In 1850, 50 million people received land, and in 1900, 82 million received land. This was inefficient because there were smaller plots of land going to these people, this caused people to leave the farms and go to the cities to look for jobs and there were many food shortages without the farmers. This put the nobles into a very bad position.
Alexander abolished serfdom; he stopped all army recruitment and eased censorship. The abolition of serfdom was seriously vital. It is believed that it was the principal setback to Russia’s development into a modern state, they were not developing like the other European powers. It was believed that serfdom prevented the growth of Russian industry, interfering with the free flow of labour and restricting enterprise. It also prevented bringing in modern methods or agriculture, which left Russia un-wealthy and not developing like the rest of Europe. In the defeat in the Crimea, this showed that the
army needed immediate improvement. This was basically impossible if serfdom was still in force.
Abolition was the only way possible to stop the expanding number of peasant revolts. But other people believed differently about serfdom. Nicholas I had claimed serfdom as
a ‘flagrant evil’ and he set up nine different secret committees to analyse how it could be abolished. The future Alexander II was on one of these committees, but unfortunately for them, nothing was achieved. The peasants knew that freedom without land would be senseless, leaving them at the mercy of the landlords once again. That following year, he brought up the Secret Committee on Peasant Affairs, followed by a number of Editing Commissions, to work out the contents of the conspiracy. The whole process was opposed by the krepostniki, who were the defenders of serfdom, to which included members of the royal family, the leaders of the Orthodox Church and many important people in noble families. In 1859 the serfs were finally set free, this meant that they could marry whoever they like, and they could own property and set up a business of their own. The land that belonged to the people remained theirs, though they had to surrender use of their home and a portion of fertile land to each peasant. Each serf was granted an allocation according to the area they owned. The serfs that were set free had to pay back to the State redemption taxes for 49 years, including interest at 6 %. Only when they had paid this, they would have full ownership of the land. Although, they were entitled to work on the Lord’s land to pay off the redemption of the land. A peasant could only separate from his land from the commune when granted with consent of the mir, until the redemption tax was paid.
The State peasants received much better treatment, but they had to wait a few more years until 1866 for their freedom. They were allowed plots of land on average over twice the size of what the private serfs received. The Household serfs received worst treatment; they had received no land but were still allowed freedom.
Emancipation was both approved and chastised at the time. The peasants now owned less land than what they had before and on top of it they had to pay a redemption tax
higher than the land was really worth. The landowner usually reserved the best land for himself, leaving the peasants with lands in horrible conditions especially in bad climates. Many peasants faced economic difficulties. It was due partly to the increasing amount of redemption and poll tax debts.
I believe in a way that the Emancipation Edict was a good change because before they did not have the freedom they got later on. They weren’t allowed to marry whom ever they wanted, they were sold and punished, and they had no land to themselves. It was a good change because they gained freedom and they had everything they didn’t have before. The worst part of the Emancipation was that the serfs had smaller and worse land as the time went by. They also had to pay the redemption taxes, which was higher than the land was actually worth. The Emancipation was good and bad in both ways.
Once serfdom was abolished, Russia needed quite a bit of reform. Alexander knew there had to be some changes in the governmental system, since the peasants and the gentry lost all use of the laws. In 1864 news bodies were elected in Russia, called zemstva. These members were elected to represent the townspeople, the gentry and the peasants. There were to be a zemstva for both districts and provinces. These new bodies had responsibilities; they were restricted to public health, prisons, roads, agriculture, and the relief of famine and to some areas of education.
In the towns and cities in 1870, municipal councils, dumas, were arranged with related responsibilities. Larger cities were given commandants to run them. Only the people who paid trade taxes or were on a property register were allowed to vote.
Although the zemstva or the dumas any association with the police, that what left to the Minister of the Interior. The zemstva also did not have a lot of money, so they were usually not able to attend to the problems of the responsibilities they had. But they did give people a chance to be embraced in political situations.
The local government reform did give the people quite a lot of freedom because he granted them with the freedom of vote and the Tsar was improving Russia more and more by organizing it and making it develop more into an appropriate running state. He was slowly granting them freedom, but with a limit.
The justice system wasn’t evolving, the people who were accused of crime were believed to be guilty, there were no juries or lawyers in court, the judges sat in a closed session room examining the written work of the evidence and the process of the law would drag along. In November 1864, the Tsar published the reforms of the legal system. The Tsar introduced the juries in criminal cases. These people were selected by the zemstva.
However, the police of the Third Section were still acting, and they were able to arrest who ever they like.
Many good things came out of the legal reforms because the new courts benefited from the freedom of expression and a lot of people came to learn more about a new career in practicing the law. A lot more freedom was coming out of these new reforms.
Since when Russia was defeated in the Crimea war, Alexander wanted to reform the army. Commissioning was postponed in 1856. Every man medically fit and over the age of 20 was obligated to conscription. The military reserve increased sucessfully from 210,000 to 553,000 by 1870 and the training and the discipline was made more tough and
cooperative. The people had a lot more freedom because they were allowed to join the army even though they weren’t wealthy .
With the reforms in force, expectations were raised for the Tsar, which the Tsar would never be able to gratify. Especially the demands for a constitution and a national assembly. These were never granted.
In the 1870’s, young members of the gentry and the intelligentsia still weren’t satisfied with Russia’s political system and they were determined to change it. They believed that the future of Russia laid on their backs and it was their duty to fight back against the political system and they planned to do this by rousing the peasants into action.
There were plenty of arrests in Moscow and St Petersburg. The movement was over with in a few months. But not all were arrested; few escaped and continued with the revolt by setting up a campaign called “Land and Liberty”. The revolutionary opposition remained being taken care of the few that were still revolting until the next century.
I believe that the title “Tsar Liberator” is not true because Alexander wasn’t a liberator truthfully. He did not liberate the people for their own good, but only for his good so he could remain in power. He treated the people badly and tricked them into believing he was going to unify and liberate their country. Which wasn’t true at all.
Word Count: 1,776
