ALEXANDER II'S DOMESTIC REFORMS

strength of opponents in the crimean war

• success of western powers attributed to many factors

• armies were not serfs as modern warfare needed with its technological advances needed modern soldiers not mass illiterate serfs

• industrial growth was the basis of technology, communications and modernity in the west to which defeated Russias agricultural society

• teh west also had confidence and energy including support from their civilian populations, newspapers, photographs and modern steam powered ships

• seemed to contrast the limitations of the Russian campaign, remoteness of regime and reliance on oppression and not consultation

crimean war: end result for Russias position in the world

• seemed out of date and old-fashioned, lagging behind other countries who had undergone industrialisation

• humiliating defeat; unable to get western forces off own land

• russia had been more successful in conflict with pre-industrialised Turkish forces than against industrialising Britain and france, reinforcing idea that russia was being left behind and needed to catch ip

• russia successful giants Turkish navy in Sinope

• peace treaty quite lenient on russia

• russia appeared to be losing its natural advantage and superiority of size and geography over the west

• increased criticism of autocracy and serfdom

crimean war: position of tsarist autocracy

• unable to defeat less charismatic opponents than Napoleon

• tsar Nicholas I had chosen to take russia into a war of expansion, not a threat of destruction as Napoleon had been increasing the undermining of tsarist authority

• tsar Nicholas I died of pneumonia and replaced by Alexander II, further destabilising the position of the tsar in the war

crimean war: opposition ideas

• taras regime appeared remote from war, from managing the campaign as well as the interests of the people

• westerniser ideas strengthened by the message that seemed to come from the war that russia needed to industrialise to compete with other powers

• no free press so criticism was limited

• a natural feeling that the thing people had sacrificed liberty and progress had turned out to be an illusion

crimean war: Russias resources and infrastructure

• outdated and inferior to britain

• problems with supplies as there were no railways in russia south of Moscow so supplies had to be brought by foot while france and britain were supplied by steam powered ships

• supplies had became increasingly important in more industrialised and attritional form of conflicts

crimean war: serfdom

• not working

• not giving sufficiently skilled troops, not allowing industrialisation to equip army

• Russian guns captured from Russian soldiers at the battle of alma early in the war were using gates that dated back to 1799

• not able to replace the 2000-3000 daily casualties at the Siege of Sevastopol as they had done after Borodino and eventually, the key port of Sevastopol had to surrender to the british and French

changes brought by the crimean war

• modernisation was sought most notably in the end of serfdom and in the liberalisation of the legal system, educational change and military and government reforms

• however, crimean war was not the only reason for this

• liberals in the ruling class and the Tsar Alexander II more prepared to change and adapt than Nicholas II but war was still a major catalyst

• principle governmental change was the creation of local councils

• zemstvos set up in 1st jan 1864 and the basic unit was the distort council chosen by election and landowners, townsmen’s, peasants voting for representatives

• then these district councils members elected to regional councils

• main role of these councils was in local matters rather than political bodies

• drew attention to the state of the army mostly comprised of peasants, many of whom were serfs

• military reformers thought russia needed a smaller, better trained army with a reserve like those in other European countries

• raised question of loyalty of how long would serfs remain loyal if nothing was being done to improve their conditions and accommodate their aspirations

issues with Russias military

• poor showing of the army provided a strong impetus for military reform

• to remain a world power and be able to defend itself, it had to modernise its army

• however, extremely expensive to maintain an army of its size, taking ip 1/3 of the governments income which could have been spent elsewhere

• it had remained so large as the government had been reluctant to return soldier serfs to their villages where they might use their training to promote discontent so they kept soldiers in service for 25 years

• after emancipation, this was not deemed necessary

• thus, military reforms were to be introduced and were undertaken by Dmitri Milyutin over a twenty year period

military reforms and changes 1861 - 1881: conditions and training

• conditions improved for ordinary soldiers such as they were housed in barracks

• reduction in number of offences that carried corporal punishment and flogging was abolished

• modern rifles and artillery introduced but slow progress and technological progress in weaponry meant some weapons were superseded before they were fully introduced

• officer training radically improved

• military colleges established, admitting recruits who were not nobles and promotions were open to other classes to improve leadership pool; specialised officer schools for the artillery and engineers

• broader education provided and education was required for commission

• staff colleges established with high standards offering accelerated promotion for graduates

military reforms and changes 1861 - 1881: service and size

• universal conscription introduced for all social classes making them liable for military service at 21; generally ¼ would be chosen by lot to serve but could be avoided if medical service was provided or deferred for students to complete their studies

• administration of army reorganised into fifteen military districts with more autonomy to district commanders making it easier to bring in the reserve in time of war

• standard length of military service reduced to fifteen years; six years in active service and nine in the reserve

• from 1862 to 1870 the reserve increased from 210000 to over 550000

consequences of military changes

• despite the genuine attempt to break down class privilege and create an army based on merit the result was a smaller more professional army which was some extent less class ridden

• however still a high proportion of nobility among officers and when Alexander became II became Tsar he restricted entry to officer training mainly to nobility

• tendency to appoint untrained members of the royal family to key military served for which they were unsuited despite a key reason for the loss of the crimean war was incompetent and uncharismatic leadership

• a fully professional army posed a threat to autocracy as it was the main means by which they stayed in control

• significant saving in government expenditure due to the smaller army supported by a trained reserve which could be mobilised

• army still reliable on peasant conscripts who were uneducated and illiterate reducing the effectiveness of their training

• reforms were opposed by the nobility who did not want their offspring mixing with the lower class and preferred the old system were nobility dominated officer corps

• merchants objected as they did not want their sons to do compulsory military service though some were able to find substitutes to replace their sons

emancipation of the serfs in russia timeline

the moral case of abolishing serfdom

• members of the royal family dating form Catherine the great considered serfdom to be morally and ethically wrong

• Nicholas I called it ‘an evil, palpable and obvious to all’

• romanov rulers uneasy about serfdom for generations

• enlightened nobles and liberal state officials accepted the view it was wrong to own someone like a possession and it was demeaning

• affected by writers such as Turgenev who drew attention to the plight of the serf and the need to improve conditions of peasants

• radical intelligentsia growing to oppose serfdom

• nevertheless, majority of nobles did not accept this position believing abolition of serfdom would damage the Russian state and their own livelihoods

concerns of risk of revolt by the serfs

• many historians have cited concern for social stability as one of the main reasons for emancipation

• serious peasant revolts in the past and disturbances have been increasing since the 1840s with a significant spike in 1857 and 1859

• Alexander told nobles it was better to abolish serfdom form above than wait for it to abolish itself from below

• unsettled by the 1848 revolutions in Europe

• worried enough to order weekly reports on the mood of the peasantry from December 1857

• particularly worried about the army being maid up of mainly peasants so it might be difficult for the government to contain a major peasant uprising

• other historians have maintained the scale of peasant unrest has been exaggerated as main sources of data are unreliable straits police records

• some nobles feared major reform might provoke serious revolt by peasants and it could be seen as a sign of weakness or might be disappointed by the reform

economic arguments for the emancipation of the serfs

• many enlightened government official and intellectuals convinced it was necessary to abolish serfdom if the economy was to advance

• expressed clearly by milyutin, an official in the ministry of internal affairs

• some accepted arguments of economists like Adam smith that free labour was more productive than forced labour; forced labour impoverished the population and stopped the growth of domestic demand which was essential for economic growth

• believed you needed a free labour market where peasants could move around yo where they could be most productive whether in agriculture or industry

• some disagreements among historians whether this was the most decisive factor, some arguing poor transport systems were more significant in preventing economic development

• point out immediately after emancipation, there was a move on the part of the government to restrict the movement of peasants by introducing internal passports suggesting free labour to allow capitalist growth was no the governments priority

emancipation statues of 19th February 1961

• took thousands of officials and numerous committees to draft plans

• an editing commission created in 1859 to turn recommendations into legislation resulting in the emancipation statutes

• serfdom abolished and legally free, with the freedom to marry, travel, vote and trade

• peasants would have land with their freedom, allowed to keep their houses and land immediately a round it but would have to but the other land they worked at the time of the emancipation

• nobility would continue to play a role in policing

• landowners compensated for their loss in land in government bonds but not for the loss of their rights over their serfs

• peasants still under control of the Mir, those power would be strengthened

• peasants still had to make annual payments for the land they were buying; the government purchases the land and peasants had to make redemption payments over a period of 49 years

• in 1866, state peasants given these rights in the same way as former private serfs or to remain tenants

emancipation of the serfs: political stability and unrest; positive impacts

• after a wave of peasant uprisings in the early 1860s the situation became calmer and order was restored to the countryside

• governments ability to bring about emancipation showed the power of autocracy; in the usa the amacipavtion of slaves required catastrophic civil war and almost the break up of the nation

emancipation of the serfs: political stability and unrest; negative impacts

• in the fist four months, 647 peasant revolts occurred

• reforms went too far for most nobles and slavophiles while not going far enough for westernisers

• some members of the disillusioned intelligentsia and nobles called for greater role in government of the empire so they would not be let down by autocracy

• troops sent to occupy the region of Kazan in response to sever peasant uprising in 1861 and killed 400

• Alexander II declared: there will be no emancipation except the one I have given you. obey the laws! work and toil! obey the authorities and the landowners

emancipation of the serfs: social effects; positive impacts

• peasants immediately granted basic rights such as no forced marriages, not being forced into the army for 25 years, free to set up their own business, at leats in theory

• in russia, over 20m people became free because of the tsars reforms

emancipation of the serfs: social effects; negative impacts

• peasants continued to have fewer rights than the richer class and be tried in separate courts

• contemporary authors commented little improvement occurred for peasants scubas in A. I. Shingarevs the dying village

• peasant mobility restricted by the need to first pay off the full 49 year term of redemption payments and by internal passports

• peasants continued with serf restrictions, services and dues between 1861 and 1863

• only privately owned serfs were freed in 1861; state peasants had to wait up until 1866 for reforms

emancipation of the serfs: economic effects: positive impacts

• on average peasants were working 25% less land after 1861 than before it

• peasants became more mobile and cities swelled

• by 1890, 2/3 of the population of st Petersburg had been born outside the city

• in 1907, 90% of Moscow print workers were sending wages back to their families in the countryside

• although total grain yields remained poor by 1909-1914, 60m tons of grains were being produced annually compared to 26m in 1861-1866

• aided by the formation of the peasants land back in 1883, more prosperous and enterprising peasants were able to buy land

• in 877 peasants held 6m hectares of land and by 1905, this was 21.6m

emancipation of the serfs: economic effects: negative impacts

• with less land available and rapidly growing population, peasants over-used soil leading to a drop in productivity which partly caused a famine in 1890-91 which killed 500,000

• in seeking to compensate the nobles for loss of their labour, the redemption payments were set too high so the government had to cut the repayment figure by 25%

• although on average, peasants could farm less land afterwards and in the black earth region this was particularly severe, in less fertile northern russia peasants farmed substantially more land