Zemsky Sobor for Modernizing the Armed ForcesThe Moscow kingdom was convened under Tsar Fyodor Alekseevich in the year 1682. The abolition of localism fell on the same year, which marked a major step towards democratization and the improvement not only of Russian troops, but of the whole system of administrative administration as a whole. This measure became a harbinger of the famous Peter's reforms, the essence of which was to eliminate the principle of nobility in determining for service and highlighting personal merit.
The most important reform in the 17th century was the abolition ofparochialism. At what tsar the transformation took place - one of the most interesting topics in Russian historiography. The corresponding decision was made under Fedor Alekseevich, whose reign was marked by a series of reforms aimed at strengthening the autocratic power. With him, an attempt was made to change the system of administrative and ecclesiastical administration, but because of his early death this measure was not realized.
Particular importance in Russian history has a year1682. The abolition of parochialism was perhaps the most important of its events, since it led to a radical transformation of a significant part of society. But, before talking about the essence and significance of this reform, it is necessary to identify the main features of the time under consideration.
The end of the 17th century was a transitional period in lifeour country, because then the government clearly realized the need for changes and serious reforms. At the same time, the old orders were still very strong, including the system of localism. So in the old days they called the principle of substitution of posts in accordance not with personal services, but according to the degree of nobility and nobility of this or that person. This led to endless disputes between representatives of boyar families who claimed higher places, referring to their ancient and noble origin.
This state of affairs complicated the work of the state apparatus and military forces. After all, the essence of parochialism was reduced not to the abilities of man, but to the definition of the degree of his nobility and gentility.
Here it is necessary to say a few words about the compositionMoscow boyars: it included representatives of the ancient metropolitan aristocracy, the incoming Lithuanian and Tatar princes, as well as the nobles of the appanage principalities attached to Moscow. All of them, as a rule, were members of the State Duma, engaged in civil and military management. However, the endless debate about which of them stood higher hindered the work of the growing state apparatus, which needed more flexible system for effective control.
Very often during military campaigns boyars andthe voevodas were occupied not so much in the conduct of military operations as in finding out which of them was supposed to be the commander, and to whom the subordinates, which, of course, sometimes led to unfortunate consequences.
Zemsky Sobor on the abolition of localism, in fact,changed all the usual administrative structure in our country. After all, for a few centuries the system of state administration was based on this principle. Therefore, naturally, the question arises of the reasons for the stability of this system. There are several reasons for this. Firstly, the Moscow princes and kings themselves supported it, actively participating in the disputes of the boyars and defining them for service by origin and degree of kinship. Secondly, the constant growth of the Moscow nobility at the expense of noblemen from other appanage principalities required some order in the distribution of posts, and parochialism with its stable structure was best suited for this. Thirdly, this order was normatively formalized in digit books and pedigrees, which from generation to generation served as the basis for disputes and claims.
The verdict on the abolition of parochialism became naturalconsequence of the need to eliminate the unwieldiness and confusion of the state apparatus based on this system. However, the modern historian D. Volodikhin notes some positive features of this system, indicating that it ensured the harmony and some strength of the entire system. According to the researcher, this principle preserved for a while the unity of the estate, despite the disputes and bickering over the rank occupied. However, most researchers still agree that this rule of substitution of posts had a very negative effect on the management system.
Based on the foregoing, we can name the followingthe reasons for the abolition of parochialism: the need to create a more efficient and mobile administrative structure, the desire of the tsarist government to attract talented and capable servicemen to the service. This reform should be seen as a continuation of the policy of the previous Moscow rulers, first of all Mikhail Fedorovich, in creating the so-called regiments of the new system. So, already at the beginning of the 17th century, the need to overcome the old system of staffing became obvious.
New meeting of representatives of the clergygathered in the year 1682. The abolition of localism became one of the main consequences of its administrative decisions. However, it should be noted that this cathedral was dedicated to more religious moments and was a continuation of the church reform. At this meeting, the main issues for consideration were the construction of new dioceses, monasteries, the rectification of the State Book. However, the need to abolish the outdated model for the replacement of military and government ranks was so mature that they decided to destroy the discharge books. It can be said that the decision taken to abolish the old system of service was a step forward in the military and public administration.
Одна из важнейших реформ в истории России была held in the year 1682. The abolition of parochialism highlighted the promotion at the expense of personal service. Therefore, Peter I cannot be considered the progenitor of this reform: the first emperor only strengthened and legislatively designed what existed before him.
