Yanice Allenspach

How successful were Alexander II’s reforms in modernising

Russia before his death in 1881?
Alexander II was (and still is) very controversial discussed by historians,
his reforms and their success as well. This essay will clarify the
achievement of every reform, Alexander II established, and at the end
there will be a conclusion.

Ending of serfdom (1803-1881)

That means that there are no serfs anymore, so the nobles have to pay
peasants to look after their land and the peasants, who were serfs before,
have now more rights. That has huge impact on the economy.

From the first idea of the emancipation of the serfs till they were really
“free” went 78 years by. That’s a very long time, and they weren’t really
free. They had to pay a lot of money for their freedom. But they had at
least an expectation to a better life for their children. This reform made
him known as the “tsar liberator”.

This reform is a very important step to the modernisation, because without

it not one of the following ones would have been possible. Rieber said that
this reform was the fundament that had to happen before every other
could build on it.

Censorship & Education (1863-64)

Alexander II wanted to make the school more open to everyone, to women

and peasants. But not even enough places in primary school were
available, so not everyone could attend the school. The church didn’t like
this reform at all, because the people became more interested in science
and would get more critical to the religion and the church. He even
allowed newspaper. Alexander II thought the people would appreciate it
but, they didn’t.

This reform wasn’t really successful because the people started to criticise
Alexander II. Some people (students) said that his reform wouldn’t go far
enough; some said that it was too far. So Alexander II became repressive
and more church-orientated again.

Legal / Court reforms (1864)

This reform is about the changes of court. Before this reform the serfs
were always guilty (you had to write defence files to proof that you aren’t
-> serfs couldn’t read nor write). The reform introduces the Jury-system.

The people had very different opinions about the new courts. Seton-
Watson said, that it was a very (or even most) radical reform and that
nothing similar ever existed. Unfortunately the other courts didn’t stop
being allowed. The new courts had a lack of lawyers. Alexander II. went
 Yanice Allenspach

back to the old courts after the case of Vera Zasulich. So, another time, he
revised his reform.

Local Government (1864-70)

This reform is about the change of the empire Russia. Zemstvas were
introduced and with them the vote power, but it wasn’t equally distributed.
The church and the nobles had the majority of the votes. The zemstvas
were like little administrative centres, where local decisions were made
and taxes were collected.

Because it wasn’t introduced all over the country, it wasn’t really

successful. And that the peasants were unjust treated didn’t helped the
reform. This system didn’t give the tsar the overview over the issues, but
the zemstva could solve some local problems on its own. Because the
zemstva presidents were most not elected, they were appointed, they
weren’t really accepted.

Military reforms (1874-75)

The military system changed, among other things, because of the money.
Alexander II. changed the length of the obligatory army service from 25 to
15 years (9 in reserve, 6 in active). The peasant could during their
“reserve” time be at home and look after their land and home. Some
historians say that he copied Germany. Rieber says that every reform had
to happen before this one, because if not, there would have been a revolt
against the tsar.

Because he shortened the army service, the moral there got higher. But
the success of this reform was reduced through the critic of the nobility.
Alexander II. had to make the life of the people better, than if he would
treat them bad, they could start a revolution against him. They would have
been well enough trained. He wanted a better, more professional army,
which could defence against other countries. He succeeded.

Loris Melikov (1881)

This reform isn’t really one, because Alexander II. signed it at the day of
his assassination. If Alexander II. have could carried it out, Russia would
have become more liberal.

We will never know if the Tsar would really have achieved the targets of
the reform plan, or if he would have become repressive like many times
before.
 Yanice Allenspach

Conclusion:

He had many great ideas, but went, after he introduced them, often to
repression, because the reaction of the people weren’t what he hoped or
expected it to be.