Первый слайд презентации: Social order in the 2d half of the 18 th century
Mohamad al moussawi and hussam kassem Group:20 ll1a Social order in the 2d half of the 18 th century
Слайд 2: Project Plan
Introduction Townspeople and Merchants State Peasants and Interstitial Categories Serfs Nobility Conclusion Questions
Слайд 3: Introduction
The Russian Empire experienced enormous growth not only in territory, but also in population during the eighteenth century. Natural growth alone accounted for much of this growth–from about ten or eleven million inhabitants in 1700 to about twenty‑eight million by the end of the century. The annexation of new territories added greatly to this amount, increasing the total population to over forty million in the 1790s. 90% of the population belonged to the peasantry and still more lived in rural areas. These subjects bore multiple identities. All belonged to a specific legal estate (noble, serf, state, peasant, and numerous lesser ones)
Слайд 4: Townspeople and Merchants
Russia’s urban population was, as already suggested, exceedingly small–some 3 per cent according to the official census of the 1760s, slightly more by the end of the century. The overwhelming majority of urban residents belonged to the legal status of townspeople. The élite in urban society held the rank of merchants ( kuptsy ), the subject of much legislation in the eighteenth century. It was chiefly for purposes of taxation, not economic regulation, that the state divided merchants into three ‘guilds ’.
Слайд 5: Townspeople and Merchants
According to the system in place before 1775, merchants had to have disposable capital of over 100 roubles to register in the first guild, 50 roubles for the second, and 10 roubles for the third. , 80 per cent of the Moscow merchants registered in the third guild in 1766 did not engage in trade. The guild status, however, played a critical role in determining status and obligations. Each guild bore specific responsibilities and had to bear a tax based on their declared kapital. The primary urban service was to participate in the urban magistrate.
Слайд 6: Townspeople and Merchants
T he elected (and mostly unpaid) councils obligated to collect (but not levy) taxes, to keep population records, to oversee town services (for example, fire‑fighting, public health, and road construction), and to maintain law and order. The magistrates also had to deal with major crises like food shortages and epidemics, as in the Moscow plague riots of 1771.
Слайд 7: State Peasants and Interstitial Categories
The category of state peasants was a catch‑all term to identify those living on state lands and owing dues to the state rather than to private landlords. One important subgroup of state peasants had formerly belonged to the Russian Orthodox Church–primarily monasteries, occasionally to parish churches. The peasant population also included a congeries of other smaller social units. One category, bridging the status of state and seigneurial peasant, was the ‘crown’ ( dvortsovye ) peasants, who lived on crown land, held this hereditary status, and owed dues to the imperial family.
Слайд 8: Serfs
If any population did roughly correspond to our conception of the primordial peasant wedded to the land, it was the serfs. Developments worked in favor of serfs natural growth of the population to reduce the individual burden of other obligations. Russia had 5.6 million male serfs (56.2 per cent of the peasant population). For all practical purposes, Russian serfs were invisible to Russian law and justice: subject to their squires (who collected dues, designated recruits, and meted out punishment ).
Слайд 9: Nobiles
Although the nobility stood at the apex of the social pyramid, with claims to pedigree and precedence, its status was uncertain and ambiguous. Nevertheless, until 1762 the nobility still owed service to the state, ordinarily in the military. As a practical matter, however, many evaded this obligation, a nonfeasance that actually increased–partly because of the quantum increase in service demands under Peter, partly because of the state’s transparent inability to coerce compliance.
Слайд 10: Conclusion
Social order in the 2d half of the 18 th century corresponded to multiple identities. All belonged to a specific legal estate (noble, serf, state, peasant, and numerous lesser ones ).