During his reign, Alexander brought about many reforms some successful and others not so.
One reform was the Emancipation of the Serfs. Alexander II was given the name of ‘The Tsar Liberator’ because he did just that in 1861 when he ‘freed’ the Serfs from powerful nobles who ruled over them. The main aim of this reform was help with the industrialisation of Russia and to allow it to try and keep up with the powerful Western Europe. It was also an effort to reduce peasant revolts and to reform the army after the Crimean War.
The main successes of the reform was that it was a big step forwards for the Romanovs and some peasants gained large amounts of land in Siberia which equalled out the class levels slightly. But in writing, the reform sounds successful but it also had its limitations. Taxes were put upon the serfs which amounted to large sums of money, obviously though most of them could not afford to pay the redemption fee and so had to remained attached to the ‘Mir’ and work to pay off their debts. There was also the feeling of the higher classes to account for. Many disagreed with the liberation and thought that they would become worse off. This led to civil unrest within the nobility. There was also peasant rioting from the state serfs who weren’t emancipated until 1866 and also other peasants who were land less and owned only huge debts.
In 1863, Alexander II attempted to reform censorship by putting The Ministry Of Interior in charge of it. In 1865 they issued a new set of guidelines for writers and editors to follow. The main aim of this reform was to extend the public ‘freedom of expression’ which had been heavily restricted in past years by severe censorship of papers and books. The reform had some successes as the emancipation of the serfs was openly discussed and the editors no longer needed to get approval from the Ministry of Interior to issue a report. But like the emancipation of the serfs it also had its limitations. In 1873, certain topics were forbidden. Again Alexander went back on his word, as the freedom of expression was restricted as was the serf’s freedom. Some books were also banned from being in public libraries or bookshops. For Instance: ‘What is to be done?’ which was probably the worst error of the lack of censorship.
Alexander was also able to reform the industry in Russia, which overall was mainly successful. He was able to expand the workforce from 860,000 to 1,320,000 by 1887, which resulted in new industries and methods being able to be set up. For instance the increase in coal production, textile industries and most importantly the development of the Naphtha Extraction Company in 1879. Main Industrial cities were also established. This helped put Russia on the ladder of industry to catch up with the powerful Western Europe Industries and also increase the capital in Russia therefore making it a more stable country. The negative outcomes were to happen later rather than in Alexander’s reign, for instance: inflation in Alexander III’s Reign.
Alexander II also tried to reform the Education system in Russia and the Army.
Education was reformed to prevent barriers between people as many serfs could not write or read. The government also wanted the schools to be regulated. To increase the amount of people educated more public schools were built and established. Grammar schools were introduced for higher-class families. A national curriculum was also introduced. The successes of this were reform were that many people learnt to read and write and the possibility of university was increased to all social class members. The successes though also led to failures as many more people went abroad to go to university and with this brought back dangerous ideas, which led to opposition and revolts.
The amount of people educated also helped reform the army as different methods could be used as all members had intelligence. Therefore as the army was mainly made up of serfs this was very advantageous. Conscription was also done on a fairer basis as every man over 20 (not just serfs), was liable to conscription for the maximum of 6 years, followed by 9 years reserve service. The successes of this were that the reserve number was increased and the training and discipline standards were also increased. The failures of this were that even though conscription had been abolished recruitment still existed, and aren’t these two the same thing? The rule of universal recruitment also annoyed the upper class as before they were able to bribed there way out of military service.
The final major reform in Alexander II reign was of local government and law. The local government needed to be reformed to control the majority of Russia’s population as the nobles had lost control over the serfs after their liberation. It was also needed, as Russia was an ungoverned society. To reform the local government the Zemstva and Dumma were set up to represent towns, peasants and gentry. The reform was successful as it provided people with a new opportunity to be involved in politics. But there were also many limitations, like the emancipation of the serfs and also the censorship reform there was restrictions on how much power the Zemstva were allowed to have, it was also still very democratic so the wealthy still dominant as they did before the reform and Alexander’s reign.
The law needed reforming as the trials were very unfair and the accused were presumed guilty before they were even tried. The law courts were also very corrupt and the judges were easily bribed by the wealthy. To reform the law Alexander published ‘The Reform of the Legal System’. The judges were also paid so the chances of them accepting bribes were reduced. This was successful as there was now a freedom of expression within the courts but they were still operated by the police who had a lot of power over the court cases and also political cases were not tried in courts. This failure could be linked into the censorship as political cases could give Alexander a bad name.
Though Alexander attempted to reform many aspects of Russia he only did it at ‘limited measures’ and during his reign there was very little reform in financial policies, the poll tax is a key example. It was a heavy burden on the peasants but gentry were exempt from which caused grief and unrest between the civil classes.
As a result of Alexander’s reforms many people began to revolt and oppose his rule.
The main causes of revolts were from students who had gone to university in Western Europe and brought back political opinions and set up organisations against the Tsar (Hell is an example of a student group). This was a result of the reform in education, which allowed more people to have the chance of education in Europe and the majority of these people were lower class that had disagreed with the Tsars methods in the Emancipation of the Serfs. After censorship had been made less severe many books and newspapers issued new ideas to people, which caused them to revolt after seeing another side to the Tsar. Revolts were also caused by the bad harvests, when there was low morale due to the lack of food and increase risk of disease.
In conclusion, I agree with the view of Seton-Watson and E. Crankshaw who both believe that Alexander II had a successful start to his reign but then led to his own downfall, as he left ‘no stamp on the age’. Even though he attempted many reforms, none of them were entirely successful, as he reformed censorship by giving writers and editors the ‘freedom of expression’ but then he restricted the reform by banning several books and forbidding certain topics for discussion. Therefore not actually changing anything on censorship and so didn’t leave his stamp.
Another example of Alexander not leaving his stamp is the fact the after the liberation of the serfs they still remained attached to the Mir to pay off their redemption taxes and once again he didn’t actually change anything because the peasants were still under the control of a higher person.
Also the example of military reform; conscription was introduced in the army to replace forced recruitment.
I feel that Alexander II was not successful in bringing about successful reform in Russia as he didn’t actually change anything just adapted the structure of rule that was already standing.
