In late 1861, Alexandre II established a committee of jurists to investigate the general principles of legal reforms. This reform was only successful to a small extent. The committee identified 25 defects in the existing system and proposed a number of radical solutions. This could be seen as an advantage as through the identification of the problems, solutions can be devised to make the new system fairer and therefore the Tsar would gain more support from the majority of the population and furthermore prevent a revolution. However, the new system suffered from numerous imperfections. For example, there was a shortage of trained lawyers and therefore the trial would be quite unfair and very disorganised. On the other hand, the new system was less corrupt, which is evident from the famous Vera Zasulich case of 1878. Therefore the reform was an improvement and therefore a success.
In 1861, the abolition of the patriarchal authority of the gentry required that a new local government system was to be implemented. It was named the zemstva. This reform had limited success because the zemstva presidents were appointed rather than elected and therefore this undermined their authority and made the new government seem unimportant and therefore the people would not take notice of their commands. However, the zemstva was successful, because it was able to operate successfully under the economic budgets they had been allowed. Many improvements were made in the provision of local services, particularly education.
Leading on from my last statement, the zemstva had great success within the education reform. The standard of teaching in elementary education had been generally poor and the zemstva successfully improved the standards through administrating local primary schools through school boards. For example, there was a large increase in the number of primary schools from 8, 000 in 1856 to over 23, 000 in 1880. Furthermore, the secondary education was modernised and the number of students increased to around 800, 000 in the first decade of Alexander’s reign, which indicates a successful improvement in the system. However, the further developments to liberalise the whole system of education and censorship in Russia were made impossible by the assassination attempts made on the Tsar in the later part of his reign.
Another factor to indicate the success of the Tsar’s reforms was the military reform. This reform had a massive success, because through introducing it, the Russian military would be able to fight on equal terms with Western forces in any future conflicts. Militin introduced a series of radical reforms, which were aimed at improving the efficiency and fairness of the Russian military system therefore creating a more professional army. Furthermore, he abolished corporal punishment, reduced the length of service form 25 years to 15 years and extended the liability to all social classes, which therefore increased morale in the army and therefore indicated the reform was a success. However, this success was limited, because the Tsar encountered opposition from the nobility. Eventhough, in my opinion, the Tsar managed to gain support from the armies and therefore ultimately increase his power and popularity within Russia. Moreover, the military’s fighting efficiency increased by a process of re-equipment with modern weapons, including the construction of railways for faster mobilisation and improvement in medical facilities. The success of these reforms was qualified by Russia’s military performance against Turkey in 1877. Russia defeated them. However, it took longer than expected and in my opinion, it was not as industrialised as the European Powers and therefore this indicates that eventhough the reforms had success it was limited. Furthermore, one of the ultimate reasons for these reforms was to make Russia into one of the strong European powers and this was not achieved at this time. Nevertheless, Russia’s participation at the Congress of Berlin in 1878 demonstrated the reforms were a success, because it indicated Russia had successfully recovered her international position.
The Economic Policy seemed to be an unsuccessful reform in the beginning. In 1862, a public budget was introduced and in 1863 a system of government excise was established. Nine of these measures managed to improve the government’s financial situation and one third of its annual expenditure was consumed by debt. This was a result of the failure to achieve a successful stabilisation of the Russian currency. However, the reform did have some success, because the currency was stabilised when Witte conformed to the western practice in the 1890s and placed Russia on the Gold Standard. Furthermore, railway construction, financed through an increasing number of credit institution was a key element in the economic policy. The growth of railways helped to link the grain producing areas with towns, cities and ports, therefore contributing to the promotion of exports. In my opinion, this would build up the economy, which would make Russia a richer and therefore more powerful country.
I have considered the reforms of Alexander II and I have well thought-out the amount of their success. In my opinion, the reforms were nothing more than ‘half hearted’ concessions and I believe that they had limited success; they were only significant on a small scale. Furthermore, I believe the reforms were an attempt to perpetuate the existing political system and in this way the reforms failed to create popular support for the Tsarist regime. On the other hand, the reforms were successful because they were a radical comparison to the previous Russian experience, but it did not go far enough to sustain the Tsarist regime, because in my opinion, the majority of the population desired a democracy, which the Tsar did not want to give and therefore he was fighting a losing battle.