Already in the 1930s, bourgeois historiography showed a certain bias in assessing the socio-economic processes that took place in European countries in the XIV - XV and XVII centuries. It is reflected, in particular, in the works of the German historian W. Abel, as well as S. M. Keruel, D. Grisiotti-Kretschmann 1 and others. The emphasis placed on the "crisis phenomena" in the European economy during these periods, and their promotion to the first place as supposedly determining factors of price movements, population, land "desolation", etc., were based, on the one hand, on an earlier historiographical tradition dating back to the works of German and Austrian historians of the late 19th and early 20th centuries. - K. T. Inama-Sterneg, K. Lamprecht, A. Grund, O. Schlueter, etc., on the other hand - on the conclusions inspired by research on the crisis phenomena in the agricultural sector of capitalist countries in the 20s of our century, in particular on the works of M. Soering, that is, they sinned with outright modernization2 .

These tendencies were further developed in the bourgeois historiography of the post-war period. This is how detailed concepts of the "crisis" of Western European feudalism emerged in the 14th and 15th centuries. The crisis of the capitalist economy dominated the consciousness of bourgeois historians and encouraged them to extend it to the phenomena of the distant historical past. Here we should first point out a number of contemporary works by the already mentioned historian W. Abel and his West German compatriots F. Abel. Lutge, E. Kelter, and English researchers G. R. Trevor-Roper, M. Dobb 3, M. Postan, and others.

1 W. Abel. Agrarkrisen und Agrarkonjunktur in Mitteleuropa vom 13. bis zum 19. Jahrhundert. Berlin. 1935; S. M. Kerhuel. Les mouvements de longe duree des priХ. 1935; J. Griziolli-Kretschmann. Il problema del trend secolare nelle fluttuazioni dei prezzi. 1935; B. H. Slichervan Bath. Die Europaischen Agrarverhaltnisse im 17. und der ersten Halfte des 18. Jahrhunderts. "A.A.G. Bijdragen", 13, 1965, biz. 134.

2 See V. E. Maye R. Voprosy agrarnoi istorii Germanii XIV - XV vvakh [Issues of the Agrarian history of Germany in the XIV-XV centuries]. in the coverage of bourgeois historians of Germany. "The Middle Ages". Issue No. 26. 1964, pp. 118-122, 125, etc.

3 E. Kelter. Das deutsche Wirtschaftsleben des 14. und 15. Jahrhunderts im Schatten des Pestepidemien. "Jahrbucher fur Nationalokonomie und Statistik". Bd. 165, H. 2 - 3, 1953; W. Abel. Die Wustungen des ausgehenden Mittelalters. Stuttgart. 1955; F. Lutge. Das 14 - 15. Jahrhundert in der Sozial und Wirtschaftsgeschichte. "Jahrbucher fur Nationalokonomie und Statistik". Bd. 162, H. 3. 1950; H. R. Trevor-Roper. The General Crisis of the Seventeenth Century. "Past and Present", 1959, N 16. See also discussion articles on this issue by E. Kossman, R. Mounier and L. Stone, etc. в "Past and Present", 1960, N 18; M. Dobb. Studies in the Development of Capitalism. L. 1946; ejusd. Transition from Feudalism to Capitalism. L. 1963; M. Postan. Die wirtschaftlichen Grundlagen der mittelalterlichen Gesellschaft. "Jahrbucher der Nationalokonomie und Statistik", 1954, August.

page 80
In the 1950s, these problems became the subject of special scientific symposia and sessions, 4 and the concepts of the "crisis of feudalism" of the 14th and 15th centuries became widespread not only in bourgeois literature, but also in the works of some Marxist historians of Western European countries. 5
Soviet historians-medievalists subjected these concepts of the "crisis" of the XIV - XV centuries to detailed and reasoned criticism. The beginning was laid by the article of Academician E. A. Kosminsky, who rejected the principle of considering the economic evolution of European countries only in terms of taking into account the movement of population and factors from the sphere of exchange, ignoring the nature of the evolution of productive forces, production relations and class struggle. Evaluating the factual material used to confirm the thesis about the "crisis of feudalism" of the XIV-XV centuries at the X International Congress of Historians in Rome in 1955, the authors of the collective report M. Molla, M. Postan, P. Johansen, A. Sapori and S. Ferlinden - E. A. Kosminsky drew attention to the inconsistency and lack of reliability of the materials used by them. information. At the same time, E. A. Kosminsky emphasized those essentially progressive shifts in the economic structure of European states, in particular England, which, while causing conjunctural declines of a quantitative order, nevertheless prepared for the rapid economic development of this country at the end of the XV - XVI centuries .6
In his articles, M. A. Barg focused primarily on elucidating structural changes in the economic system and land relations of European countries, which were associated in the XIV-XV centuries with the transition from a domenic to a "parcel-peasant" commodity economy. On the other hand, having carefully analyzed the economy of the peasant economy during the period under review, he convincingly showed its connection with commodity-economic, rather than capitalist, farm forms of production. On this basis, M. A. Barg made a reasonable conclusion that the proponents of the concept of the "crisis of feudalism" of the XIV-XV centuries pass off the crisis of the domenic-manorial system as a "crisis of feudalism" as a certain historical mode of production. In reality, having completed this undoubtedly painful reconstruction, feudalism continued to maintain its vitality, adapting its institutions and requirements to the new economic conditions created by the accelerated development of commodity production and exchange. 7 In the same general methodological direction, but revealing new facets and aspects of the problem, the concept of the "crisis of feudalism" of the XIV - XV centuries was analyzed by Yu. A. Korkhov and Yu. L. Bessmertny8. They emphasized that

4 "The Transition from Feudalism to Capitalism". A Symposium by P. M. Sweezy, H. K. Takahaschi, M. Dobb., R. Hilton, Ch. Hill. L. 1954; "Une discussion historique. Du feodalisme au capitalisme. par. G. Levebvre, S. Procacci et A. Soboub. "Pensee", 1956, N 65.

5 See, for example, E. J. Hobsbowm. The General Crisis of the European Economy in the 17-th Century. "Past and Present", 1965, N 5, 6.

6 E. A. Kosminsky. Were the 14th and 15th centuries a time of decline for the European economy? "The Middle Ages". Issue X. 1957, p. 260 - 261, 263 - 264, 269 - 271. See also: M. Mollat, M. Postan, P. Johansen, A. Sapori, Ch. Verlinden. L'economie europeene aux deux derniers siecles du Moyenage. "Comitato Internazionale di Science Storiche X Congresso Internazionale di Scienze Storiche. Roma 4 - 11 Settembre, 1955. Relazioni, VI".

7 M. A. Barg. On the so-called "crisis of feudalism" in the XIV-XV centuries. Voprosy Istorii, 1960, No. 8; izd. On the question of the beginning of the disintegration of feudalism in Western Europe. Voprosy Istorii, 1963, No. 3.

8 Yu. A. Korkhov. Discussion on the transition from feudalism to capitalism. "The Middle Ages". Vol. XV, 1959; see also the review of Yu. L., Bessmertny on the collection of articles "Transition from feudalism to capitalism" by P. M. Sweezy, H. K. Takahashi, M. Dobb, R. Hilton, K. Hill. London. 1954. Voprosy Istorii, 1955, No. 12.

page 81
the events of economic history cannot be fruitfully studied in isolation from their socio-class content and the class struggle in antagonistic societies.

Somewhat later, on the basis of an in - depth study of German material, from the standpoint of identifying the role of productive forces and production relations in the agrarian evolution of German lands in the XIV - XV centuries, a deep and carefully documented critique of the concepts of the "crisis of feudalism" of the XIV-XV centuries in West German bourgeois historiography was given by the Soviet historian V. E. Mayer. He proved the complete failure of research methods and basic conclusions on this issue in the works of such West German historians as W. Abel, F. Lutge, E. Kelter and others. In addition, V. E. Mayer revealed their tendentious modernization and attempts to use materials related to the consequences of the "black death" of the mid-14th century to indirectly support the argument in favor of using such methods of war that, having eliminated the enemy's manpower, would have left material goods intact. 9
In the 17th century. In Europe, the socio-economic situation in comparison with the XIV - XV centuries was already qualitatively different. In a number of countries, capitalist development achieved significant successes, and the first early bourgeois revolutions took place, which led to the formation of the bourgeois Republic of the United Provinces and the collapse of Stuart absolutism in England. Feudalism as a whole was dealt a series of painful blows, from which it only partially recovered, and the transformations that were going on latently in its bowels prepared new surprises for it. Complex processes also took place in the economy of the first two bourgeois countries - the Republic of the United Provinces and in England, as a result of which the former was drawn into a stage of stagnation and decline, while the latter stubbornly and consistently secured a leading position.

These and other events could not but cause symptoms of stagnation, or even decline, in individual countries, industries, and industries, especially in agriculture. On this basis, in the post-war years, the theory of the pan-European "crisis" of the 17th century became widely spread, and under the pen of some bourgeois historians, it even turned into the "crisis of capitalism" of the 17th century, which was also critically evaluated by Soviet historians. A.D. Lyublinskaya was the most argumentative critic in the historiographical chapters of her monograph. A.D. Lyublinskaya conducted a polemic both in methodological terms from the standpoint of the Marxist-Leninist understanding of the economic essence of feudal and capitalist modes of production, and in the direction of analyzing argumentation and factual data, which were based in their conclusions by R. Mounier, G. R. Trevor-Roper, E. Hobsbawm, and others. This analysis shows the inconsistency of many facts, attempts of supporters of the concept of the "general crisis of feudalism" of the XVII century. mechanically combine phenomena of a completely different order, giving them the significance of a main road in the overall development of the process, "pull up" any more or less large-scale insurrection to the level of a revolution (G. R. Trevor-Roper), etc. 10 .

The creation of such new "models" of historical European economic development in the 14th-15th and 17th centuries was accompanied by an outwardly very impressive argument: large layers of previously unused archival material were mobilized, its statistical processing was carried out, dynamic graphs and diagrams were compiled, etc.-

9 V. E. Mayer. Op. ed., pp. 119-120.

10 A.D. Lyublinskaya. French Absolutism in the first third of the 17th century, Moscow, 1965, pp. 6-113.

page 82
graphic studies, the study of price movements, wages, exchange rates of money and precious metals, etc. However, the conclusions based on these studies were most often biased. The determining role was assigned to phenomena (and then some) that occurred in the sphere of distribution and exchange of material goods, while the sphere of their production, production relations were given a subordinate place, or they were completely excluded from consideration. Neo-Malthusian ideas were persistently postulated, according to which the movement of the population, the quantity and price of primarily agricultural products are supposedly crucial for the overall course of economic and social development of society. In the field of agricultural research, the center of gravity was shifted to the study of agriculture, agricultural technology, and the development of tools. The results of production were considered most often in an abstract, non-historical context, as the result of some self-development of economic categories that are not related to a certain method of production relations. Feudalism was only briefly referred to as the period of natural economy domination, and later this term was generally replaced by such terms as "pre-industrial society", "the period of direct agricultural consumption" , etc.

The new concrete material obtained in the course of these studies is significant in volume and very valuable, but it was often interpreted with the pre - determined goal of "proving" the absence of a relationship between the process of development of productive forces and the socio-political development of society. One of the main tasks was to "refute" the doctrine of socio-economic formations, which is the cornerstone of the theory of historical materialism, on the basis of "new scientific data". In this way, in relation to the period under review, the "historical justification" of the notorious theory of "social convergence"was provided. The described historiographical phenomena were widespread, but not all bourgeois historians enjoyed the same recognition and gradually began to meet with an ever-increasing critical reaction. In this article, we try to highlight this problem on the basis of the Dutch-Belgian material.

If we turn to the Dutch and Belgian historiography of the 50s and the first half of the 60s, it looks multi-faceted, and its development was not complete without the struggle of various trends. Such major historians of the older generation as the Belgian L. Verrier, the Dutch H. A. Enno van Helder, J. H. van Dillen 11, continued to conduct their research methodologically and methodically mainly in the traditions of the first half of the XX century. While they focused on the processes of production and the analysis of land relations, they did not assign a decisive place to the sphere of distribution and exchange.

N. V. Posthumus, who has already been an ardent proponent of the cyclical theory, paid more attention to the study of price movements, wages, and demography12 . A new generation of Belgian historians and economists Sh. Ferlinden, J. Kraibeeks, E. Scholliers, H. Van Der Wee, P. Lindemans, the leading contemporary Dutch author.

11 L. Verriest. Le servage dans le comte de Hainaut. Bruxelles. 1910; ejusd. Feodalite en Hainaut. CemblouХ. 1949; ejusd. Le regime seigneurial dans le comte de Hainaut du XI-e siecle a la Revolution. Louvain. (1956); H. A. Enno van Gelder. De Nederlandsche dorpen in de 16-e eeuw. Amsterdam. 1953; J. G. van Dillen. Amsterdam marche mondial des metaux precieux au XVII-e et au XVIII-e siecles. "Revue Historeque". 1926, N 152: ejusd. Bronnen tot de geschiedenis van het bedrijfsleven en het gildewesen van Amsterdam, d. 1 - 2. s'-Gravenhage. 1929 - 1933; ejusd. Leiden als industriestad tiidens de Republiek. "Tijdschrift voor Geschiedenis", Jg. 59. 1946.

12 N. W. Posthumus. De geschiedenis van de Leidsche lakenindustrie. d. III, s'- Gravenhage. 1939. biz. 1124 - 1161; ejusd. Nederlandsche prijsgeschiedenis, d. I. Lei-Hen. 1943.

page 83
the historian-economist B. H. Sliher van Bath, the well-known Belgian economist J. A. van Houtte13 evolved or revolved in the circle of the methodological and methodological techniques of historical and economic research described above. Whereas in S. Ferlinden, J. Kraibeeks, and E. Scholliers this is noticeable from the very perspective of their research, B. H. Sliher van Bat in his consolidated work built the entire periodization based on the priority of consumption over production, 14 while ignoring the fact that the size of production and consumption are determined not only by the population size, but above all by the level of development productive forces and the social conditions of people's lives. Based on the goals of the study formulated in this way, B. H. Sliher van Bath proposed to divide the entire epoch up to 1850 into the following three periods:: 1) closed family economy (not chronologically dated); 2) 500-1150-direct agricultural consumption; 3) 1150-1850 - indirect agricultural consumption 15 . Thus, the border between feudalism and capitalism, which are united within the framework of a common, third period, is eliminated.

Modern Belgian and Dutch historians and economic historians also have a subtext in their research that aims to overthrow the periodization of the economic development of the Belgian territories created in the first third of the XX century by A. Pirenne and his school. In political terms, the apologetics of "European integration", its regional product - the Benelux, as well as the ideas of "Atlantic solidarity"are more or less clearly traced in the works of some historians of this direction .16
However, when it comes to the concepts of the "crisis of feudalism" of the 14th and 15th centuries, Belgian and Dutch economic historians have always held a reserved position, at least as far as these concepts apply to the Netherlands and Belgium. They were encouraged to do so by the fact that the fourteenth and fifteenth centuries (for all the Netherlands) were not a period of their decline, but a time of great prosperity.-

13 Ch. Verlinden, J. Craeybeckx, E. Scholliers. Mouvements des prix et des salaires en Belgique au XVI-e siecle. "Annales-Economie-Societes-Civilisation", 1955, N 2; "Documenten voor de geschiedenis van prijzen en lonen in Vlaanderen en Brabant (XV-e-XVIII-e eeuw)". Gepubliceerd o.d.l. van Ch. Verlinden en de red. van J, Craeybeckx, door H. Coppejans-De- Smedt, J. Craeybeckx, D. Dalle. Brugge. 1959; E. Scholliers. De levensstandaard in de XV-e en XVI-e eeuw te Antwerpen. Antwerpen, 1960; ejusd. Loonsverhouding en arbeidsmarkt. "Cahiers d'Histoire des Prix", II. Louvain. 1957; H. Van Der Wee. Prix et Salaires. Introduction methodologique. "Cahiers d'Histoire des Prix", 1. Louvain. 1956; ejusd. The Growth of the Antwerp Market and the European Economy. Vol. I - II. Louvain. 1963; ejusd. Das Phanomen des Wachstums und der Stagnation im Lichte der Antwerpener und Sudniederlandischer Wirtschaft des 16. Jahrhunderts. "Vierteljahrschrift fur Social- und Wirtschaftsgeschichte", 54, 1967; P. Lindemans. Geschiedenis van de landbouw in Belgie, d. 1. Antwerpen. 1952; B. H. Slicher van Bath. Agriculture in the Low Countries. "Comitato Internazionale di Scienze Storiche X Congresso Internazionale di Scienze Storiche. Poma 4 - 11 Setternbre, 1955. Relazioni, IV"; ejusd. De agrarische geschiedenis van West-Europa (500 - 1850). Utrecht- Antwerpen. 1960; ejusd Yield ratios. "A.A.G. Bijdragen", 1963, N 10; J. A. van Houlle. Ecnomische en sociale geschiedenis van de Lage Landen. Antwerpen. 1964, biz. 80 - 81.

14 B. H. Slicher van Bath. De agrarische geschiedenis..., biz. 31.

15 Ibid., biz. 32.

16 Ch. Verlinden. Les origines de la civilisation atlantique. De la Renaissance a l'Age des Lumieres. P. 1966; ejusd. Westerse beschaving en Atlantische beschaving. Een theoretische beschouwing. "Tijdschrift voor Geschiedenis", Jg. 80. afl. 1, 1967; B. H. Slicher van Bath. De agrarische geschiedenis..., biz. 356; P. Geyl. Die Diskussion ohne Ende. Auseinandersetzungen mit Historikern. Darmstadt. 1958, S. 172 - 178. As P. Hale points out, one of the goals of the consolidated work "Algemene geschiedenis der Nederlanden", d. 1 -12. Utrecht. 1949-1958 was a historical justification for the creation of the Benelux. Refutation of the periodization of A. Pirenne in a detailed form is given in the work of E. Coornaert. Draperies rurales, draperies urbaines. L'evolution de l'industrie flamande au moyen age et au XV-e siecle. "Revue Beige de Philology et d'Histoire", T. XXVIII, N 1. 1950.

page 84
However, it was not a complete and absolute winter boom, which was accompanied by recessions in the second half of the XV century.

On the negative attitude of Sh. E. A. Kosminsky wrote about the concepts of the "crisis of feudalism" in the XIV - XV centuries 17 . In the northern provinces of the Netherlands, B. H. Sleecher van Bat gave a skeptical assessment of agriculture, stating, in particular, the absence of the notorious "desolate lands" in the Netherlands to a noticeable extent, which were turned by the efforts of the creators of the concept of the "crisis of feudalism" of the XIV - XV centuries into a true bogey of agrarian life of this period18 . However, as far as the characteristics of the general process of economic development of European countries are concerned, B. H. Sliher van Bat was completely influenced by the" crisis theory", as can be seen from his consolidated work. Nevertheless, a number of reservations were also made for the Netherlands: there was a combination of elements of a reduced market situation with progress in the most commodity sectors of agriculture (viticulture and winemaking), extensive development of rural crafts in the provinces of Hainaut, Flanders and Brabant, and a more cautious term was used - "depression". In general, in connection with this period, the author very rarely appealed to the Dutch material 19 .

The deepening of research on the economic history of the Netherlands in the 14th and 15th centuries, however, led to the accumulation of factual material, which not only reinforced the position of historians who were cautious in extending the scheme of the "general crisis of feudalism"to this country. New materials, as well as an appeal to previously known but ignored facts, provided the basis for starting a general revision of the "crisis theory". In addition, they encouraged a change in the very angle of view from which the factual material was previously considered, and a critical attitude to the methodological and methodological research techniques that were used to formulate the concept of the "crisis" of the XIV - XV centuries.

The first attempt to make such a "reassessment of values" in relation to the Belgian lands can be considered a generalizing essay by R. van Uitfen, entitled: "Flanders and Brabant" the promised land " under the Dukes of Burgundy?"20 . In this essay, the author primarily follows the path of expanding the range of criteria for identifying trends in the economic development of Belgian territories. Considering statistical data on the level of prices, wages, population movement, and the size of acreage (indicators that proponents of the concept of the "crisis of feudalism" of the XIV - XV centuries consider decisive), the author comes to the conclusion that they indicate the absence of "crisis phenomena". The number of hired labor did not decrease, but increased, and wages were kept at a low level; fluctuations in the population size were purely opportunistic and were caused by such external factors as epidemics in 1484, 1488-1489, civil wars, etc.

The same reasons, as well as the ruin due to debts, were also caused by the "desolation" of lands in some areas (Brabant, Namur), which were liquidated already at the end of the XV century. Analyzing the ratio of components of the Irving Fisher formula: P = (M. I. D.)/O, where M is the mass of money;

17 E. A. Kosminsky. Op. ed., p. 264.

18 B. H. Slicher van Bath. Duizend jaar Iandbouw in de Nederlanden in vogelviucht (800 - 1800) - Landbouwgeschiedenis. s'-Gravenhage. 1960, biz. 44.

19 B. H. Slicher van Bath. De agrarische geschiedenis..., biz. 158, 160, 234 - 235, 240.

20 R. van Uytven. La Flandre et le Brabant "terres de promission", sous les dues de Bourgogne?". "Revue du Nord". t. XLIII, N 172. 1961.

page 85
And - the speed of their circulation; D - demand; O-supply, and P - the price level, R. van Uitfen concludes that prices within the country tended to decrease. However, it was offset by an increase in exports (mainly finished goods) to other European countries, where demand for them increased during this period, and the result was stabilization. There was no" agrarian crisis", or there was a relatively shallow depression, moreover, quite short-lived, accompanied by accelerated development of a number of branches of commercial agriculture .21 These statements of R. van Uitfen are also supported in the materials given by P. Lindemans on Belgian lands .22
R. van Uitfen's thesis on the downward trend in prices, in particular for agricultural products, deserves a more careful and critical consideration. The application of Irving Fischer's formula, with all the possible authority of the latter, does not yet solve the problem, as shown by comparing the conclusions drawn on the basis of its conclusions with the data on the actual gold and silver content of the reference coin - the Brabant and Flanders chrotes. From 1384 to 1499 in the first case, it decreased from 0.1089 gr. to 0.0296 gr. for gold, and from 1.17 gr. to 0.33 gr. for silver; in the second case, the same indicators for 1366-1388 were 0.416 gr. and 0.0750 gr. for gold, respectively, and 1.43 gr. and 0.78 gr.for silver. 23 Thus, there is an inflationary rather than deflationary environment.

How the decline in prices for agricultural products is sometimes proved can be seen in the example of the chart of prices for them in England, compiled by Perrou (Reggow) and given by B. H. Sliher van Bat 24 . In the original version, there is no dividing line drawn from the 1300 price index, which is assumed to be 100%. If it is present, it becomes clear that market fluctuations in prices occurred mainly above the index, and the average resultant of them will be a very sloping, with a decrease in 1450 - 1500, but an ascending line. This is also confirmed by the conclusions of J. A. van Houtte, who notes that in the 15th century wheat prices in the Netherlands increased by 11% (while silver prices increased by 50% at the same time) .25 As for rye, if the data of E. Scholliers is correct, then prices for it in the 15th century in the Netherlands were at least close to the initial data for 1430.26 But it remains an open question whether these statistical materials really reflected common English and common Dutch prices or some local version of them. In addition, it is unclear, since there is no complete data for the entire century, to what extent the available data are representative of the overall economic situation for the century.

The situation is different with the growth of prices for industrial and craft products. Their contrast with the prices of agricultural goods in many recent works is used to justify the theory of "scissors" as a supposedly determining factor in the entire course of economic development of the XIV - XV centuries.and proving the priority of demand in relation to production. First of all, it is appropriate to find out what causes such growth: just a game of market prices or the circumstances created by the structural adjustment of the economy of the XIV-XV centuries? The answer seems appropriate to look for in the latter. The transition (first of all in the countryside) from natural to commodity forms of farming was associated with

21 Ibid., pp. 300 - 303, 305 - 308, 310.

22 P. Lindemans. Op. cit., biz. 109 - 118, 128 - 129, 133 - 135, 209 - 215, 225, 228 - 235 ff.

23 H. Van Der Wee. The Growth of the Antwerp Market and the European Economy. Vol. II, pp. 125 - 128; E. Scholliers. De levensstandaard..., biz. 221 - 223.

24 B. H. Slicher van Bath. De agrarische geschiedenis..., biz. 155.

25 J. A. van Houlle. Op. cit., biz. 84.

26 E. Scholliers. De levensstandaard..., biz. 231.

page 86
a significant increase in the number of hired workers, with the replacement of natural domestic crafts (providing for personal needs) by developing commodity rural industries, which often created only semi-finished products. The strengthening of the commodity-money economy also significantly expanded the layer of wealthy citizens who showed an increased demand for all kinds of expensive products and luxury items. The life of the nobility also became more magnificent. All this has caused a large disparity between the production of agricultural products, moreover, with a certain increase in yields, and the production of handicrafts, especially in countries with a predominant agricultural economy. This is probably largely due to the fact that it was these latter countries that experienced the greatest difficulties and market downturns in the XIV - XV centuries, while the countries that produced handicrafts were in a favorable position and used the current foreign trade situation to their advantage. They were primarily the Netherlands and Italy in the 14th and 15th centuries, as can be seen at least from the fact that the former doubled their trade turnover during the 15th century. 27 Stagnation in some branches of handicraft, especially in traditional cloth making, has its own explanation.

R. van Uitfen does not believe, however, that the considered indicators are sufficient to understand the direction and nature of economic development. He considers it necessary to address the sphere of both agricultural and craft-industrial production, and this aspect of research brings the most fruitful results. It turns out that the decline in the main industry - cloth making - has mainly affected that part of it that produced export, high-quality varieties of cloth. The reasons for this were different: competition between Tuscan, English and German products of the same type, changes in the structure of demand, difficulties with the purchase of raw materials. At the same time, a number of wool-weaving centers that adapted to the new demands of the market or met these needs prospered and developed (Courtrais, Lille, Ath) until the end of the 15th century, especially Hondschoote. At the same time, there was a noticeable increase in a number of other industries: metallurgy and metalworking, linen weaving, leather, carpet making, etc.This reflected the relationship and mutual influence of production and circulation, which were now focused on the production and trade of goods of a new range or mass consumption. In general, in handicrafts and industry, despite the decline of some of their leading traditional branches, up to 1485, the defining trend was an ascending line and structural restructuring, the manifestations of which were diverse and contradictory (the decline of export cloth production, the "closure of workshops", the emergence of new and rapid development of previously subordinate industries, etc.). In agriculture, similar phenomena were observed, and the overall rapid growth of its marketability was summed up, which was accompanied by a painful breakdown of the previous foundations. 28 Structural changes in the form of the introduction of entrepreneurial methods took place in the fishing industry of Flanders, which was localized in the coastal villages of the cities of Niveport and Ostend. 29
These economic processes were accompanied by significant changes in the social structure of society. The process of property differentiation accelerated and expanded; its victims in the city were apprentices and hired laborers, and in the countryside-small-scale peasants and rural golytba, for whom the XV century was not at all a time of war.

27 R. van Uytven. Op. cit., p. 290.

28 Ibid., pp. 292 - 302, 308 - 311, 313.

29 R. Degreyse. De Vlaamse haringvisserij in de XV-e eeuw. "Handelingen van het Genootschap voor Geschiedenis gesticht onder de benaming Societe d'Emulation te Brugge". Bruges. 1951, pp. 121 - 133.

page 87
the "golden age". The number of well-off people in Brabant has decreased by an average of 15%. Therefore, the internal conflicts of the last quarter of the XV century, according to R. van Uitfen, were not only a reaction to the unpopular policy of Charles the Bold, but also to the arbitrariness - economic and social - of the city patricians, merchants, guild masters and usurers, who already at that time accumulated large reserve monetary wealth in their hands. The outcome of economic evolution was not a" crisis", but structural changes, the accumulation of quantitative and qualitative changes that prepared the rise of the XVI century .31 It is easy to see that these conclusions of R. van Uitfen largely coincide with what was expressed in the above - mentioned works of Soviet historians-E. A. Kosminsky, Yu.A. Korkhov, M. A. Barg. It is also no coincidence that X Van Der Weee, who later gave a more systematic polemical essay on the ways of economic development of the southern regions of the Netherlands in the XIV-XV centuries, already in the first pages refers to the article considered earlier by E. A. Kosminsky, which became known to him in the French translation. Emphasizing the validity of E. A. Kosminsky's conclusion about the structural breakdown of the English corvee estate as the main cause of the" crisis phenomena " of the XIV - XV centuries in the economy of England, H. Van Der Wee argues that the same was true in the southern provinces of the Netherlands. However, the author interprets this conclusion of E. A. Kosminsky in his own way, as evidence of the process of " liquidation of the feudal structure there (i.e. in England - L. Ch.)"32-a statement for which the authentic Russian text of the article does not give grounds. This is simultaneously the position of X. Van Der Weee differs from the views of R. van Uitfen, for whom the XIV-XV centuries in the economic evolution of the Netherlands are primarily a period of rapid development in the breadth and depth of commodity-economic relations, and not capitalist ones.

H. Van Der Veee mostly seems to agree with the concept of the" crisis "of the XIV - XV centuries, formulated in the works of W. Abel, M. Postan and others, he is closer to B. H. Sliher van Batu than to R. van Uitfen, does not deny the Malthusian" law of declining fertility " (only in the Netherlands he claims that the southern regions of the Netherlands also entered a period of "crisis", only less deeply and only in the XV century. At the same time, he considers it one-sided to deduce the determining trends of economic development only by analyzing the situation of population, prices and wages. In his opinion, the set of criteria should be expanded by attracting factors from the field of industrial, craft and agricultural production, especially by analyzing the evolution of their structure. Therefore, the purpose of his generalizing essay is X. Van Der Weee sees it as showing how " the interdependence between conjuncture and structure... It provides the historical and economic phenomenon with its fundamental criterion and thus determines to a decisive degree the secret of economic development. " 33 It is this side of X's argument. Van Der Vee seems to be the most scientifically fruitful. It does not correspond to the theory of historical materialism, which proceeds from the recognition of the primacy of the sphere of production over the sphere of circulation, considering economic phenomena in their inseparable connection with social antagonisms and the class struggle of the exploited against the exploited.

31 R. van Uytven. Op. cit., pp. 303, 308, 310 - 317.

32 H. Van Der Wee. Conjunctuur en economische groei in de Zuidelijke Nederlanden tijdens de 14-e, 15-e en 16-e eeuw. "Mededelingen van de Koninklijke Vlaamse Academic yoor Wetenschappen, Letteren en Schone Kunsten van Belgie". Kl. der Lett Jg. XXVII. 1965, N 8, biz. 5, note 11-a.

33 Ibid., biz. 3, 4, 6, 9 - 10, 15.

page 88
exploiters. But it is a step forward in comparison with the mysticism that by the end of the 1950s led to a dead end for the authors of bourgeois studies on the economic history of the European countries of the XIV-XV centuries. In addition, the recognition of the primacy of the sphere of production does not exclude the consideration of the influence of the sphere of exchange. The role of the market, first national, developing from the category of commodity economy to the category of capitalist economy, and then developing into a world capitalist economy, in the general economic development of Europe at that time was rapidly increasing.

This fact was also emphasized by the founders of Marxism-Leninism. Karl Marx drew particular attention to the fact that " at present, industrial hegemony entails commercial hegemony. On the contrary, in the actual manufacturing period, trade hegemony ensures industrial predominance "34 , and V. I. Lenin gave the subtitle to his classic work" The Development of Capitalism in Russia":"The process of forming an internal market for large-scale industry".

Just like R. van Uitfen, H. van Der Wee notes the contradictory nature of all spheres of socio - economic development in the southern provinces of the Netherlands, including the negative consequences of the political domination of the guild elite, the patriciate and the layer of merchant entrepreneurs that merged with it. These social strata, in his opinion, during the XIV - XV centuries were increasingly pushed out of the sphere of productive activity, transferred their capital to the purchase of real estate, turned into titled rentiers who spent their income on unproductive consumption, the purchase of luxury goods, etc. - the conclusion is not new, made by A. Pirenne 35. The real response to the change in the international market environment that was unfavorable for the Netherlands was not provided by these top-down social strata. They were provided by those dynamic and vital elements that created on a progressive basis new, skilled and labor-intensive, and at the same time more profitable industries (wood carving, furniture, sculpture and painting, artistic processing of leather, metal, lace, tapestries, carpets, weapons, finishing cloth and semi-finished products). In Antwerp alone, up to 100 such intensive and highly specialized industries developed at that time. It is their "breakthrough into the Western European market", as X puts it. Van Der Vee, led to the sixteenth century. that powerful economic leap that surprised contemporaries 36 .

No less important in terms of socio-economic significance, changes were taking place in the countryside. The elimination of domenic farming, the dominance of leases, and "developed infrastructure" (i.e., means of communication) contributed to the rapid progress of agriculture and yield. The demand for agricultural raw materials has given rise to the flourishing of various industrial crops and animal husbandry. Agriculture was increasingly combined with rural crafts, trade, fishing, and transport services, which absorbed the pauperized strata of the population. The rest were used in those cities where the economy continued to grow. Tenants '"entrepreneurial risk" has been encouraged by the practice of reducing rents in recent years.

34 K. Marx and F. Engels, Soch. Vol. 23, p. 764.

35 A. Pirenne. Histoire de Belgique. T. III. Bruxelles. 1923, p. 238; ejusd. Une crise industrielle en XVI-e siecle. (La draperie urbaine et la "nouvelle draperie" en Fiandre). "Bulletins de la classe des lettres et des sciences morales et politiques et de la classe des beaux- arts". Academie Royale de Belgique. Bruxelles. 1905, N 5, p. 511; ejusd. Les periodes de l'histoire sociale du capitalisme. "Bulletin de l'Academie Royale de Belgique, classe des Lettres". Bruxelles. 1914.

36 H. Van Der Wee. Conjunctuur en economische groei..., biz. 13, 17 - 19.

page 89
severe crop failures and natural disasters. The entire XIV century is marked by overcoming temporary market downturns and painful difficulties. Only particularly unfavorable external and internal circumstances lead to economic decline in the 15th century. Despite this (and here is the output of X). Van der Weee fully agrees with the conclusion of R. van Uitfen), it was the XIV and XV centuries that prepared the Netherlands for its economic dominance over other European developed countries in the XVI century .37 The actual basis on which X is based. Van der Veel's generalization, especially in Brabant, is based on a two-volume study published two years earlier on the history of the formation and development of the Antwerp market (the first volume contains a rich and carefully processed statistical material), as well as on the European trade situation of the XIV - XVI centuries. In this paper, X. Van Der Weee, speaking about the impact of the "crisis" of the 14th and 15th centuries on the economy of Brabant, notes that the most severe hardships fell on agriculture, as a result of which this pan-European "crisis" should be considered as "primarily an agricultural phenomenon", which in itself seems to be a significant limitation. If we look closely at the author's system of reasoning for specific symptoms and stages of the "crisis", we get the impression that, in essence, we are talking not so much about the process as about market fluctuations (caused by various reasons that are not always revealed by the author) in certain industries and sectors of industrial, craft and agricultural production .38
Difficulties and breakdowns in the economic life of the XIV-XV centuries, especially in the rural economy, did indeed exist, but still within the framework of feudalism, which continued to develop. The way in which they were overcome, however, was of no small importance for the subsequent development of European states. Where difficulties were eliminated by intensifying and adapting to the new conditions created by the development of the broad and deep commodity-money economy, which was summed up in the emergence of the national market; where such an evolution was consolidated in the outcome of the decisive class battles, in the corresponding changes in the superstructure (primarily of the state and law) - in such countries in the - In the 17th century, as a rule, things were moving towards the collapse of capitalism. Where the ruling class sought an outlet in a return to obsolete forms of economic and political life, it usually resulted in the triumph of feudal reaction.

Regarding the development of economic processes in the northern provinces of the Netherlands, R. van Uitfen expresses the opinion that things went about the same there as in the southern provinces . Of course, such a remark alone is not enough to solve such a complex set of issues, especially since the socio-economic system of most of the northern provinces was distinguished by a very significant peculiarity. Unfortunately, the latest Dutch historiography does not yet contain works similar to the generalizing essays of R. van Uitfen and H. van Uitfen discussed above. Van Der Vee 40 .

Some excursions of this order, made by X. Van Der Vee, sketchy and not without contradictions. So, in the article about trade relations between Antwerp and the Northern Netherlands regions in the XIV-XV centuries. he gave it out-

37 Ibid., biz. 5 - 13.

38 H. Van Der Wee. The Growth of the Antwerp Market and the European Economy. Vol. II, pp. 7 - 17, 35 (note 22), 43 - 47, 61 - 67 e. a.

39 R. van Uytven. Op. cit., p. 316.

40 Unfortunately, the author could not use the work of W. Albertsen H. Jansen. Welvaart in wording. Sociaal-economische geschiedenis van Nederland van de vroegste tijden tot het einde van de Middeleeuwen. s'-Gravenhage. 1964.

page 90
The thesis that this particular direction of trade, and not the Baltic one, is crucial for the latter, and only their trade relations with the Hanseatic League are artificially highlighted. At the same time, in his previously published monograph, Kh. Van der Weee rightly attributed the flourishing of Dutch cities in the 14th and 15th centuries primarily to the development of their Baltic trade .41
B. H. Sleecher van Bat addresses the issues related to the" crisis " of the 14th and 15th centuries in the northern Netherlands only in particular aspects. Thus, in one of his last works of a local nature, devoted to the province of Friesland, he explains the economic difficulties experienced by this region in the XV century as the consequences of"crisis phenomena". However, only in passing mention is made of the negative consequences for the Frisian economy of the military conflicts of that time. 42
The work of T. S. Jansma, devoted to clarifying the economic situation in Holland during the period of its entry into the Burgundian state, is not without interest (and on the topic it could solve the issues discussed in R. van Uitfen's essay in relation to the northern provinces), but, unfortunately, it sets a very narrow task and only aims to refute the conclusion of A. Pirenne, as if under the sceptre of the Dukes of Burgundy, the Northern Netherlands provinces enjoyed peace and prosperity .43
Thus, the analysis of the considered works leads to the conclusion that the question of whether there was a "crisis of feudalism" in the Northern Netherlands in the XIV-XV centuries, what were its symptoms and their intensity, is poorly studied, the sociological scheme still dominates the facts.

Our task is not to solve the problem by research. Here are just a few facts drawn from the Netherlands ' own specific studies, facts that have not been refuted, and, perhaps, cannot be refuted, which contradict the far - fetched scheme of the "crisis of feudalism" of the XIV-XV centuries in the Northern Netherlands. These data really "fit" with the conclusions of R. van Uitfen's research, although they are not identical in content, just as the entire course of economic development in the North was not identical to the "southern version".

First of all, it should be emphasized that if in Flanders and Brabant in the XIV - XV centuries there was a structural reorganization of previously existing forms of craft and industrial production, then for the vast majority of the northern provinces it was mainly about their emergence and development, since most cities in Holland, Zeeland and a number of other provinces became more or less large trade and craft centers in the XIV - XV centuries; the development of rural crafts here was also slowed down. What was common, perhaps, was a kind of "accounting" by the North of the experience of the South.

The cloth industry of Leyden developed into a thriving export industry just during this period (although with some serious setbacks, usually due to external hindrances - internal and external wars, the cessation of the import of English wool, etc.). These reasons, in particular, explained the sharp decline of the last two decades of the XV century, when the struggle between "hooks" and "cod" revived and raised the price of fish.

41 H. Van Der Wee. De handelsbetrekkingen tussen Antwerpen en de Noordelijke Nederlanden tijdens de 14-e, 15-e en 16-e eeuw. "Bijdragen voor de Geschiedenis der Nederlanden" d. XX, 1965, biz. 267; ejusd. The Growth of the Antwerp Market and European Economy. Vol. II, pp. 67 - 68.

42 B. H. Slicher van Bath. The Economic and Social Conditions in the Frisian Districts from 900 to 1500, "A.A.G. Bijdragen", 1965, N 13, biz. 129 - 130.

43 T. S. Jansma. Het vraagstuk van Hollands welvaren tijdens hertog Philips van Bourgondie. Groningen-Djiakarta. 1950, biz. 4-T-24.

page 91
The Kennemere rebellion of 44, at first complicated, and then temporarily completely stopped trade relations with England, including the supply of wool. From 1400 to 1500, Leyden cloth production increased from 9,660 pieces to 23,393 pieces per year. However, under the influence of its competition and other reasons, cloth production declined in a number of other cities in the province of Holland-Delft, The Hague, Naarden, but expanded in Hoorn and, apparently, in Haarlem .45 The period of prosperity and transformation into an export industry was the XV century. for brewing in Haarlem. The excise tax on beer production and consumption in Haarlem in 1430 - 1443 provided 51% of all excise receipts to the city treasury. Difficulties occurred here, as elsewhere, only in the last two decades of the fifteenth century and were associated with the reasons described above of an incidental nature. With their elimination, Haarlem brewing has been going up again since 1498 .46 Data from 1514 speak of it as the main branch of the urban economy; then there were such industries as cloth making, linen weaving, shipbuilding, etc. 47 .

From the middle of the 14th to the end of the 15th centuries, Amsterdam rapidly developed into a major commercial and maritime center, which already in the middle of the 15th century took the first place among Dutch cities. At the same time, Amsterdam specialized in the trade of mass-market goods: beer, grain, timber, fish, canvas, etc., in the transportation of which hundreds of sea vessels alone were engaged in the XV century. 48 These vessels were mainly owned by the Dutch. Amsterdam also influenced neighboring cities, as well as coastal villages, whose main occupation was fishing and navigation. Large, mainly transit trade was conducted in the XIV-XV centuries. the cities of Overijssel-Deventer, Zwolle and Kampen, connected with both Antwerp and Amsterdam. The structure of their assortment also consisted mainly of consumer goods-grain, timber, livestock, butter, cheese, building stone, etc. 49 . From the mid-fifteenth century onwards, the importance of another area - the bush of the Zeelandian trading towns of Middelbürch, Vlissingen, Arnemuiden, and Feuer-grew rapidly, which was closely connected not only with Bruges and the Dutch cities, but also with the then developing Antwerp, and was a kind of advanced outpost of the latter.

If in 1460 - 1461 only 13 foreign ships entered these ports, then in 1482 - 1483 (according to incomplete data) this figure increased to 352 - 380 units, and it also did not include flights of local skippers (in both directions). On this basis, shipbuilding developed in Middelbürch and Arnemuiden, and fishing developed throughout the island of Walcheren,

44 The beginning of the struggle between "hooks" and " cod " dates back to the middle of the XIV century. In the ranks of the Kryuchkov party, separatist circles of the Northern Dutch feudal aristocracy opposed the centralizing policy of the Counts of Holland and later the Dukes of Burgundy. Their allies were the guild corporations of some Dutch cities, oppressed by the urban patriciate, and the Kennemers, the remnants of the personally free, highly privileged, Frisian peasantry of North Holland and West Friesland. The suppression of the actions of the "hooks" and Kennemers took place at the end of the XV century. and was accompanied by great devastation and severe repression.

45 N. W. Posthumus. De geschiedenis van de Leidsche lakenindustrie. d. I, s'- Gravenhage. 1908, biz. 193, 201, 368, 370 - 371; A. N. Chistozvonov. The Reform movement and class struggle in the Netherlands in the first half of the 16th century, Moscow, 1964, pp. 56-57.

46 J. C. van Loenen. De Haarlemse brouwindustrie voor 1600. Amsterdam (1950), biz. 11 - 16.

47 "Informacie up den staet faculteyt ende gelegentheyt van de steden ende dorpen van Hollant ende Vrieslant om daernae te reguleren de nyewe schiltaele gedaen in den jaere MDXIV, door R. Fruin" (далее - "Informacie"). Leiden. 1866, biz. 14.

48 H. J.'Smit. De opkomst van den handel van Amsterdam. Amsterdam. 1914, biz. 96.

49 W. J. Alberts. Overijssel und die benachbarten Territorien in ihren wirtschaftlichen Verflechtungen in 14. und 15. Jahrhundert. "Rheinischen Vierteljahrsblatter", Jg. 24. 1959, S. 40 - 56.

page 92
especially the fishing and salting of herring, which was exported to a number of European countries. Even more development of fishing, salting and Herring exports were purchased in West Friesland, Waterlant, Amsterdam and Rotterdam, where there were hundreds of fishing vessels. The strength of the Dutch navy and navigation was demonstrated by the success of the wars waged by the Dutch cities against the Hanseatic League between 1417 and 1511 .50
Anyone familiar with the contents of the tax inventories of the late 15th and early 16th centuries - the Questionnaire of 1494 and the Information of 1514-is well aware that they characterize the period up to 1477-1481 as a period of economic progress, and the decline of the last two decades is associated primarily with military devastation and internal social conflicts and the resulting increase in the tax burden. The Battle of Nancy in 1477 and the events that followed it are the beginning of the decline.

These facts alone are sufficient to avoid considering the fourteenth and fifteenth centuries as a time of" crisis " for the northern provinces of the Netherlands, with the exception of temporary market fluctuations caused mainly by the reasons described above.

The agricultural economy of the Northern Netherlands of the XIV-XV centuries is less studied. Nevertheless, it is known that starting from the 13th century, here, as in the southern regions, various types of leases began to spread, including long-term and hereditary ones, in which tenants bought or built houses and outbuildings themselves, which assumed both the presence of a certain affluence and the consolidation of their rights to the leased land. In Friesland, Drenthe, Chroningen, and North Holland, the personal dependence of the peasants was already ended in the twelfth century, and a wide stratum of" hereditary owners " of land were free personally peasants, who often managed on free land. As early as the 14th century, commercial farming areas were established in Holland, Zeeland, and Friesland, specializing in wheat cultivation (Zeeland), industrial crops, dairy and meat animal husbandry, and horse breeding with a network of local specialized markets. At the same time, the level of agriculture in Zealand was as high as in Flanders. A dense network of various hydraulic structures - protective dikes, dams, sluices-was created and continued to develop everywhere, without which agriculture on these waterlogged low-lying lands was impossible .51
All this does not indicate the presence of a prolonged "crisis" in the agricultural sector, although the financial situation of the Northern Dutch peasantry cannot be painted in pink tones. As a negative phenomenon, B. H. Sleecher van Bat points to a decrease in the rate of drainage of new lands and the loss of a number of land tracts in Holland and Zeeland from severe floods in 1404 and 1421, and they were not drained during the entire 15th century. The reason, in his opinion, is the lack of workers or the unprofitability of such works in the conditions of agricultural decline 52: But R. Kools notes significant work on draining land and expanding the network of hydraulic structures.-

50 Z. VV. Sneller. Wakheren in de vijftiende eeuw. Utrecht. 1916, biz. 63 - 64, 69 - 70, 107 - 108 en. a.; H. Van DerWee. The Growth of the Antwerp Market and European Economy. Vol. II, p. 136; J. H. Kok. De "Kampenuien" import. Kampen. 1936, biz. 16 - 24; E. Brunner. De order op de buitennering van 1531. Utrecht. 1918, biz. 59 - 61; "Lnformacie", biz. 109, 138, 280 en. a; F. Ketner. Handel en scheepvaart van Amsterdam in de vijftiende eeuw. Leiden. 1946, biz. 17 - 20, 115 - 117, 119, 121 - 122, 127 en. a.

51 H. Blink. Geschiedenis van den Boerenstand en de Landbouw in Nederland, d I. biz. 123 - 129, 159 - 162, 175 - 176, 197 - 203, 271, 273, 329 - 343; d. II. Te Groningen. 1904 biz. 433 - 436, 465.

52 B. H. S Lie her van Bath. Duizend jaar landbouw in de Nederlanden..., biz 43 - 44.

page 93
the use of more durable and expensive materials and aggregates - wood piles, stone facing, drainage mills, etc. - in the 15th century, as well as the reconstruction of diversion channels into navigable ones, in particular in Holland (Rhinelant, Delflant, Schilant, etc.) 53. With such a large volume of work, was it possible to carry out drainage at the same pace, especially in the conditions of incessant internal wars? And can such a slowdown in draining be necessarily recorded in the"asset of crisis phenomena"? Did it happen at all? H. Blink, noting the economic decline in the Dutch countryside of the XV century, explained it primarily by civil wars and looting of hired soldiers, who devastated entire districts. As a whole, he considers the fourteenth century to be a period of relative prosperity for the Dutch peasantry. The ulcer of vagrancy, while apparently on a local scale, began to develop in the late XIV century, and X. Blink dates the first law against vagabonds, issued in Haarlem, to 139054 . The reasons for this phenomenon still need to be studied.

The tendency to clarify and reevaluate the nature of the" crisis " of the seventeenth century is very clearly visible in one of the latest works by B. H. Sliher van Bat, which is specifically devoted to this problem. The author begins with a critique of the historiographical direction represented by such figures as V. Abel, S. M. Keruel, D. Grisiotti-Kretschmann, R. Mounier, E. Hobsbawm, G. R. Trevor-Roper, R. Mandru, R. Romano, E. Topolsky 55, A. Klima and M. Groch, of which the first four raised the question of the "In the post-war period, five subsequent authors extended its operation from the economic sphere to the political, social and cultural areas, while the rest investigated the economic side of the issue. Then he makes a brief review of the situation in the agricultural production of European countries, after which he comes to the conclusion that "the depression of the XVII century, considered in the economic aspect, was primarily a grain depression, which caused the greatest difficulties for grain-producing countries, which (difficulties. - A. Ch.) increased even more due to the dependence of these countries from the global market " 56 .

This limitation of the concept of "crisis" in B. H. Slicher van Bat almost textually coincides with the similar restriction made by H. Van Der Weee in relation to the "phenomenon" of the XIV-XV centuries. It is supplemented by a number of significant criticisms of the methodology and methodology of research on issues related to the" crises " of the XIV - XV and XVII centuries. First of all, B. H. Sliher van Bat draws attention to the versatility and inconsistency of the economic development of the 17th century and considers the agrarian depression to be "not an explosion, but a process" that cannot be explained on a "monocausal basis". This attempt led to the erroneous conclusions of the well-known Swedish historian E. F. Heckscher, who took as a basis fluctuations in grain prices in Uppsala and did not know that they were regulated not by the local, but by the world Amsterdam index 57 .

Then B. H. Sliher van Bath criticizes the "climate theory" developed in recent years, which has gained popularity.

53 R.H.A. Cools. Strijd om den grond in het lage Nederland. Rotterdam / s'Gravenhage. 1948, biz. 45 - 49, 54, 70 - 71.

54 H. Blink. Op. cit., d. I, biz. 173 - 174.

55 As can be seen from the recently published monograph by E. Topolski, he now does not adhere to the views on the character of the economic and political development of the seventeenth century that B. H. Sliher van Bat writes about. See J. Topolski. Narodziny kapitalizmu w Europie XIV-XVII wieku. Warszawa. 1965, s. 141 - 178, 199.

56 B. H. Slicher van Bath. Die Europaischen Agrarverhaltnisse im 17. und der ersten Halfte der 18. Jahrhunderts. "A.A.G. Bijdragen", 1965, N 13, biz. 136 - 144.

57 Ibid., biz. 146 - 147.

page 94
such historians as G. Utterstrom, I. Olaguet, G. Flon, E. Leroy Laduri. Its proponents, on the one hand, often compare data for different localities and for different chronological periods, that is, incomparable indices; on the other hand, these historians, while absolutizing temperature indicators, underestimate the amount and distribution of precipitation over time during the growing season, and this factor, from the point of view of B. H. Sliher van Bat,is the most important factor in the development of climate change. it is more important than temperature indicators. Attempts to "link" the "climatological theory" to the "crisis phenomena" of the XIV-XV and XVII centuries are also futile from the standpoint of price dynamics. If it were climate fluctuations that predetermined the decline in yields, then grain prices would have increased, but they fell, and fell faster than the gross output of the grain farm was reduced.

In his other work, which is mainly devoted to the methodology and methodology of studying economic phenomena, B. H. Sliher van Bat criticizes Malthus and again E. F. Heckscher for a one-sided and simplified method of studying the agricultural situation, for the primitiveness of comparative analysis - when a direct relationship is established between the price of bread and the level of mortality of the population, even without considering it separately for different periods, in urban and rural areas separately. As additional criteria, the Dutch scientist suggests introducing the level of wages, the structure of nutrition, the reverse impact of social phenomena on market price fluctuations, changes in the overall economic structure, including the sphere of production58, that is, it approaches the positions held by R. van Uitfen and X. Van Der Vee.

Unfortunately, the qualitative difference between economic and social processes in different types of European states remains out of sight, in particular, the problem of the decline of the Dutch stock market, which reflects the further development of capitalism in an ascending line, but with the center of this development moving from the merchant republic of the United Provinces to industrial-capitalist England. On this subject, there is a very valuable analysis of the facts in the works of the Dutch economic historians T. P. van der Kooij and J. F. Niermeyer .59
This allows us to draw some preliminary final conclusions. As can be seen, the concepts of the "crises of feudalism" of the XIV-XV and XVII centuries, initially perceived by many bourgeois historians and some Marxist historians as almost sensational, turning for understanding the entire period of the late Middle Ages and the beginning of modern times, turned out to be built on a weak foundation of mechanical integration of phenomena that are often not comparable in their essence, tendentious emphasis From the very beginning, Soviet and other Marxist historians, who firmly adhere to the Marxist-Leninist methodology and the methodology of studying historical and economic phenomena, as has been shown, have been subjected to a well - reasoned discussion of population movements, market and natural conditions as supposedly all-determining factors, the relegation to the background of the sphere of production and the social factor, the modernization of the historical process, and so on. criticize these concepts. A time check proved them right. Now, as the example of Belgium and the Netherlands shows, the bourgeoisie is more objective and critical.

58 Ibid., biz. 140 - 141, 144 - 145; ejusd. Les problemes fondamentaux de la societe preindustrielle en Europe Occidental. Une orientation et un programme. "A.A.G. Bijdragen", 1965, N 12, biz. 35 - 39.

59 T. P. van der Kooy. Hollands stapelmarkt en haar verval. Amsterdam. 1931; J. F. Niermeyer. Historische schets van den Nederlandschen handel. "De Economist", Jg. 92, 1943.

page 95
historians who once supported these concepts are beginning to "reassess values".

Similar trends are also noticeable in modern French historiography, where earlier "crisis concepts" were very popular. As examples, we can refer to the article of G. Lemarchand, where the general "crisis" of the XVII century is practically not mentioned, and the assessment of the processes taking place in its framework is given in a calm and objective tone. Also noteworthy is the work of D. Richet, in which the XVII century is rightly considered as an integral part of the general process (the decomposition of feudalism and the genesis of capitalism. - L. Ch.), covering, in the author's opinion, the middle of the XV-XVIII centuries 60 . This process is still far from complete. In particular, one of the main reasons for the difference of opinion lies in the very definition of feudalism, according to which its main criterion is supposedly the naturalness of the economy. As soon as it is replaced by developed forms of commodity-money relations, the economic system becomes "modern", that is, capitalist, 61 and the later period of feudalism is included, "converged", in the bosom of the period of "mediated agricultural consumption" or "industrial society". In terms of the particular problem under consideration, however, it is important to emphasize that the ice has broken, and that the veil that prevented objective research of very important periods of European history for a number of years is gradually falling.

In the program of work of the XIII International Congress of Historical Sciences, which recently ended in Moscow, problems of European history of the XVII century were singled out in a special, IV, section and became the subject of a sharp and lengthy discussion, which was attended, including experts, by about 40 scientists from different countries. Three of the 6 main reports (N. Steensgaard. Economic and political crisis of the 17th century. France and the Constitutional conflict in England in the middle of the 17th century. Secularization of society in the 17th century) aimed to defend the concepts of the "crisis" of the 17th century. The speakers noted with regret the fact of the ever-decreasing popularity of these concepts and had to take into account the conclusions of the latest historical and economic studies, which showed that there was no pan-European economic "crisis" of the XVII century. Therefore," crisis phenomena " were persistently sought out by speakers mainly in the sphere of political, ideological, spiritual and scientific life of the European society of the XVII century. The discussion showed that the concepts of the" universal crisis " of the 17th century continue to lose their former attractive power, and their very concept and scope of application are increasingly limited. Soviet historians have clearly shown in their speeches the scientific futility of trying to study the seventeenth century in isolation, apart from the general process of the disintegration of feudalism, the initial accumulation and genesis of capitalism in its manufacturing stage, and apart from the phenomena created by this process in all spheres of European society. But many questions related to the problem as a whole are still waiting for in-depth study, thoughtful analysis and truly scientific generalization.

60 G. Lemarchand. Le XV-e siecle en France: orientation des recherches nouvelles. "Pensee", N 138, mars - avril 1968; D. Richet. Croissance et blocage en France du XV-e an XVIII-e siecle. "Annales", 1968, N 4.

61 B. H. Slicher van Bath. Duizend jaar landbouw in de Nederlanden, biz. 29; ejusd. De agrarische geschiedenis..., biz. 44.

page 96

Permanent link to this publication: