Pososhkov short biography. Ivan Pososhkov - the first Russian people's speller

(1726-02-12 ) Country:

Russian kingdom

Scientific area:

Ivan Tihonovich Pososhkov(, Pokrovskoye village, near Moscow - February 1, 1726, Peter and Paul Fortress, St. Petersburg) - an outstanding Russian economist, publicist, entrepreneur and inventor. The first Russian economist-theorist. The main work is the socio-economic treatise "The Book of Poverty and Wealth" (published in 1842).

A supporter of the military and economic reforms of Peter I. Adhered to mercantilist views. He advocated the development of industry and trade, the reform of the tax system (reduction and streamlining of taxes) and monetary circulation (he proposed to make it the basis of copper money, instead of silver and gold), the rational use of natural resources, and an increase in research on mineral deposits. For the first time he came up with the initiative of legislative regulation of the duties of serfs. Repressed (1725). He died in the Peter and Paul Prison.

Biography

Very little is known about Pososhkov. The first mention of him in documents is found in the case of the builder of the Andreevsky Monastery, Avramius, who submitted documents to Emperor Peter I, which revealed the causes of discontent among the people. In this case, among others, the peasants of "Ivashka da Romashka P." were brought to justice. In subsequent years, Pososhkov worked hard, managed to become a wealthy man, but he did not receive a high place among Peter's associates. Pososhkov died in the Peter and Paul Fortress, the reason for his arrest was, most likely, the “Treatise on Poverty and Wealth” written by him, which advocated the restriction of noble land ownership. In addition, Pososhkov owns the "Paternal Testament" and "Mirror of the schismatic wisdom of the schismatic."

A book about poverty and wealth

The full title of this book is “The Book of Poverty and Wealth, This is an Expression of What Poverty Becomes, and Why Gobzovate Wealth Multiplies”, it belongs to the number of outstanding works not only in Russian, but also in world economic literature. The treatise raised very deeply the problems that were discussed at a lower level in the environment of Peter I, and also partially raised in the works of Western economists, although the treatise was created absolutely independently of them. The treatise is a combination of mercantilist theory with the ideas of the West. He demands the restriction of serfdom on the positions of absolutism: “the landowners are not age-old owners for the peasants, for that they are not very protected, but their direct owner is the All-Russian Autocrat.” Pososhkov proposed limiting prices by punishing those who overestimate prices: “if anyone took a price that was not real excessive, take a fine and flog with batogs or whips so that they don’t do this again.” He is opposed to the plurality of taxes, in his opinion, it is necessary to establish a single "state ... tax ..., that is, a tithe", and a single duty should be established on goods.

Without reducing wealth to money, Pososhkov distinguished between material and immaterial wealth. By material he meant the wealth of the state (treasury) and the wealth of the people. What can now be identified with the gross product. Under the immaterial - "true truth", i.e. legality, legal conditions, good governance of the country - those values ​​that today we call "institutions". Therefore, Pososhkov can be called the forerunner of Russian institutionalism. He called the source of wealth productive labor, and the causes of poverty were the backwardness of agriculture, the insufficient development of industry, and the unsatisfactory state of trade. To eliminate poverty and achieve wealth, Pososhkov proposed two conditions: 1) destroy idleness and force all people to work diligently and productively; 2) resolutely fight against unproductive expenditures, implement the strictest economy.

Being the ideologist of the merchant class, Pososhkov devoted a lot of space in his work to questions of domestic trade. In an effort to make the merchants a monopolist in trade, he proposed to ban the nobles and peasants from engaging in trade and spoke in favor of a "set price", regulated from above by a system of supervision and control, that is, he defended outdated views on this issue. Pososhkov was attentive to foreign trade, the organization of which was supposed to protect the Russian merchants from foreign competition and contribute to the increase of money in the country, considered it necessary to import only what was not produced in Russia. Restricting the importation of luxury goods was supposed to keep, in his opinion, money in the country. He proposed to stop the export of industrial raw materials from the country and export only finished products abroad. Pososhkov's views on money are original: he defended the nominalist theory of money.

Contribution to economic science

In the face of Pososhkov, Russian economic thought of the late 17th - early 18th centuries. firmly stood at the level of world economic thought of that time.

IT Pososhkov was the first consistent institutionalist in the history of economic doctrines. He writes about the intangible wealth of the country - a set of civil foundations - institutions that contribute to the healthy functioning of the economy and society.

For the first time, he raises the question of material wealth, as not about the money supply located in the country, but about material goods in the hands of the state and the people. What can now be identified with the gross product.

Pososhkov paid especially great attention to the development of Russian industry, the problems of which are still relevant today. Among the measures aimed at its development, he proposed to build factories at public expense and then transfer them to private hands.

Supporting the ideology of the merchant class, Pososhkov at the same time expressed the interests of the peasantry. Without openly demanding the abolition of serfdom, he sought to limit the power of the landlords within certain limits. The merit of I. T. Pososhkov lies in the fact that he was able to correctly, within the limits of his era, understand the main tasks of Russia.

The views of the economist set forth in the book “On Poverty and Wealth” were innovative not only in Russia, but also in the international arena, which makes I. T. Pososhkov an outstanding economist at the present time, since he first raised questions, studied processes and phenomena that are relevant in today's society.

Notes

Literature

• Pogodin M.P. Foreword // Works of Ivan Pososhkov. - M.: Printing house of Nikolai Stepanov, 1842.
• Kafengauz B. B. I. T. Pososhkov. Life and activity. - M.: Publishing House of the Academy of Sciences of the USSR, 1951. - 204 p.
• Platonov D. N. Ivan Pososhkov. - M.: Economics, 1989. - 142 p.
• Pashkov A. I., Economic views of I. T. Pososhkova, “Izv. Academy of Sciences of the USSR. Department of Economics and Law, 1945, No. 4
• History of Russian economic thought, vol. 1, part 1, M., 1955; Mordukhovich L. M.
• Essays on the history of economic doctrines, M., 1957, ch. 6; Mordukhovich L. M.
• The main stages in the history of economic doctrines, vol. 1, M., 1970.
• Gukasyan G.M., Nintsieva G.V., History of economic thought, Publishing house "Piter", 2008, 168p.

Categories:

• Personalities in alphabetical order
• Scientists alphabetically
• Born in 1652
• Deceased February 12
• Deceased in 1726
• Economists alphabetically
• Economists of Russia
• Entrepreneurs of Russia
• Inventors of Russia
• Repressed in the Russian Empire
• Prisoners of the Peter and Paul Fortress

Wikimedia Foundation. 2010 .

See what "Pososhkov, Ivan Tikhonovich" is in other dictionaries:

Pososhkov (Ivan Tikhonovich) is a well-known Russian economist, one of those self-taught teachers of the Moscow church literature, who, firmly adhering to the old national principles, nevertheless clearly understood that Russia must move forward and that ... ... Biographical Dictionary

Pososhkov Ivan Tikhonovich- . Belonged to a family of hereditary jewelers (silvermen) who worked for the Armory; As a child, I learned a variety of crafts ... Dictionary of the Russian language of the 18th century

- (1652 1726) Russian economist and publicist. A supporter of the reforms of Peter I, advocated the development of industry and trade, proposed to strengthen the study of mineral deposits. Main works The book of poverty and wealth (1724, ... ... Big Encyclopedic Dictionary

- (1652, the village of Pokrovskoye, now the Moscow region, ‒ 1.2.1726, St. Petersburg), Russian economist and publicist. Born in the family of an artisan jeweler. He was engaged in various crafts, then became a merchant, entrepreneur, owned land. The main work of P. - “Book ... Great Soviet Encyclopedia

Pososhkov, Ivan Tikhonovich- POSOSHKOV Ivan Tikhonovich (1652-1726), Russian economist and publicist. A supporter of the reforms of Peter I, advocated the development of industry and trade, more active exploration of mineral deposits. The main works "The book about ... ... Illustrated Encyclopedic Dictionary

Writer of Petrovsky time, b. near Moscow in 1652 or 1653, died February 1, 1726 in St. Petersburg. His father was a quitrent peasant in the palace village of Pokrovsky near Moscow, which is now part of the city of Moscow. The village is... Big biographical encyclopedia

- (1652 1726), Russian economist and publicist. Was self-taught; practical activity of the entrepreneur combined with literary studies. A supporter of the transformations of Peter I, advocated the development of industry and trade, proposed to strengthen ... ... encyclopedic Dictionary

Other

Economists by the Grace of God: Ivan Pososhkov

This man belonged to a new, "third estate", the same one that was supposed to replace the power of the feudal nobility, namely, to the bourgeoisie.

Assembly under Peter I

But on his example, we are convinced that the Russian bourgeoisie was not like those Western "bourgeois" who were inspired by the ideas of natural law, freedom and equality. The noble liberalism that developed under the influence of the Western Enlightenment was alien to this man, and he treated him as "master's idea".
We are talking about a contemporary of Emperor Peter I Ivan Tikhonovich Pososhkov, whose manuscript A book about poverty and wealth. This is a manifestation of what happens in vain poverty and from what god-like wealth is multiplied " was discovered in 1840 by the famous literary critic Mikhail Petrovich Pogodin (1800−1875). The authenticity of the manuscript was initially questioned, and the authorship of a peasant from "mean" class was met with ridicule by Russian society. Then both were recognized. In scientific circles, Ivan Pososhkov began to be considered the first Russian economist.

A book about poverty and wealth. Title page

Pososhkov was born in 1652 into a family of quitrent peasants in the village of Pokrovskoye near Moscow. Its inhabitants worked in the workshops of the Armory Chamber of the Sovereign's Court. This circumstance helped Ivan to acquire various knowledge and skills, thanks to which he "was never idle and did not waste his days." In adulthood, by the standards of that time, Ivan Tikhonovich achieved a lot: he owned his own court in St. Petersburg, two courtyards in Novgorod, two more small estates with several dozen serfs and a distillery. Life in him was in full swing: he made money machines for the mint (and was introduced to the tsar as the best mechanic), discovered oil fields, installed fountains, invented various military tools ... But neither material wealth and position in society, nor creative self-expression could satisfy him .

A child of the stormy time of Peter the Great, "all-hearted desire for truth"(as he called himself), Pososhkov spent a lot of time and effort, “despising his brownie’s need”, writing down his thoughts, projects, compiling countless submissions, reports, notes on various issues of social and state structure. In them, Ivan Tikhonovich proposed various means to ensure that “Reinforce directly, correct crooked, set aside excess, fill insufficient”.

Already at an advanced age, in 1724 he wrote the book "On Poverty and Wealth". Pososhkov addresses his manuscript to Peter I a few months before the death of the autocrat. In it, he invites the tsar to carry out such reforms that will not only enrich all classes, but also create a strong and stable state, which will further raise the authority of autocratic power, replenish the state treasury. But this will become possible, the author is convinced, if, in addition to material wealth, we begin to care more about immaterial wealth, that is, about the true truth. This truth follows from Holy Scripture and the works of the Holy Fathers of the Church. "Carry each other's burdens, and thus fulfill the law of Christ", - called Pososhkov. Only with a common agreement and Christian love for each other, “all will be enriched”, and the royal treasures “will be filled with excesses, because the truth cannot offend anyone”, “the truth is Father God and the truth multiplies riches and glory ...”

Pososhkov's heart aches from the fact that his beloved fatherland is not getting richer, but getting poorer. What causes this general impoverishment (or scarcity)? asks the author of the manuscript presented to Peter I. And he finds an answer to it: from untruth. “The Russian land is deserted in many places, and everything is from untruth, and from unsound and wrong reasoning. And what deaths will begin and all from untruth, ”he exclaims bitterly. Untruth is lawlessness, such a state of society when everyone can offend another; this is when there is no control over the “offenders”, especially if they are wealthy people or come from the upper class, “after all, untruth is firmly rooted in us: whoever can, he crushes him.” Pososhkov sees how “soldiers are fleeing from the offense of their officer,” how peasants, leaving their homes, are fleeing “from landlord arbitrariness and violence,” how they abhor the merchant class and offend in vain.

Peter-Pavel's Fortress

Pososhkov considers truth in the broad sense of the word: it is the accumulation of both material and immaterial wealth. In Pososhkov's view, the accumulation of the country's material wealth does not occur as a result of the play of free economic forces, but is a product of the regulatory and governing activities of the state represented by the monarch. We will be rich then, our nugget declares, when the sovereign power is strong. That is why our petitioner does not advise the tsar to strive for the emancipation of the economic process, but, on the contrary, proposes to establish a rigid state dictatorship. When all subjects of the Russian state submit to the firm sovereign power, then "Under the sun of another, such a glorious, and rich, and brave state will not come" and “all our former reproach will turn into exaltation and glory”.

Pososhkov is not at all opposed to the first estate in the state, but it is in vain to think that by becoming a bourgeois, he will put forward the bourgeoisie in the first place.

If the Orthodox faith, according to Pososhkov, is a necessary condition for state well-being (and this is, first of all, the realization of truth on the Russian land), then its representatives - spiritual leaders and hierarchs - should be the first people in the state. On Russian soil, Pososhkov resolutely declares, it is the clergy that is the highest class, for our spiritual class also depends on the clergy. "doom", and our personal "salvation", and prosperity of the Russian state.

Pososhkov names the military as the next important class in the state. If the clergy protect the Russian from the invisible "enemy and adversary - the devil", then the army protects him from an external, visible enemy. “A military people,” he writes, “a wall and a solid visor to the kingdom.” Meanwhile, there is a lot of untruth there too: they don’t care about the soldiers, they have to endure a lot of insults from higher military officials. Pososhkov advises the sovereign to have "great care" for the soldiers, so that they "were neither food nor clothing scarce."

D. A. Atkinson. Plowing peasant. Colored engraving. State Hermitage

Just as the soul cannot be without the body, he says, so the army cannot exist without the merchant class. Pososhkov knows how to be a zealous defender of the class to which he began to belong. It is in vain, however, to understand his words about the need to enable Russian merchants to trade freely in the sense of the economic freedom sought by the Western bourgeoisie. "Freedom", in the eyes of Pososhkov, there is, most likely, monopoly, which must be assigned to the Russian merchants by royal decree.

Pososhkov's state is not one in which everyone can do what they want, it is not a liberal state, but, on the contrary, a state with clear regulation of economic activity. Trade should be the privilege of one class - merchants, therefore it should be prohibited to others, including foreigners. Only the king can support the merchants. The representative of the early bourgeoisie offers his own way of fighting evil in the merchant environment - this is an external, coercive organization organized by the state power.

Competition, according to Pososhkov, is contrary to God's truth, therefore he treats it with caution and does not consider it a creative economic force, as representatives of the bourgeois economic thought of the West thought.

The peasantry represents the last, lowest class in the hierarchical order of estates. "righteous" states. The peasant in the eyes of Pososhkov is not just a private person who lives for the nobleman and manages for the nobleman - no, he is a functional part of the state organism. Pososhkov does not recognize the innate right of the nobles to own the peasants, he is not for landlord serfdom, but for the state. Pososhkov proposes to the tsar to set the size of the corvée and the rate of dues. At the same time, the arguments in favor of these measures are interesting - “so that His Imperial Majesty would be profitable, and they would(to peasants) it wasn't hard". And here, as we see, Pososhkov puts the state interest above his own.

Because the earth is "the most prolific tributary", then Pososhkov expressed a bold idea for that time: to introduce a tax on land not only for peasants, but also for nobles. "Land of God", Pososhkov argues in a peasant way, and the tsar "Vicar of God on Earth" and therefore the earth "forever queen". When the peasants, along with the nobles, become not land users, but landowners, and when the nobles, along with the peasants, pay for the use of the royal land, then the Russian state "will stand inviolably" and the peasants “they will be full, and some of them will be enriched”. He proposes to introduce an income tax on all cultivated land that has its own specific owner - and not only a peasant, but also a nobleman: “So that no one lives for nothing on the land of His Imperial Majesty”, but everyone would "payers" by the amount of land.

Since the truth in Russia depends on the court, Pososhkov proposes measures to establish “direct justice”, which will protect the weak from the strong and will judge by the “most truthful and impartial” court, like God’s, where “there is no face, neither rich nor poor, nor strong, nor weak - the judgment is one for all”.

A book about poverty and wealth. Fragment of the text of the book

My "The Book of Poverty and Wealth" Pososhkov dedicated "to the most enlightened, most powerful emperor and autocrat Peter the Great, father of the fatherland, the most merciful sovereign" with the humble request that his name remain unknown "lovers of untruth" who, having learned about it "Misery ... they will not allow in the world not a little time to live, but they will stop my stomach". A bad feeling came true. His name was not hidden "from envious people" and especially from "lovers of untruth". In his immortal writing they saw "seditious" thoughts, and in generally useful transformative proposals for the organization of the Russian state - a crime against statehood.

On August 26, 1725, our author was taken "under guard". Although the investigation file does not indicate the reason for the arrest, the fact that he was arrested for "The book published by Ivan Pososhkov, called Poverty with Wealth", is beyond doubt. Imprisonment broke the bodily strength of 72-year-old Ivan Tikhonovich. The Russian businessman, merchant and first bourgeois, publicist and theologian died on February 1, 1726. Imprisoned in the Secret Office "The Book of Poverty and Wealth" was banned for a long time. It was first published in 1842, more than a hundred years after it was written.

Meanwhile, in Russia, the ideas of Adam Smith are widely disseminated (by the way, unlike Pososhkov’s book, his main work “A Study on the Nature and Causes of the Wealth of Nations” was published in our country in 1802–1804 in four volumes and was a resounding success). Under the influence of this research, the book "Experience in the Theory of Taxes" by the future Decembrist Nikolai Turgenev was written (published in 1818). The development of Russian social thought was now largely determined by the ideas of the English economist and his followers. Pososhkov's thoughts required a deeper understanding, a special perception of Russian reality, and therefore only a few of our compatriots were guided by them ... The founders of a new science in Western Europe and Russia - political economy - differed from each other not only in social origin, social status and way of life. The main difference is worldview.

Pososhkov considered the Russian state as a big economic House. Everyone obeys the head of this house, the father of the family, and unquestioningly fulfills his instructions. But to whom much is given, much will be required. The duty of the head of the House is to ensure that the latter is always in order, fit for living. But Pososhkov sees that the only thing left in this House of lasting is the Orthodox faith, on the foundation of which it is based. Other parts are all dilapidated. Ivan Pososhkov advises the monarch to urgently sort out the logs.

Like it or not, but the thousand-year period of Orthodoxy has formed a certain type of people's behavior, without which no reforms in Russia can be successful. The “economic man”, understood as a bunch of selfish interests, devoid of a sense of compassion and love for one’s neighbor, will never take root in our country, no matter how much the liberal reformers of the 1990s wanted this, who did not want to know the truth about their people. Just as a grain that has fallen on stony soil dries up without roots and moisture, so economic ideas that are alien to the Russian spirit do not germinate on Russian soil. During the years of “shock therapy”, the “new Russians” adopted the postulates of Smith’s “economic man” and suddenly found themselves in moral isolation. It has become obvious that Western-style reforms in our country are proceeding with difficulty. A Russian person at the subconscious level cannot accept the pursuit imposed on him only for material wealth. “The spirit of Western European capitalism, which raises the values ​​of wealth and well-being, is based on Protestant religious ethics. Its main postulate - individual chosenness for salvation - is incompatible with the spiritual heritage of Orthodoxy. Orthodoxy has always upheld the equality of all people before God. This is the good news, a symbol of the conscience of our people: “everyone or no one will be saved,” wrote Academician Dmitry Lvov.

Being himself from the lower classes, he apparently had great respect for Ivan Tikhonovich Pososhkov (1652-1726), a native of the peasantry, and highly appreciated his work. By entrusting this topic to me, he, I think, thereby showed me respect and gave me the opportunity to show my potential.
Then I didn’t think about anything like that and worked, on the one hand, out of necessity, and, on the other hand, I myself was very impressed with the personality of the author, his penetrating mind and his asceticism. All this I, apparently, managed to display in my term paper. I received not only an excellent grade for her, but also a kind of praise from the teacher. “In 40 years,” Pyotr Pavlovich said in front of the whole group, “you will pick up this work and think how smart I once was.” That is, as if it was implied that I would never write anything equal to my student work. Unfortunately, I did not save this work and today I am writing about Pososhkov again from scratch.
And again, he amazes me. And not only with a fundamental analysis of the Petrine era, far from us, but with insight into the essence of the times and a prophetic vision of the fate of Russia, its eternal problems and insoluble tasks. You read the hardened, archaic words of Pososhkov and involuntarily startle at some mystical coincidence of times and situations. In this case, it is impossible not to marvel at the mind and analytical instinct of our American friend/enemy Henry Kissinger, who dismissed comparisons of Vladimir Putin with Stalin and Ivan the Terrible, recognizing him as a staunch follower of Peter I.
For Putin himself, of course, this is a flattering comparison. But, firstly, being Peter the Great and following his path, imitating a glorious ancestor, are two completely different things. And, secondly, no one has yet truly calculated what the stubborn Westernism of the great Peter cost the Russian people. I am convinced that if we carefully weigh everything and carefully calculate, it will turn out that the cup of people's troubles will far outweigh all of Peter's victories and achievements.
Yes, the world dignity of the Russian state was raised to an unprecedented height. Yes, not only did Peter himself voice Russia's claim to European leadership, but our friends/enemies, in fact, were forced to recognize this claim as justified. Those were two big pluses. But there were also disadvantages, and not at all smaller ones. For the dignity of the state was raised by mobilizing and straining the entire resource potential of the country. And this, in turn, led to an unprecedented humiliation of the Russian people's "masses" by the imperial state and the ruling elite. Glory from external victories went mainly to Peter and his military companions. All of them were generously rewarded not only with orders and career growth, but also with huge estates. And all the bitterness of troubles, including the death of millions of people and work on new bars, fell on the people's shoulders.

The speller Ivan Pososhkov was neither an open rebel nor a secretive dissident who hated the state and slyly sought to destroy it. On the contrary, being a representative of the lower classes, it was precisely from the state that he expected protection and patronage, and with his thoughts and concerns sought to strengthen its power and increase its wealth. In the preface to his work, he writes: “... It is fitting to worry, if only to try as much as possible about the collection of the treasury, but if only the collected tuna did not perish, and not only the collected, but also the uncollected diligently look, so that nothing lies anywhere for nothing and does not perished." That is, Pososhkov is talking about enriching the entire state through the prudent management of sovereign people, including honest replenishment of the treasury, smart and prudent use of available funds and the prevention of negligence and ownerlessness in anything.
In second place after the state, Ivan Pososhkov is occupied by the people. And on the second - exclusively in order, but not in value. In the same preface, immediately after worries about the state, he hastily remarks: "... And it is fitting to worry about the enrichment of the people." And he adds: “Royal wealth, if all the people, according to their dimensions, were rich in their most domestic wealth.” The Russian speller does not separate the wealth of the state from the well-being of ordinary people and, moreover, does not oppose them to each other. On the contrary, he links both together, and it is precisely by the internal well-being of the people that he, in fact, measures state wealth. According to the logic of Pososhkov, the wealth of the state, separated from the well-being of the people, is false wealth, that is, what later received the name "Potemkin villages."
In the third place after the state and national prosperity, Ivan Pososhkov put in the preface nothing but the truth. But he put it as if the truth was not the top of the value pyramid, but its foundation, a solid basis for human existence. “It is necessary for all of us,” he wrote, “commonly care about immaterial wealth, that is, about the true truth ... Falsehood ... leads to poverty and death leads ... And when the truth is established in us, ... it is impossible for our Russian kingdom not to be enriched and glory rise up." It is said very strongly, convincingly and convincingly. True, according to Pososhkov, this is our main and inexhaustible wealth. Consequently, all our poverty and poverty do not stem from our individual qualities or external circumstances, but solely from lies, deceit and persecution of the truth.

Ivan Pososhkov divided his book into nine chapters, which absorbed all the main problems of the time of Peter the Great. And not only him. Spirituality is followed by military affairs and justice. Then questions of merchants, art and robbers are discussed. And they complete the work with discussions about peasant and land affairs and the royal interest. Reflecting on spirituality, Pososhkov saw two sides to it. “In the spiritual rank,” he wrote, “if there are unlearned people, ... then our pious Christian faith will be completely distorted ... And if it is built in spirituality, then the light of prudence will shine in all the people.” According to Pososhkov, not only the piety of the Christian faith, but also the prudence of the people depend on the purity of thoughts and righteous labors of the clergy. The slightest discord and disorder in the church environment is fraught, in his opinion, not only with an internal ideological split, but also with popular folly.
In justice, Ivan Pososhkov puts the truth at the forefront and, moreover, the reasonable regulation of human misconduct and measures to counter abuse. As for the truth, as an example for judges, he puts the highest judge - God. “God is the truth,” he wrote, “he loves the truth ... Most of all, judges should keep the truth.” Regarding the regulation, Pososhkov wrote the following: “In order to establish the very truth, it is necessary first to build a judicial book with a subtle arrangement for great and small cases, how to solve some cases.” In the first case, Pososhkov insists that the judge should not deviate from the truth and be like God in “straight truth”. In the second case, regarding the court book, he draws the sovereign's attention to the fact that it is this case that he must do in the first place. That is, to start everything with the Sudebnik.
In the merchant class, Ivan Pososhkov was most worried about rivalry, the pursuit of wealth, arrogance and the desire of the strong to humiliate and ruin the weak. Knowing all this firsthand, he wrote: “And it would be nice to do that in the merchant class so that everyone helps each other and does not allow anyone to poverty.” That is, partnership, corporatism and self-sufficiency come to the fore here. In a completely different way, he treated art. “In artists,” he wrote, “if there is no good overseer and proper management, then ... until the end of time he will live in poverty and in infamy.” Pososhkov's artist looks like a talented person, but helpless in practical matters and dependent on those in power. There will be care for him on the part of the sovereign, the artist will reveal his talent, if not, he will die in obscurity and poverty.
Speaking of robbers and citing the orderliness of foreign countries as an example, Ivan Pososhkov emphasized that in Russia there are places without robbers, but only where "there is no indulgence for thieves." That is, everything does not depend on the lower classes, but exclusively on the upper classes: they want to restore order, and there will be order, no, robbery and devastation will reign. He carries out the same idea with respect to the peasantry. “Peasant life,” he wrote, “is meager from nothing else, only from their own laziness, and then from the lack of consideration of the rulers and from the landlord’s violence and from their neglect.” He mentions laziness, in fact, as a figure of speech, and sees the actual evil in the lack of interest of the rulers to deal with peasant affairs, connivance and, accordingly, in the abuses of the landlords who are not controlled by the authorities.
Ivan Pososhkov wrote about the land with undisguised love and care of a zealous owner. “And whoever has his own land,” he noted, “then he clears it and plows it and manures it with manure year by year and the poor land becomes kinder, so he mows hay mowing and interest multiplies from that royal majesty.” Taking care of the actual royal interest, he condemned the practice of collecting taxes, in which "they attempt to tear the skin from one ox, two or three at a time." And he exhorted: “Without a doubt, I can say that all of our great Russia is a renovator, both in spirituality and in citizenship, and not only fills the royal treasure, but also enriches and glorifies everyone.”

Personally, I have nothing to add to all this. I myself am from a peasant family-tribe, I subscribe to every word and bow before the feat of our great and modest truth-seeker and speller, who signed and dated at the end of his three-year work - “the truth is the all-hearted wisher Ivan Pososhkov February 24, 1724”. A little higher, he clarified: “Not for myself for the sake of this writing.” Imagine a smart and intelligent peasant boy from the Moscow region, who made his way into the people, became a successful Novgorod entrepreneur and at the age of 45 joined the "Scientific squad" of Peter I. In his later years, at 69, he gives up everything, sits down to his work and writes it three years by hand, in clumsy letters.
It is possible that Peter himself suggested to Ivan Pososhkov the idea of ​​​​writing a book. In any case, it is Peter Pososhkov who dedicates his secret and risky work, asking the tsar for protection from future ill-wishers, with whom he is voluntarily or involuntarily forced to step on a sore spot for the sake of truth and the Fatherland. But at this time, 52-year-old Peter was already terminally ill. The book did not come to him, but straight to the ill-wishers. On January 27, 1725, Peter died. Almost immediately, Pososhkov was arrested and thrown into the Peter and Paul Fortress, where he died in 1726. So tragically ended the history of the relationship between the all-powerful king and the loyal peasant.
The life story of Ivan Pososhkov is fraught with sadness and joy. Sadness lies not only in the personal fate of the Russian people's speller, who trusted the tsar and was ruined by the courtiers for servile insolence. The fate of Russia is sad, in which, after 300 years, practically nothing has changed. In spirituality, military affairs, courts, business, culture, robbery, the peasantry, land and "royal" issues, all the same problems and the same "achievements". Still, we strive to get through to the "tsar" and still the voice of the people is silenced by the courtiers, and it is more and more difficult for the peasant himself to break through to the tsar. And as for lies, in three hundred years it has risen to such a height in growth and gained such power and density that the people's truth is completely invisible and inaudible because of it.
I rejoice, of course, not this, but quite another. After all, when Ivan Pososhkov was arrested and imprisoned, he had to be isolated from society not only physically, but also spiritually. That is, the arrest and imprisonment should have extended not only to himself, but also to the book and to any scraps of paper that aroused suspicion of “propaganda” of ideas objectionable to the nobility. The cunning courtiers successfully dealt with Pososhkov, but they could not burn his book / the truth. Some of the courtiers saved and hid her from dashing people. And then he secretly passed this work on to his relatives. And those, in turn, kept it like the apple of their eye and passed it from hand to hand. And so it continued until the time and opportunity came to publicize it. And today she walks freely on the Internet.
In this regard, the fate of Ivan Pososhkov's book is quite comparable with Meister Eckhart's "Spiritual Sermons" (1260-1327) and Swami Vivekananda's "Philosophy of Yoga" (1863-1902). Neither one nor the other wrote their insight speeches themselves. Others wrote them down and handed them over to reliable hands, realizing, as in the case of Pososhkov's book, all their wisdom and value. Eckhart preached the ideas of universal humanity and universal religion. Vivekananda saw in Vedanta and yoga a moral ideal and a way to save humanity. The simple Russian peasant Ivan Pososhkov, with his reflections on poverty and wealth, was half a century ahead of Adam Smith's Study on the Nature and Causes of the Wealth of Nations (1723-1790), published in 1776. At the same time, Pososhkov died in captivity and obscurity, and Smith rested in the wealth and glory of the founder of classical political economy.
What is the reason for this injustice? It seems to me that Adam Smith became very successful because, in order to please the rich, he lied on a grand scale and gave them, and only them, a recipe for increasing wealth and power. It was the rich who thanked their selfless guardian. Pososhkov, in his work, emphasized something completely different. He was concerned not so much with wealth in itself, but with overcoming state poverty and people's poverty. He saw the means of getting rid of these troubles in truth, justice and the welfare of the people. The Russian nobility did not need this at all, and, having quietly buried Pososhkov and his work, during the time of Catherine II, she glorified the foreigner Adam Smith and successfully brought the richest country to poverty and a nationwide revolt.
Liberals will call Ivan Pososhkov a utopian and a dreamer, something like a Russian holy fool. But that would be blasphemy and lies. Having traveled from the very bottom to the very top, he knew the life of all layers of Russian society thoroughly, and he felt Russia as a whole as himself. He knew the truth, he wrote the truth, and he desired the truth, and therefore he was the epitome of a realist. I don’t know what would have happened to Russia and the whole world if Peter I had not died so early and so rapidly. If he, in full health, clear mind and good mood, accepted Pososhkov's work for consideration and appreciated the peasant truth contained in it. I am sure that both Russia and the world would be completely different.
But I am a historian and I know well that history does not tolerate the subjunctive mood. Something happened that should have happened according to the objective course of things. It's just that Pososhkov's time, the time for asserting the Russian truth, had not yet come. Even now it is still only glimmering, and with some distant brilliance. But as a historian, I know otherwise. What was once born in society, what is alive in it and does not die, despite all attempts to kill and bury it, sooner or later will definitely manifest itself. Today, the liberal-bourgeois ideas of Adam Smith have completely exhausted themselves and have shown their historical limitations and social failure. Consequently, another time is coming, and completely different ideas are required ... And the simple peasant Russian truth, the truth of universal justice and world prosperity, must triumph.

Alexander AFANASIEV

Another version of the absolutist jurisprudence of the taxable population of Russia, primarily the merchants, is presented in the work of Ivan Tikhonovich Pososhkov (1652-1726). A native of the palace peasants of the Pokrovskoye village near Moscow, Pososhkov, thanks to his talent and energy, became rich and became a merchant.

By the end of his life, he had his own distillery, houses in Novgorod and St. Petersburg, a small estate (250 acres and more than 80 peasants).

Pososhkov had literary abilities, he knew ancient Russian writing, as evidenced by his book “The Mirror of Obvious” (1698), directed against the split, as well as “Paternal Testament” (1720) - a work of a religious and instructive nature, intended for his son.

Pososhkov, this truly Russian nugget, tried to give advice to Peter I even in the field of military reforms. The sad outcome of the battle between the Russians and the Swedes near Narva made a strong impression on him. He writes “Report on the Correction of All Defects” (1700), where he gives direct indications of disorder in military affairs. And in the note “On Military Conduct” (1701), he advises the tsar to refuse the services of foreigners, mercenary officers, who, in his opinion, are unscrupulous, poorly teach Russian military art: you need to rely on Russian people who are no worse than foreigners, they are only must be found and taught.

In The Book of Poverty and Wealth, addressed personally to Peter I, Pososhkov came up with a holistic program of deepening Peter's reforms, "correcting all faults", believing that "our whole great Russia will be renewed both in spirituality and in citizenship, and not only the tsarist treasury will be filled, but the entire Russian population will be enriched and glorified.

The "red thread" of this program is the emperor's competent administration of the country, proceeding from scientific data and carried out in the interests of the entire Russian people. Pososhkov's book is a continuous dialogue, a dispute between its author and Peter I, an attempt to convince the tsar of the need for new, deeper reforms. In it, he appears as if on behalf of a peasant and an artisan, a merchant and an entrepreneur, a representative of the administration and a simple soldier. Therefore, when reading the treatise, a peculiar polyphony of jurisprudence attracts attention. From chapter to chapter, the idea of ​​a continuous inversion” of his ideas about the state and law is growing. ^

This “polyphony” of legal ideas is surprising. It seems that Pososhkov kept records of that multinational council of Russia, which he proposed to Peter I to establish, in order to know the state of affairs in the country and take decisions taking this into account. Moreover, he tries to reproduce in the book “free voice "of almost all classes and ** ranks", except for the local nobility. This is a kind of "cathedral" of ideas, aspirations and wishes of the Russian people. However, this "polyphony" has an author who made a selection of "votes", wrote for each of them a special “party”, expressing both general estate and group interests.

Pososhkov wanted to convene a “Multiple Council” to draw up a new Code to replace the Council Code of 1649. “Just as a high building cannot be approved without a solid foundation, so it is impossible to approve a perfect truth without a detailed presentation by any other measures, since untruth has penetrated very deeply into us.”

He had a very high opinion of the role of law in the life of the state and believed that for a serious “bulkhead” of the house - Russia by the carpenter tsar, it was necessary to create new legislation - the foundation of transformations.

Pososhkov's proposals for new legislation were justified. From the beginning of 1700, special commissions worked, which were supposed to draw up the Petrine Code of Laws on the basis of the Cathedral Code of 1649 and new legal documents. By 1720, 4 volumes of laws were prepared, but the new code was not approved.

When substantiating the essence of the state, Pososhkov actively uses the Russian patriarchal tradition and Orthodox approaches when he explains that power is predetermined from above, that it is God-chosen and god-like, and relations between people in the state are similar to the relations of parents and children, as it has been going on since the time of the forefather Adam. Here is one of these maxims: "We honor our monarch as God and carefully preserve his honor and fulfill his will with all diligence." From such ideas, Pososhkov drew a conclusion about the sovereignty of the tsarist government. “The tsar,” he writes, “is an all-perfect autocrat, our monarch is free in our land ... Our tsar is an autocratic ruler, as he commands to be, so befits it to be unchanged, and neither to the right nor to the left is motionless; as God owns the whole world, so the king in his power has power. Pososhkov knows other forms of government, but his sympathies are on the side of the autocracy.

The patriarchal tradition was most clearly reflected in his interpretation of the state as a big house, where everyone has their own specific rights and obligations. The well-being and prosperity of the house-state depends on the consent of all the people living in it. The monarch is the head of such a house, the father of the “family of estates”. As in a family everything should be built on obedience to its head, so in the state all people unquestioningly obey the king.

Next to the idea of ​​the common good as the goal of political life, the author puts the truth, which has a divine nature and is therefore obligatory for the king. In his activities, he must be guided by the truth, take care “of the indulgence of the truth, when the truth is established in us and firmly rooted, it is impossible for our Russian kingdom not to be enriched and exalted with glory.”

Pososhkov is trying to prove to Peter I how important it is to find rational legal solutions for updating the state and legislation. “More material wealth, we all need to take care of immaterial wealth, that is, the true truth.” And when this truth - “immaterial wealth” is found, it is extremely important that it be understood. Pososhkov, as it were, leads Peter I to the idea that the Book of Poverty and Wealth” is nothing more than “intangible wealth” in the hands of a reformer, and it must be used to combat untruth in the actions of the authorities, to restore order in the government of the country. The idea of ​​a bulkhead” on the log of Russia-home and the emerging image of the tsar-carpenter are very important in the analysis of Pososhkov’s views.

Councils in the history of Russia were not uncommon, but the idea of ​​​​Pososhkov to convene representatives from the entire population of the country to draw up a new Code under the conditions of an absolute monarchy (if we recall that Zemstvo sobors actually did not meet during the reign of Alexei Mikhailovich) was revolutionary. In addition, Pososhkov proposed to convene representatives from all of Russia not according to the class, but according to the technocratic principle of the division of labor in the state: 2-3 representatives each from the clergy, the administration of “high and low rank”, the nobility and merchants, “fiscals”, soldiers and experienced peasants from the elders and sots, "who were in all sorts of needs." Then the Code drawn up must be “discussed by all the people in the most free voice, and not under duress, so that in that Code, both noble and low-born, both rich and poor, and both high-born and low-born, and the farmers themselves would be offended and there was no oppression from ignorance of their daily existence in that newly corrected presentation.

Pososhkov urged the autocrat to dialogue with the people through their representatives. He tried to convince the emperor that the introduction of the "people's council" did not reduce the role of "his majesty the autocracy", but for the sake of the true truth, one should listen to the opinion of representatives of different classes, because "every wound in himself feels better." The tsar needs to create such a social situation in which everyone, "without fear of anything, would submit his proposals for correction." Questioning the principle of autocracy in law-making, Pososhkov declares that “without many councils and without a free voice, no deeds are possible, since God has not given perfect understanding to anyone in any matter alone ...” ((and

All the “ranks” of the state should be represented in the “multinational council”, which will express the will of all sections of society in laws (which should radically change the alignment of political forces in favor of the emerging bourgeoisie).

However, the thinker does not stop halfway. The monarchy, ‘pacifying’ the estates, needs to be not only a legal, HO and political force. And for this, it needs to carry out such reforms that will not only enrich the various sections of the people, but also create a powerful state economy, which will further raise the authority of the monarch.

As part of these reforms, Pososhkov, proposing to weaken feudal duties in the countryside (regulation of peasant duties, the abolition of the poll tax, the introduction of peasant land leases from landowners, etc.), acts as a very peculiar ideologist of the peasant monarchy - not only patriarchal, but also autocratic power future wealthy sections of the city and countryside. The centuries-old dreams of the peasants about a people's monarchy, without intermediaries between the tsar and the people, received new, completely unexpected forms of expression. They were placed on firm ground of economic interest and mutual benefit, since favorable conditions for the development of peasant farms would be "paid" by taxes from the growing peasant "profit".

Absolutism must create conditions for the development of industry and trade. At the same time, Pososhkov's persistent concern for small industrialists and “low-purchase” merchants draws attention to itself. He believed that the state should patronize not only manufacturers (“manufacturers”), but also enterprising people, inventors of new industries - “fictionalists”. Moreover, these people should not only have a lifetime patent for their “craft”, but also enjoy such support from the state, which, with the help of subsidies, would turn their workshop into a manufactory. In the future, the state should organize loans for these people against their capital in order to “grow” large enterprises. Pososhkov was very interested in the idea of ​​“cultivation” by the state of large enterprises from the “invention” of a new business through the open form of the guild organization of handicraft production to small, and then large manufactories.

Pososhkov is characterized by a sharp criticism of the feudal-serf order from the standpoint of common sense. “If anyone wants to look with intelligent eyes at our Orthodox Russian life and at all our behavior and deeds, then he will not see common sense in any thing.” From these positions red tape, bribery, bribery, arbitrariness of officials, use of power for selfish purposes are exposed. “Many multitudes” of people are imprisoned in Russia without any fault, and in them “without a verdict of judges ... they die.” He gave an example of how one “detective”, having discovered that two carpenters did not have passports, arrested them and sent them to Novgorod. There, the judge put them in prison, where a year later one of them died, and the other was released on receipt only two years later. In another example, he told how he himself was subjected, without any reason or reason, to a week-long arrest by order of Prince Golitsin. In the end, he remarked indignantly: “I am truly surprised that the judges have a temper, if they put them in jail, they keep them for five or six years or more without investigation.”

An atmosphere of violence has developed in the state, where “whoever can, he crushes”, and the disenfranchised and weak are ruined, where the fever of bribery corrodes the entire state apparatus like rust, and decrees are not carried out, cases are sorted out slowly, where judges are afraid of “the strong and and cater to them.

In a number of specific examples, Pososhkov showed how the nobles did not comply with the royal decrees, evaded themselves and hid their sons from military and civil service, how they paid off their duties with bribes. At the same time, in his criticism, he boldly denounced not only the ordinary nobility, but also the courtiers, the court camarilla, pointing out that the representatives of the latter, instead of fulfilling their duty, used their high position to arrange personal affairs, to enrich themselves.

Pososhkov believed that the arbitrariness of the nobles, courtiers, officials and judges is the main reason for all the “faults” in the state and the impoverishment of the Russian land: “There are many robberies and other thefts and all sorts of insults to people from nothing but the wrong court. And the peasants, leaving their homes, are fleeing from untruth, and the Russian land has become desolate in many places, and everything is from untruth, and from a wrong decision, and no matter what the losses are, they are all from untruth.

In the works of Pososhkov, the grave consequences for the country of serfdom are depicted. The poverty of the state treasury is directly proportional to the poverty of the Russian peasantry, the main reason for which the author considers the oppression of the landowners, their merciless exploitation. Here is just one cry of the peasant soul from the book On Poverty and Wealth ': “Even the eyes do not want to see how the landlords impose unbearable duties on their peasants, for there are such inhuman nobles that during working hours they do not give their peasants a single day to work yourself. And all the arable and hay time is taken away from them; or taking away what is due from the peasants in dues or table supplies, then they also demand extra fees from them. And by this excess the peasantry is driven into poverty, and whichever peasant becomes richer, then his taxes will be increased.

Pososhkov denounced not only the extremes of exploitation, but also the feudal arguments of the masters: “And for such an order, a peasant can never get rich from such a landowner, and many nobles say:“ Don’t let the peasant grow, but shear him like a sheep, naked ". The bold and vivid facts of the exploitation of the peasantry by the nobility, cited by Pososhkov, showed that the main reason for the impoverishment of the state was the nobles: some leave and run away to low-lying places, others to outskirts, and others to foreign places, and there they inhabit other people's places, and make their own empty.

Smashing arrows were also fired at the churchmen. Like other representatives of the "scientific squad", Pososhkov denounced the darkness and ignorance, drunkenness and greed of the Orthodox clergy. He considered these vices the main reason for the split and the appearance of heresies, as well as the spread of other faiths among the Russian people. As evidence of the fall of the authority of Orthodoxy, he cited facts about empty churches. For example, he noted that “in Veliky Novgorod, barely a hundredth of the population adheres to ancient piety ... And so it was until the current 1723 in the churches empty, that even on a weekly (Sunday. - H.A.) day, two or three real parishioners did not was."

Significant is his first letter to the locum tenens of the patriarchal throne, Metropolitan Yavorsky, stating the ignorance and lack of culture of spiritual servants: it doesn’t happen at all, because he himself doesn’t understand anything, and there’s nothing for him to understand, and he himself hasn’t been taught to eat from his elders, and in our Slavic books a lot of necessary things have not been printed, and of course they have nothing to know . Describing the ignorance of the Orthodox clergy, Pososhkov supported his conclusions with facts: “I saw in Moscow a presbyter from the noble house of the boyar Lev Kirillovich Naryshkin, who could not give a sensible answer to this question to a Tatar woman. What can a rural priest say if he does not know what the Christian faith is based on?

The citation of the facts of disorder can go on and on. There are so many of them that it is enough for more than one lecture. The main thing is that although criticism of the ulcers and vices of the then Russian life was undoubtedly the strong point of Pososhkov's talent, his program of correcting all the faults in the Russian state was no less profound. It was aimed at the further development of the country, original thoughts were expressed in it about measures for jpocry industry, the prosperity of trade, a project of a kind of peasant reform was proposed (to limit serfdom and landowner arbitrariness), a draft legal reform and the adoption of a new Code or Code of Codes were put forward, requirements for legal proceedings, education of the masses, and much more.

Pososhkov's sober judgment underlies the idea of ​​a clear division of labor between estates in the life of the state, which goes back to Plato. The nobility should be engaged in military service, and the merchants - in industry and trade. Therefore, he strongly recommended not to allow the aristocracy to trade, not to mention the military, peasants, clergy and bureaucracy. If the representatives of the latter enter the path of trade, then they must leave their former ranks, titles, class and enroll in the merchant class. By this event, Pososhkov hoped to eliminate competition to the merchants in domestic trade, especially from the nobility. He also emphasized the state benefits from the implementation of this measure: “When the bargaining is given to the Russian merchants free, so that not only foreigners, but also foreigners do not interfere with them, then the duty tax will become high.”

Pososhkov developed Naryshkin's protectionist ideas to encourage domestic and limit "overseas" merchants. The Russians can produce everything themselves, supply the domestic market with their goods. Moreover, he believed that with the expansion of domestic production, Russian merchants could successfully compete with foreign merchants on the European market, rightly stating: “For us, although they will not carry their goods to us at all, we can live without their goods, and they they cannot live without our goods for ten years.” Already in the reign of Elizabeth, the Russian metallurgical industry entered the European market as the main supplier of iron, and linen manufactories as suppliers of sailing material.

With such measures in the interests of the merchant class, Pososhkov sought to eliminate, on the one hand, the competition of the nobility in domestic trade, and on the other hand, to push back foreign merchants in foreign trade, limit their greedy appetites, which, in his opinion, would lead to further development of industrial production in Russia. production and the flourishing of its domestic and foreign trade, in which the Russian merchants would play the first violin.

Pososhkov paid much attention to the change in the status of the peasants, bluntly stating that “the landlords are not the landowners for centuries ... but the All-Russian autocrat is their direct owner.” He put forward a demand to limit feudal exploitation: corvée, the peasant must establish taxes in such a way that he can pay the landowner and the state and feed himself without need". violates the rules for levying taxes on serfs, the peasant can apply to the court. The court is obliged to deprive such a landlord of his land and peasants and write them off to the sovereign. Then "even the most poisonous landowner will reduce himself and will not ruin the peasants."

It is impossible to report on all the activities of Pososhkov's state-legal program in one lecture. Therefore, I will finish it on the legal part, as the most interesting for future lawyers. Pososhkov spoke very highly of justice: “I, in my opinion, put the court case and judicial administration very highly, even above all the arts in the world.” He offered

to make the royal laws accessible to the population by composing a new "judicial book" with genuine reasoning "for all sorts of things." The purpose of the book is to simplify the legislation, to make it clear, effective: “And if a new presentation is not adopted to solve all cases, then it is impossible to have a right court, because every judge has his own mind and judges as he pleases, but it is necessary to put it that way. so that even the most unthinking judge can judge according to the law.

To do this, it is important to codify ancient and current laws, i.e., to collect ancient judicial Codes, new statutory articles and decrees, both printed and written, for civil and military departments, to make extracts from sentences in cases that have not been answered by any Code (obviously, Pososhkov had in mind the Code of Tsar Alexei Mikhailovich), nor 'New Decree Articles'. Then you need to draw up a “new book of justice”, in which “for all cases there would be indicated articles, clear with a perfect arrangement.” To draw up such a new code of laws, Pososhkov considered it expedient to use everything suitable in Russian conditions from foreign judicial codes and charters, both German and Turkish and others.

Pososhkov proposed a number of norms of judicial ethics, requiring OT officials to be honest; solve cases of minor crimes quickly, not to delay the analysis of serious crimes. He charged governors and judges with the duty to get acquainted with the newly arrested every day.

If Tatishchev allowed the presentation of gifts, then Pososhkov sharply condemned this practice of Petrine institutions, and especially in the judiciary. He wrote: “And gifts from the plaintiffs and the defendants should not be accepted at all, since the gift blinds even the eyes of the wise. If someone accepts gifts from someone, he will help him in every possible way, but encroach on the other, and the matter will never be right and sensibly judged, but on one side it is crooked. And for the same reason, one should not accept honors from lower judges to higher judges, so as not to sin in wrong reasoning before God and the king.

Pososhkov made a number of proposals in procedural law. He advised Udieu to try to reconcile the plaintiff and the defendant at the beginning of the process, recommended that he become well acquainted with the materials of the inquiry and investigation, give detailed recommendations on the procedure for the trial and clarify the truth at the court. or by kindred feeling - stigmatization and cruel punishment. Pososhkov is especially harsh when he talks about the trial of schismatics, demanding a death sentence for them. He recommends the same to the court in relation to thieves, recidivists and robbers.

Pososhkov demanded an end to judicial and administrative red tape and put forward a number of measures to eliminate it. In particular, he recommended piecework wages with detailed pricing for certain cases (merchants, contractors). In his opinion, this will lead to saving several tens of thousands of rubles in the treasury for the state. In addition, clerks will try to prepare and skip more cases, and petitioners will not waste time and money on a long wait. Pososhkov considered it necessary that the payment did not turn into bribery, “so that no one would accept any gifts in excess of the specified tariff from any business in excess of the earned money, for this, all judges and clerks” should be given great and cruel fear.

The implementation of Pososhkov's plans would have led to a change in the alignment of Russian political forces: the nobility would have weakened and the role of the merchants and "manufacturers", as well as the prosperous peasantry, would have increased. In the end, it would be possible to achieve parity between the nobility and the capitalist elements. Yes, and the nobility, renting land to rich peasants on the terms of entrepreneurial lease, would be different. However, all this could happen if absolutism, having made concessions to the bourgeoisie, began to pursue a certain pro-capitalist course of domestic policy. Such an orientation is to some extent beneficial to the absolutist bureaucratic state, since in the conditions of a balance of forces between the nobility and the bourgeoisie, the authorities receive greater independence of action.

The concept of a new monarchy based on the wealthy people is carried out very consistently in Pososhkov's teachings. The thinker assumed the strengthening of the role of the state in the course of reforms, considered it simply necessary. “In the same way, if the earth becomes very turfy, and until the grass on it is burned with fire, then it is not possible to sow wheat on it, so it is necessary to exterminate the evil old age among the people by force.”

However, Peter I and Pososhkov understood this “evil obsolescence” differently. Peter's reforms were a revolution at the "top", they severed all ties with old Russia. Pososhkov, on the contrary, suggested that the tsar take into account the old national traditions, the opinions of the broad masses of the people for a serious “bulkhead” of the dilapidated Russian house. Thus, he formulated the concept of a people's monarchy without intermediaries between the king and the people, on the basis of mutual economic interest and benefit.

The anti-noble and anti-bureaucratic meaning of Pososhkov's work did not go unnoticed. On August 26, 1725, he was arrested by the Privy Office and died in prison.