Unit 1- Tsarist Russia- Alexander II

Question 1

Tsarist Russia 1855-1917

Answer 1

Tsar- Hereditary, Divine Right, Autocratic Rulers, Supported by church and nobility
Romanov Dynasty was the same family who had ben ruling since 1613
There were lots of peasants in this time who saw tsar as a father so less challenge towards leaders

Question 2

Tsar Alexander II

Answer 2

1855-81
known as ‘The Liberator’
He emancipates the serfs, big change as the economy and society had previously been based around serfdom since the 12th century. He begins to reform- improves judicial system, education and governments. Killed in 1881

Question 3

Tsar Alexander III

Answer 3

1881-94
Reactionary
He had not been trained as did not expect to become Tsar. Didn’t agree with Fathers Policies and after seeing his death wants nothing to do with his policies so reverts then and goes in opposite direction. Uses repression to rule and promotes autocracy.

Question 4

Tsar Nicholas II

Answer 4

1894-1917
Not prepared by Father so no idea how to run country, forced to abdicate in 1917. Wants to be a strong autocrat like father but not up to job. 1905 there is a revolution and he is forced to move away from autocratic rule and to a constitutional monarchy.

Question 5

State of Russia in 1855- Size

Answer 5

-Occupied a vast area across 2 continents (Europe, Asia)
-Covered 6th of worlds total landmass
-USA could fit in 2x and UK over 90x
-Large parts were either uninhabited or sparsely populated.

Question 6

State of Russia- Biomes

Answer 6

-North is Tundra- frozen most parts of the year and only supports scrub vegetation.
-South of Tundra lies endless miles of forest- huge resource of wood
-Steppes- open plains and grasslands -most fertile land for agriculture.
- To south there are deserts
- Agriculture can be difficult with rainfall patterns and droughts can ruin harvests.

Question 7

State of Russia- Communication

Answer 7

-communication across huge area was poor
-very few paved roads outside of big cities. Most roads hard packed earth which turned to mud in heavy rain and became impassable in winter.
-For long journeys rivers were used.
- The Moscow St Petersburg railway didn’t open until 1851.
-All of these factors made it difficult to administer an Empire from the centre.

Question 8

State of Russia- The People

Answer 8

From the 15th century onwards Russians who lived in area around Moscow had conquered the people around them. Land they controlled, expanded and developed into the Russian empire. Large areas added in the mid 19th century. The Caucasus region which included the Georgian and Chechen people was secured late 1864 and the central Asian area of Russia including Turkestan was conquered in 1860s and 70s. Late Expansions brought over 100 different nationalities. Large Diversity of culture, religion and language throughout empire. Only half of country is Russian.

Question 9

Nobles

Answer 9

-provided a service ( army officers or civil servant) to Tsar in exchange for gifts of land and people to work on it.
-Huge variations of wealth. Many were absentee landlords( own estate but live in cities. Often work for governments). Mostly a conservative outlook.
-Minority have 1000s of serfs and own property in cities, majority have 100s of serfs and another minority have 20 serfs who can’t produce enough so have to sell estate.
- Nobles carry out administrative tasks for Tsar and keep order on his behalf.

Question 10

Middle Class

Answer 10

Very small group. Merchants involved in overseas trade. Shop owners, office workers. Professionals : Lawyers, teachers and doctors.

Question 11

Peasants- Serfs

Answer 11

Roughly half of peasants were serfs- 29 million.
Tied to the landowning nobles. Mainly in central and western Russia. Had to provide labour, dues or both.
Would usually have own patch of land to grow food. Controlled by the nobility. 8 million were personal/household serfs- domestic servants- who had the worse job as got no pay nor land.

Question 12

Peasants- State peasants

Answer 12

30million
Lived on estates owned by church or Tsar. Paid rent for their land and legally free however still restrictions e.g. could not own property

Question 13

Peasants- Workers

Answer 13

Small number of workers
Yet to experience the Industrial Revolution. Very few large industries ( mills and mines). Mostly cottage- industries or small-scale. Appalling living and working conditions.

Question 14

Peasant life

Answer 14

-Farming generally organised around an inefficient 2 field rotation system.
-Strips divided between households
-Main crops- Oats, Rye, Wheat. (bread, beer, vodka)
-Poor harvest meant famine
-commons, meadows and woodlands shared
-lived in wooden huts with thatched roofs
-household plots grew vegetables forming large part of diet ( cabbage in north, beetroot in south)
-Domestic animals kept but little meat eaten (fish common)
-Life expectancy 35 years
- Many lived in squalor, prone to drunkness ,STDs

Question 15

The Mir

Answer 15

If serfs provided their labour service, dues or produce and the state peasants paid rent their superiors didn’t care how they organised their day to day lives. The organisation of village life was determined by the peasants themselves through a village commune called the mir, it was an assembly of households ran by peasants. They would share processions and responsibilities as well as had village meetings to discuss issues

Question 16

Advantages and Disadvantages of the Mir

Answer 16

ADV- provided security and support and ensured an equitable distribution of land - dependent on size of household
DISADV- allocation and redistribution of strips inefficient
-tended to be dominated by older peasants who resisted change and could punish people who didn’t conform ( could choose conscripts for army)
-violence- communal and domestic - was not uncommon

Question 17

The Russian Orthodox Church

Answer 17

-The official state religion since 15th century. About 70% population were Russian Orthodox. There had been no reformation in Russia
-It was a branch of christianity independent of the Pope. Russians believed they were the ones who kept true the faith.
-It was bound up with autocracy since the Tsar had divine right

Question 18

Russian Orthodox Church connection to peasant lives

Answer 18

-Staffed by 100,000 clerics who played a significant tole in Russian society and exerted a huge amount of influence over peasants
-Priests lived in villages, involved in lives and struggles of peasants, especially in villages that supported them
-Religious observance played a significant role in life of peasants, especially in rites and rituals connected with Birth, death and marriage
-Most peasant huts had an icon in corner of room (religious painting often on wood used as an aid to devotion)
-Church also means by which peasants ,for most part illiterate, got info. Such as terms of and details of emancipation of the serfs was read out in churches.

Question 19

Tsarist Political Authority- Autocracy

Answer 19

The tsar was an autocratic ruler by law
* 1832 Fundamental Laws Article 1 ‘The
Emperor of all of Russia is an autocratic and unlimited monarch; God himself ordains that all must bow before his supreme power, not only out of fear but also out of conscience
No checks on his power and no constraints by law. His imperial edicts (ukazy) were the laws of the land.
Some Russians thought autocracy was necessary in Russia as it was so large and diverse: any shared power would mean chaos. Autocracy was a practicality

Question 20

Tsarist Political Authority- Orthodoxy

Answer 20

The tsar was supported by the ROC
Tsar appointed the Over-Procurator of the Holy Synod (leader of the group of bishops ruling the Church)
Every year churches pronounced a curse on those who did not believe the tsar had been chosen by God
Taught in Church and schools - to show devotion to the tsar and accept their place on earth as God’s will. The tsar was God’s representative on Earth entrusted to look after the people. He knew what was best for his subjects, even if it meant disciplining them at times (paternalistic relationship).
A challenge to the tsar’s political authority was a challenge to God and his will.

Question 21

Tsarist Political Authority- Nationality

Answer 21

Nationalists (Slavophiles) believed that
Russian culture was unique and superior to that of any other nation. For Slavophiles autocracy was the best form of government and the Orthodox Church was the true faith.
They believed Russian ways were superior and had to be protected from any Western influences. Russians would act in accordance with the will of God not European ideas or any others.
* Gogul, a Slavophil novelist, saw serfdom as the will of God for Russia
* Russia was distinctlv different to Western Europe and Slavophiles were proud of their differences.

Question 22

Economic- largely inefficient agriculture

Answer 22

– Three field rotation system
- Outdated methods
- Often famine

Question 23

Economic- Underdeveloped, small-scale industry

Answer 23

• Much of its natural resources ( rich- coal, oil and gas) remained untapped
• Communication between different parts of Empire were poor
• cottage based industry
• no factories
• money was not usual form of payment – exchanges, use them more often. For majority money irrelevant – no internal market demand.

Question 24

Economy- Serf based economy prevented progress

Answer 24

• land owning aristocracy: the tsarist Government and army reliant on serfs. This inhibited economic development by limiting factors that drive change such as wage earners and entrepreneurs
• land owning elite generally uninterested in how efficiently estates operated.

Question 25

Weaknesses in Tsarist Government- Tsar

Answer 25

The tsar had all individual ministers report directly to him.The amount of work required by the tsar himself meant progress was at best slow and at worst non-existent. For example- In 1849 the Ministry of Internal Affairs, alone, sent over 13 million papers to the Tsar for review ( 165,000 were marked urgent)

Question 26

Weaknesses in Tsarist Government- Ministries- communication

Answer 26

Lack of communication between the ministers and departments for example some departments would plan to spend large amounts of money but not clear with minsters of finance so would be problems with budget or money not available. After Crimean war shortage of money to pay for reforms.

Question 27

Weaknesses in Tsarist Government- Ministries- Competition

Answer 27

Ministries competed for control of policy, resources and the tsar’s attention. This led to confusion and lack of clarity or progress in policy. For example the ministry of Finance wanted to change society to allow enterprise and initiative to flourish. This could create circumstances, e.g. urbanisation, which could cause social tension or give middle class too much power. The ministry of interior resisted changes that might threaten social control or create a more liberal Russia. 2 powerful ministries pulling against each other created confusion and lack of clarity in policy

Question 28

Weaknesses in Tsarist Government- Ministries- machinations

Answer 28

Machinations (plots) and manoeuvring at the higher levels of the bureaucracy led to mediocre appointments. For example deputies schemed to depose superiors so this inclined superiors to hire mediocrities who would be no threat. This was also true of the Tsars appointment of minsters.

Question 29

Weaknesses in Tsarist Government- Ministries- Conspirators

Answer 29

Sometimes elements in government conspired against other elements for political reasons. For example The reforms of Alexander II were obstructed and then held up by conservative officials in the government who disapproved of them.

Question 30

Weaknesses in Tsarist Government- The Bureaucracy- Poor pay

Answer 30

The Lower ranks were poorly paid meaning bribe taking was common as seen as a legitimate way to supplement ones income.

Question 31

Weaknesses in Tsarist Government- The Bureaucracy- Trying to move up ranks.

Answer 31

More interested in manoeuvring to get to higher ranks and salaries rather than working for the public good. They sought the approval of their superiors for advancement and could be indifferent to the concerns of the people, so people who came into contact with them often regarded them as soulless pen pushers

Question 32

Weaknesses in Tsarist Government- The Bureaucracy- Lack of officials.

Answer 32

There weren’t enough officials in the provinces. Russian state was top heavy. Relatively few officials in the provinces compared with other European countries.

Question 33

Weaknesses in Tsarist Government- The Bureaucracy- vast range of duties

Answer 33

Provincial Governors had a vast range of duties and discretion. This was increased by the ‘temporary’ emergency powers of August 1881, for instance governors could expel people from either their home province, close businesses, search homes and so on without any appeal. Could be cruel and vicious and misuse their police powers.

Question 34

Weaknesses in Tsarist Government- Proizvol

Answer 34

Arbitrariness of central government and the bureaucracy. No clearly defined legal rules of administration to which officials had to adhere. They could abuse their authority and violate rules that did exist. Almost impossible to hate redress for any grievances.

Question 35

Nicholas 1

Answer 35

Nicholas I, Alexander II’s father, was a reactionary ruler. His reign was characterised by geographical expansion, centralisation and repression.
In 1855, theRussian Empirewas at its geographical zenith, spanning over 7.7 million square miles, but had a desperate need for reform. Aged 36 years old Alexander inherited the world’s largest power but in a critical state.

Question 36

Why was Russia ready for Reform in 1855- Growth of progressive ideas

Answer 36

Westernisers’ believed that Russia should adopt certain values and political and economic institutions from the West including individual rights and parliamentary democracy. They thought that Russia needed to industrialise and urbanise like the West or be left behind. ‘Slavophiles’, on the other hand, believed that Russia had its own distinctive rich culture and traditions that were special and superior to those of the West. This culture was transmitted by the Orthodox Church and institutions like the village commune, which they held in special regard because of its emphasis on ‘togetherness’ which they saw as a Russian value. Slavophiles rejected Western parliamentarianism, individualism, rationalism and atheism. They believed that autocracy, and the relationship between tsar and people, conveyed Russia order and stability that was lacking in Western countries

Question 37

Why was Russia ready for Reform in 1855 - A new Tsar

Answer 37

Westernisers thought a constitution and parliament was the best option, Slavophiles wanted the tsar to convene a consultative assembly that represented the different estates (social groups) of Russia to bridge the gap that had opened up between the imperial elite and ordinary Russians.

Question 38

Crimean War

Answer 38

Fought on the Crimean peninsular – Russia v. Britain, France and Ottoman Empire.
Russia had moved troops into Danubian principalities claiming a need to protect Orthodox Christians in the Ottoman Empire from persecution.
This lead to war with Turkey and initially the Russians did well against the weak Ottoman Empire but Britain and France viewed the war as an excuse for Russia to move in on the weak Ottoman Empire and secure access to the Mediterranean from the Black Sea.
Britain and France declared war on Russia and sent 60,000 troops. Russia were defeated on their own territory and humiliated. Their reputation as a strong military power had been shattered.
The war highlighted Russia’s problems and revealed them to the other world powers.

Question 39

Why was Russia ready for Reform in 1855 - Crimean War

Answer 39

It highlighted Russia’s poor communications and its inability to harness and deploy human and material resources effectively.
There was no railway south of Moscow, so troops, armaments and supplies had to be moved along bumpy roads which turned to mud in wet weather.
The army’s rifles and artillery were hopelessly outclassed by the weapons the British and French which could fire further and more accurately. Russian navy had wooden ships with sails and western ships had steam powered iron-clad ships. They also had too little with only one rifle to every two soldiers.
Serious questions were raised about the efficiency of the army and the quality of the leadership. Russia outnumbered Britain and France but their men were not as loyal or well-trained.
It was clear that Russia did not have adequate resources to fight a major European power. Western European countries had undergone industrial revolutions and industrial might was equated to military might.
Many in the top echelons of the tsarist government were convinced that Russia’s backwardness had caused its defeat. They were behind the time and had to catch up! The case for reform looked indisputable, even conservative nobles and Slavophiles agreed!

Question 40

How was Alexander II different to his father?

Answer 40

-more autocratic at heart than his father
-exhibited a curious mixture of despotic and revolutionary ideas

Question 41

Why was Alexander II different to his father?

Answer 41

-given a well rounded eduction in history, sciences and language. Among his tutors was poet Zhukovsky who raised him as a human being.
-1837 with Zhukovsky he went on a tour of the 29 Russian provinces, this was designed to build bond with future Tsar and his people which was a huge success and affected Alexander as he became 1st Tsar to consider that peoples approval was a big part of autocratic rule.
-1939 he embarked on European tour where he gained knowledge of western ideas and traditions.

Question 42

Why did Alexander II think Russia needed reform?

Answer 42

Because of modernisation in Europe. Wished to see himself in ranks of modern Western Monarchs.

Question 43

Who supported Alexander II to take a liberal approach?

Answer 43

Supported by Liberal minded brother, Grand Duke Constantine, who played an important role in assembling talented and able younger officials to work on the reforms. Also his aunt, Grand Duchess Elena Paulovna provided a forum for liberal thinkers who met at the salon in her palace.

Question 44

Why was it necessary to end serfdom

Answer 44

-reform of some kind was unavoidable for nation to progress
-Serfdom used to explain all of Russias current weaknesses- scapegoat- easy target for intelligentsia.
-Crimean War forces issue- shows if nation to have stability and be honoured abroad- reform needed- first step was removal of serfdom
-military was important to Russians- problems could no longer be ignored.

Question 45

Role of Alexander II in emancipation

Answer 45

1856- Alexander II says to nobles- ‘better to destroy serfdom from above than to wait until that time when it begins to destroy itself from below’
-over next 5 years - 1000s of officials drafted plans for abolition of serfdom, finally presented in1861

Question 46

Outcomes of Emancipation to peasants

Answer 46

-Landlords kept best land for themselves- serfs got leftover, only received a third of land. Peasants reduced to buying narrow strips that provided difficult to maintain and yielded little food or profit as a result.
-Peasants had to pay for new property, since had no savings they were given 100% mortgages however had to repay loan so found themselves with lifelong burden of redemption payments which were handed onto children.
-Government insisted that the Mir became a focus of life in the country side. Would provide effective organisation for collection of taxes which serfs were now liable and a controlling mechanism for keeping order in countryside. Arguably after 1861 the freed peasant was now restricted as he had been as a serf, tied to village now rather than Lord.

Question 47

Significance of Emancipation

Answer 47

-712 Peasant uprising in Russia 1820-54. By granting some measures intelligentsia had called for Alexander lessened the Social and Political threat to established system
-Alexander also hope emancipated peasantry, thankful, would provide fitter and morally worthier army recruits.
-Emancipation essentially a failure- raised expectations and dashed them
-Both frightened the Privileged Class- wanted ‘dark masses’ to be kept down- and disappointed the progressives
- Shows that the Tsarist system unable to find workable solutions to problems it faced.

Question 48

Consequences of emancipation- Disappointments for peasantry

Answer 48

-23 million serfs involved, very complex situation and took a long time to sort out. As a result around 15% of peasants still temporarily obligated to Landlords until 1881.
-Felt very cheated, always believed land belonged to those who worked on it.Now they still did not own the land outright and they had to pay for it - over 49 years! This was a cause of deep resentment. There were over 1,000 disturbances during 1861, one with 10,000 peasants.
The army had to be brought in to restore order on over 300 estates.
- Received less land than worked on, limited supply so many received strips which yielded little food or profit and were difficult to maintain. In Black earth region allocation well below average so difficult to make ends meet. Consequently had to work as hired labour on nobles remaining land.
-Redemption payments economically enslaved freed serfs. Now paying state rather than landlord.
-Powers of Mir increased to keep order in countryside. Mir made responsible for collecting tax and could also issue internal passports allowing peasant to travel but if left the area their land would revert to mir and village would have to make redemption payments. Aim was to stop thousands of freed serfs move around countryside. How tied to village rather than lord.

Question 49

Consequences of emancipation- Disappointments for the nobility.

Answer 49

• Redemption payments to landowners not enough to prevent steady decline in noble landownership following 1861. Much of money used to pay off existing debts and mortgages. Many nobles who could not afford to switch to hired labour moved to towns and rented out land to peasants as absentee landlords. It’s estimated the rural nobility lost up to 1% of its land per year, 1861-1905.
• Disgruntled as feel uncompensated for loss of rights over serfs, also lost power, status and influence.A small minority wanted
  representatives to form a national commission to prevent bureaucrats riding roughshod over their interests again. Some of the more liberal members of the nobility wanted elected representatives from all over Russia to be assembled.
  Emancipation had stirred up a lot of criticism of the regime.
• Rural landowners felt being left to deal with peasant disturbances alone. In province of Tula many called for local government involvement. Nobles of Tear went further suggesting assembly of elected representatives with purpose of solving problems created by emancipation be created.

Question 50

Consequences of emancipation- Concessions to nobility

Answer 50

The landowners received above the market value for the land they were handing over to the peasants.
The high valuation meant the peasants were paying more for it.
Moreover, the landowners were allowed to decide which part of their holdings they would hand over and, not surprisingly they kept the best land for themselves. It has been estimated that the
landlords retained two-thirds of the land while the peasants received only one-third

Question 51

Consequences of emancipation- improvements to peasantry

Answer 51

5.The emancipation meant that those peasants who were able, often the former state-owned peasants, could start buying the land of poorer neighbours, renting land from the nobility and hiring labour.
These peasants became known as kulaks. They were able to produce surplus grain to sell.
The emancipation also meant that peasants who chose to could sell their land and leave to find work in a town or city with regular wages.

Question 52

Terms of emancipation- improvements to peasantry

Answer 52

-Serfdom was abolished and serfs were now legally free. They could marry whom they liked, travel, own property, vote in local elections and trade freely.
-Serfs (except domestic serfs) would have land to go with their freedom. They would be allowed to keep their houses and the land immediately around it but would have to buy the other land (strips) they worked at the time of the emancipation.
-In 1866, state peasants were given the right to buy land in the same way as the formers serfs or to remain tenants. They received on average twice the amount of land as serfs.

Question 53

Terms of emancipation- Disappointments for peasantry

Answer 53

-They would have to make annual payments for the land (redemption payments). The government purchased the land from the nobility and the peasants had to make redemption payments (at 6% interest) to the government over a period of 49 years.
-Peasants were still under the control of the Mir, whose power would be strengthened. The Mir would allocate land, control farming and collect peasant taxes (including redemption dues). A peasant could not leave the Mir until all redemption payments had been paid.
-There was to be a two-year transitional period during which the serfs would remain ‘temporarily obligated’ to the landowner remaining as they had been under serfdom but the serfs were now legally free so they could not be sold. This was to allow time to work out the amount of land in each area that should be handed over to the peasants and how this should be done.

Question 54

Terms of emancipation- Concessions to nobility

Answer 54

-The nobility would continue to play a role in policing.
-The nobility were to keep some personal land as well as the meadows, pasture and woodland.

Question 55

Terms of emancipation- Disappointments for the nobility.

Answer 55

Landowners would be compensated for the loss of their land in government bonds but not for the loss of their rights over the serfs.

Question 56

Causes of Emancipation- The Moral/Humanitarian case

Answer 56

Members of the royal family dating from Catherine the Great (1762-96) had considered that serfdom was morally and ethically wrong. Nicholas I himself had admitted that serfdom was ‘an evil, palpable and obvious to all’ and had even experimented, although unsuccessfully, with serf reform in Ukrainian Russia. Alexander lI’s brother the Grand Duke
Konstantin and his aunt the Grand Duchess Elena Pavlovna had been committed to the abolition of serfdom for some time. What’s more enlightened nobles had come to accept the view that it was wrong to own someone like a possession or an object and that it demeaned the serf owner as well as the serf. A radical intelligentsia was growing who were opposed to serfdom: a political circle of progressive nobles known as the Party of St Petersburg Progress’ came into prominence at court those nobles who gathered around his brother or his aunt in agreement with their views. Abolishing serfdom was overdue and not unexpected.

Question 57

Causes of Emancipation- Risk of revolution

Answer 57

Although he may have not been fully convinced by Humanitarian arguments, but he had been worried by the 1848 revolutions and the increase in peasant uprisings since the 1840s would certainly have alarmed him. Particularly worrying was the fact that the army was made up mainly of peasants so it might be difficult for the government to contain a major peasant uprising. There was also a significant spike in disturbances following defeat in the Crimean War between 1857 and 1859. The Tsar was worried enough to order weekly reports on the mood of the peasantry from December 1857.
However, other historians have maintained that the scale of peasant unrest had been exaggerated, especially as the main sources of data are unrellable tsarist police records. Also, some nobles feared that major reform might actually
provoke serious revolt because the peasants would see it as sign or weakness or might be disappointed by the reform.

Question 58

Causes of Emancipation- Crimean war

Answer 58

The Crimean War had drawn attention to the state of the army which was mainly comprised of peasants, many of whom were serfs. They were compulsorily enlisted for periods of up to 25 years (reduced to 15 years for those of ‘good character’) but at the end of that period, if they survived, were given their freedom. Military reformers, including Dmitry Milyutin, thought that Russia needed a smaller, better trained army with a reserve like those in other European countries. This entailed conscripting peasants to serve a shorter period of time before going on to the reserve. This would mean that thousands of serfs with military training would be released back to their villages, a risky proposition.
So, officials became convinced that military reform could only be carried out if serfdom was abolished.

Question 59

Causes of Emancipation- economic reasons

Answer 59

Many enlightened government officials and intellectuals were convinced that it was necessary to abolish serfdom if the economy was to advance. One reason Russia had not yet industrialised was because serfdom meant the pool of labour needed for the new industries was tied to the land. Nicholas Milyutin, an official in the Ministry of Interior Affairs, wrote in 1847, ‘Serfdom serves as the main - even the only - hindrance to the development in Russia at the present time … Only with the emancipation of the serfs will the betterment of our rural economy become possible.Some of these officials and intellectuals accepted the arguments of economists that free labour was more productive than forced labour. They believed that you needed a free market where peasants could move around to where they could be most productive whether in agriculture or industry however immediately after emancipation there was a move on the part of the government to restrict the movement of peasants by introducing internal passports.This suggests that freeing labour to allow capitalist growth was not the government’s priority.

Question 60

Reasons for Alexander II’s liberal reforms

Answer 60

Emancipation allowed for reform of the military and necessitated reform of the judicial system and local government to replace the authority previously held over the peasantry by the nobility as serf owners.
Backwards compared to western Europe
Alexander II and intellectuals prepared to modernise Russia
Crimean War made need for reform indisputable

Question 61

Military reforms, 1861-88

Answer 61

Poor showing in Crimean War showed need for military reform in order to remain a world power and defend itself. Army also costly as Russia did not have a reserve army in time of peace like their western counterparts. Government reluctant to return solder serfs to village so they kept solders in service for 25 years, in effect life. After emancipation this was not necessary. Series of military reforms undertaken by Dmitri Milyutin, Minister of war over a 20 yr period to make army less brutal, smaller, less expensive and more professional however army still struggled to beat turkey in Russo- Turkish was (1877-78) and lost to Japan in Russo- Japanese war ( 1904-05)

Question 62

Military reforms, 1861-88, strengths

Answer 62

-Universal conscription was introduced: all social classes were liable for service at the age of 21.This could be avoided if medical evidence was provided or deferred for students to complete their studies.
-The standard length of military service was reduced to fifteen years, six of which would be in active service and nine in the reserve. This created a smaller standing army reducing government expenditure. From 1862 to 1870 the reserve increased from 210,000 to over 550,000.
-Officer training was radically improved. Military colleges were established, admitting recruits who were non-nobles. Promotion was made more open to other classes to improve the leadership pool. Literacy within the army as improved with mass education
campaigns in the 1870s-90s
-The administration of the army was reorganised into fifteen military districts with more autonomy given to district commanders. This made it easier to bring in the reserve in time of war.
-Punishments were made less severe. There was a reduction in the number of offences that carried corporal punishment and flogging was abolished.
Conditions improved for ordinary soldiers, for example, they were housed in barracks rather than forced to live in military colonies.

Question 63

Military reforms, 1861-88, Limitations

Answer 63

-Still a high proportion of the nobility among officers.
There was also a tendency to appoint untrained members of the royal family to key military posts for which they were unsuited. A fully professional army posed a threat to the autocracy as it was the main means by which they stayed in control.
-The ranks were still largely peasant conscripts who were uneducated and illiterate with substandard weaponry. This reduced the effectiveness of their training. (Although, there was an attempt to improve weaponry improvements were not quick enough to keep up with the West.
-The reforms were opposed by the nobility who did not want their sons to mix with lower classes. They preferred the old system where their sons went into the army as volunteers and were made officers.
However, some were able to find substitutes to replace their sons.

Question 64

Local Government reform, 1864 and 1870

Answer 64

• Local govt reform needed fill administartive vacuum left in countryside as link between nobility and peasantry severed by emancipation.
• 1864 Government introduced district and provincial level governments. Assemblies (zemstva) or councils were elected for 3 years. Electoral system weighed in favour of nobility to allow them to keep control of local areas and compensate them for loss of authority as a result of emancipation. in 1870 similar system set up in towns and cities with municipal councils elected by property owners.
  -Councils had general responsibility for health, education, poor relief, maintenance of roads and bridges and local economic affairs. Empowered to levy small tax to pay for these. N. Milyutin architect of this reform.

Question 65

Local Government reform, 1864 and 1870- Limitations

Answer 65

-The original plan for the zemstva had been bold and constructive, designed to establish some representative
government. But it was whittled down in the interests of the landed nobility.
-The zemstva, as an autonomous source of authority, outside its control. It was an uneasy relationship.
-The reform was only introduced into 19 provinces and had only been extended to 37 of 70 provinces by 1914.
-There were some good liberal zemstvo men like
Prince Lvov who had a real passion for improving local conditions and understood local needs. However, there were also indolent zemstva
-The peasants did not really participate, put off by the nobility, and they resented paying the zemstvo tax which was proportionately higher on their on their land than on private estates.
-Many nobles did not take their local government responsibilities seriously and some took advantage of the situation to run affairs in their own interests.
-Local government was dominated by the nobility.
They made up 40% of district zemstva and over 70% of provincial councils.

Question 66

Local Government reform, 1864 and 1870- Strengths

Answer 66

-They employed teachers, doctors, agricultural experts and other professionals to work in their areas. Many of them became local government members and frustrated with the state discussed the need for further reform in the meetings.
-The zemstva brought improvement to the areas in which they operated, building better roads, health facilities and primary schools, and developing areas like transport, street lighting.
drainage and water supply.
-Nobles and others in the councils gained political experience in managing their own affairs and many wanted to see this taken through to a national level.

Question 67

Judicial reforms, 1864-65

Answer 67

Whole judicial system was chaotic and favoured rich:
*There were numerous courts between which cases could be transferred. taking a long time, even years.
All evidence was written and the defendant was not allowed to be present in court to contest it.
*There were no lawyers or juries only a judge.
*Most judges had no legal training and many were illiterate. This gave power to court secretaries who relied on bribes to maintain their lifestyles.
*The judges had to adjudicate according to certain rules, for instance, the word of a noble was to be taken over a peasant, the word of a man over a woman.
Reform was justified but the emancipation meant justice had to change. Reforms established fairer system based off West, innocent until proven guilty.

Question 68

Judicial reforms, 1864-65, strengths

Answer 68

-witnesses could be summoned and give an oral testimony and be challenged.Courts now open to public and press so less corruption.
-Judges paid well and couldnt be removed from office which increased fairness as no bribes and couldnt be dismissed for verdicts that upset the govt.
-Jury trials were introduced for more serious cases.
-60s and 70s, legal profession began filling roles of lawyers.
-juries independent, could sypathise with guilty people and acquit them such as Vera Zasulich.
-Independent courts and judges meant that an independent source of authority existed and the regime could not act in the arbitrary way it was used to.
-Magistrates called Justices of the Peace (JPs) were to be elected every three years by the zemstva. They dealt with minor cases, free of charge. They were respected by workers and peasants because they protected the small man against local officials. Decisions by a JP could be appealed and referred to a higher authority.

Question 69

Judicial reforms, 1864-65, limitations

Answer 69

-The reforms did not affect everyone in the empire.
Ecclesiastical (church)
courts and military courts were not affected by the reforms and trial by jury was never introduced to some parts of the empire e.g. Poland, Caucasus.
-Where offences solely concerned peasants, separate village courts were used (volost courts).
The courts had judges elected by the peasantry who were often illiterate.
Peasants were thus largely outside the main judicial system - still lower status.
–The courtroom was one place in Russia where there was free speech. Since many accused were in some way a victim of government action or officials, defence lawyers would often be critical of the regime in their case. Some defendants, accused of political offences, made speeches reported by newspapers like the Russian Courier.

Question 70

Education reforms, 1863-64

Answer 70

Alexander recognised that a modern state required a more educated population.
The abolition of serfdom increased the need for education so peasants could run their private small holdings and the establishment of the zemstva provided an opportunity to change the control of education.
The zemstva took over the responsibility of running many schools from the Church and, with the employment of more professional teachers, the quality of teaching rose.
The liberal-minded Alexander Golovin, Minister for Education, introduced reforms for primary, secondary and university level education.

Question 71

Education reforms, 1863-64, limitations

Answer 71

Attendance at school was voluntary and subject to a fee from secondary onwards. Both affected attendance for the lower classes. Education was possible for the peasantry but not actively encouraged.
-Many university students relied on state financial help and were poor and undernourished. They formed mutual-aid groups organising communal kitchens and libraries.
-University students formed study circles discussing radical ideas and discussing the injustices of the tsarist system. The political authority of the regime was being questioned.

Question 72

Education reforms, 1863-64, strengths

Answer 72

• In first decade of regin pupils nealry doubled, new schools built open to all classes. 1856-78, primary schools increased from 8000 -> 25000, with 1 million pupills in attendance
• Secondary school curriculum extended to wider range of subjects.
• Unis regained the right to govern themselves, choose own professors, design courses and admit and discipline students.
  -1865-99, uni student numbers grew 4000 -> 16000. Wider variety of students including sons of peasants and lower ranking towns people. Women could attend courses but not take degree.

Question 73

Censorship reforms, 1855-65

Answer 73

Alexander began to relax the rigid system of censorship in the first year of his reign.
He never considered abolishing censorship altogether and no one really expected him to.

Question 74

Censorship reforms, 1855-65, limitations

Answer 74

-The Ministry of the Interior could still withdraw any publication deemed as dangerous and fine or close down periodicals.
-Public opinion was taking shape and becoming more informed. It was not necessarily anti-government but an autocratic regime does not generally appreciate the free flow of opinion.

Question 75

Censorship reforms, 1855-65, strengths

Answer 75

-From 1865 newspapers, books and periodicals no longer had to submit to prior censorship (preventive censorship)
-Newspapers could discuss government policy and editors were given more freedom. Foreign publications were permitted with government approval.
-This more generally relaxed atmosphere led to a huge growth in the number of books and periodicals published.
There was a growing literate readership to buy a
‘good’ story.
-Bolder editors were prepared to push the boundaries of what was deemed dangerous. Some journals were overtly radical and critical of the regime. Others took more moderate lines but were critical of the government, for instance, when reporting court cases. Some reported social problems like crime, alcoholism and the sufferings of groups like peasants

Question 76

How did Alexander II’s rule change after 1866- Growth of dissident and radical ideas and groups

Answer 76

Alexander’s reforms in the 1860s stimulated both excitement and the emergence of opposition.
The relaxation of censorship encouraged more radical literature, educational reforms encouraged the growth of radical ideas and groups, all reforms led to the growth of a the liberal-minded professional classes.

Question 77

How did Alexander II’s rule change after 1866- Conservative nobles pressured the Tsar

Answer 77

Some conservative nobles were convinced that introducing Western ideas was weakening autocracy.
Two of these men were Dmitri Tolstoy and Pyotr Shuvalov.

Question 78

How did Alexander II’s rule change after 1866- Polish revolt 1863

Answer 78

After decades of harsh limits on Polish autonomy, many Poles were hopeful following Alexander lI’s reforms. Patriotic demonstrations broke out
1861-1862. The Russians tried to suppress these protests but only generated more anger culminating in an official uprising, 1863. The revolt was crushed but had highlighted the danger of a liberal approach

Question 79

How did Alexander II’s rule change after 1866-Assassination attempts

Answer 79

In 1866, a former student of noble status, Dmitry Karakozov, shot at Alexander, but missed. The following year a Polish immigrant Antoni Berezowski fired on a carriage carryingAlexander and his two sons but hit a cavalryman instead. These events gave conservative ministers the evidence they needed to convince the tsar that reform was dangerous.

Question 80

How did Alexander II’s rule change after 1866- Alexanders family

Answer 80

Alexander may also have been affected family events. His favourite son and heir to the throne, Nicholas, died in 1865. His death affected his mother terribly and she withdrew from public life. The tsar sought consolation in the hands of his mistress and as their affair became public he lost favour with those in upper society including his liberal-minded relatives.

Question 81

How did Alexander II’s rule change after 1866- How did the government change?

Answer 81

-Liberal ministers in government lost influence and some sacked. Those in Alexanders family with liberal leaning such as brother Constantine found it difficult to gain access to Tsar. In came a wave of conservative appointments.

Question 82

How did Alexander II’s rule change after 1866- What were Shuvalovs changes

Answer 82

Count Petr Shuvalov who was made head of the third section made the following changes:
-Vetted appointments and made sure conservatives gained posts
-tightened up censorship and closed down some periodicals
-brought in tighter controls on students and their organisation
-made use of military courts to try more serious political cases as they were not open to reporting and were likely to reach the verdicts the government wanted
-Increased new rule by decree

Question 83

How did Alexander II’s rule change after 1866- What were Tolstoys changes

Answer 83

Reactionary minster of education, Count Tolstoy
-His minsters took a greater control of primary schools, reducing rule of the 1864 school boards which were often dominated by liberal zemtsvo representatives. Now Ministry inspectors were responsible for appointing teachers and opening schools and kept an eye on moral views conveyed by teachers
-Classical subjects like Greek and Latin favoured over modern subjects like history, sciences and modern languages. Tolstoy even withdrew science from some schools
-Entry to Uni restricted- only those with classical education could go which favoured nobles who tended not to do more technical and modern subjects.
-Crackdown in Unis and disciplinary functions were transferred to the police. Students associated with revolutionary activity or views were expelled

Question 84

Why was it too simplistic to say Alexanders reign was one of 2 halves, Liberal and Reactionary

Answer 84

-Some reforms did continue, local government reforms were extended to towns and cities in 1870 and the military reforms continued. The first women was admitted to Moscow Uni in 1872. So although there was clearly a mov towards reactionary responses to the changing system, Alexander was carrying on some measures of reform.

Question 85

Summary: Successes of Alexander II reforms

Answer 85

-emancipation despite its deficiencies ended an evil institution comparable with slavery in USA. Achieved without civil war or massive armed force. Described as probably the greatest single piece of state directed social engineering in modern Europe prior to 20th century.
-Judicial reform replaced a corrupt and archaic system with a fair and independent justice system
-Military reform created more professional army with improved command structure.
-The local government reforms introduced the zemstva which brought improvements in health, education and other areas and suggested the possibility of more participative government.
-There was a dramatic increase in the number of schools open to all classes, a great success that had a great impact later on.
-During Alexander’s reign, there was greater freedom of expression and action than under his predecessor or his successor.

Question 86

Summary: Weaknesses of Alexander II reforms

Answer 86

-Did not go far enough-Emancipation- peasants did not get their freedom in a real sense and felt aggrieved. It was the autocracy’s chance to provide economic and social stability as a basis for agricultural and industrial growth. But it failed to take this opportunity.
-The judicial reforms were radical but there were far too many opt-outs, too many special courts outside the system, ways for the regime to get round the courts and try people secretly; also peasants were not included in the mainstream justice system.
-The zemstva were a bold move, aiming to provide self-government in which all classes participated. But they were watered down, became the province of the nobility and were not the success they could have been.
- But the major drawback of the reforms was the Tsar’s decision not to have a national representative assembly where reform and change could have been discussed and the public engaged. The Tsar was determined to steer his own ship.

Question 87

Summary: ways the reforms weakened the regime

Answer 87

Many members of the court and bureaucrats opposed the reforms and were only too willing to criticise them when things went awry, for instance, when the relaxation of censorship led to criticism, protests and revolutionary activity. These conservative elements were a thorn in the side of the enlightened reformers. It was hard for Alexander to overcome this resistance, especially as some of his own values and views meant he was inclined to agree with the conservatives The regime had gone so far and then stepped backwards. It had not been prepared to change its institutions fundamentally. The autocracy was a personalised system of control that was arbitrary in character. It did not want a rational civil service, elected bodies and the rule of law to challenge it.
And neither did Alexander. He was no liberal, he was trying to preserve the autocracy. But once the reforms had failed to produce a new more rational system, all the regime could do was to fall back on the police, emergency powers and repression to stay in control

Question 88

Summary: ways the reform strengthened the regime

Answer 88

When he became Tsar in 1855, Russian state in desperate need of fundamental reform, Programmes of reform introduced were radical in comparison to previous Russian experience, but it did not go far enough.

Question 89

Why did opposition develop under Alexander II- Reforms encouraging opposition

Answer 89

-Alexanders liberal approach brought hope of further change. There was excitement about the future.
-His reforms also brought frustration for both radicals and liberals where they fell short of expectations, in particular there was anger surrounding the emancipation reform. The ‘betrayal of the peasantry’ kick-started the revolutionary movement in Russia.

Question 90

Why did opposition develop under Alexander II- Reforms facilitating growth

Answer 90

-Local government reform created a forum for intellectuals and professionals to criticise the government and discuss the need for further reform.
-Judicial reform created a public forum for free speech often critical of the government or its actions
-Liberal and radical ideas critical of the government could circulate more easily due to the relaxation of censorship
-University reform allowed for more students and more scope for them to discuss liberal and radical political ideas

Question 91

Why did opposition develop under Alexander II- Alexander’s Reaction

Answer 91

The opposition were further frustrated by the change of course post 1866
The repression and restrictive policies following the 1866 assassination attempt encouraged more to join the ranks of the opposition
Increased police activity and restrictions in universities only served to increase the radicalisation of the youth as anger intensified towards the government

Question 92

Why did opposition develop under Alexander II- Key individuals

Answer 92

Socialist writers and theorists encouraged young and educated Russians to adopt socialist ideas
Their publications guided the aims of socialist groups
Key individuals also provided leadership and organisation to create formal opposition groups

Question 93

Moderate Liberal opposition

Answer 93

Liberal Intelligentsia (westerners and slavophiles)
Developed in 1840s and grew throughout 19th century
Members were middle class and nobility
Most were Westerners who wanted to modernise Russia along Western lines or Slavophiles who wanted to modernise but preserve Russia unique and superior culture
Some looked for answers in nihilism or anarchism
Express views through Zemstva and hoped power to make decisions at a local level would lead to greater national representation

Question 94

Moderate Liberal opposition Successes and Failures

Answer 94

S: -In 1880 in response to Zemstva demands Loris-Melikov, minister of interior affairs, proposed the Loris-Melikov constitution’ which elected representatives of the Zemstva and larger towns to form part of a consultative body to help in the making of laws. Although limited in scope it seemed a first real step to popular participation in national government.
F:- Their influence over primary education was restricted after 1866
-The Loris-Melikov Constitution’ was arguably only considered by the tsar due to pressure from the terrorist group The People’s Will so not a product of Zemstva demands. Alexander I had firmly refused their earlier requests.
-They were a small group as there were few literate and educated Russians

Question 95

Radical Student groups Opposition

Answer 95

Much of support for new revolutionary movement in 1860s came from students, often children of liberals that wanted to go further than parents. Variety of groups appeared often with vague and ill defined aims. Some young people were proclaimed nihilists and determined to challenge conventional attitudes and values. Men let their hair grow and women cut it short to blur gender differences. They opposed tradition, authority and hypocrisy.
Others were more formally organised:
-Young Russia- Established 1862. Made up of students who saw violent revolution as only solution to disappointment of emancipation. In June 1862, lit a series of fires in St Petersburg destroying over 2000 shops . There was a commission to investigate but insufficient evidence found.
-The Organisation- Established 1863 in Moscow. Formed by students at Moscow University. Wanted to mould public opinion to accept need for revolution

Question 96

Agrarian socialist/ revolutionary theorists opposition

Answer 96

-Alexander Herzen- 1857-67 edited radical journal, The Bell. Aims were to Liberate the peasants , give them land and send corporal punishment. Wanted to achieve an agrarian socialism ( remove government and give peasants collective ownership of the land). He hoped agrarian socialism would occur after emancipation but instead simply saw a new serfdom, led to him calling for action in The Bell where he coined the phrase ‘ Land and Liberty’. HE was known as the father of Russian Socialism.
-Nicholas Chernyshevsky- In 1863 he published the novel -what is to be done?
Believed that peasants had to be made the leaders of revolutionary change and that revolution must come before all else.
What is to be done? was a call to action and an inspiration to many later revolutionaries, who sought to emulate the novels hero, who was wholly dedicated to the revolution to the point of sleeping on a bed of nails and only eating raw steak to build strength for the revolution. Among those to reference the novel include Lenin.
-Mikhail Bukanin and Sergei Nechaev- 1869 published Catechism of a revolutionary. Believed in Anarchism and to ultimately achieve agrarian socialism. Thought revolutionaries must be ruthless and unmoved by emotion which may distract them from their goal.

Question 97

Agrarian socialist/ revolutionary theorists opposition Successes and Failures

Answer 97

S: - The writings and publications of Chernyshevsky, Bakunin and Herzen influenced young and educated Russians to adopt socialist ideas.
* Their writings also served to guide and encourage socialist opposition groups.
* The ideas in their publications had a long-lasting effect in Russia as they would be read and referenced long after Alexander’s reign ended.
F: - Socialist writings had a minority readership -mostly students and liberal intelligentsia. Their ideas did not reach the mass populace.
* The government banned The Bell which restricted its circulation
* Herzen died in 1870 and Bakunin broke with Nechaev in 1871 when he fled after murdering one of his students
* Chernyshevsky never published after What is to be done? He was arrested and exiled to Siberia where he died in 1883

Question 98

Radical groups Opposition

Answer 98

The Tchaikovsky circle was established in St Petersburg in 1868 with the most prominent member being Nicholas Tchaikovsky.
1873/74 most of the members were arrested and later prosecuted in the trial of the 193. Tchaikovsky fled to the USA.
Wanted a liberal society which organised the printing and distribution of banned revolutionary literature. Wanted social although not political revolution.

Question 99

Radical agrarian Socialist groups opposition- The Populists

Answer 99

The Populists (Narodniks)- made up of students from middle class and noble families including both men and women.
1874- first populist movement
1876- Second populist movement
1877- Trial of 50, Trial of 193
They were inspired by the writings of the agrarian socialist Peter Lavrov whose Philosophy was that the peasant commune had the values of good society and that they should overthrow the authority suppressing them. They were the righteous ones! Wanted to Ultimately achieve agrarian socialism and they would go to the people ( peasantry) and educate them about socialist ideas as well as encourage peasants to take revolutionary action against the government. They would dress and talk like peasants to gain acceptance. Some even learnt trades like joinery yo take with them

Question 100

Radical agrarian Socialist groups opposition- The populists- Successes and Failures

Answer 100

S: -In the first populist movement, 1874, Peter Lavrov, encouraged around 2000 young people, mainly students to ‘go to the people’. This was a significant following.
* There is some evidence of isolated success where some Narodniks were accepted by the peasantry. Vera Figner was a Narodnik who was valued by her peasant community as she gave medical advice to peasants and set up a school with her sister to teach local children and adults basic literacy and arithmetic.
F: - The first populist movement was met with ignorance and fear from the peasantry. They had misjudged the conservative character of the peasantry. The peasants were loyal to the Russian Orthodox Church and their tsar, they did not trust ‘outsiders. For their good intentions, many Narodniks were reported to the police by the peasants resulting in 1600 arrests.
* A second movement in 1876 much like the first failed and resulted in many arrests
Two large trials were held in 1877 - the ‘Trial of the 50 and the Trial of the 193: The government tried to use these aS propaganda ‘show trials’ to make an examples of the Narodniks, Yet, only some got long sentences and the majority received light sentences or were acquitted as the court sympathised with these wel-intentioned young people from respectable middle class or noble famties. The government however did not sympathise and so those were acquitted were exiled to Siberia.

Question 101

Radical Agrarian socialist groups- The peoples will

Answer 101

The Peoples Will- established 1879
Led by Timofei Mikhailov
Made up of former members of Land and Liberty who favoured violent/ extreme methods. Had a larger following than The Black Partition.
Believed that they would force revolutionary change by assassinating key members of the government, in particular they became focused on killing the Tsar as a way to initiate revolution. They condemned him to death for crimes against the people. Wanted to ultimately achieve agrarian socialism

Question 102

Radical Agrarian socialist groups- The peoples will- Successes and failures

Answer 102

S:- * The pressure of repeated terrorist attacks may have been the reason the tsar decided to turn away from the use of repression in 1880 and explore a different approach. Loris-Melikov, Minister for Internal Affairs proposed more civil rights for the peasants and help to make it easier for them to acquire their land as well as the ‘Loris-Melikov Constitution’ that elected representatives of the zemstva and larger towns would form part of a consultative body to help in the making of laws. Although limited in scope it seemed a first real step to popular participation in national government.
* 1881, assassination of Alexander II with a bomb as he was travelling by coach to the Winter Palace in St.Petersburg
F: -Their terrorist action was met with increased repression.
Loris-Melikov’s proposals were never enacted because they killed the tsar before he could approve them. The
reactionary Alexander Ill then brutally repressed the revolutionary opposition.

Question 103

Radical Agrarian socialist groups- Land and Liberty opposition

Answer 103

Land and Liberty- established in 1877
In 1878 carried out the assassination of the head of the Third Section
1879 split into The Black Partition and the People’s will
Members were remaining Narodniks who wanted to try a different approach as peaceful persuasion had not been successful. They were also angered by treatment of fellow Narodniks. particularly the injustice that those who were acquitted had still been exiled. Vera Zasulich was a prominent member.
Wanted to Ultimately achieve agrarian socialism. Committed to secrecy and discipline to try and avoid government repression. They would force change using violent methods, particularly by assassinating key members of the government with the ultimate aim of killing the Tsar. Cells set up in villages and towns to encourage demonstrations and actions against the government and the Tsar.
Worked in peasant communes but more discreetly

Question 104

Radical Agrarian socialist groups- Land and Liberty opposition- Successes and Failures

Answer 104

S: -Attempted assassination of General Trepov, 1878
-Assassination of the head of the Third Section, 1878
-The local cells killed government informers and officials as well as organising the successful escapes of imprisoned revolutionaries
F:- The assassination of the head of the Third Section, 1878 and several failed attempts on the tsar’s life only resulted in further repression from the regime
* Mass arrests and the decision to move political trials to military courts provoked a split in the party. Some were deterred from continuing with violent methods

Question 105

uRadical agrarian socialist groups- The Black Partition

Answer 105

The Black Partition- established in 1879, broke up in 1881
Organised by George Plekhanov and Vera Zasulich. Made up of former members of Land and Liberty who favoured peaceful methods. Smaller group than the Peoples Will.
Aimed to partition the black (fertile) soil provinces among the peasants. Believed that revolution would be best achieved peacefully and through working with the peasants. Ultimately wanted to achieve agrarian socialism
Successes: They spread radical socialist materials among students and workers
Failures : They were weakened by arrests 1880-81 and broke up

Question 106

Ethnic minorities in Russia

Answer 106

Ethnic Russians made up around half of the population of the Russian Empire (55.6%)
The other half represented a huge range of culturally diverse ethnic groups.
Many of these resented Russian control and this led to civil disobedience, riots and disturbances in different parts of the Empire.

Question 107

Nicholas I and ethnic minorities, 1825-55- Development of national ideology

Answer 107

Following the defeat of Napoleon, who had tried to exert French influence across Europe, there was a growth of nationalism
Nationalism is an ideology that a nationality should have their own language and culture and potentially their own government
In 1830 Polish nationalism led to rebellion
In the 1840s Finnish pressure groups were demanding use of their own language
In 1845 a Ukrainian secret ‘Brotherhood’ encouraged the use of Ukrainian and wanted a Federation of Slavic Peoples rather than a Russian Empire

Question 108

Nicholas I and ethnic minorities, 1825-55- Nicholas I continued the tradition of repression

Answer 108

In 1827 a law was passed to conscript all 18-year-old Jewish boys into the Russian army for 25 years. Away from their families they were forced to convert to Christianity
In 1830 the Poles rebelled against Russian rule and were crushed by the Russian army
The principles of Autocracy, Orthodoxy and Nationality were formalised in Uvarov’s triad, 1833
The influence of the Russian Orthodox Church was strengthened and there were forced conversions of Catholics in Ukraine, Lithuania and Belarus.
Publications in non-Russian languages were subject to strict censorship
The Ukrainian ‘Brotherhood’ had all been arrested and exiled by 1847

Question 109

Alexander II and ethnic minorities, 1855-81- Initially a liberal approach

Answer 109

Polish:
Poland was still treated with caution as following the 1830 rebellion their loyalty was not assured but no new restrictions were brought against them.
Jews:
-Initially restrictions towards Jews were relaxed. From 1736 the 5 million Jews living in the empire were legally confined to an area known as the Pale of Settlement (Poland and Ukraine)
-Alexander allowed wealthier Jews to live elsewhere
-Jews were allowed to attend university and work in government
Others:
-Allowed the publication of the first Ukrainian-language journal
-Societies called bromady celebrating Ukrainian culture were permitted

Question 110

Alexander II and ethnic minorities, 1855-81- The Polish revolt, 1863

Answer 110

The Causes:
-Alexander’s reforms gave renewed hope to the Poles that they would be granted more freedom. There was a rise in Polish nationalism and increased demands for political autonomy.
-Following the emancipation decree there were increased demonstrations against Russian rule and an attempted assassination of the Polish Prime Minister Wielopolski (he was seen as a tsarist puppet).
-Wielopolski responded by introducing forced conscription of all young male Poles into the Russian army. The new recruits refused to cooperate and fled to the woods to create bands of rebels
The Revolt
Guerrilla warfare ensued on a wide scale from Jan 1863. More than 200,000 Poles were involved. Wielopolski had fled during the revolt and
Poland was placed under the control of Dmitri Milyutin:
-Hundreds of the Polish nobility were exiled to Siberia (they hadn’t been able to control the countryside) and replaced with Russian officials
-The Russian army regained control by spring 1864, the rebel leaders were arrested and executed
-Polish nationalism diminished

Question 111

Alexander II and ethnic minorities, 1855-81- More intolerant

Answer 111

Following the Polish Revolt and increased revolutionary opposition of the 1870s Alexander II was less tolerant of nationalities but there were still concessions made. His priority was to maintain control and he would use both repression and concession to do so.
Polish:
Following the Polish Revolt some of Alexander’s liberal reforms were extended to Poland in an attempt to secure loyalty:
-Polish serfs were emancipated, and they gained move favourable terms than their Russian counterparts.
-District councils (similar to the zemstva) were set up
Yet he also maintained control by..
-Making Russian the official language for administration and governance in Poland
-Keeping Russian officials in the place of the Polish nobility
-Not extending trial by jury to Poland (or the Caucasus)
Jews:
-Their participation in government was restricted following the Polish Revolt (for instance, they could not make up more than one third of a town council)
-No longer permitted to leave the Pale of Settlement
-Anti-semitic literature increased and some was even financed by the government
Others:
-Decrees of 1864 and 1875 allowed Latvians and Estonians to re-adopt Lutheranism instead of Orthodoxy
-In 1863 the Finns were allowed their own diet (parliament) and currency
-From 1876 the Ukrainian language was banned from use in schools, publications or the theatre

Question 112

The case of Vera Zasulich

Answer 112

1878
Vera Zasulich shot and wounded the governor of St Petersburg, General Trepov. She admitted this but the jury, who accepted her plea that the act was politically justified, brought in a not guilty verdict. Trepov was well-known to be exceptionally cruel and flogged prisoners, one for refusing to remove his hat in Trepov’s presence.
The defence counsel brought in political prisoners as witnesses to the flogging, young well-educated men who looked pale and worn after months of imprisonment.
Their testimonies moved the jury and public. The public applauded the not guilty verdict. The government’s authority had been challenged and they were powerless to stop it.

Question 113

How were economic problems dealt with?

Answer 113

Mikhail Reutern, Minister of Finance (1862-78) was the man Alexander appointed to address Russia’s economic problems.
Following emancipation, he introduced a number of reforms to begin state-promoted industrial growth in Russia.
He did not reform agriculture although there were some improvements as a result of the emancipation (Nicholas Milyutin).

Question 114

Alexander II economy- Finances

Answer 114

Since Russia did not possess a middle class, Mikhail von Reutern believed the government must direct economic change. To support industrial growth he needed to deal with the financial crisis by increasing government revenue and creating a stable financial environment to encourage investment in industry.

To increase government revenue:
Tax-farming was abolished (groups or individuals could no longer buy the right to collect taxes)
The Treasury was reformed with budgeting and auditing systems (checking accounts to make sure all spending is accounted for) introduced

To create a more stable financial environment:
Credit facilities were made available through the establishment of banks: A state bank (1860), municipal banks (1862) and a savings bank (1869).

However:
The value of the rouble (Russian currency) was still unstable
A third of government expenditure still went to paying off debts

Question 115

Alexander II economy- Industry- Actions taken

Answer 115

Since Russia did not possess a middle class, Mikhail von Reutern believed the government must direct economic change. To support industrial growth the government would have to intervene:
-Subsidies were offered to private railway companies and other industrial initiatives
-Government support was offered to cotton industries (seizing the opp. created by the American Civil War, 1861-65, to capture former American markets).
-Import tariffs were reduced (1863) to make raw materials and machinery more affordable for industries
-Government-guaranteed annual dividends were provided for foreign investors
-Joint-stock companies were made subject to new regulations to protect investors
-Foreign experts were brought in to support industrial development in coal, iron and steel
-The emancipation also meant a labour force was available. Peasants left with no land or those who chosetoselltheir land left to find work in atown or city with regular wages. By 1864 1 in 3 of the inhabitants of St. Petersburg were peasants by birth, and the proportion continued to rise.

Question 116

Alexander II economy- Industry- Improvement and limitations

Answer 116

These measures led to:
-More investment in Russian industry from foreign investors as well as some former serf-owners and tax-farmers (they had money to invest
-Growth of metallurgy and cotton industries (largely due to British investment)
-New industrial developments including coal, oil extraction in Baku (1871) and an ironworks in Donetsk (1872)
-The Nobel brothers from Sweden set up the Naphtha Extraction Company (1879) to carry out oil and coal extraction in the Caucasus
-John Hughes from Wales set up a steelworks in the Donetsk (Dombass region).
-Growth of the railway network from 3000 miles in 1866 to 13,270 miles by 1881
An annual growth rate of 6%

However:
-Textiles was still the dominant industry
-Transport and labour mobility remained low
-Growth was slow and the economy remained weak relative to the West
-Reduced import tariffs had led to a decline in government revenue so they were increased from 1878
-Limitations of emancipation and a reliance on indirect taxation for 2/3rds of government revenue meant most of the peasantry were still poor meaning the domestic consumer market was small

Question 117

Alexander II economy- Agriculture

Answer 117

Mikhail von Reutern did not address the agricultural economy and despite small improvement as a result of emancipation the situation in agriculture was largely unchanged.

The Emancipation led to some improvement:
peasants who were able,often the former state-ownedpeasants, could start buying the landof poorerneighbours, renting land​ from the nobility and hiringlabour.These peasants became known askulaks. They were able to producesurplus grain to sell.​This meant there was a small increase in agricultural production in the 1870s.

However:
Most received slightlyless land than they had workedbefore. Many received strips of landthat proved difficultto maintain andwhichyielded little food or profit. Inthe populous Black Earthregiontheallocation waswell below the​ average,so it wasdifficult to makeends meet. This situation was made worse by rapid population increase.
The powers of the Mir werestrengthened (dominated by older peasants who resisted change to farming practices)
The redemption payments put anenormous strain on the ruraleconomy.
Limitations of emancipation and a reliance on indirect taxation for 2/3rds of government revenue meant most of the peasantry were still poor meaning they were unable to invest in agricultural improvements
Emancipation had failed to bring any fundamental change to agricultural practice and yields remained low

Question 118

How far had society changed from 1855-81 -Nobility

Answer 118

Position in 1855 - Provided a service to the Tsar ( army officers or civil servants), huge varieties of wealth, many were absentee landlords, mostly conservative outlook.
Changes 1855-81 - Personal landownings considerably declined, as some sold out to pay off debts and others abandoned farming in favour of more rewarding professional activities. In 1880 nearly one fifth of university professors, for example, came from the hereditary nobility. Yet others saw the future in business and by 1882, more than 700 nobles owned their own businesses in Moscow, while nearly 2500 were employ in commerce, transport or industry. Some also found places in the Zemstva and the provincial governorships.
Continuities 1855-81 - Although changes to their position, most former serf owners retained much of their previous wealth and status and society remained highly stratified (arranged in layers according to wealth)

Question 119

How far had society changed from 1855-81 - Middle class

Answer 119

Position in 1855- Very small group, merchants involved in overseas trade, shop owners, office workers. Professionals such as lawyers, teachers and doctors.
Changes 1855-81- With urban and industrial expansion and an increase in educational opportunities, Russia’s middle class began to grow. Bankers, doctors, teachers and administrators were in greater demand, although their numbers added up to no more than half a million in the 1897 census. Government contracts to build railways, and state loans to set up factories, provided tremendous opportunities for those who were enterprising. At the lower end of the scale, there were more opportunities to take up management positions or set up as workshop owners and traders.

Question 120

How far had society changed from 1855-81 - Peasants

Answer 120

Position in 1855- Serfs- tied to land-owning nobles, had to provide labour and dues, controlled by nobility- 29 million of them
Peasants - Lived on estates owned by church or Tsar, paid rent for land - 30 million
Changes 1855-81- The only differences are that the quantity of plough-land has been reduced, that cultivation is carried on even less well, and the meadows are not kept in good condition. Although there was considerable variation, the average peasant received only a little less than four hectares. High taxes, grain requisitions, redemption payments and the traditional farming practices perpetuated by the mir elders hampered agricultural change.
Continuities 1855-81- Emancipation failed to bring any fundamental change in agricultural practice. Aleksandr Engelgardt, a radical writing in the mid 1870s, was to say everything carries on as it was before the Emancipation. Yields remained low in comparison to Western Europe.

Question 121

How far had society changed from 1855-81- Workers

Answer 121

Position in 1855- Small number of them, yet to experience an industrial revolution, very few large industries (mills and mines) Mostly cottage based industry or small scale. Appalling living and working standards.
Changes 1855-81 - The expansion of industry was accompanied by a growth in the urban population. The number of urban workers was, however, still very small in this period - probably no more than two per cent of the population. Indeed, it was still relatively common for peasants to move to the towns to work temporarily, while returning to their villages to help out at peak times, such as harvest. However, some peasants sold up and left the countryside, either to Join a migrant group building railways or to become urban workers. By 1864 one in three of the inhabitants of St Petersburg were peasants by birth, and the proportion continued to rise.
Continuities 1855-81- Conditions in the cities could be grim and the early factories paid little heed to their workers’ welfare. Still a very small proportion.

Question 122

Church reforms 1867-69

Answer 122

Russia was a strongly Orthodox state (70% of the population were Orthodox believers). Religion and superstition were an integral part of peasant culture. Priests had close ties with both village and State; they were expected to read out imperial manifestos and decrees and to inform the police of any suspicious activity.
The Church also possessed strict censorship controls and the Church courts judged moral and social’crimes’ and awarded punishments to the guilty.
The government was highly conscious of the power of the Orthodox Church.
Church reforms (1867-69)
The Orthodox Church had a close bond with the tsarist regime. Its influence over the peasantry had been hugely beneficial to the regime as a means of controlling the masses. However, in 1858 a report on the poverty and ineptitude of the rural clergy had been written by Ivan Belliustin.
Largely as a result of these revelations, the minister of internal affairs, Pyotr Valuev, set up an Ecclesiastical Commission to look into the Church organisation and practice in 1862. It was important to the government in the uncertain times following emancipation that the Church maintained the respect of the people, and helped implant loyalty to the state. If the Church were open to criticism, or did not toe the official line, it was feared that the authority of tsardom would be weakened.
The bureaucracy was slow to act and by the time the Commission set out its proposals in 1868, the reactionary Dmitrii Tolstoy had become a primary influence. The 1868 reforms allowed talented, educated and charismatic priests to gain promotion to key positions in the Church hierarchy, but little was done to address the initial concern about clerical poverty or the suitability of rural priests to do their job.
1862 - an Ecclesiastical Commission was established to look into the Church organisation and practice.
* 1868 - reforms were introduced to improve the education of priests.

Question 123

Contemporary art and literature- Why is it important to study this period

Answer 123

It is important for historians studying this period to look at their work because they were writing about social and political issues and about the nature of Russian society. Also, people were reading them in increasing numbers. They influenced the educated elite. The public library in St Petersburg had over half a million books in it.

Question 124

Contemporary art and literature- How were social changes reflected in Virgin soil

Answer 124

Turgenev deals sympathetically with the young Russian radicals of the 1870s in Virgin Soil (1877) where he portrays the idealism and naivety of the young populists (narodniks) who ‘go to the people’ to educate them and encourage them in peaceful revolution towards socialism.

Question 125

Contemporary art and literature- How were social changes reflected in What is to be done?

Answer 125

In the 1860s Chernyshevsky more directly provided inspiration for young revolutionaries, arguing that unhappiness in the world had economic causes only remedied by socialist solutions. His novel What Is to Be Done? was enormously successful

Question 126

Contemporary art and literature- How were social changes reflected in Brothers Karamazov

Answer 126

Not all writers were sympathetic to revolutionaries. Dostoyevsky had been arrested and sentenced to death for his membership of an underground group. but he was reprieved at the last moment and turned to the Orthodox Church for salvation. He rejected revolution in favour of the uniqueness of the Russian
‘soul’, drawing heavily on his Orthodox beliefs. His novels contain complex characters such as the tortured Raskolnokov in Crime and Punishment (1866).
In The Brothers Karamazov (1880), one brother is a cold intellectual atheist in contrast to another who is versed in the Orthodox religion and studies under a holy man at a nearby monastery. A third brother is a wild Russian character prone to violence and mood changes from kindness to cruelty. In this way Dostoyevsky is exploring types’ of Russians and it is the religious brother who represents the real Russian soul with love and self-sacrifice.

Question 127

Contemporary art and literature- How were social changes reflected in Anna Karenia

Answer 127

Tolstoy also wanted to look at the reality of Russian life. In Anna Karenina, he writes a scene of a harvest in which he shows the close band between peasants and the land. In the 1880s and afterwards, he turned more to philosophy and writings about morality. He idealised the peasantry and attacked the wealthy, state repression and Church hypocrisy.

Question 128

Contemporary art and literature- who were the Wanderers and what was their aim

Answer 128

In 1863 thirteen artists rebelled against the Academy of Art and its formal style. They called themselves ‘the Wanderers’ because they wanted to bring their work to the people in travelling exhibitions. Like the writers these painters believed that art should be useful to society. that it should be primarily concerned with, and subordinate to, reality They focused their work on the Russian landscape and Russian history. They did not get involved in the growing revolutionary movement of the 1870s but they did depict social problems in their art..

Question 129

Contemporary art and literature- IIlya Repin’s work

Answer 129

Ilya Repin’s painting of the Volga Bargehaulers (1873) portrays the harshness of a group of ‘human pack animals
A contemporary critic called it, a commentary on the latent force of social protest in the Russian people. Dostoyevsky, though, saw it as an epic portrait of the Russian character, and it was Alexander III’s favourite painting.

Question 130

Contemporary art and literature- Abramtsevo artists’ colony

Answer 130

Abramtsevo illustrates very well what was happening in Russian culture and society. In 1870 an estate from a declining noble family was bought by Savva Mamontov, a railway tycoon, who founded an artists’ colony.
Mamontov and his wife, Elizabeth, were influenced by the Populists and believed that art was for the education of the masses. It became the focus for the arts and crafts movement and Mamontov wanted to sell its artefacts in Moscow which was 60 kilometres away. Abramtsevo has been described as the ideal dacha. Artists, including Rein, flocked to it. Abramtsevo grew out of the Wanderers and has been called the cradle of the modern movement in Russian art. There was a common determination to create a new Russian culture.

Question 131

Contemporary art and literature - Elizabeth Mamontov in 1881-82

Answer 131

Elizabeth Mamontov was deeply religious and involved the whole community - artists, craftsmen and peasant builders - in the building of a small church in the colony between 1881 and 1882. It was deliberately modelled on medieval Russian churches and painting, and Repin executed some of the paintings on the screen bearing the icons. There was a great revival in interest in icons but also in the lubok tradition of peasant woodcuts. Alexander III used Abramtsevo artists for the decoration of the church built in the old-Russian style over the site where Alexander I had been assassinated.

Question 132

Contemporary art and literature- Abramtsevo’s influence

Answer 132

Abramtsevo’s influence was diverse. There was a direct link between peasant woodcuts and Larionov, Goncharova and Malevich and the Russian avant-garde at the beginning of the twentieth century. Merchants helped again 100
The younger generation of merchant patrons collected modern art and Moscow became the centre of the avant-garde at the beginning of the twentieth century.
Merchants helped fund the ‘Jack of Diamonds’ exhibitions. Larionov and Goncharova were key founders of the group and Malevich showed at the first exhibition. One of the organisers regarded the title ‘Jack of Diamonds’ as a symbol of young enthusiasm and passion, ‘for the Jack implies youth and the suit of diamonds represents seething blood’ They declared war on the realist tradition and shocked the public with their art. By this time Malevich believed in the radical reduction of painting to nothing but shape and colour. His revolutionary contribution was The Black Square in 1915. It was first shown as part of a group of abstract paintings in a dramatic display in Moscow in December 1915, and was hung high and across a corner, connecting two walls, just as icons were mounted in homes all across Russia. Characteristically immodest, he said The Black Square marked the beginning of a new culture, which he called suprematism.