Recommended
More Related Content
What's hot
What's hot (20)
Similar to Revision Russian Tsars Alexander II and III, Nicholas II
Similar to Revision Russian Tsars Alexander II and III, Nicholas II (20)
More from Kari Robertson
Recently uploaded
Recently uploaded (20)
Revision Russian Tsars Alexander II and III, Nicholas II
- 1. The decline of imperial power in Tsarist Russia and the emergence of the Soviet State
- 2. Why, in spite of his efforts to reform Russian institutions, was Alexander II assassinated? How far is it true to say that Russia was transformed into a modern country between 1855 and 1900? Compare and contrast the causes of the 1905 and February/March 1917 revolutions in Russia. What factors led to the increase of opposition to the ruling Romanov dynasty in Russia between 1855 and 1905?
- 3. Ethnic diversity Religious diversity Russian economy Autocracy: the royal family Russian Society Barge Pullers on the Volga, Ilya Repin
- 4. Nicholas I: ‘I am bequeathing you [Alexander II] much worry and distress.’ Crimean War Slavophiles vs. Westernizers
- 5. A Monastery Refectory, Vasily Perov
- 6. The debate: Why had serfdom existed for so long? How and Why should it be ended? The Terms of emancipation Was emancipation a success?
- 8. Influence of ‘new’ literature. Narodniks Revolutionary Methods: Assassination (attempt on Trepov, 1878) Prison population increased Political Trials
- 9. Main Reforms Why was there opposition?
- 10. Ideas of Alexander III: influence of Pobedonostsev, Ignatiev Circumstances surrounding the death of Alexander II Russification
- 11. UNDOING REFORMS THE 1891 FAMINE Centralised Police Land Captains Increased censorship Universities lose control of teaching “We ourselves will not eat but we shall export.” Vyshnegradskii
- 12. Role of Witte Fastest growing economy in 1900 Foreign investment Trans-Siberian Railway
- 15. Long term causes Medium term causes Short term causes Bloody Sunday The October Manifesto The Fundamental Laws
- 16. Electoral college system Role of Stolypin
- 17. Social Democrats 1898 Social Revolutionaries 1901 Kadets 1905 Octobrists 1905 Bolsheviks 1903 Mensheviks 1903 (Trudoviks) a.k.a. Constitutional Democrats Key People Lenin Martov, Plekhanov (Trotsky) Chernov Milyukov Guchkov, Rodzianko Main Beliefs -Marxist -Professional revolutionaries - centralized leadership -Marxist -broad based party, anyone can join -trade unions should improve workers conditions - democratic party -Peasant revolution -land redistribution -rural socialism based on the mir -constitutional monarchy, tsar’s power restricted by elected representatives -equality and rights for all -free education -end of censorship -loyalty to Tsar -preservation of the Russian Empire -a strong regime working with the peoples representatives -support of the October Manifesto
- 18. Impact of War: Crimean, Russo-Japanese, World War I Opposition: Narodniks, Peoples’ Will, SRs, SDs Middle Class Aspiration: Kadets, Octobrists, growth of bourgeoisie
- 19. Modernisation: Reforms, urbanisation, transport Russian Prestige: Leader of the Slavs Personalities of the tsars Foreign Policy – from Europe to Asia and back again….
- 20. February/March 1917 Provisional Government: Kerensky, Petrograd Soviet, April Theses, July Days, Kerensky Offensive, Kornilov Revolt October/November 1917 Then onto Lenin’s rule….
Editor's Notes
- Note: rarely AIII alone NII often as part of decline/WWI.1905
- Alexander II succeeded to the throne upon the death of his father in 1855. The first year of his reign was devoted to the prosecution of the Crimean War, and after the fall of Sevastopol to negotiations for peace, led by his trusted counselor, Prince Gorchakov. It was widely thought that the country had been exhausted and humiliated by the war. Encouraged by public opinion he began a period of radical reforms, including an attempt to not to depend on a landed aristocracy controlling the poor, to develop Russia's natural resources and to thoroughly to reform all branches of the administration.
- Imperial Russia was a land of peasants, which made up at least 80% of the population. There were two main categories of peasants, those living on state lands and those living on the land of private landowners. Only the latter were serfs. As well as having obligations to the state, they also were obliged to the landowner, who had great power over their lives. By the mid-nineteenth century, less than half of Russian peasants were serfs. The rural population lived in households (dvory, singular dvor), gathered as villages (derevni, lit. 'wood', larger villages were called selo), run by a mir ('commune', or obshchina) - isolated, conservative, largely self-sufficient and self-governing units scattered across the land every 10 km (6 miles) or so. There were around 20 million dvory in Imperial Russia, forty percent containing six to ten people. Despite this the land was not owned by the mir; the land was the legal property of the 100,000 or so land-owners (dvoryanstvo) and the inhabitants, as serfs, were not allowed to leave the property where they were born. The peasants were duty bound to make regular payments in labor and goods. It has been estimated that landowners took at least one third of income and production by the first half of the nineteenth century.[2] The need for urgent reform was well understood in 19th-century Russia, and various projects of emancipation reforms were prepared by Mikhail Speransky, Nikolay Mordvinov, and Pavel Kiselev. Their efforts were, however, thwarted by conservative or reactionary nobility. The liberal politicians who stood behind the 1861 manifesto - Nikolay Milyutin, Alexei Strol'man and Yakov Rostovtsev - also recognized that their country was one of a few remaining feudal states in Europe. The pitiful display by Russian forces in the Crimean War left the government acutely aware of the empire's backwardness. Eager to grow and develop industrially, hence military and political strength, there were a number of economic reforms. As part of this the end of serfdom was considered. It was optimistically hoped that after the abolition the mir would dissolve into individual peasant land owners and the beginnings of a market economy. Alexander, unlike his father, was willing to deal with this problem. Moving on from a petition from the Lithuanian provinces, a committee "for ameliorating the condition of the peasants" was founded and the principles of the abolition considered. The main point at issue was whether the serfs should remain dependent on the landlords, or whether they should be transformed into a class of independent communal proprietors. The land-owners initially pushed for granting the peasants freedom but not any land. The tsar and his advisers, mindful of 1848, were opposed to creating a proletariat and the instability this could bring. But giving the peasants freedom and land seemed to leave the existing land-owners without the large and cheap labour-force they needed to maintain their estates. To 'balance' this, the legislation contained three measures to reduce the potential economic self-sufficiency of the peasants. Firstly a transition period of two years was introduced, during which the peasant was obligated as before to the old land-owner. Additionally large parts of common land were passed to the major land-owners as otrezki ("cut off lands"), making many forests, roads and rivers only accessible for a fee. The third measure was that the serfs must pay the land-owner for their allocation of land in a series of redemption payments, which in turn, were used to compensate the landowners with bonds. 75% of the total sum would be advanced by the government to the land-owner and then the peasants would repay the money, plus interest, to the government over forty-nine years ( redemption payments were finally cancelled in 1907). Tsar's Emancipation Manifesto of March 3, 1861 (February 19, 1861 (Julian Calendar This Manifesto proclaimed the emancipation of the serfs on private estates and of the domestic (household) serfs.[1] Serfs were granted the full rights of free citizens, gaining the rights to marry without having to gain consent, to own property and to own a business. The Manifesto prescribed that peasants would be able to buy the land from the landlords. Newly freed serfs created communities led by male elders. These communities were called a mir. Each mir had the power to distribute the land given to them by the Russian government amongst individuals within the community. Due to the community’s ownership of the land, as opposed to the individual’s, an individual peasant could not sell their portion of land in order to work in a factory in the city. A peasant was required to pay off long term loans received by the government. The money from these loans was given to the primary landowner. The land allotted to the recently freed serfs did not include the best land in the country, which continued to be owned by the nobility.
- Army and navy re-organization (1874), incompetence at the Crimea War, A new judicial administration based on the French model (1864); a new penal code and a greatly simplified system of civil and criminal procedure. An elaborate scheme of local self-government (Zemstvo) for the rural districts (1864) and the large towns (1870), with elective assemblies possessing a restricted right of taxation, and a new rural and municipal police under the direction of the Minister of the Interior. Alexander II would be the second monarch (after King Louis I of Portugal) to abolish capital punishment, a penalty which is still legal (although not practised) in Russia. However, the workers wanted better working conditions; prosecuted national minorities, "integrated" only in the last 50 or 60 years almost, wanted freedom
- When radicals began to resort to the formation of secret societies and to revolutionary agitation, Alexander II felt constrained to adopt severe repressive measures. The idea that some moderate liberal reforms, in an attempt to quell the revolutionary agitation, will do, and the creation of special commissions as proven by an ukase he delivered would not do either. The Marxist idea of countries being liberated from capitalism and soviets of workers united for the World Revolution, but respecting their own national characteristics, was clearly out of place within the Russian land aggregation processes of the 17th, 18th and 19th Centuries
- Konstantin Petrovich Pobedonostsev (Константин Петрович Победоносцев in Russian) (May 21, 1827 - March 23, 1907) was a Russian jurist, statesman, and adviser to three Tsars. Usually regarded as a prime representative of Russian conservatism, he was the "gray cardinal" of imperial politics during the reign of his disciple Alexander III of Russia, holding the highest position in the Holy Synod (the governing body of the Russian Orthodox Church), He denounced democracy as "the insupportable dictatorship of vulgar crowd". Parliamentary methods of administration, modern judicial organization and procedures, trial by jury, freedom of the press, secular education - these were among the principal objects of his aversion. Ignatiev - Shortly after the accession of Alexander III in 1881, he informed the czar of a “diabolical combination of Poles and Jews,” and was appointed Minister of the Interior on the understanding that he would carry out a nationalist, reactionary policy. After a period of intense, violent, destructive anti-Jewish rioting, known as pogroms, which some accused Ignatiev of fomenting, he issued the infamous and anti—Jewish "May Laws" in May 1882. Pogroms received state-sponsorship from local authorities, and typically police were involved in them as well. He retired from office in June 1882. Explanations include that he was suspected of dishonesty or extortion. After that time he exercised no important influence in public affairs. In the last years of his reign, Alexander II had been much exercised by the spread of Nihilist doctrines and the increasing number of anarchist conspiracies, and for some time he had hesitated between strengthening the hands of the executive and making concessions to the widespread political aspirations of the educated classes. Finally he decided in favour of the latter course, and on the very day of his death he signed an ukaz, creating a number of consultative commissions which might have been easily transformed into an assembly of notables. Following advice of his political mentor Konstantin Pobedonostsev, Alexander III determined to adopt the opposite policy. He at once canceled the ukaz before it was published, and in the manifesto announcing his accession to the throne he let it be very clearly understood that he had no intention of limiting or weakening the autocratic power which he had inherited from his ancestors. Nor did he afterwards show any inclination to change his mind.
- All the internal reforms which he initiated were intended to correct what he considered as the too liberal tendencies of the previous reign, so that he left behind him the reputation of a sovereign of the retrograde type. In his opinion Russia was to be saved from anarchical disorders and revolutionary agitation, not by the parliamentary institutions and so-called liberalism of western Europe, but by the three principles which the elder generation of the Slavophils systematically recommended—nationality, Eastern Orthodoxy and autocracy. His political ideal was a nation containing only one nationality, one language, one religion and one form of administration; and he did his utmost to prepare for the realization of this ideal by imposing the Russian language and Russian schools on his German, Polish and other non-Russian subjects (with the exception of the Finns), by fostering Eastern Orthodoxy at the expense of other confessions, by persecuting the Jews and by destroying the remnants of German, Polish and Swedish institutions in the outlying provinces. These policies were implemented by "May Laws" that banned Jews from rural areas and shtetls even within the Pale of Settlement. In the other provinces he sought to counteract what he considered the excessive liberalism of his father's reign. For this purpose he removed what little power had by zemstvo, had and placed the autonomous administration of the peasant communes under the supervision of landed proprietors appointed by the government. These came to be known as land captains, who were much feared and resented amongst the peasant communities throughout Russia. At the same time he sought to strengthen and centralize the Imperial administration, and to bring it more under his personal control. I
- Raising Money Raised massive amounts of capital: loans from foreign governments, especially the French Raised taxes, tariffs and interest rates Put Russia on the Gold Standard – foreign currency investment in Russia trebles between 1897 and 1907 Investing Money Trans-Siberian Railway – showpiece Military and trade advantages of improved transport Some areas e.g Moscow and Donbas industrialized rapidly Textile production was 40% of Russia’s industrial output Witte was aware that the long term benefits of industrialization were preceded by short term social dislocation. There was massive industrial growth between 1893 – 1900 BUT! The establishment (nobility, and Tsar’s other advisers) were suspicious – they thought him extravagant and unpatriotic as he encouraged foreign investment Growth was from a low base: In 1910 only 30% of Russian production came from industry, compared to 75% in Britain 80% of Russians were still peasants The rapidly growing proletariat were beginning to cause social and political disruption
- The first years of his reign saw little more than continuation and development of the policy pursued by Alexander III [disambiguation needed]. Nicholas allotted money for All-Russia exhibition of 1896. In 1897 restoration of gold standard by Sergei Witte, Minister of Finance, completed the series of financial reforms, initiated fifteen years earlier. By 1902, the Great Siberian railway was sort of completed, this helped for the Russian trade in the Far East but the railway still required huge amounts of work (England and France railways completed in 1930s). Russian delegation at the Hague Peace Conference 1899. In foreign relations, Nicholas followed policies of his father, strengthening Franco-Russian Alliance and pursuing a policy of general European pacification, which culminated in the famous Hague peace conference. This conference, suggested and promoted by Nicholas II, was convened with the view of terminating the arms race, and setting up machinery for the peaceful settlement of international disputes. The results of the conference were less than expected, because of the mutual distrust existing between great powers. Still, Hague conventions were among the first formal statements of the laws of war. Anti-Semitic pogroms of 1903-1906 Main article: Kishinev pogrom The administration of Nicholas II published anti-Semitic propaganda that encouraged people to riot in various parts of the Pale of Settlement, resulting in the pogroms of 1903-1906. Viacheslav Plehve, the Minister of the Interior, paid the Kishinev newspaper "Bessarabets" for anti-Semitic material, and the press during the Russo-Japanese War accused the Jews of being a fifth column. This accusation encouraged the eruption of numerous pogroms, especially after Russia lost the war. Pogroms also resulted from the government's reaction to the 1905 revolution. [20]
- clash between Russia and Japan was almost inevitable by the turn of the 20th century. Russia had expanded in the East, and the growth of her settlement and territorial ambitions, as her southward path to the Balkans was frustrated, conflicted with Japan's own territorial ambitions on the Chinese and Asian mainland. War began in 1904 with a surprise Japanese attack on the Russian fleet in Port Arthur, without formal declaration of war. The Russian Baltic fleet traversed the world to balance power in the East, but after many misadventures on the way, was almost annihilated by the Japanese in the Battle of the Tsushima Strait. On land the Russian army experienced logistical problems. While commands and supplies came from St. Petersburg, combat took place in east Asian ports with only the Trans-Siberian Railway for transport of supplies as well as troops both ways. The 6,000-mile track between St. Petersburg and Port Arthur was one-way, with no track around Lake Baikal, allowing only gradual build-up of the forces on the front. Besieged Port Arthur fell to the Japanese, after nine months of heroic resistance. In mid-1905, Nicholas II accepted American mediation, appointing Sergei Witte chief plenipotentiary for the peace talks. War was ended by the Treaty of Portsmouth. Nicholas's stance on the war was something that baffled many. Nicholas approached the war with confidence and saw it as an opportunity to raise Russian morale and patriotism, paying little attention to the finances of a long-distance war.[19] Shortly before the Japanese attack on Port Arthur, Nicholas held strong to the belief that there would be no war. He felt that it was his divine power to rule and protect Russia, and that a war with Japan would simply not happen. Despite the onset of the war and the many defeats Russia suffered, Nicholas still believed in, and expected, a final victory. Many people took the Tsar's confidence and stubbornness for indifference; believing him to be completely impervious. As Russia continued to face defeat by the Japanese, the call for peace grew. Nicholas's own mother, as well as his cousin, Kaiser William, urged Nicholas to open peace negotiations. Despite the efforts for peace, Nicholas remained evasive. It was not until March 27-28 and the annihilation of the Russian fleet by the Japanese, that Nicholas finally decided to pursue peace.
- With the defeat of Russia by a non-Western power, the prestige of the government and the authority of the autocratic empire was brought down significantly.[21] Defeat was a severe blow and the Imperial government collapsed, with the ensuing revolutionary outbreaks of 1905-1906. In hope to frighten any further contradiction many demonstrators were shot in front of the Winter Palace in St.Petersburg; the Emperor's Uncle, Grand Duke Sergei, was killed by a revolutionary's bomb in Moscow as he left the Kremlin. The Black Sea Fleet mutinied, and a railway strike developed into a general strike which paralized the country. Tsar Nicholas II, who was taken by surprise by the events, mixed his anger with bewilderment. He wrote to his mother after months of disorder, "It makes me sick to read the news! Nothing but strikes in schools and factories, murdered policemen, Cossacks and soldiers, riots, disorder, mutinies. But the ministers, instead of acting with quick decision, only assemble in council like a lot of frightened hens and cackle about providing united ministerial action... ominous quiet days began, quiet indeed because there was complete order in the streets, but at the same time everybody knew that something was going to happen — the troops were waiting for the signal, but the other side would not begin. One had the same feeling, as before a thunderstorm in summer! Everybody was on edge and extremely nervous and of course, that sort of strain could not go on for long.... We are in the midst of a revolution with an administrative apparatus entirely disorganized, and in this lies the main danger."[22] [edit] Bloody Sunday Main article: Bloody Sunday (1905) On Saturday, 9 January 1905, a priest named George Gapon informed the government that a march would take place the following day and asked that the Tsar be present to receive a petition. The ministers met hurriedly to consider the problem. There was never any thought that the Tsar, who was at Tsarskoe Selo and had been told of neither the march nor the petition, would actually be asked to meet Gapon. The suggestion that some other member of the Imperial family receive the petition was rejected. Finally informed by the Prefect of Police that he lacked the men to pluck Gapon from among his followers and place him under arrest, the newly appointed Minster of the Interior, Prince Sviatopolk-Mirsky, and his colleagues could think of nothing to do except bring additional troops into the city and hope that matters would not get out of hand. That evening Nicholas learned for the first time from Mirsky what the next day might bring. He wrote in his diary, "Troops have been brought from the outskirts to reinforce the garrison. Up to now the workers have been calm. Their number is estimated at 120,000. At the head of their union is a kind of socialist priest named Gapon. Mirsky came this evening to present his report on the measures taken."[23] At Tsarskoe Selo, Nicholas was stunned when he heard what had happened. He wrote in his diary, "A painful day. Serious disorders took place in Petersburg when the workers tried to come to the Winter Palace. The troops have been forced to fire in several parts of the city and there are many killed and wounded. Lord, how painful and sad this is."[24] On Sunday, 22 January 1905, Father Gapon began his march. Locking arms, the workers marched peacefully through the streets. Some carried crosses, icons and religious banners, others carried national flags and portraits of the Tsar[citation needed]. As they walked they sang religious hymns and the Imperial anthem, 'God Save The Tsar'. At 2PM all of the converging processions were scheduled to arrive at the Winter Palace. There was no single confrontation with the troops. Throughout the city, at bridges on strategic boulevards, the marchers found their way blocked by lines of infantry, backed by Cossacks and Hussars; and the soldiers opened fire on the crowd. The official number of victims was ninety-two dead and several hundred wounded. Gapon vanished and the other leaders of the march were seized. Expelled from the capital, they circulated through the empire, exaggerating the casualties into thousands. That day, which became known as "Bloody Sunday", was a turning point in Russian history. It shattered the ancient, legendary belief that the Tsar and the people were one. As bullets riddled their icons, their banners and their portraits of Nicholas, the people shrieked, "The Tsar will not help us!"[25] Outside Russia, the future British Labour Prime Minister Ramsay MacDonald attacked the Tsar calling him a "blood-stained creature and a common murderer".[24] Grand Duchess Olga Alexandrovna wrote, "Nicky had the police report a few days before. That Saturday he telephoned my mother at the Anitchkov and said that she and I were to leave for Gatchina at once. He and Alicky went to Tsarskoe Selo. Insofar as I remember, my Uncles Vladimir and Nicholas were the only members of the family left in St.Petersburg, but there may have been others. I felt at the time that all those arrangements were hideously wrong. Nicky's ministers and the Chief of Police had it all their way. My mother and I wanted him to stay in St.Petersburg and to face the crowd. I am positive that, for all the ugly mood of some of the workmen, Nicky's appearance would have calmed them. They would have presented their petition and gone back to their homes. But that wretched Epiphany incident had left all the senior officials in a state of panic. They kept on telling Nicky that he had no right to run such a risk, that he owed it to the country to leave the capital, that even with the utmost precautions taken there might always be some loophole left. My mother and I did all we could to persuade him that the ministers' advice was wrong, but Nicky preferred to follow it and he was the first to repent when he heard of the tragic outcome."[26] From his hiding place, Father Gapon issued a letter. He stated, "Nicholas Romanov, formerly Tsar and at present soul-murderer of the Russian empire. The innocent blood of workers, their wives and children lies forever between you and the Russian people ... May all the blood which must be spilled fall upon you, you Hangman. I call upon all the socialist parties of Russia to come to an immediate agreement among themselves and bring an armed uprising against Tsarism."[24] Gapon's body was found hanging in an abandoned cottage in Finland in April 1906
- Stolypin’s reforms: land, Peasants, repression