The formation of the ancient Russian state. Political and socio-economic system Political structure of the ancient Russian state

The head of the Old Russian state was the Grand Duke of Kiev, who was at the same time the head of the feudal hierarchy, legislator, military leader, recipient of tribute and supreme judge. The power of the Grand Duke of Kyiv was hereditary and passed on ladder principle i.e., the next most senior appanage prince. However, it must be said that this principle was violated quite often, and the struggle for the grand-ducal throne between the appanage princes of the “Rurik House” was a characteristic feature of the political system Ancient Rus'.The support of princely power in Ancient Rus' was princely squad. In the early stages of its existence, the princely squad lived mainly from military campaigns, foreign trade and tribute collected from the subject population (polyudye), and then (from the middle of the 11th century) took an active part in the process of the formation of feudal land ownership.

The princely squad itself was divided into two parts: senior and junior. The senior squad (gridis, ognishchans, tiuns and boyars) not only participated in all military campaigns and diplomatic relations with foreign powers, but also took an active part in managing the princely domain economy (tiuns, ognishchans) and the state as princely posadniks and volostels. The junior squad (children, youths) was the prince’s personal guard, which also participated in all military campaigns and carried out individual orders of the prince to manage his domain economy and the state as guards of public order, swordsmen (bailiffs), virniks (collectors of fines) and etc.

from the middle of the 11th century. the process of decomposition of the princely squad begins as a purely military organization and the formation of boyar patrimonial land ownership takes place, which was formed:

1) through the grant of state land into private inalienable possession (allod or patrimony);

2) either through the grant of land from the princely domain to private but alienable possession (flax or fief).

8. International relations of the Old Russian state.

The closest southern neighbor of the Old Russian state was Byzantium. Peaceful relations gave way to military conflicts.. A new stage in Byzantine-Old Russian relations occurred during the reign of Svyatoslav, the son of Igor and Olga. The defeat of Khazaria and the advance of Rus' in the Black Sea region greatly worried Byzantium. Emperor Nikephoros II decided to pit Rus' and Danube Bulgaria against each other, hoping to mutually weaken them. Imagine the emperor’s amazement when Svyatoslav won and settled on the Lower Danube in the city of Pereyaslavets! There was a threat of unification into one state of the eastern and southern Slavs, with whom Byzantium could not compete. To prevent such a turn of events, Byzantine diplomats managed to send the Pechenegs against Rus'. While Svyatoslav was in Bulgaria, they almost took Kyiv. Svyatoslav concluded an alliance with the Bulgarian Tsar Boris against Byzantium. The war has begun. Military operations took place with varying degrees of success. The Kyiv prince had to agree to conclude an agreement. Under this treaty, Svyatoslav lost everything that he had conquered in the Balkans. The Russian squad had the opportunity to return to Rus' with their weapons. On the way home they were attacked by the Pechenegs, bribed by Byzantine diplomacy. Svyatoslav died in battle. Under Vladimir, relations with Byzantium entered a new stage, marked by the adoption of Christianity by Russia. The Byzantine Emperor Basil II turned to Vladimir for help in suppressing the uprising of the commander Bardas Phocas, who captured Asia Minor and threatened Constantinople. For this, the emperor promised to give his sister Anna in marriage to Vladimir. The Kiev prince fulfilled the terms of the agreement, but the emperor was in no hurry. To force him to comply with the conditions, Vladimir besieged Chersonese and took it. The emperor had to fulfill the agreement. Only after this Vladimir converted to Christianity

9. The Middle Ages as a stage of the historical process: relations of production and methods of exploitation, political systems, ideology and social Psychology

In the XIV century. foreign policy has finally emerged as a specific and important area government controlled Russia. The volume of international information has expanded, diplomatic relations have become more complex, and most importantly, the foreign policy priorities and national-state interests of the country have been determined. The difficulty of including Russia in the international life of Europe and Asia was that this happened during the first stage of the formation of the world system. A core of advanced Western European states was formed. The network of international relations became denser, their effectiveness and significance for the internal development of each state included in the system increased sharply. The structure and forms of international communication have become noticeably more complex. Formulated in the last third of the 15th century. the goals of Russian diplomacy determined its activities over the next two or three centuries. The main thing for Russia was the western direction. The country has become an important element of the Eastern and Northern European subsystem of states. "The western direction is becoming - and for a long time - leading in Russian diplomacy. The internal difficulties of the Principality of Lithuania were perfectly used by the Moscow government: the western border was pushed back more than a hundred kilometers, almost all of the Verkhovsky principalities and the Seversk land (captured at one time by Lithuania) crossed under Moscow's rule. The Baltic issue became an important and independent part of Russian foreign policy: Russia sought guarantees of equal conditions - legal and economic - for the participation of Russian merchants in maritime trade. Relations with Italy, Hungary, and Moldova ensured a powerful influx of specialists of various profiles into the country and expanded horizon of cultural communication. After eliminating dependence on the Golden Horde, Rus' objectively becomes the strongest state in the Volga basin in terms of economic, demographic and military potential. Its intentions are not limited to traditional limits. Following the Novgorodians of the 12th-14th centuries, detachments of Russian troops, artels of merchants and fishermen begin to the development of the endless expanses of the Urals and Trans-Urals. The campaign to Ugra and the lands of the lower Ob in 1499 outlined the goals and guidelines of Moscow's expansion to the east. The emerging Russian state firmly entered into the complex system of international relations

10. The causes, place and essence of feudal fragmentation in the historical process.

In Rus', the period of feudal fragmentation begins in the 30s. XII century In 1132, the Grand Duke of Kiev Mstislav dies. On the spot single state sovereign principalities arose, equal in scale to Western European kingdoms. Novgorod and Polotsk separated themselves earlier than others; followed by Galich, Volyn and Chernigov, etc. The period of feudal fragmentation in Rus' continued until the end of the 15th century. Feudal fragmentation became a new form of statehood in the conditions of rapid growth of productive forces and was largely due to this process. Cities became a major economic force. Ties to the market of individual feudal estates and peasant communities were very weak. They sought to satisfy their needs as much as possible using internal resources. Under conditions of domination subsistence farming each region had the opportunity to separate from the center and exist as an independent land. Feudal fragmentation was the result of historical integration. Feudalism grew in breadth and was strengthened locally, and feudal relations took shape. The order of occupation of thrones that existed in Kievan Rus, depending on seniority in the princely family, gave rise to a situation of instability and uncertainty. In the centers of each of the principalities, their own local dynasties emerged. Each of the new principalities fully satisfied the needs of the feudal lords: from any capital of the 12th century. it was possible to ride to the border of this principality in three days. In general, the initial phase of feudal fragmentation is characterized by the rapid growth of cities and the vibrant flowering of culture in the 12th - early 13th centuries. in all its manifestations. The new political form promoted progressive development, created conditions for the expression of local creative forces. negative sides era of feudal fragmentation:

1. A clear weakening of the overall military potential, facilitating foreign conquest.

2. Internecine wars.

3. Increasing fragmentation of princely possessions In each of the separated principalities of lands at the initial stage of feudal fragmentation, similar processes took place:

1. Growth of the nobility of palace servants.

2. Strengthening the positions of the old boyars.

3. The growth of cities - a complex social organism of the Middle Ages. The union of artisans and merchants in cities into “brotherhoods”, “communities”, corporations close to the craft guilds and merchant guilds of the cities of Western Europe.

4. Development of the church as an organization

5. Increasing contradictions between the princes and the local boyars, the struggle between them for influence and power.

In each principality, due to the characteristics of its historical development, the balance of forces was developing; its own special combination of the elements listed above appeared on the surface. The Moscow state, a link between the pre-Mongol period of Russian history and all subsequent history. In Novgorod, the boyars were able to subjugate the princes and established a boyar feudal republic.

Novgorod the Great is one of the largest medieval cities. Craft and trade center It finally became independent from Kyiv after the “Novgorod revolution” - the uprising of the townspeople, the arrest and expulsion of Prince Vsevolod Mstislavovich. The highest authority of the Novgorod feudal republic was the veche, in which all free residents of the city could participate. The Veche decided issues of war and peace and elected senior officials. The Veche made or rejected decisions, but the Council of Gentlemen prepared them. In fact, the owners in the city were the largest boyars of Novgorod - 300 “golden belts”. The boyars of Novgorod are a powerful corporate force. The veche elected the head of the Novgorod church - the bishop. He controlled the treasury, foreign relations of Novgorod, trade measures and ruled the church court, had his own military regiment, headed the Council of Gentlemen, and was the largest landowner of Novgorod. The veche elected the mayor - the head of the government (court and administration), the thousand (the head of the city militia). Higher positions were filled only by boyars, sometimes even by inheritance. The veche invited the prince and his retinue as the military leader of all armed forces in the event of a war or campaign, and concluded an agreement with him. The princes and their warriors were prohibited from acquiring land on the territory of the republic and conducting trade. The independent history of Novgorod the Great ended in the 15th century. A special situation has developed in Kyiv. On the one hand, he became first among equals. Soon, some Russian lands caught up and even ahead of him in their development. On the other hand, Kyiv remained a “bone of contention.” Kyiv was “conquered”, for example, by Yuri Dolgoruky, the Vladimir-Suzdal prince; in 1154 he achieved the Kyiv throne and sat on it until 1157. His son Andrei Bogolyubsky also sent regiments to Kyiv, etc. Under such conditions, the Kiev boyars introduced a curious system of co-government, which lasted throughout the second half of the 12th century. The meaning of this original measure was as follows: at the same time, representatives of two warring branches were invited to the Kyiv land, thereby establishing relative balance and partly eliminating strife. One of the princes lived in Kyiv, the other in Belgorod. They went on military campaigns together and conducted diplomatic correspondence in concert.

Ancient Rus' (9th-12th centuries) was a proto-state (early), which was just beginning to take shape as a political system. The former disparate communities began to gradually unite into a single state, headed by the Rurik dynasty.

Scientists agree that Ancient Rus' was an early feudal monarchy.

The origin of the socio-political system of Ancient Rus'

The state (Ancient Rus') was formed at the end of the 10th century on the territory Eastern Slavs. It is headed by a prince from the Rurik dynasty, who promises patronage and protection to the surrounding feudal lords. In exchange for this, the feudal lords give part of their lands for the use of the prince as payment.

At the same time, part of the lands conquered during wars and military campaigns is given for the use of the boyars, who receive the right to collect tribute from these lands. To remove the tribute, warriors were hired, who could settle in the territory to which they were attached. Thus, a feudal hierarchy begins to form.

Prince -> patrimonial owners -> boyars -> small land holders.

Such a system contributes to the fact that the prince turns from an exclusively military leader (4-7 centuries) into a political figure. The beginnings of a monarchy appear. Feudalism develops.

Socio-political system of Ancient Rus'

The first legal document was adopted by Yaroslav the Wise in the 11th century and was called “Russian Truth”.

The main objective of this document is to protect people from unrest and regulate public relations. The “Russian Truth” spelled out various types of crimes and punishments for them.

In addition, the document divided society into several social categories. In particular, there were free community members and dependent ones. Dependents were considered not full citizens, had no freedoms and could not serve in the army. They were divided into smerds (common people), serfs (servants) and temporarily dependents.

Free community members were divided into smerds and people. They had rights and served in the army.

Features of the political system of Ancient Rus'

In the 10th-12th centuries, the head of the state (which united several principalities) was a prince. The council of boyars and warriors were subordinate to him, with the help of whom he administered the state.

The state was a union of city-states, since life outside the cities was poorly developed. City-states were ruled by princely mayors.

Rural lands were ruled by boyars and patrimonial lands, to whom these lands belonged.

The prince's squad was divided into old and young. The ancient one included boyars and older men. The squad was engaged in collecting tribute, implementing trials and local management. The junior squad included young people and less noble people. The prince also had a personal squad.

Legislative, executive, military and judicial powers were in the hands of the prince. With the development of the state, these branches of government began to separate into separate institutions.

Also in Ancient Rus' there were the beginnings of democracy, which were expressed in the holding of popular assemblies - veche.

The final formation of the political system in Rus' was completed by the end of the 12th century.

Introduction………………………………………………………………………………..3

Formation of the ancient Russian state………………………………….5

1. Prerequisites and reasons for the emergence of the Old Russian state………………………………………………………..5

   The emergence and development of ancient Russian law………………….10

Development of the ancient Russian state……………………………………...15

1. Social and socio-economic relations……………...15

   Domestic and foreign policy…………………………………………………….19

State and political system of the ancient Russian state….24

Conclusion…………………………………………………………………………………...31

List of used literature……………………………………………………..32

Introduction.

The conquest and subjugation of the Slavic, as well as their neighboring tribes, to the new political center, which became Kyiv, was a distinctive feature of the initial stage of the Old Russian state. This is how his territory developed. The earliest chronicles began their presentation, apparently, with the presentation of Kiy, the founder of the Kyiv principality and the city of Kyiv. The legend about the emergence of Kyiv (about its construction by Kiy, Shchek, Khoriv) arose before the 9th century, since it was recorded in the Armenian chronicle already in the 8th century. Other chroniclers considered the beginning of statehood in Rus' to be the “calling of the Varangians” in the second half of the 8th century.

The emergence of state institutions in Kievan Rus was inextricably linked with the emergence and strengthening of princely power. The prince personified the power; he was the central link, the core of the political system. The supreme legislative power belonged to him. He headed the entire military organization of the ancient Russian state and personally led the army into battle. The grand dukes performed the external functions of the state not only by force of arms, but also by diplomatic means. Ancient Rus' stood at the European level of diplomatic art. It concluded various international agreements of a military and commercial nature, either orally or in writing. Diplomatic negotiations were conducted by the princes themselves; they sometimes headed embassies sent to other countries. The princes also performed judicial functions.

Many historians equate the political system of the ancient Russian state with a monarchy, but on the other hand, the “anti-monarchists” reduce their argument to the fact that the power of the Grand Duke of Kyiv was never complete; it was limited either by the council of boyars, or the people's assembly, or other princes - members of the princely dynasty.

Purpose This course work is a study of the political system of the ancient Russian state.

Based on the goal set, we have identified a number of tasks :

Study the prerequisites and reasons for the emergence of the ancient Russian state;

Analyze the emergence and development of ancient Russian law;

Identify social and socio-economic relations developing in the ancient Russian state;

Analyze internal and foreign policy ancient Russian state;

Determine the state and political system of the ancient Russian state.

In this course work textbooks were used and Tutorials Bystrenko, V.I., Andreeva, I.A., Danilevsky I.N., Isaeva I.A., Karamzin N.M., Klyuchevsky V.O., Markova A.N. Smirnova A.N., Titova Yu.P. “Fundamentals of State and Law”, “History of Public Administration and Self-Government in Russia”, “Ancient Rus' through the Eyes of Contemporaries and Descendants (IX – XII Centuries)”, “History of State and Law of Russia”, “History of the Russian State”, “Russian Course history”, “History of public administration in Russia”, “Rus X - XVII centuries”, “Ancient Slavs”, “History of state and law of Russia”, which contributed to the study and analysis of the ancient Russian state, its formation and development of the political system.

Research methods used in course work: study of specialized literature on the chosen topic; analysis of the political system of the ancient Russian state.

1. The formation of the ancient Russian state.

   1. Prerequisites and reasons for the emergence of the Old Russian state.

The moment of the emergence of the Old Russian state cannot be determined with sufficient accuracy. Obviously, there was a gradual development of those political formations that we talked about earlier into the feudal state of the Eastern Slavs - the Old Russian state. In the literature, this event is dated differently by different historians. However, most authors agree that the emergence of the Old Russian state should be attributed to the 9th century.

The question of how this state was formed is not entirely clear. And here we are faced with the so-called Norman theory.

The fact is that we have at our disposal a source that, it would seem, to some extent answers the question about the origin of the Old Russian state. This is the oldest chronicle collection “The Tale of Bygone Years”. The chronicle makes it clear that in the 9th century. our ancestors lived in conditions of statelessness, although this is not directly stated in the Tale. We are only talking about the fact that the southern Slavic tribes paid tribute to the Khazars, and the northern ones to the Varangians, that the northern tribes once drove out the Varangians, but then changed their minds and called the Varangian princes to themselves. This decision was caused by the fact that the Slavs fought among themselves and decided to turn to foreign princes to establish order. It was then that the famous phrase was uttered: “Our land is great and abundant, but there is no decoration in it. May you come and reign over us.” The Varangian princes came to Rus' and in 862 sat on the thrones: Rurik - in Novgorod, Truvor - in Izborsk (not far from Pskov), Sineus - in Beloozero.

This interpretation raises at least two objections. Firstly, the factual material presented in The Tale of Bygone Years does not provide grounds for the conclusion that the Russian state was created by calling the Varangians. On the contrary, like other sources that have come down to us, it says that statehood among the Eastern Slavs existed even before the Varangians. Secondly, modern science cannot agree with such a primitive explanation complex process formation of any state. The state cannot be organized by one person or several even the most outstanding men. The state is a product of the complex and long development of the social structure of society. Nevertheless, the chronicle mention in a certain sense was adopted back in the 18th century. This is how the notorious Norman theory of the origin of the Old Russian state was born.

Already at that time, Normanism met with objections from advanced Russian scientists, among whom was M.V. Lomonosov. Since then, all historians studying Ancient Russia have been divided into two camps - Normanists and anti-Normanists.

Modern domestic scientists predominantly reject the Norman theory. They are joined by the largest foreign researchers of Slavic countries. However, a certain part of foreign authors still preach this theory, although not in such a primitive form as was done previously.

The main refutation of the Norman theory is the fairly high level of social and political development of the Eastern Slavs in the 9th century. The Old Russian state was prepared by the centuries-old development of the Eastern Slavs. In terms of their economic and political level, the Slavs were higher than the Varangians, so they could not borrow state experience from the newcomers.

The chronicle story contains, of course, elements of truth. It is possible that the Slavs invited several princes with their squads as military specialists, as was done in later times in Rus' and in Western Europe. It is reliably known that the Russian principalities invited squads not only of the Varangians, but also of their steppe neighbors - the Pechenegs, Karakalpaks, and Torks. However, it was not the Varangian princes who organized the Old Russian state, but the already existing state that gave them the corresponding government posts. However, some authors, starting with M.V. Lomonosov, doubt the Varangian origin of Rurik, Sineus and Truvor, believing that they could also be representatives of some Slavic tribes. In any case, there are practically no traces of Varangian culture in the history of our Motherland. Scientists, for example, have calculated that per 10 thousand square meters. km of Russian territory, only five Scandinavian geographical names can be found, while in England, which the Normans conquered, this number reaches 150.

We do not know exactly when and how exactly the first principalities of the Eastern Slavs arose, preceding the formation of the Old Russian state, but in any case they existed until 862, before the notorious “calling of the Varangians.” In German chronicles, already from 839, Russian princes were called Khakans - kings.

But the moment of unification of the East Slavic lands into one state is known with certainty. In 882, the Novgorod prince Oleg captured Kyiv and united the two most important groups of Russian lands; then he managed to annex the rest of the Russian lands, creating a huge state for those times.

The Russian Orthodox Church is trying to link the emergence of statehood in Rus' with the introduction of Christianity.

Of course, the baptism of Rus' was of great importance for strengthening the feudal state, since the church sanctified the subordination of Christians to the exploitative state. However, the baptism occurred no less than a century after the formation of the Kievan state, not to mention the earlier East Slavic states.

In addition to the Slavs, the Old Russian state also included some neighboring Finnish and Baltic tribes. This state was thus ethnically heterogeneous from the very beginning. However, its basis was the Old Russian people, which was the cradle of three Slavic peoples - Russians (Great Russians), Ukrainians and Belarusians. It cannot be identified with any of these peoples separately. Even before the revolution, Ukrainian nationalists tried to portray the Old Russian state as Ukrainian. This idea has been picked up in our time in nationalist circles, trying to quarrel the three fraternal Slavic peoples. Meanwhile, the Old Russian state did not coincide either in territory or in population with modern Ukraine; they only had a common capital - the city of Kyiv. In the 9th and even 12th centuries. It is still impossible to talk about specifically Ukrainian culture, language, etc. All this will appear later, when, due to objective historical processes, the Old Russian people split into three independent branches.

Also, the Old Russian state arises in a heterogeneous society and is a way of regulating relations between different social strata, classes, etc.

Statehood among the Slavs began to take shape in the 6th century, when there was a transition from the clan and tribal community to the neighboring community, and property inequality was formed. There are many reasons for the formation of the Old Russian state, here are the main ones:

Social division of labor . The sources from which people drew their livelihood became more diverse; Thus, military spoils began to play a major role in the life of the clan. Over time, professional artisans and warriors appeared. Frequent migrations of clans, the emergence and disintegration of inter-clan and inter-tribal unions, the separation from the clan of groups of war booty seekers (squads) - all these processes forced every now and then to deviate from tradition, based on custom; old solutions did not always work in previously unknown conflict situations.

Economic development . Not only the changed individual and group identity and the existing inter-tribal relations, but also the economic, economic activity encouraged people to search for more suitable forms of common existence. The importance of the economic factor in the emergence of the state is usually exaggerated in studies by supporters of Marxism and other teachings that consider production (or distribution of what is produced) the basis of social life. The relationship between the economy and the ideas that guide people, between economic activity and the ways of organizing power is much more complex than it seems to Marxists. Without going into the details of the long-standing dispute between “materialists”, who highlight the economic needs of people, and “idealists”, who consider ideas to be the main factor social development, let us limit ourselves to recognizing the close relationship between the material world and human consciousness. Private property could not arise until a person realized his distance from the clan, but the further development of the self-awareness of the individual was undoubtedly influenced by the practical, material results of the fragmentation of common clan property. Economic factors influenced the formation of the state, but this influence was neither direct nor decisive. The state arose when property differences directly related to the economy were not too significant; The emerging state power initially made almost no claims to serious participation in economic life. The bearers of the new, pre-state and state power (princes, warriors) were distinguished from society not on property, but on professional grounds. At the same time, the often coinciding professions of a warrior and a ruler (standing above the traditional, patriarchal power of clan elders) were almost unanimously recognized as socially useful.

Society's interest in the emergence of a state . The state arose because the overwhelming majority of members of society were interested in its emergence. It was convenient and beneficial for the community farmer to have the prince and warriors with weapons in their hands protect him and save him from burdensome and dangerous military affairs. From the very beginning, the state solved not only military, but also judicial problems, especially related to inter-tribal disputes. The princes and their warriors were relatively objective mediators in conflicts between representatives of various clans; the elders, who from time immemorial had to take care of the interests of their clan, their community, were not suitable for the role of impartial arbiters. Resolving communal disputes by force of arms was too burdensome for society; As the general utility of power was realized, above private and tribal interests, the conditions were created for the transfer of the most important judicial powers historically.

Hence it turns out that the created Kievan Rus was one of the largest states of the Middle Ages in the 9th-12th centuries. Unlike Eastern and Western countries, its process of statehood formation had its own specific features - spatial and geopolitical. The geopolitical space in which Kievan Rus was located was at the junction different worlds: nomadic and settled, Christian and Muslim, pagan and Jewish. During its formation, Rus' acquired the characteristics of both Eastern and Western state formations, since it occupied a middle position between Europe and Asia and did not have clearly defined natural geographical boundaries within the vast flat space. The need for constant protection of a large territory from external enemies forced peoples with different types of development, religion, culture, language to unite and create strong state power.

In the period from the end of the 10th to approximately the second third of the 12th century. Rus' was a state consisting of volosts ruled by representatives of the Rurik dynasty. At the head of the princely hierarchy was the Kiev prince. The princes - the rulers of the volosts - were his vassals. The volosts were formed on the basis of the territories of the unions of tribal principalities, but their borders did not remain unchanged. They changed as a result of the activities of princes, internecine wars, divisions and divisions of land. The main form of exploitation of the agricultural population at the end of the 10th - mid-12th centuries. What remained was the state tribute - the tax. At the same time, this period includes First stage the formation of individual large land property in Rus' - patrimony. The princely estate began to take shape in the second half of the 10th century. - during this period, princely villages and hunting grounds were already known. In the middle of the 11th century. the existence of the princely estate was legally enshrined in the Russian Pravda - the legal code of early medieval Rus'. In the 11th century land ownership appears among the warriors and the church. But the patrimonial form of ownership did not yet play a significant role - its appanage was insignificant, the bulk of the territory was in the cooperative (state) property of the military-retinue nobility, sold through a system of tribute-taxes.

The corporation into which the ruling layer of Ancient Rus' was organized during this period continued to be the squad. There were squads for the Kyiv prince and his relatives-vassals. The druzhina organization had an internal hierarchy: the top of the druzhina layer was represented by the oldest druzhina, its members were called boyars. The lowest stratum was the young squad. Its representatives were called youths.

The privileged position of the members of the oldest squad was reflected in ancient Russian law. At the beginning of the 12th century. all its representatives received increased legal protection- for their murder, a fine was set at 80 hryvnia, twice as large as the fine for the murder of an ordinary free person, including a junior warrior.

With folding by the end of the 10th century. In the structure of a single state, a centralized and ramified management apparatus is formed. Representatives of the druzhina nobility act as officials of the state administration. Under the princes there is a council (duma), which is a meeting of the prince with the top of the squad. The princes appoint posadniks from the warriors - governors in cities, governors - leaders of military detachments of various sizes and purposes, thousand - senior officials in the so-called decimal system of dividing society, dating back to the pre-state period, land tax collectors - tributaries, court officials - swordsmen, Virnikov, Yemtsy, Podezhniki, collectors of trade duties - Mytniks, minor officials - Birichi, Metelniks. The stewards of the princely patrimonial economy, the tiuns, also stand out from the squad.

The prince did not rule and rule completely. Princely power was limited to elements of surviving popular self-government. The people's assembly - the veche - was active in the 9th-11th centuries. The custom of veche meetings has existed since ancient times in clan unions and communities. When the Kiev dynasty subjugated the volosts, the activities of the veche assemblies naturally narrowed: they began to be in charge only of their local community affairs.

The process of formation of the main classes of feudal society in Kievan Rus is poorly reflected in the sources. This is one of the reasons why the question of the nature and class basis of the Old Russian state is debatable. The presence of different economic structures in the economy gives grounds for a number of experts to evaluate the Old Russian state as an early class one, in which the feudal structure existed along with the slaveholding and patriarchal ones.

Feudalism is characterized by the feudal lord's full ownership of the land and incomplete ownership of the peasants, in relation to whom he applies various forms of economic and non-economic coercion. The dependent peasant cultivates not only the land of the feudal lord, but also his own land plot, which he received from the feudal lord or feudal state, and is the owner of tools, housing, etc.

The process that began of the transformation of the tribal nobility into land owners in the first two centuries of the existence of the state in Rus' can be traced mainly only on archaeological material. These are rich burials of boyars and warriors, the remains of fortified suburban estates (patrimonies) that belonged to senior warriors and boyars. The feudal class also arose by separating its most prosperous members from the community, who turned part of the communal arable land into property. The expansion of feudal land ownership was also facilitated by direct seizures of communal lands by the tribal nobility. The growth of the economic and political power of landowners led to the establishment of various forms of dependence of ordinary community members on landowners.

Free population. Serfs. Temporarily obliged categories of the population. Ancient Russian cities. Posads and their population.

However, during the Kiev period there remained a fairly significant number of free peasants, dependent only on the state. The term “peasants” itself appeared in sources only in the 14th century.

Personally, the free rural population, subject to tribute, as well as ordinary townspeople are called people in the sources. For the personally dependent population of estates, as well as for unfree servants, the term servants (servants) and serfs were used. Their disadvantaged position was enshrined in law: for example, for the murder of a slave, only a fine of 5 hryvnia was paid, which went to the master of the murdered person as compensation for damage. Smerds constituted a special category of the population. The question of its essence is the subject of a long-standing dispute in historiography; it is most likely that the smerds are a group of semi-military, semi-peasant population dependent on the prince. In the second half of the 11th century. a category of purchasers appears - people who become dependent on the landowner for debts and are forced to work for the master to pay off the amount of the debt. Their legal status was intermediate between free people and peasants.

The main social unit of the agricultural population continued to be the neighboring community - the Verv. It could consist of one large village or several small settlements. Members of the vervi were bound by collective responsibility for paying tribute, for crimes committed on the territory of the community, by mutual responsibility.

The community included not only smerds-farmers, but also smerds-artisans (blacksmiths, potters, tanners), who provided the needs of the community for handicrafts and worked mainly to order. A person who broke ties with the community and did not enjoy its protection was called an outcast. With the development of feudal land tenure, various forms of dependence of the agricultural population on the farmer appeared. A common name for a temporarily dependent peasant was purchase. This was the name of a person who received a kupa from a farmer - help in the form of a plot of land, a cash loan, seeds, tools or draft power and was obliged to return or work off the kupa with interest. Another term referring to dependent people is ryadovich, i.e., a person who has entered into a certain agreement with the feudal lord - a series and is obliged to perform various works in accordance with this series. In Kievan Rus, along with feudal relations, patriarchal slavery existed, which, however, did not play a significant role in the country’s economy. Slaves were called serfs or servants. Primarily captives fell into slavery, but temporary debt servitude, which ceased after the debt was paid, became widespread. Serfs were usually used as domestic servants. In some estates there were also so-called arable serfs, planted on the land and having their own farm. A fairly large group of the population of Rus' were artisans. Around the 7th-8th centuries. crafts are finally separated from agriculture. Specialists include blacksmiths, foundries, gold and silversmiths, and later potters. By the 12th century. in the cities of Rus' there were over 60 craft specialties. Russian artisans produced more than 150 types of iron products. Craftsmen usually concentrated in tribal centers - towns or in settlements-cemeteries, which from military fortifications gradually turned into centers of craft and trade - cities. At the same time, cities become defensive centers and residences of power holders. Cities, as a rule, arose at the confluence of two rivers, since the location provided more reliable protection.

The central part of the city, surrounded by a rampart and a fortress wall, was called the Kremlin or Detinets. As a rule, the Kremlin was surrounded on all sides by water, since the rivers, at the confluence of which the city was built, were connected by a moat filled with water. Slobodas, settlements of artisans, adjoined the Kremlin. This part of the city was called posad.

The growth of cities and the development of handicrafts is associated with the activities of such a group of the population as merchants. The most ancient cities arose most often on the most important trade routes. One of these trade routes was the route from the “Varangians to the Greeks.” Through the Neva or Western Dvina and Volkhov with its tributaries and further through a system of portages, ships reached the Dnieper basin. Along the Dnieper they reached the Black Sea and further to Byzantium. This path finally took shape by the 9th century. Another trade route, one of the oldest in Eastern Europe, was the Volga trade route, connecting Rus' with the countries of the East.

Power is the ability and opportunity to exercise one’s will, to exert a guiding, determining influence on the activities and behavior of people using the means of authority, law, violence, even despite resistance and regardless of what such an opportunity is based on.

As a phenomenon, power is necessary; it is designed to provide for the needs of human society. State power is called upon to govern, establish legal relations and judge.

Public power in the Old Russian state was initially formed privately in consanguineous societies. It retained its private law character throughout the entire first period. However, awareness of the social role of power appears at the very beginning of history. In the most ancient period of Russian history, the last of the three mentioned functions, i.e., the court, came to the fore; however, both the first ones are already included in the tasks of state power.

The state of the first period, in terms of management tasks, is completely different from the state of subsequent periods, especially the 3rd (when the eye becomes the policeman par excellence). The most ancient state there is predominantly military.

As for self-government in the Old Russian state, science has not yet formed a consensus on the time of its origin. A number of authors attribute the origin of community self-government in Russia to the formation and development of the communal system among the Slavs, the unification of industrial communities into community unions and urban settlements, and the division of power into central and local.

Other authors trace Russian city government back to the widespread tradition in early pre-Mongol Rus' (X-XI centuries) of deciding at the veche (from the Old Slavonic “vet” - council) critical issues public life up to the invitation or expulsion of the prince. The idea of ​​veche government was most fully realized in two Russian feudal republics - Novgorod and Pskov, liquidated already during the time of Ivan the Terrible, where the veche was considered a body of people's power. The first ideas about social independence come from Novgorod or the Novgorod possessions.

The third group of authors connects the initial stage of the emergence of Russian self-government with the first zemstvo reform of Tsar Ivan IV in the middle of the 16th century. Since that time, the development of individual elements of local self-government in Russia began.

Formation of the Old Russian State .

In the 9th century. The Eastern Slavs already had internal prerequisites for the creation of statehood. The tribal system was at the stage of decomposition. The supreme body of the tribe was still the veche - a meeting of all its free members. But there already existed a tribal nobility in the person of several privileged clans, which differed from the mass of community members in social and property terms. From among them, the veche elected leaders (princes) and elders. By the time the state was formed, separate tribal kingdoms already existed. The power of the tribal princes was based on a system of fortifying urban settlements, some of which later turned into real feudal cities. Tribal principalities were still pre-state formations, and tribal leaders were not yet princes in the true sense of the word.

There were also external prerequisites that contributed to the creation of a state among the Eastern Slavs. The endless steppes stretching between the Black Sea and the forest belt of the Russian Plain have long been the highway to Europe for warlike nomads, whose hordes were driven out of Asia every one and a half to two centuries. Many nomadic tribes tried to gain a foothold in these lands, but settled Slavic farmers were ready to stubbornly defend the fertile arable land, which yielded huge harvests.

The constant struggle with nomads contributed to the unification of the East Slavic tribes into the Old Russian people. In essence, the Kiev state emerged in the fight against external enemies and later became truly a “form of survival” in the constant struggle with the Steppe.

In 882, according to the chronicle, the Novgorod prince Oleg, having previously occupied Smolensk and Lyubech, took possession of Kiev and proclaimed it the capital of his state. “Behold, be the mother of the Russian city,” the chronicler put the words into Oleg’s mouth. Oleg himself began to be titled Grand Duke. Thus, 882, when Northern Rus' (Novgorod) and Southern Rus' (Kyiv) united under the rule of one prince, became a turning point in the destinies of the Eastern Slavs. The unification of the two most important centers for the great waterway“from the Varangians to the Greeks” gave Oleg the opportunity to begin subjugating other East Slavic lands to his power. Thus began a long process of consolidation of individual tribal principalities of the Eastern Slavs into a single state.

The highest political power in Kievan Rus was represented by the Grand Duke. He acted as legislator, military leader, supreme administrator and supreme judge. Since the time of the first Russian princes, known from the chronicles, Rurik and Oleg, princely power became individually hereditary, and this gave it legitimacy in the eyes of its contemporaries. The idea of ​​the chosenness of people belonging to the princely family was affirmed. Gradually, the power of the prince began to be perceived as state power. By the end of the 10th century, the Kiev state acquired the features of an early feudal monarchy. The adoption of Christianity by Russia was of great importance. The Church strengthened the authority of the prince, considering his power as God-given. In 996, a council of Russian bishops solemnly declared to Prince Vladimir Svyatoslavich: “You have been appointed by God to be executed by the evil, and by the good to mercy.”

The political system of Kievan Rus became the subject scientific research back in the 18th century. In pre-revolutionary historiography, Kievan Rus was primarily viewed as a distinctive society and state, developing in a different way than Europe or Asia. N.P. Pavlov-Silvansky was the first Russian historian to try to prove the presence in Russian history of a feudal period similar to Western feudalism. Since the 30s. XX century Soviet historiography affirms the idea of ​​the Old Russian state as an early feudal monarchy. Despite the critical attitude of a number of scientists of the Soviet and post-Soviet times to this concept (S.V. Bakhrushin, S.V. Yushkov, I.Ya. Froyanov), it still dominates in historical works.

The early feudal monarchy grew out of tribal relations and was characterized by the weakness of the central government, fragmentation of the territory and the preservation of significant remnants of tribal self-government. This form of government existed in some European countries - in the Frankish state, the Anglo-Saxon kingdom, and the German Empire. In the political system of Kievan Rus one can also find signs characteristic of this type of statehood.

At the head of the Old Russian state was the Grand Duke of Kiev, who had the highest economic, administrative, judicial and military power. He, however, was not the sole ruler of the state, and his power had not yet acquired a clearly hereditary character. There were various ways replacement of the grand-ducal throne: inheritance, violent seizure, and finally election by the veche. The latter method, however, was of an auxiliary nature: the election of a prince by the veche usually only reinforced his inheritance or usurpation of power.

The prince ruled with the help of a squad, divided into senior (“boyars”, “men”) and junior (“gridi”, “youths”, “children”). The senior squad was actually the princely council. Together with her, the prince made decisions about campaigns, collecting tribute, building fortresses, etc.

The Boyar Duma subsequently grew out of it. The squad was supported by the prince at his own expense: from spoils from aggressive campaigns, deductions from tribute and court fees. Princely feasts were a means of uniting the warriors and maintaining the authority of the prince among them. State affairs were discussed at them, disputes and conflicts between combatants were resolved, and positions were distributed. In the depths of the druzhina organization, even before the formation of the Old Russian state, the so-called decimal or numerical system of government developed, which later spread to cities and communities: the population was divided into tens, hundreds, thousands, led by tens, sots, and thousand, respectively.

The prince's closest relatives - brothers, sons, nephews - formed a special aristocratic stratum that stood above other warriors. Some of them had their own squads. Occupying the Kiev table, the new prince usually united his own squad with the squad of his predecessor.

To collect tribute from the subject population, the Kyiv princes undertook special campaigns - polyudye. Initially, tribute was collected in furs, from the 11th century. Monetary tribute prevailed. For a long time, tribute was not standardized, and its size was determined either by the appetite of the prince and his warriors, or by the possibility of using tribute as a means of putting pressure on disobedient subjects. The establishment of tributary relations meant the entry of one or another territory into the Old Russian state, and polyudye itself was a way of governing the country in the absence of a developed state apparatus, since the princes settled conflicts on the spot, held court, resolved border disputes, etc.

Gradually, a princely administration was formed from warriors and people personally dependent on the prince, the most important role in which belonged to the prince’s local representatives: posadniks (governors) in cities and volostels in rural areas. They did not receive a salary for their service and were supported by taxes from the population - the so-called feed. This system was called feeding, and the officials were called feeders.

The princely household was managed by a nobleman. He was helped by tiuns, appointed from the prince's courtyard servants. They were also present at the court of the prince or mayor and even often replaced them in court. The tax collectors kept track of the collected tribute, the trade duty - “wash” - was collected by the mytniki, the fine for murder - “viru” - by the virniki, the duty for the sale of horses - “spot” - by the stainers.

Despite some growth in the princely administration, the state apparatus of the Old Russian state remained primitive. State and palace functions had not yet been separated from each other and were performed by the same persons.

The development of feudal relations contributed to the strengthening of the positions of local feudal lords - princes and boyars. Their status as large patrimonial owners combined the right to land and the right to power. Being vassals of the Grand Duke, they were obliged to serve him. At the same time, they were complete masters in their estates, had the right of immunity, that is, they carried out some state functions in their possessions and could have their own vassals.

Thus, the so-called palace-patrimonial management system is finally taking shape, in which two control centers are distinguished - the princely palace and the boyar patrimonial estate, power is divided between large land owners - the prince and the boyars, and the implementation of the most important government functions entrusted to their representatives, who were both officials and managers of the patrimonial farm. The state apparatus actually coincided with the apparatus for managing the princely and boyar estates.

There were no judicial bodies as special institutions in the Old Russian state. Justice was administered by the prince or his representatives on the basis of customary law and the norms of Russian Truth. As patrimonial land ownership became established and boyar immunity was established, the importance of the boyar court over dependent peasants grew. The transformation of Christianity into the state religion led to the emergence of ecclesiastical jurisdiction that extended to the clergy.

The formation of the Old Russian state did not entail the immediate liquidation of tribal principalities. Local princes were in vassal dependence on the Grand Duke, which was limited to paying tribute and participating in military enterprises in Kyiv.

In fact, the Old Russian state was a federation of lands under the suzerainty of the Kyiv prince. As the grand-ducal family grew, the Kyiv princes practiced allocating separate lands - appanages - for the reign of their sons. They gradually replaced princes from local dynasties. For some time this strengthened the grand ducal power.

The veche continued to play an important role in the Old Russian state. From a tribal gathering of the ancient Slavs, it turned into a meeting of townspeople. The decisive word at veche meetings belonged to the city nobility. The most important issues in the life of the city community were discussed at the meeting. The role of the veche in organizing the defense of the city was especially significant: it formed the people's militia and elected its leaders - thousand, sotsky, ten. Sometimes the veche elected princes and entered into an agreement (row) with them. Of the 50 princes who occupied the Kiev table in the 10th - early 13th centuries, 14 were invited to the veche. The attributes of the veche were the veche bell and a special tribune rising above the square - the degree. There was a certain procedure for conducting the meeting, and, perhaps, recording of speeches was sometimes practiced. Decisions at the meeting were made by a majority vote. In a large city there could be several veche meetings. The first mention in the chronicles of the city council is dated 997 (Belgorod near Kiev).

Many historians considered the veche as an organ of democracy. At the same time, they differently assessed the place of the veche in the system of governance of the Old Russian state. AND I. Froyanov believed that the veche was the supreme institution in the city-states of Ancient Rus'; M.B. Sverdlov, on the contrary, argued that the convening of veche was episodic, usually in emergency circumstances of war or uprising and mainly in the cities of North-Western Rus'. According to academician V.L. Yanina, in the veche allotment of personal land, livestock, and household equipment constituted the personal property of each family. Arable land, meadows, forests, ponds, etc. were in common use. Arable land and hayfields were subject to division among community members, carried out every few years. The community was engaged in the redistribution of land plots, distributed taxes between households, resolved disputes between community members, and searched for criminals. The institution of mutual responsibility operated within the community. Community self-government was headed by an elected headman. The state was interested in preserving communal order, since with their help it was easier to collect taxes and ensure the loyalty of the population to the princely government.

The development of feudal relations and the growth of large land ownership resulted in the gradual subordination of communities to the state or individual feudal lords. Along with the elected elders, clerks and other officials appointed by the princes and boyars appear. Over time, elders also began to be appointed by feudal lords.

Legislative system. "Russian Truth"

The formation of statehood in Kievan Rus was accompanied by the formation and development of the legislative system. Its original source was customs, traditions, and opinions that came from the primitive communal system.

Among the earliest known monuments of Russian law are Russian law(apparently a set of oral rules of customary law), treaties between Rus' and Byzantium 911, 944, 971, related to international, trade, procedural and criminal law, mainly in the military-merchant environment; church statutes X-XI centuries, containing norms of marriage and family relations, crimes against morality and the church, etc.

The largest monument, a genuine code of Old Russian law, which widely reflected the features of the political and socio-economic system of the Old Russian state, is Russian Truth. Amazing with the high level of lawmaking and the legal culture developed for its time, this document was in force until the 15th century. and consisted of: Separate norms of the Russian Law; The Most Ancient Truth or the Truth of Yaroslav; Additions to Yaroslav's Truth (provisions on collectors of court fines), etc.; Pravda Yaroslavich (Russian Truth, the land, approved by the sons of Yaroslav the Wise); the Charter of Vladimir Monomakh, which included the Charter on cuts (interests), the Charter on procurement, etc.; Extensive Russian Truth.

The original text of Russian Pravda has not survived, and more than a hundred copies of this document have reached us, including three main editions: Brief, Long and Abridged.

Brief edition (Brief Truth), prepared no later than 1054, it is the oldest edition and consists of Pravda Yaroslav, Pravda Yaroslavich, Pokon Virny, Lesson of the Bridge Workers.

Associated with the name of Vladimir Monomakh Long edition, which arose no earlier than 1113 and included the Court of Yaroslav and the Charter of Vladimir Monomakh.

Revised Extensive Truth in the middle of the 15th century. received the name Abridged edition.

The evolution of Russian Pravda was based on the gradual expansion of legal norms from the princely (dominant) law among the squad, the definition of fines for various crimes against the person. The law provided for inequality of rights for people belonging to different social groups (combatants, feudal lords, rural community members, servants).

Certain legal privileges were also provided for such groups of the population as princes, boyars, princely men, princely tiuns, firemen (managers of the estate), etc. For the murder of a representative of a privileged class, higher criminal liability and a special procedure for inheriting real estate (land) were established.

Legally and economically independent categories included townspeople and community smerdas, who paid taxes and bore certain duties in favor of the state. Thus, a free community member had the right to bequeath property to his children, but land only to his sons. In the absence of heirs, the property came into communal ownership. Smerd also had the legal right to protect his person and property and bore corresponding responsibility for crimes or misdemeanors committed.

Along with free smerds, Russkaya Pravda mentions dependent people - purchases, ordinary people, etc., who owned their own household, but for one reason or another became partially dependent on the feudal lord and worked a significant part of their time on patrimonial lands. Thus, the Long Pravda contains the Procurement Charter. Purchase- a person who took from a feudal lord any valuable “kupa” (loan) in the form of land or money, grain, etc. In this case, the volume of debt service was determined by the creditor himself. Often the purchase worked for the feudal lord only for interest, and the “purchase” taken at the time had to be returned in full. A certain limit to this enslaving dependence was set by Vladimir Monomakh

After the purchase uprising in 1113, limits were established on the permissible interest rates for the “kupa”. This law protected the person and property of the purchaser. However, for a crime, a purchase could be turned into a serf (slave). A similar fate awaited him in case of non-payment of debt or escape. Thus the page of enslavement, the gradual enslavement of former free community members, was opened.

A complete serf or “slave servant” did not possess any property; everything he used belonged to the master. Meanwhile, the lives of slaves, who made up the special service personnel of the princely or boyar's court (servants, children's educators, artisans, etc.), were protected by higher penalties. Russian Truth introduced certain regulation into the sources of servility. Among them are the self-sale into slavery of one person or the entire family, marriage to a slave or birth from a slave, loss of the status of a free person upon entering service without a special reservation, committing a serious crime, escaping a purchase from a master, etc. Captivity, however, as a source of slavery I did not find any reflection in Russian Pravda. And yet, for the Old Russian state, the enslavement of peasants, their attachment to the land and the personality of the feudal lord was not yet typical.

The vira (fine) for murder or mutilation was very differentiated. Its size depended on the category of the victim. 80 hryvnia (hryvnia is a unit of monetary account corresponding to 50 g of silver) for " the best people", 40 - for a simple free person, 20 - for causing serious injury, etc. In this case, the vira went to the treasury, and the victim received a monetary reward. The life of dependent people was valued low: 12 or even 5 hryvnia, which was not considered vira .

Yaroslav the Wise was involved in legislation a lot; he went further than his father (Vladimir Krasnoe Solnyshko) in realizing his role as a sovereign ruler, and introduced important innovations in financial, family and criminal law. His “Church Charter” introduced a legislative act that regulated the relationship between the princely authorities and the church, as well as rights in the field of court, collection of tribute, etc. At the beginning of the 11th century. he affirms the Russian Truth, apparently compiled during the period of his reign in Novgorod and attempting to regulate the relationship between the Novgorodians and the Varangians, who were part of the princely squad. The prince himself was called, like the Byzantine rulers, king, as evidenced by the inscription of the 11th century. on the wall of St. Sophia Cathedral in Kyiv. The legend tells that Metropolitan Neophytos, presenting Greek gifts: the cross of the life-giving tree, the carnelian cup of Augustus Caesar, the crown, golden chain and bars of Constantine Monomakh, the grandfather of the Grand Duke, crowned Yaroslav the Wise in the Kiev Cathedral Church with the imperial crown and proclaimed him Tsar of Russia.

Sons of Yaroslav the Wise in the 11th century. significantly supplemented and changed the text of the Russian Pravda, creating the so-called Yaroslavich Pravda.

In 1097, on the initiative of Vladimir Monomakh, the grandson of Yaroslav the Wise, a congress of princes was held in the city of Lyubech , the goal of which was to eliminate strife and take measures to protect the Russian land from the Polovtsians. New rules for organizing power in Rus' were introduced. Each prince "kept his fatherland." However, this principle did not become an immutable law, and strife resumed. Vladimir Monomakh, distinguished by his statesmanlike mind, willpower and energetic activity, carried out a major revision of the Russian Pravda. Additions and changes were made, in particular, limiting the arbitrariness of moneylenders, three cases of turning a poor man into a slave were identified, and measures were introduced to protect the property rights of merchants. It was noted above that he introduced the Procurement Charter, which regulated bonded debt and borrowing relations, partly protected the personal and property interests of purchases, somewhat reduced the interest charged by moneylenders from poor citizens, etc.

Vladimir Monomakh remained in historical memory as a talented ruler of the state, who put all his efforts into strengthening the unified government, preserving the unity of the country and its transformation. "Monomakh's teaching to children"- a genuine wish for his descendants: respect for elders, observance of laws, so that there are no litigations and quarrels over land and civil strife in Rus', so that the country remains strong, united, well governed.

Mstislav, son of Vladimir Monomakh(1076-1132), was the last prince of a united Rus'; with his death, the Russian land finally disintegrated, and a long period of feudal fragmentation began.

Power is one of the fundamental principles of society and politics. It serves as the basis of policy and is capable of having, albeit indirectly, a tangible impact on various spheres of society.

Power appeared with the emergence human society and accompanied its development, which was reflected in various teachings about power.

In terms of its form of government, the Old Russian state was a typical early feudal monarchy. The Grand Duke was the eldest (suzerain) in relation to the local princes. He owned the largest and strongest principality. Relationships with other princes were built on the basis of agreements - letters of the cross, which determined the rights and responsibilities of the Grand Duke (to protect vassals, provide assistance to them and receive, in turn, help from vassals), as well as the rights and responsibilities of vassal princes.

The system of governing bodies in the future in the Old Russian state was determined by the character political power under early feudalism, which was, as it were, an attribute of land ownership.

Local government in Russia and its legal basis were formed under the influence of a combination of certain objective and subjective factors. Such factors operate in all countries, but have different consequences. Famous government expert I.A. Ilyin especially emphasized for Russia the importance of such factors as the size of the territory, population density and the degree of enormity of the tasks being solved by the people. With regard to national, social and religious factors, he was convinced that the more homogeneous a society is in terms of these characteristics, the easier it is to govern the state. The less developed the national way of life is, the less individualized its culture is, the more it needs state guardianship, including over the institutions of local self-government.

The development of local self-government in Russia, in which the state traditionally occupied a leading place and position, was possible only under the tutelage of the state. State guardianship social institutions(policeism), including local self-government, led to the dominance both in municipal theory and in practice of a powerful system of state power.

A kind of “fatherly” assistance from the state is still necessary today.

For the development of local self-government, it is also necessary to form a management culture. Many problems at the municipal level are often aggravated by a subjective factor - the inability and unwillingness of officials to carry out coordinated actions in the interests of the population.

1. Gomola A.I. History of state and law of Russia: Textbook. allowance. / A. I. Gomola, S. G. Pantsernaya. - 2nd ed., rev. and additional - M.: Publishing Center "Academy", 2005.

2. History of public administration in Russia. Textbook. / Rep. ed. V.G. Ignatov. – Rostov-n/D.: Phoenix, 2003.

3. History of public administration in Russia (X-XXI centuries): Reader / ed. R.G.Pikhoi. M., 2003.

4. History of public administration in Russia: textbook / N.Yu. Bolotina [and others]; Ed. R.G. Pihoi. M., 2006.

5. Kulikov V.I. History of public administration in Russia: textbook. manual for universities. M., 2003.

6. Linets S.I. History of the Russian state and its governing bodies. - Pyatigorsk, 1998.

7. Postovoy, N.V. Local self-government: history, theory, practice, M. Advertising-ed. Center "Fedorov" 1995.

8. History of Russia. http://rushistory.stsland.ru/index.html

Pihoy R.G. History of public administration in Russia. - M., RAGS, 2001.

Ignatov V.G. History of public administration in Russia. - Rostov-on-Don, Phoenix, 1999.

Markova A.N. History of public administration in Russia - M.., Law and Law, 1997.