...Alexander II faced several major problems during his reign, largely stemming from the negative implications of Russia’s system of serfdom that stifled economic and industrial growth, as well as Russia’s outdated and ineffective military that limited Russia’s presence in Europe and demonstrated her lacking industrial sector. Alexander was shown to be a keen reformer and managed to effectively tackle these problems, with his emancipation of the serfs, followed by his overseeing of successful economic and military reforms. Arguably the greatest problem that faced Russia in 1855 was the outdated and feudal – like system of serfdom which lagged far behind the social infrastructures of other major European nations. This system, in which over 23 million serfs were forced to work for their food and keep under private landowners, Nobles, and the state, was both economically inefficient (as Russia required a free labour force for industry and internal markets to grow) and attracted rising opposition to the Tsarist autocratic rule. For these reasons, Alexander decided to emancipate the serfs in an attempt to quell unrest and bring Russia “up to date”, famously stating: “It is better to abolish serfdom from above than to await the time when it will begin to abolish itself from below”. This shows that Alexander II saw the threat of grievances among the serfs with the ruling administration and wished to protect his own position from threatening opposition. This desire for self-preservation...
Words: 1110 - Pages: 5
...In 1905 Tsar Nicholas II has faced a revolution in 1905 which was caused by the growth of reformist groups, however also other factors such as weak Tsarist regime of repression, Tsar's leadership, poor conditions and Bloody Sunday contributed towards the breakout of 1905 revolution. The growth of opposition is considered to be a significant factor contributing towards the 1905 Revolution because they were developing the desire for moderation which was to be achieved by a revolution. The assassination of Alexander II by people's will, had the consequences of inspiring other opposition groups to form such as Social Revolutionaries and Social Democrats, however the assassination was also the factor deciding upon ruling by repression under Alexander II followers. However lack of freedoms, russification, Ohkrana and heavy taxation all encouraged the opposition groups to form even at a faster rate as the public dissatisfaction was rising. By 1905, those groups were targeting different aspects of society from peasants to workers who formed 80% of the total population. This wide spread of ideas opposing Tsarist rule could be therefore responsible for the 1905 revolution however it has to be underlined that 1905 revolution has started with strikes organised by workers which would mean that there may have been a significant growth in opposition groups however 1905 revolution took place despite them rather than because of them. Additionally, the poor conditions created by great spurt...
Words: 768 - Pages: 4
...How successful was the regime in overcoming the opposition to the regime? Opposition was slowly growing within the Tsars Empire and Alexander II felt threatened and took action that in fact reversed some of his reforms. He was very disgruntled that people were actually going against him, as he considered himself to have done so much for them, the biggest being emancipation. What he did not realise was this made people greedy and gave them a taste for freedom, and gave many the incentive to spur on for further reform. Due to this, he went back on his words and tightened up many reforms in an attempt to clamp down on those who opposed him, succeeding in the process. The most important measure to overcome growing opposition was tightening up the education reforms he had made. Alexander II saw that student radicals were emerging many were associated with populism. As a result he increased university fees, making it extremely difficult for peasants to receive a higher education. Also, while before he in the past he had given universities the control to appoint professors, Alexander II changed this and instead gave Tolstoy more control over this and Tolstoy made sure to choose the more reserved professors. The Zemstvos powers over schools reduced and churches reasserted control over rural schools, resulting in an education being more centred around religion, as it had been in the past. The tsar discouraged history, literature and modern languages as he felt these encouraged critical...
Words: 762 - Pages: 4
... an individual. Similarly ,before Lenin, Witte had been significant by reforming the economic policies of the Tsars by improving the Russian currency aswell as making the Russian market for accessible for foreign enterprises. This had long term significance as investments were more likely to come to Russia and thereby strengthen the Russian economy. All Tsars attempted some form of economic reforms, however in comparison to Lenin and stalin they did not succeed. From this it can be argued that individuals did play a role in the shaping of Russia, however it was very much dependant on the time an d situation in which they found themselves. One factor that was more important than the individual was the political structure in Russia. Alexander II,...
Words: 2316 - Pages: 10
...The nineteenth century was filled with a variety of tsars. There are two that deserve a great amount of focus: Alexander II and Alexander III. Alexander II hoped to change and resolve Russia and their social and economic problems. His son, Alexander III, was more conservative and wished to undo everything his father did. Alexander II ascended the throne at the age of thirty-seven. He was tsar of Russia from 1855-1881. Alexander II was referred to as the “Tsar Liberator.” One of the major accomplishments of Alexander II is that he was able to emancipate the serfs. Alexander II singed the emancipation manifesto on March 3, 1861. At his coronation he stated that it is better to abolish serfdom from above than to wait until it would abolish itself from below. (Riasanovsky 366) Prior to the emancipation there had been many peasant uprisings in the attempt to gain freedom. According to the official record, Vasilii Semevsky had counted 550 peasant uprisings in the 19th century prior to the emancipation of the serfs. (Riasanovsky 365) It is speculated that this number is very inaccurate and it is more likely that there were 1,467. Inna Ignatovich gave this break down, “281 peasant rebellions, that is, 19 percent of the total, in the period form 1801-1825; 712 rebellions, 49 percent, from 1826-1854; and 474 uprisings, or 32 percent, in the six years and two months of Alexander II’s reign before the abolition of serfdom.” (Riasanovsky 365) Clearly there were many uprisings going on, which...
Words: 1056 - Pages: 5
...AS Level History Russia 1855 – 1917 Alternative F Revision Guide Contents 1. Alexander II 2. Alexander III 3. Nicholas II 4. Stability of the Tsarist Regime 1905 - 14 5. Political Opposition 6. February / March Revolution 1917 7. October Revolution 1917 Tsar Alexander II To what extent does Tsar Alexander II deserve to be viewed as the Tsar Liberator? Think BALANCE!! Alexander II 1855-81 ▪ Came to the throne during the Crimean War (1855) ▪ Initiated a wide range of reforms (social, economic, administrative and legal) ▪ Earned the title ‘Liberator’ for giving freedom to the peasants BUT did not wish to share political power ▪ Assassinated by the People’s Will in 1881 Answering the key question |Introduction |Use this chart to answer any question on Alex II | | |All questions (whether relating to ‘Liberator’ or not) will require BALANCE | | |Precision of knowledge – “Detail is King!” | | |Yes |No | |Emancipation |Emancipation Committees set up |Redemption Payments...
Words: 7115 - Pages: 29
...After the loss of the Crimean war in 1856, Tsar Alexander II of Russia, his people, and its surrounding major powers realized the true conditions of un-industrialized Russia. The strength of its military ended up being an illusion, and now the country faced both an incredible backwardness and a lack of credibility in its own potential in protecting itself against competitive and rival countries, bringing into question some of the very basic structures of Russian politics and society. Russia’s backwardness in all key institutions compared to surrounding great powers was massive, and the loss of the war had a critical effect on the faith the people of Russia had in their Tsar. Because of this intolerable humiliation, Alexander II found his back pushed against a wall and was forced to make all sorts of reforms in order to ameliorate the poor conditions of his country. As one of Alexander’s first reform, in 1861 Alexander II declared “the edict to emancipation”, in other words, the abolishment of serfdom for fear that it would “reform from the below”. Even though Slavophiles stressed the importance of serfdom in the preservation of political and social stability, Westernizes emphasized its role as a brake upon Russia’s economic development in relation to other countries surrounding it. Alexander therefore decided to free the serfs from their landowners and give them land that they could now grow crops on without being governed by the landowners. However, right from the very first...
Words: 1643 - Pages: 7
...what extent does Alexander III deserve the title “reactionary”? Although Alexander III enacted some social and economic reforms, most importantly those of industry, he did more to repress the people, strengthen autocracy, and remove the more liberal reforms of his father, so it would be fair to say that Alexander III was a reactionary. This was because fundamentally he was a believer in autocracy and nationality, and so only would only accept reforms that would strengthen these ideals, was necessary to keep up with other countries, or was neutral. So this hindered the social reform and progress, which was clearly wanted by some parts of the population, leading to him being defined as a reactionary. One way, in which it can be seen that Alexander II was a reactionary, was through his policy of Russification. This was a policy that was designed to unite the very diverse Russian empire into a uniform nation, in which everyone could define himself or herself as Russian and would therefore rally behind his ‘great Russian’ administration. This was however implemented forcefully. It involved harassing and repressing minorities such as Poles, Finns and Jews, forcing them to learn Russian by having all official paperwork printed in Russian and even expelling students who spoke their local language in school. This was reactionary behavior, because it stopped minorities creating their own national identities and trying to become politically independent, so here Alexander was clearly trying...
Words: 1085 - Pages: 5
...Alexander II was pronounced Tsar in 1855 after his father died. On his Nicholas I death bed he said the following to his son: “I hand over to you my command, unfortunately not as in good order as I would have wished” Although Alexander II was not a natural reformer he had recognised the need to reform. He was certainly more receptive to new ideas and understood the need for change. The need for reform was evident a long time before Alexander II became Tsar of Russia. Alexander II believed that part of his responsibility involved developing and improving the power and prestige of Russia. This was done to restore the country’s dignity and assisting Russia to become a leading power of Europe. Furthermore Alexander II knows that any reforms he made had to modernise and strengthen Russia as well as maintain autocracy. Alexander II embarked on the reform programme for the following reasons: * Russia was at a crossroads. * It had suffered defeat in the Crimean War. * There had been peasant unrest caused by his father’s decision to recruit a militia in January 1855. * The Crimean war had caused the government a large financial problem. This resulted in a debt burden of one billion roubles. The defeat in the Crimean War concentrated the minds of Alexander II and his advisors. This defeat also discredited the entire regime and forced Alexander II to acknowledge that there were military deficiencies that were a deeper refection of the problem faced within Russian...
Words: 1391 - Pages: 6
...aggression, and new technology. The leader at the time was Nicholas I from 1825-1855. After his death, he was succeeded by Alexander II that reigned from 1855-1881. Nicholas did not like serfdom, which was a member of the lowest feudal class, attached to the land owned by a lord and required to perform labor in return for certain legal or customary rights. He wanted to abolish it but did not because he feared the aristocracy and believed they might turn against him if he abolished serfdom. When Alexander II came to power, he completely abolished serfdom granting freedom to 12 million serfs and land to peasant communes. In 1864 most local government in the European part of Russia was organized into provincial and district zemstva. Zemstvo was a form of local government which were made up of representatives for each district that were responsible for local schools, public health, roads, prisons, and food supply. The district zemstvos elected executive committees and delegates to the provincial assemblies. Resources were scarce due to the defeat in the Crimean war. There were insufficient rail lines in the railway system and the production rate of weapons and machinery decreased by a lot. The standard of living in Russia was very bad. There were millions and millions of serfs and a lot were very poor. Almost 50% of Russia was made up of serfs until Alexander II issued the Emancipation reform of 1861. This made serfs free from their landlords. Surprisingly, this reform wasn’t too...
Words: 559 - Pages: 3
...of the Russo Japanese war was a considerable loss for Russia, a country typically seen as powerful. The loss of the war challenged the old Russia, therefor change had to occur. The loss of the war demonstrated how far behind Russia was in comparison to the rest of Europe. As most war supplies came from the work of the Serfs, it made sense to free them and further increase the effectiveness of Russia’s army. Soldiers were allocated to suppress protesting Serfs, meaning Russia could further portray its image of solidarity as a nation. As the war was a large reason towards the emancipation, personal attitudes towards the Tsar became significant. A Russian novelist, Leo Tolstoy described Alexander II as a humane ruler through asserting “In reality we owe the emancipation to the Emperor alone.” Alexander is often seen as a liberator that further instigated reforms in education and the aims of moving towards a constitutional monarchy. Earlier Russian rulers considered Emancipation, but later war was the catalyst needed for progression and change. The Russian revolution demonstrates how an idea of liberalization can grow and cultivate a break from a traditional form of government. Nicholas II’s declaration states, “maintain the principle of autocracy as strongly and firmly as my late father.” This contradicted the social desire to see more democratic form of government. This can be seen in the agricultural debates addressing Russia’s rural issues. The divided government would prove to...
Words: 461 - Pages: 2
...feudalism. In political terms it was also backward as there was no legal political parties nor was there any centrally elected government Russia at this time was under tsarist rule by Nicholas II of the Romanov empire. Nicholas II was brought up by his father Alexander III who didn't believe that his son could take an intelligent interest in anything and therefore did not educate him in the business of state . The fact that his father who died at age 49 thought that he had many more years ahead of him may also be another factor behind Nicholas' poor leadership of Russia . Alexander who died in 1894 had left Russia with a society no longer controlled by tsarist rule and when Nicholas took the throne after his father's death Russian society was not prepared to turn on it's heels and return to how it use to be . Nicholas II was 26 when his father died and was soon to marry the German princess, Alix of Hess, Granddaughter of Queen Victoria . The relationship between Alexandra and Nicholas was a 'critical relationship at a turning point in history' . He was weak and indecisive but he wasn't an imbecile, Alexandra, if not an imbecile was politically and socially illiterate, dominating him and towards the end of their lives forced him to make chaotic decisions. Nicholas nor Alexander III were well trained for the job of ruling this vast country....
Words: 1327 - Pages: 6
...response, Tsar Alexander II passed a series of reforms, which were intended to liberalize Russian society. They included the abolition of serfdom, the modernization of the government, the opening of universities to people of all socioeconomic classes, the granting of semi-autonomy to the Russian territory of Poland, and the relaxation of some laws that were punitive to various religious groups (Burleigh 27). While these reforms had good intentions they failed to have the intended effects. The educational reforms did allow more people to be admitted to universities, but they did little to change life conditions for these new people. For example, women left universities with no new societal roles in which they could utilize their education. In addition, educated people of lower classes had few employment opportunities available for them upon graduation (Alexander and His Times). The tough situation for the newly accepted students caused students to rise up and take control of their professors (Burleigh 28). The emancipation of the serfs was also not entirely successful. This is because it left awkward agreements between former serfs and landlords that forced serfs to reimburse their former masters for the financial loss of losing them as unpaid workers. These agreements caused tension and some unrest in rural areas. Even in Poland, the limited self-rule that was granted to them failed because it caused many Polish people to demand full independence (Alexander and His Times)...
Words: 1888 - Pages: 8
...Nicholas I • Was the third son of Czar Paul I, he had few chances of ever gaining the throne. o Not seen as a possible heir, thus was educated accordingly. o His upbringing was strict, flogging was common and few efforts were made to motivate the young student. • Was attracted to engineering and military affairs, especially enjoying the drills and luster of parades. • His eldest brother, Czar Alexander I, was childless. o Paul’s second son and next in line for succession, Constantine, renounced the throne. o Left Nicholas an apparent heir. • Didn’t feel ready to rule, realizing he lacked necessary skills & knowledge. o His lifestyle didn’t change. o Wasn’t taking part in state affairs & was unpopular among soldiers; was disliked for his ruthlessness and fault-finding. • The sudden death of Alexander I, in November 1825 plunged Russia’s monarchy into turmoil. o Army swore allegiance to Constantine. o Having no support, Nicholas was prepared to give up power. • After Constantine confirmed his refusal, Nicholas declared himself emperor o A plot was hatched by the military to overthrow Nicholas and to usurp power. Led to the Decembrist Revolt on 26 December 1825 Nicholas was successful in suppressing the uprising. • Fighting revolutionary ideas & dissent became Nicholas’ obsession o In the early 1830s, he brutally crushed a Polish rebellion, reducing Poland to the status of a Russian province. o In 1848 he sent troops to suppress a Hungarian uprising...
Words: 1224 - Pages: 5
...Russian system, yes some of it was quite cruel and hard on the Russians but the Russians must have a ruler that is hard and is a stiff upper lipped person and is a powerfull ruler, every leader of Russia has been a hard and powerful one so I do agree that violence and repression were key factors in his role to rule Russia. Alexander III came to power very unexpectedly due to the assassination of members of the terrorist organization Narodnaya Volya. He was only 36 when his father died and he came to power He was very aware and under no illusion that he could suffer the exact same fate as his father did, because he was so aware of this he put in place many forms of repression These were labelled ‘Russification’ and they came into being immediately he was crowned tsar in 1881. The primary aspect of Russification was to rid Russia of western ideas that Alexander III believed had weakened the country and reduced its national identity. Alexander wanted to reclaim Russia’s ‘Russian-ness'. To achieve this he had to remove those people who had imported into Russia alien ideas that were covertly undermining his position and the national identity of Russia itself. Alexander saw no difference in what he wanted for himself and what he wanted for Russia. Russification was not new to Russia. There had been isolated examples of when this was done before. What made Alexander’s policy so different was the intensity of it after 1881 and the attempt to give it some form of academic intellectual backing...
Words: 2019 - Pages: 9
