, and provided them with assistance with food, money and weapons. The Cossacks, for their part, pledged to serve on the borders of the Moscow kingdom.

An influential class in the 17th century was the clergy, which held a monopoly in the sphere of education, culture, and ideology. The Orthodox understanding of class duties as a form of religious service led to the fact that the entire population bore universal state service: nobles personally, and peasants and townspeople through taxes for the maintenance of troops. A unique system of Russian state serfdom is being created.

During the reign of Alexei Mikhailovich, changes were made to the judicial system. The Zemsky Sobor of 1649 developed a new set of laws, called the “Cathedral Code”. The most important directions of the Code were the protection of the interests of nobles and townspeople against the background of some restrictions on the privileges of the boyars and clergy, as well as protectionism in favor of Russian merchants and industrialists. Peasants were legally bound to the land.

Thus, the process of consolidation of classes occurs, their social framework is more clearly delineated. The dominant role belonged to the boyars and nobles. Regardless of the form of land ownership, they were required to perform military service. There is a convergence of the socio-political position of the nobles and the boyars. The difference between an estate and a fiefdom is reduced to a minimum. A nobleman, even having sold or mortgaged the land to a monastery or an “unserviceable” person, could pull it back. The nobles owned most of the peasant households (57% according to the 1678 census).

The position of the archers, gunners, and state blacksmiths (the so-called “instrument servants”) became more difficult. Their salaries were reduced, many of the servicemen were transferred to the category of townspeople and lost their previous privileges (for example, the right to purchase land).

The number of townspeople - townspeople - grew. A significant part of the artisans worked for the state. Some artisans served the needs of landowners (patrimonial artisans). According to the Council Code of 1649, only townspeople could engage in crafts and trade in the city. They entered communities and bore various duties, paid taxes, the totality of which was called tax The “best” people of Posad - merchants - led the Posad communities, became deputies of Zemsky Sobors, and were in charge of collecting taxes and duties.

The peasant class became more closed. The social strata of serfs and “children” of the monasteries disappeared. The legal status of privately owned peasants came closer to the position of state-owned peasants, who were increasingly regarded as serfs.

As a result, by the middle of the 17th century, the devastation of the Time of Troubles was overcome.

By the second half of the 17th century, the economic situation had changed. The state needed money. Taxes increased. The government of Tsar Alexei Mikhailovich increased indirect taxes. raising the price of salt 4 times in 1646. However, the increase in the salt tax did not lead to replenishment of the treasury, since the solvency of the population was undermined. The salt tax was abolished in 1647. It was decided to collect arrears for the last three years. n. In 1648 it resulted in an open uprising in Moscow. The uprising in Moscow, called the “salt riot,” was not the only one. Over the course of twenty years (from 1630 to 1650), uprisings took place in 30 Russian cities: Veliky Ustyug, Novgorod, Voronezh, Kursk, Vladimir, Pskov, and Siberian cities.

According to the modern historian A.P. Toroptsev, the state had no other choice but to issue copper coins into circulation. With this, the state wanted to accumulate silver to pay salaries to soldiers. This had a negative impact on the economy. Merchants tried not to take copper money for goods. As a result, money depreciated. In addition, counterfeiters have appeared in Moscow. This led to a whole series of discontent and uprisings. In the summer of 1662, for one silver ruble they gave eight copper ones. The government collected taxes in silver, while the population had to sell and buy products with copper money. Salaries were also paid in copper money. The high cost of bread and other products that arose under these conditions led to famine. The Moscow people, driven to despair, rose up in rebellion.

Thus, by the middle of the 17th century, the state managed to overcome the consequences of the turmoil, but already in the second half of the 17th century, increased taxes and the exhausting wars waged by Russia depleted the treasury. In response, the state took a number of measures that caused a series of popular discontent.

By the beginning of the 17th century, the situation Russian state

Agriculture

By the beginning of the 17th century, the situation Russian state was critical, it was on the verge of destruction. But the liberation war against the Polish-Lithuanian invaders ended in victory. The Romanovs were elected to the throne.

The internal and external situation of the government was extremely difficult. The administrative apparatus was destroyed. Agriculture fell, the sown areas were reduced, the noble estates and estates “became in great ruin and desolate.” Not only in the outskirts, but also in the central regions it was restless. In the center, in the north and in the south, gangs of rebellious Cossacks were operating, the Nogai Tatars were approaching Moscow itself. The Swedes besieged Pskov, the Poles sat in Smolensk and again made a last attempt in 1618 to impose their tsar on Moscow.

The first measures of the government were to restore the economy, the government apparatus and organize the armed forces. For this purpose, it was necessary to allocate new estates to service people. Taxation was eased for peasants by introducing the so-called “living quarter”, i.e. taxation of land taking into account existing available yards.

The situation was especially bad with government finances. The entire 17th century passed for the Russian state under the sign of financial disorder. The main capital of the feudal state - the state land fund - was largely wasted. Due to financial need, the state even resorted to such measures as selling off state and palace lands.

The government was forced to turn to loans from private individuals, from eminent merchants (the Stroganovs, Sveshnikovs, Nikitnikovs, etc.).

The severity of taxation of the rural, townsman, urban and industrial people caused frequent unrest and direct uprisings of the population. An attempt to switch to indirect taxation, for example, of salt, did not yield anything financially, but caused (1648) riots in Moscow and other cities.

The domestic policy of the first Romanovs had the character of not always successful compromise attempts to bring the state out of the state of economic ruin by at least some alleviation of the economic hardships of the most burdened and ruined economic classes - the peasantry and small townspeople.

These events often ran counter to the interests of the nobility and higher merchants, on which the government relied. Therefore, they were practically not implemented or were even soon formally cancelled.

There were changes in the class structure and class relations of the country in the second half of the 17th century compared to its first half. With the completion of the formation of a centralized state and the formation single national market state power, relying on the feudal-serf nobility, was forced to reckon with the growing power of the emerging bourgeoisie, big capital, and big merchants.

The interests of this latter did not always coincide with the interests of the feudal-estate class. Therefore, the policy of the state reveals its dual character, which was determined by its class structure as a state of landowners and merchants.

All this gave the economy of the 17th century a transitional character.

Literature

1. History of the national economy of the USSR. T.1. – M.: Politizdat, 1956.
2. History of Russia from ancient times to the second half of the 19th century. Course of lectures / Ed. Prof. B.V. Lichman. Ekaterinburg, 1994.
3. History of the USSR from ancient times to the end of the 18th century. / Ed. B. A. Rybakova. – M.: 1975.
4. Klyuchevsky V. O. Historical portraits. M.: Pravda, 1990.
5. Kostomarov N.I. Stenka Razin's revolt. Historical monographs and studies. M.: Charlie, 1994.
6. Platonov S.F. Textbook of Russian history. – M.: Progress. 1992.

The economic development of the country in the 17th century was complicated by the consequences of the Time of Troubles:

Arable lands are abandoned - up to 50%.

The population decreased, villages and cities were depopulated.

Loss of large areas in the north and west.

Only by the middle of the 17th century were these consequences overcome.

The territory of the state in the 17th century compared to the 16th century increased significantly due to the development of Siberia, the Southern Urals, the annexation of the Left Bank Ukraine and the Wild Field. It was divided into counties, volosts and camps.

The population is 10.5 million people, most of them live in the European part, the density is low. In the middle of the 17th century, there were 254 cities, the largest being Moscow with a population of 270 thousand people.

Russia in the 17th century was a feudal country. In Western Europe at this time, the process of decomposition of feudal relations was underway, capitalism was being established, and in Russia feudalism was strengthening, and capitalist relations were just emerging in industry, trade and partly in agriculture.

The country is dominated corvée economy.

His features:

Under conditions of the dominance of a subsistence economy, when everything necessary is produced on one’s own farm and consumed here, there is a weak economic connection with the market.

It is impossible without the peasants having a plot of land provided by the landowner. From it the peasant feeds and pays taxes.

The peasant is personally dependent on the feudal lord; there is non-economic coercion.

The organization of labor and land cultivation techniques are improving slowly. The peasants work the old fashioned way, there is no interest.

At the same time they appear new features in the economic development of Russia:

Commodity production is developing, i.e. production designed for market sales, both in the city and in the countryside. Nobles, boyars, and monasteries are actively involved in trade and industrial activities. The main goods going to the market are bread, salt, fish, and handicrafts. Commodity and monetary relations are developing.

The craft is gradually developing into small-scale production - artisans used to work to order, but now for the market. The number of craft specialties is increasing due to the identification of new craft specialties within individual types of production.

Specialization of regions in the production of certain types of agricultural products or handicrafts (Volga region - commercial production of bread, Siberia - furs, Pomorie - fish, salt, carpentry, northwest and west - flax, hemp, crafts, Yaroslavl, Vologda, Kostroma - linen business, leather production, Novgorod, Tula, Moscow - metallurgy, metalworking).

Rapid development of domestic and foreign trade. Trade ties are developing throughout the country. The role of Astrakhan and Arkhangelsk as port cities through which foreign trade passed is increasing. The trade statutes of 1653 and 1667 indicate the emergence of a policy of protectionism; favorable conditions were created for Russian merchants. Fabrics, spices, carpets, paints, jewelry, and precious vessels were brought from the East. From the West - fabrics, guns, cannons, wines, sugar. From Russia - furs, leather, wax, honey, resin.

Cities were centers of trade. Fairs were held there - Makaryevskaya, Tikhvinskaya, Svenskaya, Irbitskaya and others.

The development of foreign trade was complicated by the lack of access to the Baltic and Black seas.

An all-Russian market is gradually beginning to take shape. It is characterized by:

A single monetary and tax system, a single system of weights and measures, a single economic space, the absence of customs barriers between regions.

The appearance of manufactories is the main evidence of emerging capitalist relations.

Manufactory is a large enterprise based on manual labor with division of labor between workers.

Manufactures arose in ferrous metallurgy, salt making, tanning, and shipbuilding. The first manufactory was founded by the Dutch merchant Andrei Vinius in 1636. In the 17th century there were about 30 manufactories.

Peculiarities:

Unlike European manufactories, Russian ones were based not on civilian labor, but on serf labor. (the exception is salt-making factories in the North, where there is no noble land ownership). Peasants were bought and assigned to manufactories. There are few available workers.