The Aristocracy And Reformation In 18th Century Russia

Russia early modernization beginning in the middle 19^th century was filled with difficulties and resistances, which was rooted in the social background established by the reformation in 18th century which can be divided into three phases: Peter I's reign,palace revolution period, Екатерина Ⅱ reign.The reformation in 18^th century was just a readjustment whithin Russian feudalism in order to overcome the social crisis caused by feudal development and strengthen Czar despotism striked by Western industrialization .The despotism was a paradoxical complex :a strange mixture of modern structure and medieval frame. Peter I's reform aimed at the national whole interest ,but the economicoccidentalization divided the society into two classes: aristocracy and peasantry. The successors' further economicand cultural occidentalization and the conflict within aristocracy sharpened the aristocratic split and rivalry. Then the Czar's absolutism turned into an allied depotism between the monarch and high-class aristocracy.The latter became resistance to social development,while the low-class aristocracy were in hot water.,were pushed aside by the traditional eupatrid and chose to escape the national service and the social reality through retirement. In this point the aristocracy were not only the propellants and benefits but also evaders and victims of the reformation.During Kiev period,the aristocratic housecarl status was determined by agent commerce,economic and ranking system. With Tatar's invasion which destroyed Russian past economic form and social structure, feudalism was built;settled agriculture began,and the housecarl turned to courtier, then to be service man of Moscow archduke with the territorial expansion and ducal submission Seigneur strengthened the service man's economic dependence on Czar, meanwhile the hierarchical system hindered the their political alliance and solidarity. The reform of the 18th century made aristocracy a privilege class, but didn't estabilsh a political league with uniform social consciousness. The progress of Russian modernization was delayed by the enhanced Czar depotism and the spreaded serfdom.The aristocratic system's paradoxcial development embodied the dualism of this reform.In political and social fields, Russia feudalism never had any sort of feudal reciprocal principle and legal tradition like Western Europe. 《Табелъ　о　рангах》 united the service man to an uniform social class: Aristocracy. Under this principle, each member can receive a title by being an officer. Promoting or conferring medal were based on educational level and service time. This principle replaced the traditional rank framework, broke the exclusion of aristocratic hierarchy and enhanced the aristocratic vitality and flexibility. In the middle 18^th century , Анна　Ивановна modified Peter's radical policies in time,reducing aristocratic service obligation,set up schools for their children who were inspected regularly.In the late 18th century, Екатерина Ⅱ further made the principle perfect,and aristocratic service was regulated through regular register,identification,record,scroll and census. Position term .achievements and educationdegree were reemphasized,especially the achievements .The principle spreaded to other service and united the feudal aristocracy and bureaucracy,which was carried out more utterly than Prussian principle.Therefore, all the title and social power came from court, the Russian aristocracy with land and serf were more appreciated to the monarch than any other countries'. Peasantry was always a dissident force.Professional, permanent and military services without any self-determination were the characters of aristocrat,who never made trouble. In one word, 18th century saw a compromise between Czar and aristocrat. Confronted with social crisis,they were in the same boat,which enhanced the solidarity of Russian society and created helpful conditions for future prosperity.But every coin has two sides. We should not ignore that the reform of 18th century split Russia society even more, firstly into aristocrat and peasant. Later reform again divided the aristocracy into high and low ranks. ^Taoejit o paHrax)) ostensibly weakened the feudal hierarchical system, but the effects could not be exaggerated. Actually the social origin and pedigree were still very important to officer appointment.,and civil officers had more difficult in promotion than aristocray. In the middle 18th century aristocracy could get a position through regnal largess,and aristocratic officers'number and rank increased,which destroyed Peter's democratic principle.lt was regulated that aristocry obtained permanent freedom and independence in 1785.In late 18th century,aristocratic privilege was protected eagerly,and civil officers'work term was prolonged while military officers' was shortened.A committee summoned in 1767 abrogated old means of becoming a aristocrat through appointment and decided family status as a main criterion in appointing officials Aristocray was divided into six categories in 1782.Aristocratic property and rank privilege was estabilshed in law in 1785. It was obvious that in 18th century absolute government acquired some capitalism characteristic,but in essence,Russian bureaucratic system retreated back into the traditional principle based on family status Government wouldn't consider the low-class aristocracy as real officer, the prime positions in government still in the hands of high-class aristocracy. What's more, Czar's governments often changed the preferment order of military officer and lift the qualification higher and higher in order to limit the ordinary entering into aristocratic class. The bureaucratic system gradually tended to be aristocratic.Besides, some rank discrimination inside sharpened this tendency. Compared with the Western Europe, Russian aristocracy showed itself unprecedented diversity and openness. But the laggard economic development limited the renewal and progress of aristocratic system. The traditional eupatrid refused new official title and looked down on the bureaucracy. While the bureaucracy with humble origin tried hard to conceal their real status and be deferential to the eupatrid. The life of most aristocrats deteriorated along with the total number's increase of aristocracy. Especially in the later 18th century, a lot of French exiled aristocrats' affluxing into Russia made the hierarchical discrimination spread?Ta6ejib o paHrax)) also prescripted that the aristocracy included both eupatrid andlife peer. The jemadar whose degree was higher than eighth grade can be entitled eupatrid. Later the freedom proclamation of aristocracy in 1762, the Corpus Juries Committee and the aristocracy remit proclamation of 1785 prescripted that the main path to get a title was by monarch's largess or by pedigree. Thus the Russia aristocracy divided into two sides: great and mean, high-class and low-class. On one hand, the mean aristocracy were excluded by the great aristocracy, they didn't have prerogative to have serf or autonomy. They would dawdle everyday rather than engage the vocation other than military service. Consequently they conflicted between great aristocracy and ordinary taxpayer. Poor life made them go to country and become farmers, meanwhile, the greedy made them swarm into big city and capital. On the other hand, the great aristocracy despised the low-class aristocrat's humble breed. In order to maintain the hierarchical dignity, they chose to retire from military service or go abroad to avoid the contact with the low-class aristocracy. At the same time, the bureaucratic aristocracy tried their best to enter into hereditary aristocracy, even through counterfeiting a whole testified stuff. Although in 1760s 's Corpus Juris Committee, the representative aristocracy presented some feasible advices, the rank or regional differences and conflicts made them failed at last, the fissure in the aristocracy became more and more sharpen.As to regional difference, only Baltic Sea's aristocracy got autonomy. In social life, great aristocracy evaded the low ranks in entertainment and religious activities. In educational institution, they would accept private education at home rather than let their children to Moscow University, which didn't have aristocratic boardinghouses. In ideological field, they indulged in the Hierolatry of Orthodox Church and refused enlightening idea of Europe. The government put most attention on the military education which only opened to aristocracy. And the curriculum of aristocratic school concentrated on the foreign language so much that Russian traditional culture had been ignored. The aristocracy just copied the western culture and value, they hadn't understood western spirit. This superficial Occidentalization polarized Russian social culture into elite culture and rural communal culture, also caused a slit in the bosom of aristocratic class. On one side, some conservative aristocrat depended desperately on Czar government. They excluded western civilized culture, and finally became an obstacle of Russian modernization. On the other side, aristocratic intellectuals came to receive the western advanced culture. But they didn't have any certain value idea; they were absolutely deferential to government as well as doubtfully disavowal to it. This kind of deviation made them escape political life and became the Rover of Russia. The split in culture resulted in extreme conflict between different ranks, even a lot of social turbulences.Discrimination and conflict within Russian aristocrat prevented them to make political alliance, which resulted in the surge of aristocratic retirement from army in the middle and late eighteenth century. Social status and property became the only standard for employment, promotion, education, vacation and transfer to civilian work, therefore, large number of middle and lower aristocratic officers were transferred to civilianirreversibly. The retired military officer were much more than the civilian officer, and they became younger and younger. They couldn't manage to subsist, so became destitute and homeless; they became beggars, clergy or robbers and threated the social stability. In middle and late 18th century, Russian government was corruptive, selling official position, Church authority's moralization slacked, and officers each tried to cheat each other. The upper aristocracy couldn't bear that burden, who both utterly submitted to and doubted and denied the Czar despotism, which droved them to ignore this life and retreated to country life. As a result, Czar government couldn't attract aristocracy to do military service within; Russian military power was weakened without, furthermore, citizen class with modern capitalist democratic and enterprising awareness didn't shape within Russian society, which would threat Czar despotism. The failure in the Crimean War suggested that Russian military technology trailed western nations, and that the inherent crisis of Russian military system based on aristocracy.In economic field, every Czar acquired power with aristocratic support .In order to gain further aristocratic favor and support, the government tried its best to broaden their privilege which presupposed serfdom. One Son Inheritance Law in 1724 regulated that in principle land couldn't be inherited, even couldn't be hold for life, which entirely depended on military service. Through secularization of church property, government hit and crippled church influence in economy, and made it dependent. Tax reformation changed past inequality, and treasury income increased. However, the new tax system reduced the freedom of employment choice through ID card system, which strictly prohibited citizen migrate at liberty at home and abroad. Government reduced the social mobility to the limited level. In order to attract aristocracy to military service, government replaced land largess with money largess. Aristocracy Book of 1785 ensured aristocratic privilege in law.Aristocracy benefited most from serfdom. In 17th century, Russian aristocracy held 9% land which increased to 29% in 18th century. As Russian territory expansion, church possession secularization, immense land became national economicfoundation, and government absolutely predominated land. Because Russian industrial development was based on military need rather living need, military industry priority resulted in economicstructure unbalance. Industrialization based on serfdom developed very low without an impulse to improve labour productivity. Potential labour was under aristocratic supervise, while short-term hired hand in factories were serf. The state had abundant resource and labour force, but couldn't expand reproduction or introduce in foreign capital. Aristocrats were more interested in usury to gain sudden huge profits. They even spent mint fund achieved from industry and commerce on luxurious consume, rather invested in expanding reproduction . Enterprisers without noble birth purchased noble title with big money by the way of ingratiation and intermarriage. Therefore, Russian capitalism accumulation was kept within limits, which determinate the failure and technical difficulties in the future. Aristocracy was the biggest obstacle for peasantry to gainfreedom. The more free aristocracy was, the less national farmer serf was. Serf was aristocrat's separate property. Because serf was the main taxpayer and main safeguard of national finance, army and military service, aristocratic privilege expansion prevented government from overseeing serf. Aristocracy took advantage of their economicpower to enhance their political influence. The more privilege aristocracy had, the less farmer the state hold. As long as aristocracy was Czar's vassal, government couldn't adjust its dominion over landlord, and serfdom was nationwide and arrived at zenith. Aristocratic golden age appeared in Russia in the late 18th century, but Russian economicfoundation was confronted with profound crisis. nyraneB peasantry revolt at the end of 18th century and the failure in the Crimean War in 19th century testified its economiclaggard. According modernization theory, modernization means the transition from traditional society to modern society, and, modernization centered on industrialization is a huge and total social change, while human development is a core and ultimate aim of every development. Any political modernization depends on the establishment and measurement of civil society, which depends on whether the relationship between individual and society and state is dealt with correctly. Russian modernization took place under outside influence. Nationwide market didn't form until the late 18th century,, and internal capitalist economy development was very limited. Although before faced with modernization challenge, Russia had established national boundary and base, and Czar government could response initiatively to the challenge, but its purpose was to resist foreign enemy rather to give up old system. A great deal of rural population couldn't be mobilized by modernization; the businessman and handworker couldn't acquire real autonomy; aristocracy couldn't become real ruler. The relationship between these three was contorted: Czar government was despotic; society was divisive; individual was enslaved. Russian reformation in 18th century strengthened serfdom and despotism, enlarged social and cultural disparity between different orders, and demolished social development harmony. Imbalance in political, economicand cultural development reached high-point, thus, under strong pressure, the nation still could keep its integrity through traditional cultural cohesion and self-identity. However, this development trend blocked social transition, and ultimately delayed the process of Russian modernization.