Historically, Russia has repeatedly relied on rapid and drastic reforms to catch up to the modern Western world. Sometimes these reforms were successful, and sometimes they failed. Peter the Great’s reign is an example of successful reform, while Alexander II’s is an example of failed reform. The success of Peter’s reforms led to Russia’s rise as an imperial power, and player on the international stage, especially in Eastern Europe. On the other hand, the failure of Alexander II’s reforms eventually led to Tsarist Russia’s collapse, and the rise of the Soviet Union. Clearly, Russian reforms had an impact on world history, and must be studied as a result. This paper will seek to explain why Alexander II’s reforms failed. This will be done …show more content…
However, the key difference is that the Russian army was not defeated in the Crimean war because it lacked modern weapons or tactics, as was the case at Narva. Instead Marshall Poe explains in The Russian Moment in History, that right before Alexander’s ascent “Nicholas’ forces were suitably equipped according to the standards of the day. Rather the Crimean debacle proved the preeminence of European logistics and the industrial system that supported them” (Poe, pg 74). This means that Russia lost the war because its society as a whole lacked the necessary industry, infrastructure and wealth to supply its forces over long distances and periods of time. This means that unlike Peter the great, Alexander II could not modernize Russia by simply forcing new western habits on its elites, reforming the bureaucracy, and building a few new factories (week 3 PowerPoint, slides 18, 20, and lecture). All of society had to be modernized through the construction of infrastructure, the increase in private savings, and improvement in agricultural efficiency in order to increase urbanization, and mass industry. This new need for social modernization could also explain the difference in content between Peter the Great’s and Alexander II’s …show more content…
As discussed in class, Peter’s reforms focused on modernizing the nobility’s habits by forcing them to adopt western ideas, culture, and habits. Peter also sought to reorganize the state’s bureaucracy into specialized colleges. He also sought to staff the bureaucracy with professionals by implementing a table of ranks, which rewarded merit, instead of ancestry (Week 3 PowerPoint, slide 21 and lecture). The majority of Peter’s reforms focused on modernizing the state itself, not society as a whole. As a result, feudalism remained in place until the emancipation of serfs in 1861. This is where Peter’s reforms differed from Alexander’s, which were primarily social. Alexander’s emancipation of the peasantry not only sought to free peasants, it also sought to provide them with services and reforms that have long been denied to them, through the local assemblies or Zemtsvos. The Zemtsvos, according to Orlando Figes in Natasha’s Dance, “founded schools and hospitals; provided veterinary and agronomic services for the peasantry; built new roads and bridges; invested in local trades and industries; financed insurance schemes and rural credit” (Figes, pg 226). The Zemtsvo’s focus on rural development is a clear attempt by the government not only to spread its presence to the countryside, but also to provide the peasants with the public goods and services they lacked.
With the coinciding of a revolution on the brink of eruption and the impacts of the First World War beginning to take hold of Russia, considered analysis of the factors that may have contributed to the fall of the Romanov Dynasty is imperative, as a combination of several factors were evidently lethal. With the final collapse of the 300 year old Romanov Dynasty in 1917, as well as the fall of Nicholas II, a key reality was apparent; the impact that WWI had on autocratic obliteration was undeniable. However, reflection of Russia’s critical decisions prior is essential in the assessment of the cause of the fall of the Romanov Dynasty.
Peter the Great, the Russian Czar, inherited his absolutist power from his brother, Ivan V. Born in aristocracy, Peter’s dad was the Czar, and later his brother, and after his brother’s death, him. He was a firm believer in the possible benefits from the control of a single leader to make decisions for the people, and he exercised this divine right to create many renouned institutions. At the beginning of Peter’s reign, Russia was in a poor condition: many rejected modernization from the Renaissance, and large spending from his brother’s reign caused economic droughts. He took advantage of his absolutist power to help ameliorate Russia’s situation and first decided to minimalize power from the other aristocrats. The subduction of the rich allowed
This meant that Alexander II would need to somehow release the serfs from their owner’s land. Another reason for emancipation was made clear in a quote from Alexander II in March 1856: “It is better to abolish serfdom from above than to await the time when it will begin to abolish itself from below”. This shows that emancipation was going to be used as a tool to solve two problems facing Alexander II. However, in order for emancipation to succeed another reform had to occur which was land reforms. However, Alexander II did not want the political system of Russia to change whilst the economic transformation was occurring.
Russia, industrialized as a result of many peasant revolts. The revolts led to the emancipation of the serfs in 1861, they received land but the political chains were still in place. Many reforms were still needed. The military became based on merit, education was increased, transportation became more efficient with the introduction or railroads, and law codes were improved with local councils put in place called zemstvoes. These reforms and the great size and natural resources of Russia allowed it to build factories. Yet, the change experienced by the West had not, yet, occurred.
While most of Europe had develop strong central governments and weakened the power of the nobles, Russia had lagged behind the times and still had serfs as late as 1861. The economic development that followed the emancipation of peasants in the rest of Europe created strong industrial and tax bases in those nations. Russian monarchs had attempted some level of reforms to address this inequality for almost a century before, and were indeed on their way to “economic maturity” (32) on par with the rest of Europe. But they overextended themselves and the crushing defeats of the Russo-Japanese War in 1905 and the First World War in 1917 lost them the necessary support from their subjects and created “high prices and scarcity” which were by far “the most obvious factors in the general tension”
Serfs were considered property and were disallowed representation at the assembly. The rule of Peter the Great had an enormous impact on Catherine’s reign. Peter redefined the duty of the Russian autocracy by binding together the notion of an autocrat who rules over the populace without any limitations and the notion of the autocrat who reforms society for the benefit of the populace (Whittaker, 1992, p. 78). Catherine wanted to become the enlightened and reforming despot that Peter the Great was, but she also realized the flaws that he possessed that she saw in herself.
Peter the Great revolutionized the Russian Empire into a European Superpower during his reign by defeating the Swedish Empire in the Great Northern War and modernizing Russian relations with the rest of Europe. Peter the Great became Tsar of Russia after the death of his brother Ivan. He inherited a nation that was severely underdeveloped compared to European countries, which were prospering both culturally and economically, as the Renaissance and the Reformation had just occurred in Europe (“Bio.com”). At first, he did not seek to improve conditions in Russia; he sought to expand its borders by taking over the Bl...
The need to abolish serfdom was a persistent and, according to Mosse writing in 1958, biggest problem in Russian society since the reign of Peter the Great. All the problems of Russian Empire stemmed from serfdom and would automatically be solved with its removal .
Serfdom was put to an end after it was evident that it contributed to Russia’s lagging behind of the wider European shift to the industrial and commercial ages. This was attributed to Russia’s remaining socially and economically behind because they perceived of the western changes as “unacceptable” ideologies. It was later in the decade that Russia realized that serfdom was responsible for its civil disorders, industrial poverty, overpopulation, food inadequacy, and military incompetence. It was for these reasons that tsar Alexander II called to an abolishment of the act as a means of strengthening Russia. This was, for instance pushed by the need to have a stronger and larger army to fight in the Crimean War unlike the previous one which only had serfs as military men .
The need to modernise in Russia was a problem that the tsar had to face between the years, at the time in question, Russia was very backwards in the way that it farmed its lands, its economy was behind that of the rest of Europe, this meant that action had to be taken, in this area the tsar did have some successes.
The Russia system of serfdom that operated dated back to 1649, basing its operation of the relationship between lord and serf on the land one owned. This system was proof of the backwardness of the country and needed to be remedied. If one were to believe that the emancipation of the serfs stemmed only from the ideas of Alexander II as he aimed for modernization, it would be incorrect. Since the reign of Peter I, mod...
During the process of carrying out these plans, there was an opposition of the power and traditions by the Russian nobles. But, achieving the goals required to reach absolute monarchy, Peter the Great had the power he needed to carry out his plans and remain in control during his reign. His rule had later ended in the year Conde 1 of 1725. He achieved the goals of becoming an absolute monarch during his reign by modernizing the army, creating a navy, creating a domestic policy, and centralizing the government. Before the rule of Peter the Great, the Russian army wasn’t as great as when Peter the Great ruled.
The Russian culture has a vast and elegant past, present, and future, but it also has a dark side like every other place on earth. Stained with the blood, sweat and tears of all those who helped sculpt it. “Experience hath shown, that even under the best forms of government those entrusted with power have, in time, and by slow operations, perverted it into tyranny” (Thomas Jefferson). In the past there has been tyrants that “helped” shape countries into what they are today, one key leader in the Russian culture is none other than Ivan Chetvyorty Vasilyevich IV also known as Ivan the Terrible. During the years 1533-1584 Russia grew exponentially but by no means in a peaceful manner, Ivan the Terrible acquired vast amounts of land for Russia
Annotated Bibliography Ascher, Abraham. The Russian Revolution: Beginners Guides. London: Oneworld, 2014. This publication is example of the entrance of text into the mainstream public.
After their defeat in the Crimean war (1853-1856), Russia’s leaders realized they were falling behind much of Europe in terms of modernisation and industrialisation. Alexander II took control of the empire and made the first steps towards radically improving the country’s infrastructure. Transcontinental railways were built and the government strengthened Russia’s economy by promoting industrialisation with the construction of factory complexes throughout...