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

Were Alexander IIs reforms successful and did he deserve to be called a Liberator?

Extracts from this document...


Bethan Port Were Alexander II?s reforms successful and did he deserve to be called a Liberator? I believe that Alexander II did deserve to be called a Liberator, as he introduced a number of reforms that revolutionised Russia from its extremely backward state. There was a great demand for change at the time, although reforms faced adversity from traditional supporters of autocratic power, such as nobility and gentry. Alexander II remained determined to hold onto his autocratic powers, but was open to the arguments of others; including the much needed abolition of serfdom. It was the subsequent unbalance between Alexander?s commitment to autocracy and his liberal reforms that created opposition towards his reign, and eventually led to his assassination by terrorists in 1881. ...read more.


He therefore maintained a level of peace, which was made all the more difficult by opposition from the ?Krepostniki?. The immediate impact of the emancipation was often delayed as Alexander could not get the support of the Krepostniki, and the reforms often favoured landowners over peasants. For example, 75% of allotments awarded to the serfs were less than 4 dessyatinas which was not enough to feed a peasant family. However, within 20 years of the reform, emancipation led to over 85% of former serfs becoming landowners, and Alexander had avoided a major rebellion. Alexander was also successful in his Army reforms. Recruitment was suspended in 1856, and every man over 20 was made to conscript if medically fit, which meant the wealthy also had to participate. ...read more.


This was a success for Alexander II as courts enjoyed more freedom of expression and provided career opportunities for many. This reform especially shows Alexander II?s sympathy for men ?of the humble class?. In conclusion, I think that Alexander II does deserve to be called a liberator as ultimately his reforms were a huge success; 40 million Russians were liberated overnight and Russia?s social and economic state radically improved to compete with the level of change occurring in Europe. Furthermore, Alexander II?s other reforms, such as in law and the army replaced the previous lifestyle that serfdom enforced, in order to support his tsarist system of government that he wanted to retain. Alexander II?s reforms aimed to make his country strong again and this is, to a degree, what he managed to achieve. ...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. Reasons for Napoleon's Success (to 1807).

    As a result, as in Spain for instance, they were unavoidably left in charge in Napoleon's absence from the country, his senior staff proved quite unable to cope on their own. * By 1814 Napoleon's early self-confidence and determination had degenerated into supreme egoism, obstinacy and unwillingness to face facts

  2. To What Extent Were the Reforms of Alexander II Intended to Preserve and Strengthen ...

    The aspect of the reforms suggest that Alexander was trying to hold onto power while once again creating the aura that he was actually reforming Russia, when in fact he only reformed it for 17% of the population. It can also be argued that by creating an independent legal bar

  1. How well does Alexander II deserve his reputation as The Tsar Liberator(TM)?

    serf conditions only in his craving to retain an autocracy: "Nothing Alexander did altered, or was intended to alter, the fundamental political fact of a God created autocracy." The vague terms of the emancipation and the insignificant power given to small local governments, that were later dissolved, is proof enough that Alexander...

  2. How successful were the attempts by Alexander II to reform Russia?

    Despite being given freedom from their previous owner, they were still under the control of the Mire. Alexander II failed to realise that simply declaring the serf's freedom was insufficient. The Russian society itself was still restricting their freedom, they were not given any land from the state, most of

  1. Does Alexander II deserve his historical reputation?

    Domestic serfs were given freedom, however, they received no land and found it hard to find new jobs, leading to many serfs being unemployed and in a worse state than they were originally in. Many things had to change as a result of the emancipation of the serfs, seeing as they now had a new 'freedom'.

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

    in the legal system and thus freeing the poor from the bounds of the unfair law. In the short term, there was a new found freedom of expression and the reforms opened up new career opportunities for the educated people of Russia.

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