The publication of the three-day corvee manifesto is an important event in the history of Russia. The legislative act laid the foundation for the restriction of serfdom in the empire. What is the content of the manifest? How did contemporaries react to this legislative act?
The meaning of the term
Barshchina - forced labor, which was carried out by peasants. This phenomenon became widespread in the second half of the 16th century. What is a three-day corvee? It is easy to guess that this is the same work, but performed within only three days.
The decree on the three-day corvee was adopted by the Russian emperor Paul I on April 16, 1797. The event for the country has become unprecedented. For the first time since the advent of serfdom, the rights to use peasant labor were limited. Serfs from now on could not work on Sundays. In total, within a week, the landowner was entitled to attract them to free labor for no more than three days.
Background
In the second half of the 18th century, corvée farming took an intensive form of exploitation of peasant labor. Unlike the on-board system, it had every chance of leading to the complete enslavement and exploitation of bonded forces. Clear disadvantages of this type of farming have already been observed. For example, the appearance of a month, that is, daily corvee. By the end of the 17th century, small-scale peasant farming faced the threat of extinction. The serfs were not protected from the arbitrariness of the landlords.
The adoption of the three-day corvee manifesto was preceded by events that had taken place before the reign of Paul I, that is, in the Catherine’s era.
The peasants were in a terrible situation. Catherine II, being impressed by the European enlighteners with whom she had many years of correspondence, established the Free Economic Society and the Stated Commission. Organizations played a key role in the development of draft regulations for peasant accusations. However, the activities of these structures have not received significant consequences. The corvée lying on the peasants with a heavy yoke remained in a rather vague form.
Causes
Paul I took certain measures to change for the better the position of the peasants before he ascended the throne. He, for example, reduced and reduced duties. He allowed the peasants sometimes, exclusively in their free time from corvée labor, to engage in their own farming. Of course, these innovations spread only on the territory of his personal estates: in Pavlovsky and Gatchina. Here he also opened two hospitals and several schools for peasants.
However, Paul I was not a supporter of radical forms in the field of the peasant question. He allowed the possibility of only a few changes in serfdom and the suppression of abuse. The Manifesto edition of the three-day corvee was caused by a number of reasons. The main ones:
- The plight of the serfs. The peasants were completely uncontrollable landlord exploitation.
- The growth of the peasant movement, expressed in constant complaints and petitions. There were frequent cases of disobedience. armed rebellion.
A few months before the publication of the Manifesto on the three-day corvee, the emperor received many complaints from the peasants, which reported on daily hard work, on various kinds of fees.
Russia was obliged to publish a three-day corvee manifesto of the political will of the emperor. The beginning of his reign was marked by a series of reforms. The adoption of the decree was a key event, timed to coincide with the coronation of Paul I.
The content of the legislative act
What is the essence of the three-day corvee decree, we found out. The text was compiled in a rather ornate form, like other similar documents of that time. Nevertheless, it is worth highlighting two main provisions that governed peasant labor in landowning:
- It was forbidden to force peasants to work on Sundays.
- The remaining six days according to the decree, it was necessary to divide the level between the work of the peasant into himself and into the landowner.
In fact, in just a few lines of the manifesto was one of the most important events of the short reign of the son of Catherine II. But this event became an important stage in the peasant history of Russia. And most importantly, the first attempt of the Romanovs to introduce a three-day corvée throughout the empire. It was an attempt, because far from every landowner followed the decree.
The attitude of contemporaries
A decree about a three-day corvee provoked controversy. The edition of the Manifesto was welcomed by both the old Catherine’s officials of the reformatory cell and future reformers of the 19th century, among whom the most prominent public and political figures were M. Speransky, V. Kochubey, P. Kiselev.
In conservative landowner circles, for obvious reasons, there was a dull murmur and indignation. Here the imperial decree was greeted as something unnecessary and harmful. Later, Senator Lopukhin openly warned the follower of Paul I - Alexander - not to renew the decree, which limits the power of the landowners. The Pavlovsk law partially remained only on paper, which opponents of reforms in serfdom were very pleased with.
disadvantages
Paul regulated the feudal exploitation, set a certain framework for it, thereby restricting the rights of the landowners and took the peasants under his protection. The manifesto laid the foundation for the development of further rather complicated processes of modernization of serfdom. This is the advantage of the decree.
Were there any flaws in the Pavlovsk manifesto? Of course. No wonder the landowners ignored the decree. In its text, no sanctions for violation of norms were discussed, which reduced the effectiveness of the law and made its implementation difficult.
Another drawback: a legislative act restricting the rights of landowners was introduced in the territory of Malorussia, where, according to unspoken tradition, a two-day corvé has long existed. This miscalculation of the Pavlovsky decree was subsequently criticized by many researchers.
Subsequent events
The issued decree, according to many historians, was initially doomed to failure. The edition of the manifesto was mixed. Its mechanisms are not developed. In addition, the popularization of the opinions of judicial and government officials, who interpreted its contents in different ways, played a significant role in the implementation of the Pavlovsky decree.
In issuing the decree, Pavel, on the one hand, was guided by the desire to improve the position of the peasant masses. On the other hand, he did not want to see in the serf peasantry a social support, an independent political force. This, perhaps, explains the lack of strict control over the observance of the norms set out in the manifesto.
The landlords treated this law as a formality. They were in no hurry to establish a three-day corvee on their estates. Serfs still worked even on weekends and holidays. Pavlovsky decree was actively boycotted throughout the country. Local and central authorities looked at the violations through their fingers.
The reaction of the peasants
Serfs took the manifesto as a law that would facilitate their fate. They tried in their own way to fight the boycott of Paul’s decree. They complained to the state authorities and the courts. But these complaints, of course, were not always paid attention to.
Under Alexander I
The son of Catherine II, as you know, did not rule for very long. Too many did not like the political innovations he introduced, among which the publication of a legislative act, the content of which is described in today's article, was far from the most annoying factor. Under Alexander I, sovereignty resigned to the boycott of Pavlov’s decree. In fairness, it is worth saying that officials sometimes made attempts to control compliance with the framework contained in the manifesto. But this, as a rule, provoked harsh attacks by the nobleman's estate. Liberals such as Speransky and Turgenev also sought to revive Pavlovsky law. But their attempts were unsuccessful.