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

To what extent does Alexander II deserve the title

Extracts from this document...


When Alexander the second came to power in 1855, he inherited many of the problems that augmented from his previous predecessor, Nicholas the first. This led the tsar to undertake a series of great reforms, which gave him the charming title of "Liberator". However, were his motives clearly to bring change and a better Russia or were there other motives? Did he expect something in return? After all, for the sake of autocracy he couldn't just welcome liberation with arm wide open, but rather with a wary handshake. Perhaps the most significant reform was the emancipation of the serfs. This sought to update the structure of the current serf system and in turn reverse the fortunes of the failing nobility. ...read more.


Unrest would die down subsequently in the countryside. Alexander the second did not fail entirely though. Nobles were compensated with political power for the reduction of their land. One must also consider the awful conditions already at the countryside before reform. The tsar at least made an effort to combat the out- dated structures. The tsar also tried to reform the local politics and the economy. The zenistra (local council) would govern over many issues such as education. Despite early fast establishments of the council, by 1917 only 43 of the 70 provinces of Russia were converted. With the duma (created in 1870), cabinet, the zenistra proved to be quite useful with 15,000 extra schools being introduced by 1880. ...read more.


It may be unfair to name Alexander the second as a selfish Machiavellian, as he did not have perhaps, the mental capacity. His reforms seemed not to be measured but were reflections of his personality, because of their blatant inconsistency. The tsar could be seen in some context as a liberator, simply for attempting to develop an undeveloped, traditional ruling philosophy. As the lonesome ruler over Russia the tsars had to control and decide its fate. Emancipation was at least given priority, which had been demoted for many years. It may not have been the ideal end result, especially for the peasantry, but it had reversed old age policies. Liberation may have been instilled with some importance and credibility, but above all else, autocracy had to be upheld. ...read more.

The above preview is unformatted text

This student written piece of work is one of many that can be found in our GCSE Russia, USSR 1905-1941 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 GCSE Russia, USSR 1905-1941 essays

  1. Marked by a teacher

    Why did Alexander II Emancipate the Serfs in 1861?

    5 star(s)

    needed to be to catch up with the rest of Eastern Europe, would not be compatible with the system of serfdom.

  2. Why and with what results did Alexander II abolish serfdom in Russia?

    legal system, local governments, education system and in the way of censorship. He introduced local legal authorities, significantly relaxed censorship, abolished corporal punishment, established new education institutions and set up district assemblies in 1864. All these extra reforms put the emancipation into a seemingly liberal context.

  1. To what extent was the storming of the Bastille the most significant event of ...

    To generalise, it seems that while the economic situation alone cannot be attributed to the outbreak of the revolution, the crises contributed to the mergence of the major 'popular movement', made up of discontented workers and small traders. While political affairs and economic ones cannot be totally distinguished, without the

  2. Why and with what consequences did Alexander II adopt more reactionary policies in the ...

    He was the leader of the revolutionary democratic movement of the 1860s called Narodism. This was a system of views was formed in response to the growing conflicts between the peasantry and the kulaks. The groups did not establish a concrete organization, but shared the common general aim of overthrowing the monarchy and kulaks, and distributing land among the peasantry.

  1. How valid is the view that the reign of Alexander II achieved nothing of ...

    so that common men could advance in rank, rather than the military simply being dominated by the nobility. There was also a massive increase in military education - levels of literacy were hugely improved so that the Russian army had one of the best systems of education in the Empire.

  2. 'To What Extent Did Tsar Alexander III's Reign Mark A Major Change From That ...

    Hutchinson argues that Tsar Alexander II's actions after Crimea had '...underlined the need to adapt to a rapidly changing world.' Yet Tsar Alexander III's response was to systematically destroy the remnants of the political groups in Russia, especially the 'People's Will'.

  1. How Fair were the Intentions of Alexander II and Why did the Emancipation of ...

    Despite the general contentedness of the majority of serfs, there were a significant number who were not happy, and many groups of political activists, such as the Narodniks, had begun stirring up discontentment. In a population of 67 million, Russia had 23 million serfs belonging to 103,000 landlords.

  2. The blance sheet for russia.

    It was still necessary to use armed force to overcome the resistance of the old order. No ruling class has ever surrendered power without a fight. But resistance was minimal. The government collapsed like a house of cards, because nobody was prepared to defend it.

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