On the Study of the Financial Status of Russian Monasteries in the 16th-17th Centuries (Based on Actual Material). On the study of the financial status of Russian monasteries in the 16th-17th centuries (according to act material) Questions at the beginning of the paragraph

Cherkasova Marina Sergeevna

TO THE STUDY OF THE FINANCIAL STATUS OF RUSSIAN MONASTERIES IN THE XVI-XVII CENTURIES (according to the act material)

The land and financial problem occupied an important place in the relations between the Russian state and the church in the 16th-17th centuries. On the whole, there was a steady limitation of the growth of church and monastic land ownership and tax immunity of large corporate owners. In the monographs of S. M. Kashtanov, this process for the 15th-16th centuries was considered on an exhaustive source base, which consisted mainly of grants and decrees to monasteries 1. The author traced the stages of the restrictive-immune policy of the Russian state in the first half of the 16th century during the mass confirmations of grant letters to monasteries in 1505, 1534 and 1551). The most important measure of the government on the way to the abolition of tarkhans in the early 1580s was their massive revision of 1551. As S. M. Kashtanov found out, 262 letters were submitted for revision relating to Trinity-Sergiev, Kirillo-Belozersky, Moscow Simonov, Iosif-Volokolamsky, Ferapontov, Spaso-Prilutsky, Arsenyevo- and Kornilyevo-Komelsky, Spaso-Kamenny, Dionisiev Glushitsky, Alexander-Kushtsky, Mikhailo-Arkhangelsky Ustyug and Trinity-Gledensky monasteries, as well as Vazhsky, Dvinsky, Novgorod and many other monasteries. The "revision of the tarkhans" (tax exemptions of the church) in May 1551 consisted in the fact that the former letters of grant to the named monasteries were considered by the government of Ivan IV and signed with restrictions, which meant exemptions from their tax immunity. Two editions - a short one and a lengthy one - of the most restrictive formula were developed. The first included three components, reflecting the main state taxes for monasteries, - "including yam money and field services, and tamgas - then give them", the second contained a larger number of components - "including yam money and field services, and tamgas, and payback money, and washing, and food money"2.

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

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

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

We undertook a special study of the Stern Book of the Trinity-Sergius Monastery, the results of which reinforce the observations and conclusions of S. M. Kashtanov noted above about attracting Russian monasteries as early as 1548 to fulfill the main state taxes. The Trinity Stern Book was compiled in the early 1590s by reworking the earlier Stern Book, which arose in 1549-1551 under Abbot Serapion Kurtsev and under the direct influence of the decrees on this subject by Ivan IV and the Stoglavy Cathedral. The Stern Book contains an extensive list of the largest patrimonial complexes of the Sergius Monastery, with an indication of the salaries and salaries for each. If the first ones served as a total expression of the owner's income of a given village and were necessary to determine the size of funeral fodder (large, medium or smaller, respectively, from 100, 70, 50 vodkas), then the latter, it seems, reflected the taxation of the largest corporate owner in the country. This indicates the involvement of the rural and urban population of the Trinity in 1549-1551 in the payment of state taxes and the serving of duties.

Information about salaries in the Trinity Kormovaya Book coincides with scribe documentation of the 20-60s of the 16th century (hundreds of extracts for Bezhetsk, Uglich, Rostov, Maloyaroslavets, Kostroma, Moscow counties) and a number of decree letters. This circumstance makes it possible to bring together the information of these independent sources in time. Apparently, the references in the Stern Book to "written books" are also not accidental, by which, following S. M. Kashtanov and L. A. Kirichenko4, one can understand scribe books. In addition, for a number of complexes named in the Feed Book with sosh salaries, there are letters of commendation and decrees on the obligation of the population to pay "pits", to perform "city affairs" and "passing service" (the villages of Nakhabino and Karaulovo of the Moscow district, the villages of Popovskoe and Lavrentievskoe Poshekhonsky Uyezd, Filisova Slobidka, Vladimir Uyezd)5. And although we do not know the scribe's descriptions of the second quarter of the 16th century from them, the noted coincidence may testify in favor of the opinion that the salaries of the Stern Book reflect the attraction of these complexes to the main state taxes and duties.

Thus, by the end of the 40s - the beginning of the 50s of the 16th century, the government needed a detailed systematization of the salaries of the largest monastery in the country, and the Trinity Spiritual Corporation itself had to know how many salary units (cox) it would have to pay state taxes. This obligation was recorded in the general letter of commendation of Ivan IV addressed to the Trinity hegumen Serapion Kurtsev dated September 2, 1550. The monastery was supposed to pay "pit money" and perform "passing service", but it could do it itself, without the intervention of government agents on the ground6.

This right granted in 1550 to the Trinity Monastery in the form of an exclusive privilege in the future (1550-1570s) will be extended to a greater number of monasteries. For example, the Kirillo-Belozersky Monastery, according to a number of letters of 1555-1556 and 1564, began to collect and pay taxes to the Great Parish in Moscow7. In 1576, Spaso-Evfimiev and the Vladimir Nativity Monastery, the Bishop of Suzdal, received the right to pay pit money to Moscow themselves. In a series of decree letters to the Kirillo-Belozersky Monastery of 1573-1574, we are talking about its right to collect state taxes from its population (yamsky, conspicuous money, for city, serif and yamchuzhny business and field people), moreover, "from the living, and not from empty"9.

Since the 1570s, the division of "living" and "empty" arable land was not accidental. It took into account the severe economic crisis in the country that began in the late 1560s. For the Trinity-Sergius Monastery in 1569-1571, there was a general charter on independent collection and payment of taxes ("in Moscow, and others - in Sloboda") by a corporation from a "living" and non-correction of taxes and duties from an "empty". This letter was issued in 1569 after the execution of the specific prince Vladimir Andreevich Staritsky, and in May 1571 burned down in Moscow during the invasion of the Crimean Khan Devlet Giray. It is mentioned in Ivan IV's letter of commendation dated March 20, 1572, which allowed the Troitsk authorities to pay "tribute and a staff in Moscow and Sloboda" from "living" in the Gorokhovetsky district"10. A year earlier, two tsar's charters of similar content were issued: on March 17 - for the entire Trinity patrimony, and on October 12 - for 18 villages near Moscow, devastated during the Devlet Giray raid and therefore freed for three years (until September 1, 1574) in general from all state payments and duties 11 .

Despite the growing desolation of the country, the state in the 1570s continued the policy of taxing the monasteries. Even before the official conciliar act of July 20, 1584, which abolished tarkhans 12, spiritual corporations were involved in paying taxes. According to the income and expense books of the Joseph-Volokolamsk Monastery of the 1570s, E. I. Kolycheva provided information about the payment of "staves", money for "Novgorod", "Pskov", "Tver", "Staritsky" carts, "to help for sovereign's bread", "danish money"13. The researcher noted that by introducing new requisitions that were not indicated in the previous charters of monasteries, the government was gradually preparing the abolition of tarkhans. Already in 1581/82, according to E. I. Kolycheva and B. N. Florya, the Joseph-Volokolamsky, Kirillo-Belozersky, Assumption Tikhvin monasteries systematically paid state taxes. E. I. Kolycheva associated with such payment the appearance of tax books of the Joseph-Volokolamsk Monastery in 1581/82-1590 and on their basis found that in the period under review the growth of state payments was 4 times ahead of the growth of feudal rent in the Volokolamsk Monastery14. Table 1 below shows information from the "payment replies" of a number of monasteries (Ryazan Voskresensky Terekhov, Novgorod Nikolo-Vyazhitsky, Pereyaslavsky Fedorovsky, Kostroma Ipatiev, Vologda Spaso-Prilutsky) for 1582-1616; printed in the "Acts of legal". These replies are interesting in two ways: firstly, they indicate the very nomenclature of state payments for monasteries (yamsky, turning, polonyanichny, bridge money, "for the governor's feed", "for every barnyard income", etc.). Secondly, all replies testify to the payment of these taxes by the representatives of the monastery administration themselves (treasurer, solicitors, servants, clerks). This means that at the end of the 16th - beginning of the 17th century, many monasteries themselves collected state taxes (along with the property rent) from their population and delivered them to Moscow (to the Great Parish or to Chet).

There are several references to payment and seasoning books of 1581/82 for the Trinity-Sergius Monastery (these books even survived for Derevskaya Pyatina), as well as for Dmitrovsky and Pereyaslavsky districts 15. In the late 70s - early 80s of the 16th century, legal The foundations of the financial status of the Trinity Monastery were expressed in the last general charter granted to him by Ivan IV on April 28, 1578, confirmed by Tsar Fedor Ivanovich on May 3, 158416. The monastery was obliged to pay taxes from the "living" person, but he did it himself. The fact that the order of payment should have been exactly this is evidenced by its violations by money collectors, committed in a number of cities and counties in September 1584, as soon as the tarkhans were canceled. On September 25, 1584, decree letters of Tsar Fyodor Ivanovich were sent (to Tver, Yaroslavl, Poshekhonye, ​​Dmitrov, Rostov, Kostroma, Pleso, Kashin, Suzdal and other cities), forbidding local financial authorities to enter the Troitsk possessions. The monastery was again confirmed its right "to pay all our income to our treasury ourselves"17.

Further study of the problem of the financial status of Russian monasteries, the nomenclature and the very mechanism for paying state taxes by them can be built, in addition to acts, on a more representative source base - these are scribe books and economic documentation of the spiritual corporations themselves. On the eve of the gross revision of all Troitsk estates in 1592-1594, local (in some counties) descriptions of the monastery's possessions were carried out in 1584-1589, after the abolition of tarkhans. A scribe book for the Moscow district of 1584-1586 has come down to us (scribes - T. Khlopov "with comrades"), a scribe book for the Novotorzhsky district of 1587/88 (scribe - Prince M. Shcherbaty)18. According to references, several more scribe books of the 1580s of the Troitsk lands are known: in Staritsky district in 1586/87 (scribes - E. Stary and S. Vasiliev), in Tverskoy district in 1586/87 and 1587/88 (scribes - A. Klobukov, A. Grigoriev, prince M. Shcherbaty) and in the Kashinsky district in 1590/91 (payer) "9. Some payment books of the Big Parish are mentioned in the Belozersky district (their year is unknown, but payment books were usually compiled on the basis of scribes)20. The quitrent records of the Nizhny Novgorod clerks D. Alyabyev and S. Sumarokov 1589-1593 and the Balakhna townsmen kissers of the same years are mentioned in the scribe books of the Trinity Monastery of 1593/94 for the Nizhny Novgorod and Balakhna districts2. The compilation of all the enumerated scribal, payment books, and "commissions" can be regarded as an important milestone in the preparation of a grandiose government description of the Trinity estates in 33 districts of Russia by twelve scribal commissions in 1592-1594.

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

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

There is no mass information about what kind of state taxes and in what amount were paid from the Troitsk plows in the 1570-1590s. According to the documentation of the Novgorod Nikolo-Vyazhitsky monastery, S. M. Kashtanov calculated the amount of state taxes on a plow in 1571: yam money and will accept - more than 14 rubles, city and security affairs - 1 ruble 13 altyn, money for bread and dues - 11 money, for clerks and zemstvo clerks - 7 altyn 4 money, for help to Yamsk hunters - 1 ruble, half a ruble and 5 altyn. In 1581/82 - 1583/84, S. M. Kashtanov cited the per diem salaries of state taxes for the Joseph-Volokolamsky Monastery: this money - 25 rubles, Polonyansky - 13 rubles 15 altyns, Yamsky - 10 rubles, fodder - 1 ruble 10 altyn25.

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

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

The 17th century inherited from the 16th century the gross inspection and mass signing of monastic letters of commendation carried out by the government. As mentioned above, in 1551 one such check made it possible to attract a wide range of monasteries to pay basic state taxes. A new revision of the tarkhans was launched in the summer of 1617 by the Order of the Grand Palace. From this department, an order was sent to the governors signed by the clerk Patrikey Nasonov. They were instructed to take from the archimandrites, abbots and builders of local monasteries their old and new granted tarkhan letters. Documents were confiscated both from the clerks of the monastic villages and from the religious corporations themselves28. The fact that the Trinity-Sergius Monastery really submitted a set of its letters of commendation for government verification is mentioned in the right letter dated November 30, 1618, published and studied by V. I. Koretsky. The reason for her extradition was the robbery by thieves near the village of Cherkizovo on the way from Moscow to the monastery servant Karp Yudin, who on August 21, 1618 was carrying a box with grand ducal and royal letters of commendation29. Among them was the famous forged letter of the Grand Duke Dmitry Ivanovich Donskoy "on taxes and trade duties, and not convicted of kissing the cross."

According to S. B. Veselovsky, a specially created Investigative Order consisting of clerks Semyon Golovin, Ivan Pozdeev, Prokofy Pakhirev, Semyon Bredikhin was engaged in reviewing and signing monastic documents. During the years 1618-1629, some monasteries were issued several new general tarkhan letters of commendation, and their previous letters were also confirmed. In his early work devoted to this revision, S. B. Veselovsky revealed a wide range of spiritual corporations that received "new tarkhan" charters Astrakhansky, Ryazansky Solotchinsky, Suzdalsky Vasilyevsky, Nikolo-Vyazhitsky, Joseph-Volokolamsky, Kirillo-Belozersky, Trinity-Kalyazin, Tikhvinsky Uspensky, Solovetsky, Simonov, Pskovsky John the Baptist, Suzdalsky Intercession, Murom Blagoveshchensky, Kostroma Ipatiev, Nikolo-Ugreshsky, Spaso -Stone, Resurrection Derevyanitsky, Uglichsky Alekseevsky, Ladoga Vasilyevsky, Cherdynsky Theological, Klimetsky Nikolaevsky monasteries. Letters from other church institutions were also considered: - Kazan Archdiocese. Metropolia of Novgorod Ryazan and Murom Archdioceses, Suzdal Dioceses. Episcopacy of Kolomna and Kashira, Assumption Cathedral of the Moscow Kremlin. Attention was also paid to relatively modest deserts - Vazhskaya Vvedenskaya Uzdrenskaya, Kargopolskaya Vassianova Strokina, Vologda Antonyeva. Turning to the publication of act material in the "Complete Collection of Laws" and "Collection of Letters of the College of Economics", the list of S. B. Veselovsky can be supplemented by a group of important monasteries - Theological, Nikolo-Markushevsky Agapitov, Nikolo-Klonovsky, Shidrovsky Nikolo-Velikoretsky, Vologda Glushitsky Pokrovsky and Kornilyevo-Komelsky, as well as the Tikhvin Vvedensky and Rostov Belogostitsky monasteries31. It should be noted that in the charter of the Novgorod Metropolis of August 6, 1625, it was about such Novgorod monasteries as Yuryev, Antoniev, Dukhov, Nikolo-Vyazhitsky, Otensky, Klopov32.

S. B. Veselovsky considered the most significant in the "new code" of the 1620s to be the obligation to pay yamsky money and archery bread without exception. These taxes were introduced in 1613, and the government of Tsar Mikhail Fedorovich demanded their payment without exemptions. According to S. B. Veselovsky, the revision of monastic charters in the 1620s meant the actual abolition of the old church tax privileges33. Was not an exception in this process of unification of the tax immunity of spiritual feudal lords and. the largest of them is the Trinity-Sergius Monastery. General letters of commendation establishing the procedure for paying state taxes were issued to him in 1606, 1607 and 1617 (see table 2). In the 20s of the 17th century, he received two general letters of commendation - October 17, 1624 (signed by the clerk Prokofy Pakhirev) and April 11, 1625 (signed by the clerk Semyon Bredikhin). The last charter was later given official significance, since its list was included in the copy book No. 52734 (from the original certified with a red seal), and it had confirmations in 1657, 1680 and 1690 (see table 2). The letter of 1624 did not receive official significance, and there is no list from it in the copy book No. 527.

In the monastic inventories and copy books, the general letters of commendation of the 1620s were called "new tarkhan". For example, in the inventory of the Spaso-Kamenny Monastery of 1628, “a letter of the Sovereign Tsar and Grand Duke Mikhail Fedorovich of All Russia, a new tarkhan to the entire monastic patrimony, about all sorts of deeds”35 is mentioned. Simultaneously with the complained tarkhans, obedient letters could also be issued containing instructions to local authorities to comply with the norms of tarkhan acts. In the aforementioned inventory of the Spaso-Kamenny Monastery of 1628, after writing about the general "tarkhan new letter", we read: "yes, a letter obedient to the same letter." In one of the copies of the books of the Kirillo-Belozersky monastery (list of 1638/39) there is a "new tarkhan and non-conviction three-term and preferential letter attributed to the clerk Semyon Golovin"36. The general Trinity charters of 1617 and 1625 are also called Tarkhan in the copy book No. 52737. In the unsubscribe book of the Kornilyevo-Komel Monastery of 1657 published by Yu. 21 years old (attributed by clerk Semyon Golovin), the second, "large", 1628/29 (clerk Semyon Bredikhin), and both were authentic, since there is an indication of the sovereign's red seal hanging38. References to common tarkhan charters of the 1620s are also found in the scribe documentation of that time. For example, in the hundredth excerpt from the Vologda scribe book of S. G. Korobin and the clerk F. Stogov of 1628-1630, we find a reference to the sovereign’s charter of 1620/21, attributed to the clerk Semyon Golovin, in which, among other things, it was about customs rights Kornilyevo-Komelsky Monastery for auction in the village of Gryazivitsy (modern Gryazovets)39.

Thus, the "new code", recorded in the 1620s in a series of general letters of commendation to monasteries, consisted in attracting the latter to pay the main state taxes - yam money, streltsy grain reserves, and the execution of city and guard affairs.

All this was to be paid and executed "according to scribe and sentinel books with a quarter of arable land with plowed people together." The very organization of the collection of state taxes and their delivery to the Moscow orders was entirely left to the will of the monastic authorities: "money collectors" and "pit builders" were not supposed to enter the monastic estates. Thus, the administrative-reserved status of the latter ("introitus iudicum"), associated with a large amount of administrative, organizational, tax and other powers of the monastic authorities over the dependent population, was not violated. In addition, all general letters of commendation contained unified norms of judicial and customs immunity for monasteries (three judicial terms for the appearance of accused monastic people in court, obedience to the Order of the Grand Palace in Moscow, customs and travel privileges), and this just fell under the concept of tarkhans , administrative-judicial and customs-tax privileges.

The established procedure was not without some exceptions. They touched, for example, the monasteries of Solvychegodsk and Ustyug districts (Pokrovsky Telegov, Vvedensky Solvychegodsky, Nikolo-Koryazhemsky, Mikhailo-Arkhangelsky, John the Baptist). These corporations "from the old times" were listed in black plows, so their removal from the limits of obscheuyezd taxation and endowment with a tax "feature" in 1629/30 was revised by Tsar Mikhail Fedorovich and Patriarch Filaret. The clerks Prokofy Pakhirev and Semyon Bredikhin indicated such a procedure without the "sovereign's knowledge" when issuing letters of commendation to the named monasteries, which were ordered to be returned to Moscow, to the Ustyug Chet. This was to be done by the Ustyug governor P. Volynsky and the clerk S. Matyushkin40.

Letters of 1622 and 1625 of the Metropolis of Novgorod had some peculiarities. They reflected the desire of the state to influence the restriction of intra-church immunity. Tsar Mikhail Fedorovich canceled for the Novgorod monasteries (Yuriev, Antoniev, Dukhov, Vyazhitsky, Klopov, Otensky) the former sovereign letters about non-payment of church tribute and non-entry of metropolitan tithes. The monasteries were also freed from levies that had no practical significance already in the 17th century - "royalty and Tiun entry fodder", "Furry", "Smerdovshchina", "Poral money" - the very list of which reflects the early feudal archaism. On the other hand, the Novgorod Metropolis, represented by its main monasteries, was by no means freed from the state taxes that became universal in the 1620s - yam money, archery bread, city and prison affairs.

Specific information about the right of monasteries to collect state taxes on their own estates has come down to us as part of monastic tax, quitrent, and salary books in general. For the Trinity-Sergius Monastery, such information has been available since the 90s of the 16th century (in fragments of the dues books of 1595/96). Researchers also have at their disposal a voucher book of 1617 and a votive book of 1623, fragments of economic documentation of the 1630s and 1670s, tuition books of 1696 of two ascribed monasteries - Trinity-Alatyrsky and Trinity-Sviyazhsky - and, finally, an income-expenditure book 1703-170442. Without giving here a detailed analysis of each of these books, we note only one striking feature common to all of them. This is a sharp disproportion in the votny norms (and the vot was used in the estates as a salary unit for taxing both property and state duties) in favor of the seigneurial rent. In the Galician villages and villages, the monetary obligations of the peasant household in 1617 consisted of 86-88 percent of quitrent for the monastery and only 12-14 percent of state payments. In the estates of the Bezhetsky, Yaroslavl and Poshekhonsky districts in 1623 there was a great variety in the incremental rates of quitrent for corporations, depending on the corvée or quitrent profile of the complexes. But the incremental salaries of state taxes - 94 money - were stable and did not depend on him. Within the vast surroundings of the village of Priseki, the peasants performed corvée for the monastery, so the cash quitrent here was lower than in other Bezhetsky estates - about 74 percent of all the monetary obligations of the peasant household (26 percent went to pay state taxes - "for white fodder, for the oral business for help and for pit and running money"). In the villages of Molokovo, Akhmatovo, and Baskaki, which were of a monetary nature, payments to the lord amounted to 92-94 percent, to the state - 6-8 percent.

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

Thus, the given data from the economic documentation of the Trinity-Sergius Monastery of the 17th century deepen the problem of the financial status of spiritual corporations in Russia, posed in the title of the article. They allow us to talk about the financial immunity that has not yet been eliminated in the 17th century, in our case, the Trinity Monastery. By 1700, he had up to 20 thousand peasant and bobyl households. And tax powers in relation to such a large population had not the state, but the seigneurial power. Even by the beginning of the 18th century, the senior system in the field of management and finance had not yet been rebuilt into a public law one, although the state at that time was already on the eve of its transformation into an absolutist one. These observations make us take a somewhat different look at the thesis firmly established in modern historiography (meaning collective works on peasant studies) about the unambiguous predominance of state-centralized rent over property rent in Russia from the middle of the 16th century and into the 17th century43. Apparently, the very relationship between state and seigneurial feudalism in Russia does not look so unambiguous.

* * *

The question of the various customs privileges of Russian monasteries in the 17th century, in the initial period of the formation of the all-Russian market, also has an undoubted financial aspect. Of the general charters of the 1620s mentioned above, many had customs-immune sections sanctioning the privileges of monasteries in this area. In addition to these sections, from the end of the 16th-17th centuries, quite a few independent letters of commendation of washing and customs-traveling letters to large and small monasteries have been preserved44. For the Trinity-Sergius Monastery, from the end of the 16th century, the "Astrakhan fishery" associated with the purchase and transportation of large consignments of fish and salt became almost the main one. In 1628/29, among the orders to the Astrakhan governors F. Kurakin and I. Korovin, one was sent, according to which not customs duties were taken for excess luggage from the Trinity ship, but a fixed dues in the Order of the Kazan Palace. The governors of all cities were instructed not to stop that ship, "but to let it through without delaying everywhere" (in Kazan, Nizhny Novgorod and other cities). At the same time, it was added that such an order was established "for the mercy of the Most Holy Life-Giving Trinity and the Wonderworker Sergius, and other monasteries and all sorts of merchants were not ordered to set this as a model"45. At the end of the 16th - the first third of the 17th centuries, the Kirillo-Belozersky Monastery also received quite a lot of letters of commendation for washing and customs travellers. Actually, "tarhan" in Cyril's letters was called 40 thousand pounds of salt and goods, duty-free transported "for monastic use." Tarkhans of monasteries in the trade sphere were preserved until the 70s of the 17th century (near Makaryevo-Kalyazin, Simonov, Kornilyevo-Komelsky). Fluctuations in government policy in the customs area throughout the 17th century were traced in their works by I. A. Bulygin and V. N. Zakharov47. Two decrees of 1672 and 1677 eliminated the customs privileges of the monasteries ("Troitse-Sergiyev" was personally mentioned) for "grassroots mounted crafts" (Astrakhan. - M. Ch ..): "and henceforth no one in those places will be a tarkhan"48. The later mention of these decrees in the Petrine decree of June 15, 1700 interpreted them as the abolition of all tarkhans in general49. Another direction of the restrictive-immune policy in the customs sphere was the abolition of monastic rights to collect trade duties at auctions in their villages. True, even here it was not without inconsistency and deviations from the intended course. Until the beginning of the 18th century, a great variety remained in the customs status of Russian monasteries. It was expressed in different ways of organizing the customs service in the trading monastic villages. The first consisted in the taking of torzhkov (collection of tamga) in large villages by the wealthiest monastic peasants. The second was to a greater extent connected with the economic interests of the corporations themselves, when they sought to control the collection of tamga and other duties. As a partial compensation to the Trinity Monastery for the abolition of tarkhans for "grassroots plant crafts" in 1672, in the following 1673, the right to collect tamga in the villages of the Kostroma district was granted50. The corporation succeeded in ousting its own peasants from this lucrative economic activity. In 1699-1700, the government of the young reformer Peter I abolished a number of monasteries of their traditional customs rights in the villages (Nikolo-Pesnoshsky, Purdyshevsky, Trinity-Sergiev). But even after this cancellation, the collection of tamga for the monastery in this village continued, as evidenced by the income and expenditure book of 1703-1704. Have not found; consistent application and Peter's decree, which in February 1694 banned distillation in monasteries ("personally" it even named the Trinity-Sergius, Savvino-Storozhevsky monasteries) 52. In the late 17th - early 18th centuries, the Trinity Monastery was successfully enriched due to customs tax We see records of this in the income-expenditure book of 1703-1704: the collection of duties for "walking bargaining", "shovel sale flour", "small sale fish", "sale mansion building", "sale beer and kvass grains "etc.53 In general, during the 16th-17th centuries, the principle of centralization of state finances was more or less consistently carried out by limiting and unifying the main tax privileges of spiritual feudal lords. There were many objective difficulties.The persistent features of economic fragmentation in the first half of the 16th the difficulties of its second half, then the "troubles" and its long overcoming can be considered as inhibitory factors on the way to the formation of an all-Russian financial system. And yet, it seems to us, the state in the 17th century, on the whole, coped with the task of attracting the church to the tax, creating a special regime for this. The position of monastic immunity in the 17th century became even more unified than in the 16th century. At the same time, there was still an insufficient delimitation of the state and private taxes. From the 17th century, the next 18th century inherited (if we turn to the financial reform of Peter I) the right of the nobles to be in charge of the layout and collection of taxes from their population. Then it became one of the elements of the emerging general estate immunity law, formalized by the Letter of Complaint to the nobility of 178554.

Table 1
STATE TAXATION OF MONASTERIES AT THE END OF THE XVI - THE FIRST QUARTER OF THE XVII CENTURY

table 2
General letters of commendation to the Trinity-Sergius Monastery
late 16th - 17th century

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

NOTES

1. Kashtanov S.M. Essays on Russian diplomacy. M., 1970; Kashtanov S. M. Finances of medieval Russia. M., 1988.

2 Source base for studying the immunity policy in the 16th century: Kashtanov S. M. Chronological list of immunity letters of the 16th century. Part 1 // AE for 1957. M., 1958. S. 302-376 (No. 1-595); Kashtanov S. M. Chronological list of immunity letters of the XVI century. Part II // AE for 1960. M., 1962. S. 129-200 (No. 596-1139); Kashtanov S. M., Nazarov V. D., Florya B. N. Chronological list of immunity letters of the 16th century. Ch. Ill // AE for 1966. M., 1968. S. 197-253 (No. 1-519); Tebekin D. A. List of immunity letters 1584-1610. Part I // AE for 1978. M., 1979. S. 191-235 (No. 1-325); Tebekin D. A. List of immunity letters 1584-1610. Part II // AE for 1979. M., 1981. S. 210-255 (No. 326-714). Literates are privileged feudal landowners who received letters of commendation from the state.

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

14 Ibid. pp. 167-168.

15 RGADA. F. 281 (Diploma of the College of Economics, hereinafter - F. GKE), in Novgorod. No. 8458. L. 7-12; F. 1209 (Local order). Book. 258. L. 225, 226v.; PCMG. Dep. I. C. 850.

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

17. Kashtanov S. M. Copy books of the Trinity-Sergius Monastery of the 16th century. // ZOR GBL. Issue. 18. M., 1956. S. 40; Kasht and n about in S. M. Essays ... S. 185, 206-207; ATSL. Book. 519. L. 256-733v.

18 PKMG. Dep. I. Moscow Section No. 2; ATSL. Book. 598; Rubtsov M.V. To materials for the church and everyday history of the Tver region in the XV-XVI centuries. Staritsa, 1905. Issue. II. pp. 33-38.

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

20 PKMG. Dep. II. pp. 419-420.

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

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

23 ATSL. Book. 569, 570.

24 See: Rozhdestvensky S.V. Servant land tenure in the Moscow State of the 16th century. SPb., 1897. P. 27; Smetanina S.I. Changing forms of rent in the second half of the 16th century. // Feudalism in Russia. Anniversary readings dedicated to the 80th anniversary of Academician L. V. Cherepnin. Abstracts of reports and communications. M., 1985. S. 44-46; Cherkasova M.S. Forms of dismembered property in the patrimony of the Trinity-Sergius Monastery in the XV-XVI centuries. // There. pp. 41-44.

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

26 K olycheva E. I. Agrarian system ... S. 166-167.

27 ATSL. Book. 637. L. 302-302v. About book. 637 see: Ivina L.I. Troitsky collection of materials on the history of land ownership of the Russian state of the XV-XVII centuries. // ZOR GBL. Issue. 27. M., 1965. S. 149-163.

28. Lipinsky M.A. Uglich acts of the 17th century. // Provisional Demidov legal lyceum. Yaroslavl, 1882. Book. 148. S. 40-41. No. 45.

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

30. Veselovsky S.B. On the issue of reviewing and confirming letters of commendation in 1620-1630. in detective orders. M., 1907.

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

32 AI. SPb., 1841. No. 210, 238.

33. Veselovsky S. B. Feudal land ownership of North-Eastern Russia in the XIV-XVI centuries. M.; L., 1947. S. 407.

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

41 Cherkasova M.S. On the study of monastic immunity on the lands of the Novgorod Metropolis in the 16th-17th centuries. // Public Administration and Local Self-Government in the European North: Historical Experience and Modernity. Petrozavodsk, 1996, pp. 7-9; AAE. T. III. No. 123, 139.

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

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

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

45 AI. SPb., 1841. T. III. No. 154.

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

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

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

49 Ibid. T. IV. No. 1799.

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

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

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

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

Exercise 1. Among the inventions made by mankind listed below, mark (underline) those thanks to which in the XV-XVI centuries. great geographical discoveries were made. Specify their role.

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

The caravel had high maneuverability, shallow draft, excellent seaworthiness and at the same time was a capacious vessel.
The compass was essential for positioning and plotting a course.
Firearms gave the Europeans a huge advantage over the natives.
Typography contributed to the spread of books and maps in Europe.

Task 2. Contemporaries of the Great Geographical Discoveries pointed out that every navigator who went on an expedition had to have a set of necessary things with him. These items are shown below. Sign them and indicate what they served.

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

Click to enlarge

Task 3. Choose the correct answer.

For the first time the musket was used: a) in the XV century. the English; b) in the 16th century. the Spaniards; c) in the 17th century the French; d) in the 18th century the Swiss.

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

A life Christopher Columbus full of legends and mysteries. It is known that he was born in 1451 in an Italian city Genoa in the family of a poor weaver. The question of his education remained unclear. Some researchers believe that he studied in the city of Pavia, others that he was a self-taught genius. It is known that in the 70-80s. 15th century he was enthusiastically engaged in geography, studied navigational charts, worked on a project to open the shortest sea route from Europe to Asia, hoping to get there through Atlantic ocean.
Money was needed to carry out the plans, and Christopher Columbus in search of funds went to the European royal courts. In Portugal, the "Council of Mathematicians" rejected his project as fantastic, and the English king found it unrealizable. The Spanish king also refused money, as his advisers stated that "the spherical shape of the Earth would form a mountain in front of the ship, through which he could not swim even with the most fair wind." As time went. Finally in 1492 Spanish kings Ferdinand and Isabel signed with Columbus contract and provided with money to organize the expedition.
The hard sailing began. AT 1492 the navigator set foot on the land of the island, which they called San Salvador, and then two more islands were discovered, which bear the names Cuba and Haiti .
As a result of the subsequent three expeditions, Puerto Rico, Jamaica, coast of South America and Central America . Until the end of his days, the navigator believed that he had discovered a new route to India. The mainland he discovered bears the name of another explorer and is called America . In the 19th century, the French writer Victor Hugo wrote: “There are unfortunate people: Christopher Columbus cannot write his name on his opening...”

This story is about the great navigator Christopher Columbus.

Task 5. Explain expressions. In what cases were they applied?

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

Task 6. Choose the correct answer.

The price revolution is:
a) a sharp rise in the price of gold and a fall in the prices of all other commodities; b) fall in the price of gold and rise in priceallother goods; c) replacement of gold and silver coins with paper money.

Task 7. Fill in the table "Great geographical discoveries."

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

Click to enlarge

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

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

Task 10. Write an essay in which express your opinion on how the principle of "one monarch, one law, one religion" influenced the position of the individual in an absolutist state. Justify your point of view. To answer, use the text of the textbook, works of fiction, videos and films.

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

Task 11. What were the political and economic consequences of the establishment of absolutism in European states?

1. Formation of nations and nation-states;
2. Creation of a state church or submission to an existing one;
3. Creation of permanent professional armies;
4. Creation of a single economy (politics, taxes, systems of measures, customs regulations, etc.).

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Task 15. Fill in the table "Differences between a manufactory and a craft workshop."

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

Early in the morning our merchant opened his shop in the city market. He traded in fabrics. The shop occupied the entire first floor of the house. He himself did not stand behind the counter, but only looked after his salesmen, messengers and day laborers, who were full of the market in the morning and who were just looking for an opportunity to earn an extra penny and took on any job. The flow of people noisily filled the city square. The merchant spotted his familiar nobleman, who tried to breed sheep on his lands. After greeting each other, the acquaintances got down to business. It turned out that the nobleman needed a lot of fabric for the holiday he was throwing. But, unfortunately, at the moment he was experiencing difficulties with money and could not pay for the fabric immediately. After listening to the nobleman, our merchant said: “All right, I will let you have the fabric on credit.” The pleased nobleman said: “It is indeed said that it is better to have friends in the market than to have gold in a chest!”

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

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

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

Exchanges often traded contracts for the supply of goods in the future, when the goods themselves were not available. Moreover, payment was made not only in “live” money, but also in receipts (bill of exchange).
Seller: "I'm selling a batch of peppers!"
Customer: "When will the product be available?"
Seller: "In six months, five hundred pounds of selected peppers."
Buyer: "I agree to buy the whole batch."
Seller: "How will you pay?"
Buyer: "Promissory note."

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

a) the development of manufactories; b) crusades; c) an increase in the number of employees; d) natural economy; e) growth in the number of entrepreneurs?

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

a) merchants; b) bankers; c) hired workers in manufactories; d) factory owners.

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

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

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

In the 16th century, the Habsburg Empire played a leading role in Europe, uniting half the continent under its rule and enjoying the unlimited support of the pope. The Fuggers were creditors to the Habsburgs and popes. "The Gray Cardinals of the 16th Century".

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

Taking advantage of the location of the Habsburgs and the popes, the Fuggers had the opportunity to freely expand the network of branches of their trading house in the largest shopping centers in Europe. No wonder the collapse of the Fuggers coincides with the collapse of the Habsburgs, when in the 17th century the primacy in trade passes to the British and Dutch.

Task 23. What city was said in the 16th century that it "absorbed the trade of other cities" and became the "gates of Europe":

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

Task 24. Match the term with its meaning. Enter the letters of your answers in the table.

Task 25. Renaissance fashion was replaced by Spanish fashion, then France became the trendsetter in Europe. Examine the drawings and sign to which direction of European fashion each of them belongs. Explain what are the features of the presented fashion trends.

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

Click to enlarge

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

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

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

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

Task 28. How do you understand the expression "Tell me what you eat and I'll tell you who you are"? Look carefully at the drawings and insert in each caption the missing keyword that helps determine the social status of this family.
The nutrition of Europeans depended on their property status.

a) dinner in a bourgeois family

b) dinner in a poor family

c) dinner in a noble aristocratic family

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

In the 16th century, the Habsburg Empire played a leading role in Europe, uniting half the continent under its rule and enjoying the unlimited support of the pope. The Fuggers were creditors to the Habsburgs and popes. "The Gray Cardinals of the 16th Century".

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

Taking advantage of the location of the Habsburgs and the popes, the Fuggers had the opportunity to freely expand the network of branches of their trading house in the largest shopping centers in Europe. No wonder the collapse of the Fuggers coincides with the collapse of the Habsburgs, when in the 17th century the primacy in trade passes to the British and Dutch.

Task number 23. What city was said in the 16th century that it "absorbed the trade of other cities" and became the "gates of Europe":

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

Task number 24. Match the term with its meaning. Enter the letters of your answers in the table.

Task number 25. Renaissance fashion was replaced by Spanish fashion, then France became the trendsetter in Europe. Examine the drawings and sign to which direction of European fashion each of them belongs. Explain what are the features of the presented fashion trends.

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

Task number 27. Read an excerpt from the book of the historian N. M. Karamzin (1766-1826) “Letters of a Russian Traveler” and underline the features of a medieval city in different colors (highlighted in the text in red ) and features inherent in the cities of the New Age ( in blue ). Make up a story about the daily life of the townspeople in the XVII-XVIII centuries. To answer, use the text of the textbook (§ 4-6) and illustrations.

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

Task number 28. How do you understand the expression "Tell me what you eat and I'll tell you who you are"? Look carefully at the drawings and insert in each caption the missing keyword that helps determine the social status of this family.

The nutrition of Europeans depended on their property status.

Rise of the Grand Ducal Power.

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

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

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

State governing bodies.

With the advent of a single state in Moscow, central authorities are being formed. At the head of the state was the Grand Duke, Sovereign and Autocrat of All Russia. Only he had the right to legislate, Boyarin. The artist negotiates with other states, declares war, makes peace, mints coins. He led the most significant military campaigns.

The Grand Duke "held advice" with the Boyar Duma, which consisted of representatives of the old boyar families. With the inclusion of new lands in the Muscovite state, the princes of formerly independent principalities began to enter the Boyar Duma. The boyar duma consisted of representatives of two duma ranks: the boyars and the roundabouts, who were appointed by the grand duke. The numerical composition of the Duma was small: 10-12 boyars, 5-6 okolnichy.

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

The entire territory of the country was divided into counties. The borders of the counties coincided with the borders of the former specific principalities, and therefore they were all of different sizes. Counties were divided into smaller units: volosts and camps. The Grand Duke sent his governors to the county - governors, to the camps and volosts - volosts. They collected taxes, monitored the execution of princely decrees, and carried out court and reprisals. Governors and volostels did not receive a salary for their work. They kept the court fees and a certain part of the taxes. This procedure for keeping officials at the expense of the local population was called feeding.
Within the Muscovite state, destinies continued to exist, which were allocated only to the brothers and sons of the Grand Duke. But the rights of the specific princes were severely curtailed, and they were subordinate to the Grand Duke in everything.

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

In 1497, Ivan III issued the Code of Laws - the first set of laws of a single state. It contained all the laws that existed in the Moscow principality. But now they became mandatory throughout the Russian state. In addition, the Sudebnik fixed important changes that had taken place in the distribution of land ownership and in the relationship between landowners and peasants.

Transformations in the army.

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

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

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

The emergence of landownership and its rapid growth were associated with the desire of the Moscow princes to increase the layer of people on whom they could rely. The well-being of the landlords, the size of their possessions depended entirely on the sovereign. Therefore, they were interested in strengthening his power, in the existence of a single state.

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

There was an increase in church land ownership. The monasteries, the metropolitan, the bishops intensively bought up the lands of the estates, received them as payment for debts. But most often the church received land as a gift. People of that time believed that by donating property to the church, one could thereby atone for sins and avoid hell.

Restriction of freedom of peasants.

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

Remember what duties the peasants traditionally carried in Russia.

From the second half of the 15th century, arable farming with a three-field crop rotation was finally established throughout the territory of the Moscow State. With this order of farming, the peasant divided the field into three plots. He sowed the first plot with spring crops, the second with winter crops, and the third plot rested under fallow, that is, he remained unsown. Three-fields did not bring fast and rich harvests, but it provided stable yields for a long time. In addition, such a system did not require collective labor and made it possible to take care of the land.

With the spread of three fields, the set of grown grain has changed. The most common winter crop was rye, and spring fields were sown mainly with oats. The crops of wheat, barley, and millet have been noticeably reduced. Buckwheat, which has the most valuable nutritional properties, has spread quite widely. Improved agricultural tools. The plow was replaced in some places by a plow.
At first, many peasants did not realize that the land on which they ran their farms had passed into the category of estates. After all, the state represented by the Grand Duke still remained the owner of the land.

However, the attack on the rights of the peasants soon began. The landlords were interested in forcing the peasants to work on their land with the help of the law. After all, earlier the peasants were free to leave from one owner of the land to another, when they please. In large boyar and monastic estates, the peasants lived more freely than in small estates, the owners of which constantly needed money for life and for military needs. Going to meet the wishes of the landowners, Ivan III established in the Sudebnik of 1497 a single period for the whole country for the transition of peasants: a week before St. George's autumn day (November 26) and a week after. At the same time, leaving the landowner, the peasant had to pay him the old - a fee for living on the land. The amount of the elderly in the late XV - early XVI century was about 1 ruble per person. With this money at that time it was possible to buy a good horse, 100 pounds of rye or 7 pounds of honey.

Find out what 1 pood is in kilograms.

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

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

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

Thus, in the course of the formation of the Russian unified state, the power of the Grand Duke of Moscow began to increase significantly. The Grand Duke relied on service people, giving them land grants as payment for their service. As the number of estates grows, peasant freedom is limited, peasants are attached to the land.

Checking our knowledge

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

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

• Gdz history workbook for grade 7 can be found

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

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

Page 95

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

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

Page 97

Remember how relations were built between the emperor and the church in the Byzantine Empire.

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

Page 97

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

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

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

1. What role did the parish church play in the neighborhood?

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

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

3. What is the contention between the Josephites and nonpossessors? How did this dispute end up being resolved?

The essence of the dispute between the Josephites and the non-possessors is the question of the church's ownership of land and relations with the state. This dispute was resolved by the subordination of the church to the state.

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

Page 100. We think, compare, reflect

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

Resurrection Monastery

Founded 1849

Historical confession

Modern address Chelyabinsk region, Satkinsky district, village Istrut

Short description

The Edinoverie Monastery, founded in 1849. Hieromonk John (Vlasiy Gordeev), a former fugitive from the Old Believers of the Ufa province, was appointed the first rector. It was relatively few people and not rich, but played an important role in the life of the Ural co-religionists, since 1918 - the residence of the co-religious Bishop of Satka. Closed in 1924, the buildings are occupied by a pioneer camp, later a mental hospital.

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

Kazan Convent

Founded 1865

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

Short description

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

It received the status of a monastery in 1865.

At the beginning of the twentieth century. - a crowded monastery with an extensive economy.

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

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

Examples of the relationship between the church and the laity

The parish church played a big role for the district: all important events in the life of the parishioners took place in it - baptism, weddings, funerals, they taught literacy, held gatherings, etc.

Examples of the relationship between church and government

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

The dispute between the Josephites and the nonpossessors over the church's ownership of land and relations with the state was resolved by the subordination of the church to the state.

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

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

3. What is the name of the architectural religious buildings of Orthodox Christians and Muslims?

The architectural religious buildings of Orthodox Christians are called cathedrals, temples, churches. The architectural religious structures of Muslims are called mosques.

4. With the help of additional literature and the Internet, collect information about Metropolitan Philip. Based on the information collected, make a message to classmates. In what do you see the moral feat of this man?

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

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

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

A short break in the terror of Ivan the Terrible ended with a new series of murders, and Philip did not remain silent. In the spring of 1568, in the Assumption Cathedral, Philip publicly refused the tsar's blessing, condemning the oprichny executions. The commission sent to the Solovetsky Monastery was unable to find materials proving that Abbot Philip led a vicious life. Nevertheless, in November 1568, the hierarchs obedient to the tsar at the Church Council found Philip guilty of "mean deeds" and deposed him. Sent into confinement in the Tver Otroch-Assumption Monastery, Philip, refusing to bless the Novgorod oprichnina pogrom, was strangled by M. Skuratov-Belsky. In 1652 he was canonized by the Russian Orthodox Church.

Culture and everyday life of the peoples of Russia in the XVI century.

Material for independent work and project activities of students

Page 100

How did the creation of a single state affect the development of the culture of the peoples of Russia?

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

Page 101

Name the figures of Russian culture of the XIV-XV centuries known to you.

Figures of Russian culture of the XIV-XV centuries.

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

Afanasy Nikitin (merchant), his book description of the journey "Journey beyond three seas"

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

Painting: Feofan Grek, Andrey Rublev, Daniil Cherny

Page 102

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

In the mekteb, children were taught reading, writing, grammar and Islam.

The madrasah is a Muslim theological seminary where Islam was studied.

Page 102

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

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

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

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

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

2. Why were Russia's cultural contacts with other countries important?

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

3. What united the heroes of epics and epics of various peoples?

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

4. What themes were characteristic of literary works in the 16th century? List the titles of these literary works.

For literary works in the XVI century. the themes of justification of tsarist power in Russia were characteristic.

Names of literary works: Legends about the princes of Vladimir, Legend about Tsar Constantine, Legend about Magmet-Saltan, History about the Grand Duke of Moscow

5*. Using DIY materials and the Internet, determine what new building material has come to replace natural stone at this time. From which country was the technology of its manufacture brought to Russia?

Came to replace the natural stone brick. The technology of its manufacture was brought to Russia from Byzantium.

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

Page 111. Working with the map

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

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

Page 111. Think, compare, reflect

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

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

2. What are the consequences for the development of culture had the beginning of printing?

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

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

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

4. How is Russian history presented in the Book of Powers? How does it explain the causes of historical events?

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

8. In the daily life of the peoples of Russia in the 16th century. Highlight common and special features. How was the original culture of the various peoples of Russia formed? How did a single Russian culture take shape?

In the daily life of the peoples of Russia in the XVI century. there are common and special features. The common thing was the following: the working schedule of life, the presence of rituals, holidays, life retained the features of the past.

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

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

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

REPEAT AND MAKE CONCLUSIONS

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

Reforms of the Chosen One are glad:

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

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

Restriction of the rights of governors

Administrative and managerial policy:

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

Finalization of the system of central government - orders: Ambassadorial, Petition, Discharge, Local

Military reform

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

The personality of this ruler did not influence the fate of Russia in the best way. During his reign, the unlimited power of the king took shape. Ivan the Terrible brutally suppressed any disagreement with his opinion, which developed a slave psychology in his subjects. Under such conditions, the development of the state on the basis of humanism was difficult

5. Can Russia be called the end of the 16th century? multinational state? How was the process of including various peoples in its composition? What has changed in the life of these peoples after their entry into Russia?

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

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

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

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

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

Literature and music developed.

Printed books appeared, enlightenment and education developed.

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