• Join over 1.2 million students every month
  • Accelerate your learning by 29%
  • Unlimited access from just £6.99 per month

To What Extent Were the Reforms of Alexander II Intended to Preserve and Strengthen Autocracy?

Extracts from this document...

Introduction

"Window-dressing by a Tsar whose real intention was to preserve and strengthen autocracy." How far do you agree with this verdict on the reforms of Alexander II? Alexander II was a great reformer as Tsar. Alexander reformed local government, the legal system, the economy, the education system, censorship, the military and abolished serfdom. These massive achievements gave Alexander the deserved title of "Tsar Liberator". However, it is clear that in some respects Alexander was just trying to strengthen the Tsar's autocracy. There is sufficient evidence to show that Alexander was not as much of reformer as his various reforms portrayed. The various flaws in each reform do detract from the "Tsar Liberator" status, but despite this, Alexander II still brought about a great sea change in Russia that saw many aspects of the country vastly improved, autocrat or not. The most significant of reforms that Alexander II implemented during his reign as Tsar was definitely the abolition of serfdom. Alexander II carried on Nicholas I's sympathy towards the first, and sought to remove serfdom from Russian society. A year before setting up a Committee to investigate the issue of Serfdom in 1857, Alexander said, "It is better to abolish serfdom from above than to await the time when its abolition would begin from below without any action on our part." ...read more.

Middle

The reforms were also a genuine move to improve the poor reputation of Russia in terms of human rights and to dispel the image of unjust courts in Russia. Alexander II also chose to meddle very little with the new legal system; once the Tsar appointed new judges it was incredibly difficult to remove them. This aspect was highlighted in the Vera Zasulich case were a women revolutionary attempted to assassinate the mayor of St Petersburg. Zasulich was found not guilty by a jury in case that could have seen the Tsar interfere, but instead Alexander stuck true to his reforms and let the case proceed as usual. This was a sign that Alexander wanted the Russian legal system to move forward and to modernise Russia. However, like all his reforms the legal reforms had their flaws. The serfs and peasants were only allowed to be tried by the Mir courts, so 83% of Russia's population had no trial by jury available to them. This aspect was incredibly unjust from the serfs and detracted from largely liberal reform. A possible reason why serfs were not allowed trail by jury was that if Alexander granted them this, he could risk further angering the nobles who now had to go through for complex legal procedures than before and could not bribe officials as had previous been the case. ...read more.

Conclusion

There were vast reforms in financial control, taxation and new sources of income were exploited. Annual budgets were also published and the economy was definitely starting to get back on its feet. Alexander II did not have much to gain in terms of strengthening his power over Russia, it was clear that Alexander had to reform the economy in order for this many other reforms to function fully. Despite the reform of the economy, inflation worsened and national debt rose due to the Russo-Turkish War. In conclusion, Alexander II was without a doubt a great reformer. His vast reforms, which I have spoken about broke Russia out of a previously archaic system. Alexander II also took huge risks with these reforms. With his education reforms being very liberal he risked coming under fire from the new breed of students that his reforms created, the same was the case with the new breed of lawyers that the legal reforms created. This put Alexander's absolute power at risk, but still he was brave enough to push through the reforms for the benefit of Russia. Alexander II did give the serfs a raw deal in many of his reforms, but he did take the crucial first step in their complete liberation and with it left hi mark on Russian society. Like any Monarch, Alexander II was not perfect, but his reforms completely changed the face of Russia and it society, mostly for the better. ...read more.

The above preview is unformatted text

This student written piece of work is one of many that can be found in our AS and A Level Modern European History, 1789-1945 section.

Found what you're looking for?

  • Start learning 29% faster today
  • 150,000+ documents available
  • Just £6.99 a month

Not the one? Search for your essay title...
  • Join over 1.2 million students every month
  • Accelerate your learning by 29%
  • Unlimited access from just £6.99 per month

See related essaysSee related essays

Related AS and A Level Modern European History, 1789-1945 essays

  1. Marked by a teacher

    To what extent does Stalin deserve the title of Red Tsar when assessing his ...

    5 star(s)

    Although some of these methods continued under Khrushchev, they were comparatively less horrific. Even though grain seizures were common to all communist leaders, it is important to recognise that all communist leaders were against the forced collectivisation experienced under Stalin, which led to widespread famine in Russia.

  2. How successful was Alexander II in transforming Russian Society

    The zemstva took over the church's educational responsibility in 1864, leading to more liberal and modern thinking. The educational reforms lead to all communities being brighter, encouraging further business and free education lead to social mobility and opportunity. The Minister of Internal Affairs, Pyotr Valuev set up the Ecclesiastical Commission in 1862 to investigate church organisation and practise.

  1. Causes of show trials + purges of 1930s.

    By early 1929 USSR were forced to import grain and introduce bread rationing. 8. Molotov illustrates the fear of foreign invasion was why the policy of collectivisation was introduced, as he said. "The imperialists have not so far decided to attack us directly", therefore, "we must utilise this moment for a decisive advance".

  2. Describe the Russia that Tsar Nicholas II inherited

    Due to urbanisation, Moscow tripled in its size. The modernisation of Russia would have to seemingly be imposed from the top down, since there was a lack of a bourgeoisie. Conversely, Tsar Nicholas II was unprepared to subside some of his power to make this happen and for a middle

  1. Does Alexander II deserve his historical reputation?

    The Zemstvo were a local assembly introduced during the major liberal reforms during the reign of Alexander II. Each district elected representatives who had control over the education, roads and agriculture of that region. The zemtvo helped the Tsar increase his liberal image.

  2. To what extent did Alexander II deserve his title of the Tsar Liberator

    The law reforms were needed after the injustice between the rich and the poor was highlighted by the existing system. The poor were presumed guilty; there were no juries or lawyers; and the judges were heavily influenced by the police.

  1. How significant was Piotr Stolypin in attempting to strengthen Tsarism between 1906 and 1911?

    in the short term, his plan was set over 20 years, but his assassination in 1911 meant only 9 years of the reforms had been taken into effect, and after his death, they were downgraded and minimal further action was taken.

  2. What were the mains reasons for the emancipation of Serfs in Russia?

    But decrees on free farmers and serfs have been carried out on a limited scale only.[4]? In addition, the historian Bruce Lincoln offered another important interpretive. He said that the emancipation of Serfs was a long process; he argued that The Edict of Emancipation was drafted by a generation of

  • Over 160,000 pieces
    of student written work
  • Annotated by
    experienced teachers
  • Ideas and feedback to
    improve your own work