Signs of absolutism. Absolutism in Russia: conditions of emergence and characteristic features Absolutism in Austria
The prerequisites for the emergence of an absolute monarchy in Russia arose in the second half of the 16th century, under Ivan 4. By the end of the 17th century. absolute monarchy begins to emerge as a type of state power. All European states went through the period of absolutism in their development. A monarchy can be considered absolute if it has the following characteristics:
The concentration of all power in the hands of one monarch,
The presence of a strong bureaucratic apparatus,
Presence of a standing army,
There was a liquidation of estate-representative institutions.
However, while coinciding in form with the absolute monarchies in Europe, the Russian monarchy was different in socio-economic content. The peculiarity of absolutism in Russia was that it arose not on the basis of the development of capitalist relations, as in Europe, but on the basis of serfdom. The social base of absolutism in Russia was not the nobles and bourgeoisie, as in Europe, but the serf-owning nobility, the service class and the merchant class.
The characteristic features of the policy of the period of absolute monarchy were:
expansion of territory,
enslavement of peasants,
strengthening the role of the state,
regulation of the rights and duties of all classes.
The economic basis of Russian absolutism was manufacturing production, corvée farming and the emerging all-Russian market.
From the middle of the 17th century. under Tsar Alexei Mikhailovich, some elements of absolutism began to take shape. Thus, Zemstvo Councils began to convene less frequently, the role of the Boyar Duma fell and the role of the administrative bureaucracy grew, the basic principles of feudal service (localism) began to be eliminated, and the number of soldiers and regiments of the foreign system increased, which brought the troops closer to the regular army. In addition, the role of secular culture grew, Russia gradually joined the system of European states (peace with the Polish-Lithuanian Commonwealth, joining the anti-Turkish coalition).
The legal formalization of absolutism began at an accelerated pace under Peter 1. This was expressed in the fact that Russia was declared an empire in 1721, and Peter was declared emperor. The legislative formula of absolutism in the interpretation of Article 20 of the Military Regulations looked like this: “His Majesty is an autocratic monarch who should not give an answer to anyone in the world about his affairs, but he has the power and authority of his own states and lands, like a Christian sovereign to govern according to his own will and good will.” " The “Spiritual Regulations” of 1721 contain the following definition: “The All-Russian Emperor is an autocratic and unlimited monarch. God himself commands to obey his supreme authority not only out of fear, but also out of conscience.”
The construction of new bodies of power and administration began: the Senate was created (1721), the post of Prosecutor General was established (1722), orders were replaced by collegiums, local government reform was carried out, the Patriarchate was abolished (1700), and a Synod was created in its place (1718). This also includes the emergence of a state list of expenses and income, the transition to capitation taxation, as well as the creation of the “Table of Ranks”, which laid down uniform principles of length of service in military and civil service. In 1722, the General Regulations, the Civil Service Charter, the Military and Naval Regulations appeared. The Decree on Succession to the Throne of 1722 gave the emperor the right to appoint an heir to the throne himself.
The economic policy of the period of absolutism was the promotion of trade. Development of mining, manufacturing and agriculture related to the needs of the state, army and navy. This includes the cultivation of industrial crops, sheep breeding, horse breeding, distilling, and forestry. A new side of the state's activities was the discovery and description of new lands. A new ideology also appeared in the absolutist state. Translations of the works of European politicians and lawyers spread, and an essay by Peter I’s associate F. Prokopovich “The Truth of the Will of the Monarchs” appeared, which substantiates the idea of strong autocratic power.
The formalization of absolutism took place in harsh forms - the duties of peasants and townspeople increased, numerous emergency taxes and fees were introduced, the population was driven to build roads, canals, and fortresses, which caused numerous deaths.
Having taken shape under Peter 1, the absolute monarchy continued to strengthen under Anna Ioannovna, Elizabeth, and Catherine II.
By the end of the 17th century. In Russia, an absolute monarchy begins to take shape, which did not arise immediately after the formation of a centralized state and the establishment of an autocratic system, because autocracy is not absolutism.
1) Absolutism and its features.
An absolute monarchy is characterized by the maximum concentration of power (both secular and spiritual) in the hands of one person. The concentration of power was carried out by Egyptian pharaohs, Roman emperors and dictators of the 20th century. It was not an absolute monarchy. For the latter to emerge, a transition period from the feudal system to the capitalist system is necessary. This period occurred in different periods in different countries, while maintaining common features.
An absolute monarchy is characterized by the presence of a strong, extensive professional bureaucratic apparatus, a strong standing army, and the elimination of all class-representative bodies and institutions. These signs are also inherent in Russian absolutism. However, it also had its own significant features:
Absolute monarchy in Europe took shape under the conditions of the development of capitalist relations and the abolition of old feudal institutions (especially serfdom), and absolutism in Russia coincided with the development of serfdom;
The social basis of Western European absolutism was the alliance of the nobility with the cities (free, imperial), and Russian absolutism relied mainly on the serf-dominated nobility, the service class.
The establishment of an absolute monarchy in Russia was accompanied by widespread expansion of the state, its invasion into all spheres of public, corporate and private life. Expansionist aspirations were expressed primarily in the desire to expand their territory and access to the seas.
Another direction of expansion was the policy of further enslavement, which took its most severe forms in the 18th century. The strengthening of the role of the state was also manifested in the detailed, thorough regulation of the rights and responsibilities of individual classes and social groups. Along with this, the legal consolidation of the ruling class took place, and the nobility class was formed from different feudal strata.
2) The ideology of absolute monarchy.
The ideology of absolutism can be defined as patriarchal. The head of state (tsar, emperor) is presented as the “father of the nation”, “father of the people”, who loves and knows well what his children want. He has the right to educate, teach and punish them. Hence the desire to consolidate everything, even the slightest manifestation of public and private life: decrees of the first quarter of the 18th century. they prescribed to the population when to turn off the lights, what dances to dance at assemblies, what coffins to bury in, whether or not to shave their beards, etc.
The idea of an absolute monarchy manifests itself in Russia in the second half of the 17th century. and is closely intertwined with projects of economic transformation of the country.
One of the first theoretical justifications for the establishment of an absolute enlightened monarchy was given by Semyon of Polotsk, who wrote his “Rod of Government” for the church council (1666-1667). In the treatise, the royal personage is elevated to the level of the “sun king”, “divine origin” is attributed to royal power, and any criticism or condemnation of it is rejected. The king was directly identified with his state.
In a quarter of a century, the 18th century, which was not at all as rapid as the 19th and even more so the 20th, Peter I turned Russia into a great power, not inferior in its industrial and military strength to the developed European countries of that time. Peter the Great introduced Russia to the progressive achievements of Western culture and opened access to the Baltic Sea, which Moscow rulers wanted to achieve starting from the 16th century. The country not only entered “the threshold” of Europe, but also became a leader in the east and north of the continent. Most of Peter's innovations demonstrated amazing vitality. State institutions created by Peter I functioned throughout the 18th century, and some even further. Recruitment sets introduced under Peter the Great existed in Russia until 1874, and the Senate, Synod, prosecutor's office, Table of Ranks, as well as the Russian Empire itself, lasted until 1917.
The Russian Empire was created:
1) with the further strengthening of serfdom, which suspended the formation of capitalist relations;
2) with strong tax pressure on the population. October 22, 1721 During the celebration of the Peace of Nystadt (the celebrations lasted for several weeks), the Senate awarded Peter I the titles of Great Emperor of All Russia and “Father of the Fatherland.” Together with Peter I accepting the title of Emperor, Russia becomes an empire. The increased international authority of the state was reflected in the fact that it was recognized as an empire by European countries: Prussia, Holland, Sweden, Denmark in 1722–1724, England and Austria in 1742, France in 1744. And Poland was the last to recognize the Russian Empire – in 1764
The reforms of Peter I marked the formalization absolute monarchy: 1) the king received the opportunity to rule the country unlimitedly and uncontrollably with the help of officials completely dependent on him; 2) the unlimited power of the monarch found legislative expression in the 20th article of the Military Regulations and the Spiritual Regulations, namely, “the power of monarchs is autocratic, which God himself commands to obey”; 3) the external expression of absolutism established in Russia is the adoption in 1721 by Peter I of the title of Emperor and the title “Great”; 4) bureaucratization of the management apparatus and its centralization occurred; 5) reforms of central and local government created an apparently orderly hierarchy of institutions from the Senate in the center to the voivodeship office in the counties.
Absolutism is the highest form of feudal monarchy.
Characteristic signs of absolutism:
1) its occurrence presupposes a certain level of monetary relations and large-scale industry;
2) monetary relations create the preconditions for financing an expanded military and civil bureaucracy;
3) the emergence of large-scale industry formed the material basis for the construction of a regular army and navy;
4) an absolute monarchy represents primarily the interests of the nobility.
The difference between Russian absolutism and classical Western European absolutism:
1) it did not arise under the influence of the genesis of capitalism, the balancing of the monarch between the feudal lords and the third estate;
2) Russian absolutism was formed on a serfdom-noble basis;
3) its formation was facilitated by:
– traditions of autocracy;
– increased centralization of power;
– tense international situation;
– the experience of Western European absolutism.
Symbol of absolutism
“I am the state,” said Louis XIV. However, these words are also attributed to other monarchs. And in essence, it does not matter who the author of this statement is, the main thing is that it accurately characterizes the essence of absolutism.
And if we look in the encyclopedic dictionary, we will find the following more detailed definition of absolutism: “Absolutism (from the Latin absolutus - independent, unlimited), absolute monarchy. Absolutism is characterized by the fact that the head of state, monarch, considered as the main source of legislative and executive power, which is carried out by the apparatus dependent on it; He sets taxes and manages public finances. Under absolutism, the greatest degree of state centralization is achieved, an extensive bureaucratic apparatus is created (judicial, tax, etc.), a large standing army and police; the activities of the class representation bodies typical of a class monarchy either cease or lose their former significance. The social support of absolutism is the nobility.”
Absolutism as a general phenomenon for European countries
Symbols of absolute monarchy
Under absolutism, the entirety of state (legislative, executive, judicial), and sometimes spiritual (religious) power is legally and actually in the hands of the monarch.
Absolute monarchy was characteristic of almost all European countries until the 18th century, except for San Marino and some cantons of Switzerland, which were always republics. Some historians even consider absolutism as a natural phase of historical development.
In the Age of Enlightenment, this form of government was ideologically justified and reinforced for the first time: they remember the Roman jurists who recognized the absolute power of the ancient Roman emperors for the sovereigns, and accepted the theological idea of the divine origin of the supreme power.
After the Great French Revolution, a process of gradual democratization and limitation of the power of the monarch took place. But this process was uneven: for example, the heyday of absolutism in Western European countries occurred in the 17th-18th centuries, and in Russia the absolute monarchy existed until the 20th century.
Under absolutism, the state reaches the highest degree of centralization, an extensive bureaucratic apparatus, a standing army and police are created; The activities of class representation bodies, as a rule, continue.
The social support of absolutism is the nobility. Magnificent and sophisticated palace etiquette served to exalt the person of the sovereign. At the first stage, absolutism was progressive in nature: it united the state under uniform laws and eliminated feudal fragmentation. The absolute monarchy was characterized by a policy of protectionism and mercantilism, which promoted the development of the national economy, trade and industry. The military power of the state is strengthened to enable it to wage wars of conquest. These are the features of an absolute monarchy common to all countries.
But in each country, the features of absolutism were determined by the balance of power between the nobility and the bourgeoisie.
Absolutism in Russia
In Russia, the system of power created by Peter I is usually called absolutism. You can read about the absolutism of Peter I on our website:. And although the heyday of absolutism as a type of state power in Russia occurred in the 18th century, the prerequisites for its formation appeared during the reign of Ivan the Terrible (second half of the 16th century), and its fall - in 1917.
P. Delaroche “Portrait of Peter I”
Ivan the Terrible showed traits of autocracy. He wrote to Andrei Kurbsky: “The sovereign commands that his will be done by God to his guilty servants,” “we are free to favor our slaves, but we are free to execute.” Russian statehood during the time of Ivan the Terrible had many of the features of the system of eastern despotism. Despotism- the possibility of arbitrariness of the highest bearer of power, not limited by any laws and relying directly on force. A person's place in society was determined not by nobility and wealth, but by proximity to the monarch. Social status and wealth came from power. Everyone was equal before the monarch, actually being in a slave state.
But there were also objective prerequisites for this: the historical and geographical conditions of the country, a short agricultural cycle, risky farming, low surplus product. Under these conditions, a rigid mechanism was created for the forced withdrawal of that share of the total surplus product that went to the needs of the state itself - this is one of the determining factors in the tradition of despotic power.
Bank of Russia coin “Historical Series”: “Window to Europe. Acts of Peter I"
Another factor is the presence of collective land ownership of the community. The eastern coloring of state power was stimulated not by objective, but by subjective reasons, the main of which was the Horde yoke. The government remained weak and infinitely cruel.
The formation of absolutism in Russia began already in the middle of the 17th century, during the reign of Tsar Alexei Mikhailovich:
- Zemsky Sobors were convened less frequently;
- the role of the boyar Duma decreased and the importance of the Middle Duma and the administrative bureaucracy (secretaries and clerks) increased;
- the basic principle of feudal service (localism) was becoming obsolete; the number of soldier and regiment regiments of the foreign system, the harbingers of the regular army, increased;
- the role of secular culture increased;
- By joining the anti-Turkish coalition, Russia tried to enter the system of European states.
In Europe, the classical forms of absolute monarchy arose during a period of relative “balance” between the forces of the bourgeoisie and the nobility. This was not the case in Russia: capitalism and the bourgeoisie had not yet formed. That is why Russian absolutism was different from Western absolutism. Having support primarily in the nobility, like the European, in social terms it represented dictatorship of the serf nobility. The protection of the feudal-serf system was an important task of the state at this stage, although at the same time vital national tasks were also being solved: overcoming backwardness and creating security for the state. This required the mobilization of all material and spiritual resources, total control over his subjects. Therefore, in Russia, the absolutist regime seemed to stand above society and forced all classes to serve itself, micromanaging all manifestations of public life. Peter's reforms were carried out on a large scale and harshly. They explain this solely by the peculiarity of the emperor’s character, but often do not take into account the fact that it was impossible to carry them out in any other way in a given country and at a given time. Resistance to Peter's reforms was observed in various circles of society, including among part of the clergy and boyars, who rallied around Peter's son from his first wife (E. Lopukhina), Tsarevich Alexei. The prince's true plans have not yet been clarified. There is an opinion that he was not opposed to reforms in general, but intended to implement them in a more evolutionary way, without breaking old traditions. Due to disagreements with his father, he was forced to flee abroad, but in 1717 he was returned to Russia and executed after an investigation.
In connection with the case of Tsarevich Alexei in 1722, Peter announced a decree on the succession to the throne, which gave the tsar the right to appoint a successor at his own discretion.
Forced shaving of beards. Lubok of the 18th century
But why was there such resistance? Everything new was imposed by harsh methods: the duties of the peasantry and townspeople increased, numerous emergency taxes and fees were introduced, tens of thousands of people died in the construction of roads, canals, fortresses, and cities. Fugitives, Old Believers, and opponents of reforms were persecuted. The state, with the help of a regular army, suppressed the unrest and uprisings of the people, which occurred mainly in the first half of the reign of Peter 1 (1698-1715).
One of the manifestations of Russian absolutism was the desire for complete regulation of all manifestations of society's activities.
In addition, the features of Russian absolutism were formed under the influence personal qualities rulers. The personality of Peter I was of great importance. The Tsar not only realized the crisis, but also completely rejected the old Moscow, traditional way of life. From childhood and adolescence, seeing the Streltsy riots, Peter carried a charge of hatred towards the boyars, Streltsy, and the old way of life, which became an important psychological stimulus in his activities. The trip abroad strengthened Peter's aversion to Russian traditional life. He considered the “old times” not only dangerous and hostile to him personally, but also a dead end for Russia. The Western model of life in all its diversity became for him the model by which he remade his country. Peter did not receive the Orthodox education traditional for Russian tsars, was completely illiterate, until the end of his life he did not know the rules of spelling and wrote many words according to the phonetic principle. The main thing is that Peter did not internalize the overall system of values inherent in traditional Russian culture. Peter was attracted by the typically Protestant model of existence in the real, pragmatic world of competition and personal success. Peter largely followed this model in his activities. He turned to the experience of France, Denmark, and especially Sweden. But foreign models could not always be adapted to Russian reality and Russian custom.
After Peter's reforms, Russia became the Russian Empire, which, with some changes, lasted for almost 200 years.
After PeterI
Absolutism continued to strengthen, finding widespread support among the nobility. 60-80 years of the XVIII century. passed under the sign of “enlightened absolutism” of Catherine II. Under it, the “geographical argument” becomes popular, justifying autocracy as the only acceptable form of government for a country of the size of Russia. She managed to adapt the ideas of the Enlightenment to the conditions of Russia. She created the “Order of the Commission on the creation of a new Code.” It was written by the empress herself in 1764-1766, but was a talented compilation of the works of jurists and philosophers of the 18th century. Thanks to the Order, the legal regulation of autocracy was implemented in Russia.
D. Levitsky “Catherine II - legislator in the Temple of Justice”
The main task of Catherine II was the development of a set of legal norms that substantiated the fact that the monarch is “the source of all state power.” The idea of enlightening people in general, the idea of progress as a movement from savagery to civilization turned into the idea of educating a “new breed of people”, enlightening society, subjects of an enlightened monarch.
Catherine believed that the law was not written for the monarch. The only limitation on his power can be his own high moral qualities and education. An enlightened monarch cannot act like an uncouth tyrant or a capricious despot.
Catherine II sought to combine the idea of autocracy with the idea of class. By the time of Catherine's reign, the process of formation of estates was underway. To create a class system in Russia, to connect it with autocracy - this was the task Catherine set herself at the beginning of her reign. These ideas were supposed to be realized with the help of a single lever - the state.
Order of Catherine II
But in Catherine’s time, as the empire expanded to the west and south, this policy became imperial: it reflected a stable complex of imperial ideas of domination over other peoples. This is not about politics directed towards the outside world, but about politics within a multinational empire. Its essence is three principles: Russification, centralization and unification, as well as the forced spread of Orthodoxy.
All of Russia received a unified system of local government, built on the basis of strict centralism and bureaucratization. With great religious tolerance, Orthodoxy was the state religion.
In the first half of the nineteenth century. Russian absolutism was distinguished by frequent changes in internal political courses, parallelism in the implementation of conservative and liberal measures, frequent reorganizations of various parts of the state apparatus, and the legal justification of the serfdom. By the mid-40s of the 19th century. It turned out that these attempts were ineffective. Tsarism, having carried out reforms in the 60-70s. XIX century extended its existence. In post-reform times, absolutism retained many of the features of the organization and activities of the state apparatus of the serfdom era. The changes affected mainly the composition of the bureaucracy.
Absolutism in Russia was eliminated on March 2, 1918 as a result of the February Revolution and the abdication of Nicholas II.
By the way…
Currently, there are only five states left in the world whose form of government can be called an absolute monarchy: Vatican City, Brunei, Saudi Arabia, Oman, Qatar. In them, power rests undividedly with the monarch.
The United Arab Emirates is a federal state consisting of seven emirates - absolute monarchies.
Introduction
In this work we will talk about absolutism in France and, in general, about the features of absolutism. We will look at the establishment, rise and fall of absolutism in France using the example of the reigns of Louis XIV, Louis XI and Henry IV and their successors. Let's see which sections of the population were the social support of absolutism and supported it, and with whom it fought during the process of its formation. We will also look at several dynastic wars in which France participated and religious wars in France. During this period, the culture and art of France developed well, France gave the world many wonderful writers, such as Moliere, Racine, La Fontaine, Boileau, Madame de Sevigne, so this side of the era of absolutism cannot be ignored.
The relevance of this work, in my opinion, lies in the fact that during this period France turned into one of the most powerful, strong European powers of the 16th - 18th centuries.
The purpose of this work is to consider successively three stages of absolutism in France: formation, heyday, decline and, based on the analysis of these periods, to conclude what role the era of absolutism played in the history of France. In order to get a more complete picture of what is happening, we will consider the institutions of an absolute monarchy such as: the regular army, the bureaucracy, permanent taxes, etc.
Based on this, we will have several research tasks:
define what absolutism is and consider the features of its development in different countries, especially in France;
Consider:
the formation of absolutist institutions in France;
consider the establishment of absolutism in France;
consider French foreign policy before Louis XIV;
analyze the period of the reign of Louis XIV in France, the foreign policy of the state under him;
And finally
consider the decline of absolutism in France.
When writing this work, historical-comparative, historical-genetic and historical-descriptive methods were used.
My personal interest in this work is that I am interested in France, and I believe that the era of absolutism is one of the most important pages in its history.
absolutism france louis
The concept and features of absolutism
What is absolutism and what are its features?
What is absolutism? Absolutism in the political sense is a form of government in which the constitution cannot limit the top of the government. Absolutism was the dominant form of government in European states throughout the 17th and 18th centuries, supported by theologians who attributed divine origin to the supreme power, and by Roman jurists who recognized the absolute power of the ancient Roman emperors in the sovereigns. This state form reached the apogee of its development under the French king Louis XIV; he is credited with the phrase “L"Etat c"est moi" (the state is me) Deschodt E., Louis XIV p. 49. .
Now the question arises, what then is an absolute monarchy? The answer can be found in the very definition of absolutism. An absolute monarchy is a government system in which the head of state enjoys unlimited power. More precisely, we can say that an absolute monarchy is a type of monarchy in which the entirety of state (legislative, executive, judicial), and sometimes spiritual (religious) power is legally and actually in the hands of the monarch.
What features does absolutism have? Under absolutism, the state reaches the highest degree of centralization, a strong bureaucratic apparatus, a standing army and police are created. Also, the peculiarities of absolutism include the fact that under it the activities of class representative bodies, as a rule, cease.
Let us consider the national characteristics of French absolutism:
1) the high role of the state bureaucracy, which emerged from the nobility;
2) active protectionist policies, especially during the reigns of Louis XI, Francis I, Henry IV, Louis XIII and his Cardinal Richelieu;
3) active expansionist foreign policy as a sphere of national interests (participation in the Italian Wars, the Thirty Years' War);
4) a departure from confession-oriented policies as the religious-civil conflict smoothes out.
One should also add to the national characteristics that in France there was one language, one faith - Catholicism, one tax system, one law, one army - the royal one, not the feudal lords. We wrote this based on the opinions of Brockhaus and Efron.
To highlight the features of absolutism in France, a comparative analysis can be carried out with some other countries. For example, let's compare absolutism in France and absolutism in another famous European state - England. In England, absolute monarchy was established, as in many other countries, during the period of the decline of feudalism. During the reign of the Tudor dynasty (1485-1603), royal power in England strengthened significantly and became absolute. Already the first king of this dynasty, Henry II (1485-1590), waged a merciless fight against the remnants of the feudal nobility. The founder of English absolutism was Henry II.
The absolute monarchy in England had features that were not characteristic of France. Thanks to these features, absolutism in England is often called “unfinished.” The incompleteness lies in the fact that although England had a strong royal power, parliament continued to exist. The inconsistency of this phenomenon is evident from the fact that parliament had the right to distribute taxes, but at the same time, the king’s decrees were in no way inferior to parliamentary laws in terms of power. Also in England, a new nobility was formed, making their farms capitalist. Vast fields were used as pastures; hundreds of sheep were raised on one property, wool was processed, and later trade was carried out, even for export. The split in the feudal classes led to civil wars (the Scarlet and White Roses). Representatives of the new capitalist society were interested in a strong central government, which allowed them to develop production, and therefore the country's economy. Thanks to its powerful economy, England builds powerful fleets and becomes the largest colonialist. Monarchs in England were able to seize church lands and make them the property of the state, and the highest church body, the High Commission, was formed under the control of the king.
As a result, we can briefly formulate the features of absolutism in England:
along with a strong monarchy, parliament continued to exist in England;
local self-government is preserved;
lack of a permanent large army.
The political system of England during the period of absolutism:
1) king - real power was concentrated in his hands;
2) central authorities and management:
The Privy Council - the Star Chamber - performed the functions of censor and supervision over the correctness of verdicts by the jury and the chamber of petitions;
parliament - approved the amount of taxes and fees;
The High Commission fought against opponents of the reformed church, investigated cases related to violations of laws and the supremacy of royal power in church affairs.
We were able to write this based on Ryzhov’s opinion. You can see what absolutism was like in Russia. The period when the form of government in Russia was an absolute monarchy is dated differently by different sources. A more common option is the beginning of the 18th - beginning of the 20th century. Or from the reforms of Peter I, when the Boyar Duma was abolished and power was concentrated in the hands of the autocrat, from the release of the “Manifesto on the Improvement of State Order” on October 17, 1905, and the subsequent convening of parliament. Or, that period of the country that was between an estate-representative monarchy (classic sign - the Boyar Duma) and a parliamentary monarchy (sign - the convening of parliament). The head of the state was the king. The monarch had unlimited power and was the only source of law. The government of the country was in his hands. The system of power that was created under Peter 1 is often called absolutism. Absolutism in Russia differs from absolutism in Europe in that in Russia the bourgeoisie and capitalism have not yet been formed. Absolutism in Russia had support among the nobility. We can say that absolutism in social terms represented the dictatorship of the feudal nobility. In this regard, we can conclude that one of the main tasks of the autocracy was to protect the feudal-serf system. However, absolutism also solved vitally important national problems, primarily overcoming backwardness and creating guarantees of the country's security. In order to accomplish this task, it was necessary to include all the material and spiritual resources of the state and establish complete control over its subjects. Therefore, one of the main differences between Russian absolutism and European absolutism, and therefore absolutism in France, which was considered classical absolutism. Therefore, if European absolutism provided for the autonomy of society from power, then in Russia the absolutist regime seemed to stand on society and forced all classes to serve itself.
As a result, we can say that, as in many European countries, absolutism existed in France throughout the 17th and 18th centuries. But in France it had its own characteristics and it makes sense to emphasize that absolutism reached the apogee of its development precisely in France during the reign of King Louis XIV, to whom the words “the state is me” belong. Also E. Deschodt, Louis XIV p. 49 it should be added that absolutism in France is considered classical.
The will of the monarch in a formal sense is above the law.
The royal authority controls all provinces of the state.
The monarch has the right to uncontrollably issue binding laws and decrees.
Seigneurial courts were abolished and replaced by royal courts both in the center and locally.
Elimination of city autonomy.
The Crown has uncontrolled power to impose taxes on the population.
Mercenary army.
During the period of absolutism, the activities of the states general ceased. Secretaries of state - ministers - began to play the main role in the central apparatus. The bureaucracy has become stronger. They become the conductor of government decisions at the local level quartermasters who were appointed by the central government. A major role in management was played by the Comptroller General of Finance, who directed not only economic policy, but also often controlled the activities of the administration.
Sources of law in feudal France
Sources of law of feudal France:
customs (kutyums);
norms of Roman law;
norms of canon law;
norms of city law (considered as a kind of common law);
legislative acts of kings establishing, ordinances, edicts, orders, declarations, etc.);
judicial practice of parliaments.
Customs
The most important source of law was custom. By the 10th century In France, the Salic truth and other barbaric customs, which were applied on a personal basis, practically ceased to operate. They were replaced in conditions of feudal fragmentation by territorial legal customs (kutyums) individual regions, seigneuries and even communities.
Customs developed orally(hence the north of France was called the “country of unwritten law”); they were formed on the basis of customs recognized from generation to generation in a certain territory, local or regional scale. The power and authority of customary law was determined by the fact that it reflected real needs territorial collectives of feudal society arose, as a rule, from a compromise and did not depend entirely on the arbitrariness of state power. Therefore, compliance with kutyums in most cases was voluntary, although they acquired mandatory force, supported primarily by the judiciary.
For customs to be recognized in courts, it was necessary that they had been known since “time immemorial”, i.e. at least 40 years old. Since the 12th century. individual kutyums began to be written down, and by the middle of the 13th century. In Normandy, a relatively complete collection of customary law was compiled - the Great Kutyum of Normandy, which was used in judicial practice. From this time on, a number of private records of local customary law appeared, made by royal judges and legalists.
Judicial practice of the parliaments of feudal France
An additional and relatively less significant source of French medieval law was judicial practice of parliaments, especially the Parisian Parliament. On many issues, in particular those related to the use of kutyums, parliamentary decisions made in individual cases acquired normative and binding force.
Legislative acts of the kings of feudal France
As royal power strengthens, law takes an increasingly important place among other sources of law. legislation of kings:
declarations, etc.
establishments;
ordinances;
Property rights, law of obligations of feudal France
Feudal ownership of land
The feudal basis of French law was most clearly manifested in the fact that it secured the exclusive privileges of the nobility and clergy on land. By the 11th century. Free peasant ownership of land completely disappears, as well as other forms of allodial ownership that persisted longer in the south of the country. The feud is established as the main and practically the only form of land ownership. As a result of the development of the process of subinfeodation, a rule emerges that every land holder must have a lord according to the principle “there is no land without a lord.” This rule, which arose initially in the north, by the 13th century. distributed throughout France. As the king's power increased, legists and royal judges began to assume that all lands in the country were held in the name of the king. Another purely feudal feature of land ownership in France was its split. As a rule, land was not in the unlimited ownership of one person, but acted as the property of two or more feudal lords belonging to different levels of the class ladder. Clearly separating the powers of the supreme and direct owner of the land, the law consolidated the hierarchical structure of feudal land ownership.
The senor began to be recognized "direct ownership", and for the vassal - "useful property right". This meant that the vassal, who directly used his privileges as the owner of the land, was assigned the right to exploit the peasants by collecting various exactions . The lord, acting as the supreme owner of the land, retained certain administrative and judicial rights and control over the disposal of the transferred plot. So, subinfeodation, i.e. the transfer of part of the feud to vassals was required until the 11th century. consent of the lord. Later, it could be carried out by the vassal independently, but subject to the restrictions provided for in common law.
The rights of the land owner in terms of real estate were considered not as individual, but as family-tribal. Therefore, the disposal of ancestral lands was placed under the control of relatives. Their consent when selling such lands was required until the 13th century. Later, this requirement was relaxed, but relatives retained the right to redeem family property (the right of retract) for one year and one day after its sale. If the head of the family died without leaving children, the family property was returned along the line through which it entered the family.
A special design of land rights was developed in a country of customary law, where the Kutyums did not know the right of ownership of land as such, but recognized special ownership rights - sezina, land holding, dependent on the lord, but recognized by customary law and protected as property in court. The rights of the land holder took on a stable character as a result of the long-standing possession of the land plot.
The uniqueness of the right of feudal ownership of land also lay in the fact that it wasinextricably linked with the ownership rights of peasants. These rights were limited but permanent. Initially, the peasant could not alienate his land plot without the consent of the lord, but the latter also could not arbitrarily drive even a personally dependent serf off the land. From the 13th century the main form of peasant holding of land becomes censorship. The censitor is freed from personal duties and receives greater freedom to dispose of the land. However, the peasants' right to land was still considered as a derivative of the lord's right of land ownership, and therefore the peasant economy was burdened with various feudal exactions.
From the 16th century the process of initial accumulation of capital begins to significantly influence the fate of communal lands. The French nobility actively pursued a policy of theft (through purchase) of communal lands. The royal power initially, for fiscal reasons, prevented the seizure of communal lands, but under Louis XIV, an edict of “triage” was issued, which allowed the nobles, subject to the payment of the appropriate payment to the treasury, to seize a third of the land belonging to the peasant community. In fact, 2/3, and sometimes more, of communal lands were cut off.
Only in the cities did land ownership, concentrated mainly in the hands of the patrician-burgher elite, under the influence of the structures of Roman law, in its legal regime in some respects approach unlimited private property.
Law of obligations of feudal France
Main types of contracts:
loan.
purchase and sale;
donations;
hiring;
Purchase and sale. The feudal nature of law was manifested even in such an agreement as purchase and sale. In the early period, the sale of things, especially real estate, was carried out in a solemn form, which was supposed to ensure the stability of the contract. From the 12th century, especially in the south of the country, where the influence of Roman law was already felt, important sales transactions began to be drawn up in writing, and subsequently approved by notaries. The text of such transactions often appeared in the form of uniform formulas.
Giving. In the X-XI centuries, when the purchase and sale of property was still a relatively rare phenomenon and was not combined with ideas about feudal honor, gift agreement
Hiring and rent. In the XVI-XVIII centuries. many nobles abandon their farms, give up their own ploughing, hand out the land in parts for rent for a fixed fee or part of the harvest. Such contracts were initially concluded for a year, but gradually the terms of their validity are extended (for one, two, etc., the life of the tenant) .
Loan Canon law prohibited the collection of interest, but since the largest lender in France at that time was the church, it also found workarounds for this prohibition.), which was not considered. In some cases, the debtor paid the creditor a predetermined amount (up to 25% of what he received in debt with interest. In other cases, he assumed a counter-obligation to pay the creditor a fixed annuity in the form of a certain part of the income. Over time, a “dead clause” began to be used more and more often in loan agreements.pledge ", in which the debtor mortgaged a land plot, and the income from it went to the creditor and was not counted towards the payment of the debt.
Criminal law, trial of feudal France
Criminal law of feudal France
In the IX-XI centuries. France largely continued to have a system of crime and punishment dating back to the early Middle Ages. A crime was considered as an action (private offense) affecting the interests of individuals, and punishments, which were not yet marked with the stamp of cruelty, were reduced primarily to compensation for harm caused to private individuals.
However, by the XI-XII centuries. the feudal features of criminal law are revealed quite fully. Crime ceases to be a private matter, but acts as a “violation of the peace,” i.e. established feudal law and order. Such qualities of criminal law as criminal liability without guilt, cruelty of punishments, uncertainty are being developed corpus delicti . If even among the feudal lords themselves the issue of crimes and punishments was considered in the “court of equals,” then in relation to the subject peasant population, the lord in criminal cases was essentially both a legislator and a judge. He could apply criminal repression against peasants for a variety of manifestations of disobedience, including failure to fulfill seignorial duties.
With the gradual centralization of the state and the strengthening of royal power in the XIII-XV centuries. Seigneurial jurisdiction is weakened and the role of the legislation of kings in the development of criminal law, which is increasingly becoming repressive, increases. The range of cases that are considered serious crimes is expanding and are included in the category of so-called “royal cases” (counterfeiting, murder, rape, arson, etc.). Kings with their legislation begin to actively intervene in the religious sphere, supplementing the norms of canon law. Thus, back in 1268, Louis IX issued an ordinance providing for special punishment for blasphemy. A number of new ones are appearing corpus delicti associated with the concept of lese majeste. The final disappearance of the idea of crime as a “private matter” was facilitated by the Great Ordinance of March 1357, which prohibited the replacement of punishment with monetary compensation. At the request of the estates, the king was deprived of the right to pardon persons who had committed serious crimes.
Until the revolution of 1789, the criminal liability of a person was directly linked to his class status. All ideas about legality in cases of suppression of urban and peasant uprisings, when the distinction between judicial and extrajudicial reprisals finally disappeared.
In medieval French criminal law it was allowed objective imputation, i.e. criminal liability without guilt. Thus, royal laws for some political crimes provided for collective liability of members of city corporations, as well as members of the offender’s family, including his children. Legislation and customs in principle knew the concept of insanity, i.e. the inability of a person, due to a mental disorder, to realize the meaning of his actions. But for a number of crimes, including lese majeste, the insane and minors were prosecuted.
During the period of absolutism, legislation particularly detailscorpus delicti, aimedagainst the king, the French state and the Catholic Church. In this regard, the range of actions that fall under the concept of “lese majeste” is significantly expanding. Attempts on the life of the king or members of his family and conspiracy against the state were considered the most serious. In the 17th century under Richelieu, a “second level” of crimes was created, considered as “lese majeste”. This is a conspiracy against the king's ministers, commanders of the royal troops, provincial governors and other high royal officials, treason in war, desertion, espionage, building fortresses without royal permission, etc.
Religious crimes were also varied: blasphemy, blasphemy and sacrilege, witchcraft, heresy, etc. The concept of “heresy,” like the concepts of other religious crimes, was particularly vague and changed at different stages of the development of the French state.
In connection with the process of initial accumulation of capital and the massive ruin of the peasantry, royal orders provided for special measures of criminal repression against vagabonds, beggars and the unemployed, with the goal of creating a wage labor system.
Just like crimes, punishments were not clearly defined in royal legislation; their application largely depended on the discretion of the court and on class status accused . The purpose of punishment was retribution and intimidation. Sentences were given carried out publicly, so that the suffering of the convicted person would cause fear in all those present. The death penalty was used in various forms: tearing to pieces by horses, quartering, burning, etc. Self-mutilation and corporal punishment were numerous: cutting out the tongue, cutting off limbs, tormenting with hot tongs, etc. Imprisonment, which in an earlier period had been administered mainly by ecclesiastical courts, also became widely used. Confiscation of property was also used as a primary and additional punishment, which was beneficial to the royal treasury when it came to the large fortunes of the bourgeoisie.
In French criminal law, such a specifically medieval feature as a clear discrepancy between the severity of the punishment and the nature of the crime was clearly manifested. It was aggravated by the arbitrariness of the royal judges, who especially abused the confiscation of property, which caused great discontent among the French bourgeoisie, whose leading ideologists subjected them in the 18th century. devastating criticism of the entire system of pre-revolutionary criminal law.
Trial of feudal France
Until the end of the 12th century. the trial, as it had previously been among the Franks, retained a mainly accusatory character. A judicial duel, which was carried out with the mutual consent of the parties or in the case where one of them accused the enemy of lying, is becoming widespread. Legal customs regulated in detail the procedure for a judicial duel.
When considering cases of peasants in seigneurial courts, along with traditional evidence, back in the 11th century. Torture began to be used, and the process lost its former adversarial character. By this time wanted(inquisition) form of the process, also called Roman Catholic, was established in church courts, and from the 13th century. gradually introduced into the courts of the king and large feudal lords. Until the 15th century. the investigative and accusatory processes existed, as it were, in parallel, but the latter gradually began to fall out of use due to the abolition of important traditional types of evidence (“divine judgment”) - ordeals and judicial combat. The final consolidation of the investigative process occurs with the establishment of absolutism at the beginning of the 16th century. It was during this period that the practice became widespread where, in order to imprison a person, all that was required was to write his name on a blank form of the royal warrant for arrest.
The first stage of the search process wasinquiry , i.e. collection of preliminary and secret information about the crime and the criminal. The court case was initiated on the basis of the accusation of the royal prosecutor, as well as denunciations and complaints, the content of which remained unknown to the accused.
Then the forensic investigator collected written evidence, interrogated witnesses and the accused, conducted confrontations . During the search process, the guilt of the accused was implied, so the testimony of one witness was enough to warrant torture. Its goal was to extract the confession of the accused, which was considered the “queen of evidence.” The trial itself took place in a closed session, and decisive importance was attached to the materials collected during the investigation. Complete evidence of the guilt of the accused was, in addition to his own confession, the testimony of two “credible” witnesses, letters from the accused himself, reports drawn up at the crime scene, etc. Although the ordinance of 1670 provided for the division of evidence into exculpatory and accusatory, the court focused on the latter. If there was insufficient incriminating evidence, the judge could order the torture to be repeated.
Until the 13th century. court verdicts were considered final and were not subject to appeal. A person dissatisfied with the decision of the judges could challenge them to a judicial duel and fight with each of them successively. An appeal to the court of a higher overlord was possible only in the event of an “error of law.”
From the 13th century The right to appeal any case from the seigneurial court to the royal court is gradually being recognized. In turn, the royal courts allowed treatment of appeal to a higher authority. The Paris Parliament eventually becomes the highest court of appeal in civil and criminal cases. The presence of a large number of appellate instances, especially in the pre-revolutionary period, made
The Norman conquest of England and its influence on the social and political system. Reforms of Henry II.
The special geographical location of the British Isles largely determined the peculiarities and originality of the emergence and development of the state and law of England. In the 3rd and 4th centuries, the British Isles were invaded by tribes of the Angles, Saxons and Judobes. In the 5th and 6th centuries, the first principalities of these peoples were formed, which still had clear signs of a state. Only towards the end of the 7th century in some principalities, due to the growth of large land ownership and social differentiation, statehood was formed. The number of large landowners, called Glafords , under whose power is the dependent peasantry. Within the feudal class, 2 groups are formed:
Earls - large landowners.
tens - small, medium-sized landowners and military service nobility.
In the 10th and 11th centuries, large landowners were granted immunity privileges. In the 9th century, the Anglo-Saxon principalities were united. At the head of the state was the king, endowed with supreme military and judicial power. In matters of legislation and administration, he relied on the council of the nobility, which was called whitanohemoth , which included the family aristocracy. Local management was carried out aldermen - representatives of landowners of the district. The local administration was also represented sheriffs - officials appointed by the king. In 1066 England was conquered by the Norman Duke William. William, having killed the English king, becomes king. The Norman Conquest had a profound impact on the political development of England. England, in which tendencies towards fragmentation are intensifying, is turning into a united, centralized state with a strong monarchical power. Those who refused to obey the new king were expelled and their lands were confiscated. As a result, the king became the actual owner of all the land. The king distributed part of the land to his entourage, and when distributing land, he avoided concentrating possessions in one place. Large feudal lords had dozens of estates, but in different counties. This was the result of Wilhelm’s conscious policy, since this objectively created obstacles to the transformation of feudal lords into independent rulers. Thus, the royal power had sovereignty over the entire country. The new feudal lords owed their landownership directly to the king, so their vassal relationships were more durable than on the continent.
In 1086, William took the oath of allegiance to all Lennikov (landowners) of the country, regardless of whose immediate vassals they were. As a result, in England the principle is being implemented: “The vassal of my vassal is my vassal,” that is, the vassal system has acquired a centralized character.
In 1086, the Domesday Book was compiled - it was an inventory of all the land and property of the population of England in order to streamline all taxpayers.
Peasants, even personally free ones, were now perceived as belonging to a certain estate, which created the conditions for their enslavement. Thus, the layer of peasants dependent only on land was not numerous. State administration began to be built according to the Norman type. Instead of whitanohemoth was created Royal Curia , which included the king’s relatives, his associates, senior officials and prelates (highest spiritual ranks) of the church.
The Curia was in charge of various branches of government. The financial department occupied an important place in it - Accounts Chamber . Under William's sons, the strengthening of central power continues. A royal judicial body was created - Court of Queen's Bench . The Accounts Chamber began to be called Chessboard Chamber . Locally, the counties were governed by sheriffs - royal servants who carried out administrative, judicial and military functions. At the head of the lowest administrative unit, the hundred, was Bailiff .
