Emancipation Of The Serfs

The instant consequences to the emancipation of the serfs left Russia crippled, ironic, when alleged that it intended to advance Russia’s status. Many historians argue that despite abolishing serfdom, the means in which it was carried out didn’t coincide with reality. Subsequently, there were many riots which caused a rise of political groups such as Narodnik movement whose existence proves that Russian society was changing. Disorder spread with calls for change within Russia like In May 1862 where a number of pamphlets were issued including the radical Young Russia. Such propaganda aimed to gain support and create challenging individuals which would pressure the Tsar to make further changes. One could argue that as a result this led to the 1905 revolution and the end of Tsardom.

In the 19th century, Russia was a huge country with millions of extremely poor farming peasants called serfs. They believed that the Tsar was second only to god in power, and that tsar had control over everyone.

Taking control of autocratic Russia in 1855, Alexander II was the successor to his father Tsar Nicolas I having been trained his entire life to take on the role. During his reign as Tsar, Alexander passed many reforms all of which varied in political, social and economic stance. His most famous reform was deemed to be that of the emancipation of the Serfs, gaining him the title ‘Tsar Liberator’ as many believed that his effort to free those who had be bound by slavery, made him a hero. However some question whether he truly deserved this title as many reforms became reactional and many initially liberating reforms were revoked in order to ensure the security of the autocracy. As

The last Tsar Nicholas II ascended the throne in 1894 and was faced with a country that was trying to free itself from its autocratic regime. The serfs had recently been emancipated, the industry and economy was just starting to develop and opposition to the Tsar was building up. Russia was still behind Europe in terms of the political regime, the social conditions and the economy. Nicholas II who was a weak and very influenced by his mother and his wife had to deal with Russia’s troubles during his reign. In order to ascertain how successfully Russia dealt with its problems by 1914, this essay will examine the October Manifesto and the split of the opposition, how the Tsar became more reactionary after the 1905 revolution, Stolypin’s

The decline of indentured servitude and the rise of chattel slavery were caused by economic factors of the English settlers in the late 17th century. Colonists continually tried to allure laborers to the colony. The head right system was to give the indentured servant a method of becoming independent after a number of years of service. Colonists chiefly relied on Indentured Servitude, in order to facilitate their need for labor. The decreasing population combined with a need for a labor force, led colonists to believe that African slaves were the most efficient way to acquire a labor force that would satisfy their needs.

“Power tends to corrupt and absolute power corrupts absolutely. Great men are almost always bad men, even when they exercise influence and not authority” (Acton Institute 1). Alexander the Great was and absolute ruler that had both influence and authority; he abused both which is why many of his subjects followed him out of fear and not loyalty. Rulers are defined by how they use their power, the decisions’ they make; and how those decisions will affect the people. In my essay, I will analyze two viewpoints’ made by two professors and their viewpoints about Alexander III and whether or not he was deserving of the title “The Great”.

Czar Nicholas II was a very poor leader at the time. Many of his bad leadership decisions and weak skills lead to the Russian Revolution. The Czars were rich, but many Russians were very poor. The Czars took advantage of this and and made them slaves. Finally, Czar Alexander II freed them in 1905. When there were protests and many people were getting killed, he

In 1917, Tsar Nicholas ll is the current ruler of Russia. Russia’s economic growth is increased by the czar’s reforms of the production of more factories. Since, Russia desperately needed to keep up with the rest of Europe’s industry. This reform worked out perfectly, but the working conditions of these factories didn’t please factory workers. After the events of the Russo-Japenese War, “Bloody Sunday”, and WW1, all of Russia was in utter chaos under the czar’s ghastly leadership. With no signs of the czar’s attempt to solve the problems that kept coming up, all of Russia banded together and filled the streets with strikes and riots. A revolution was peaking among the peasants. The uprising brought Nicholas ll no choice but to abdicate

Alexander II and Alexander III were both Tsars of Russia and they both believed in the divine will to rule the people. However Alexander II is said to be more liberal than Alexander III though they were both conservative in one way or the other in their social and economic policies because they both wanted to remain with the power over the people. Alexander II was more relaxed in his polices ‘’Great Reformer’’ and Alexander III was more strict ‘’great reactionary’’. After the defeat in the Crimean defeat Alexander II introduced very many reforms in Russia because he had seen how backward Russia was and how all the other

1855 was a tough time for Alexander II to take the throne. Russia was in the middle of a costly war

Intentions of Alexander II and the Failure of the Emancipation of the Serfs In the 19th century it was estimated that about 50 per cent of the 40,000,000 peasants in Russia were serfs, who worked on the land and were owned by the Russian nobility, the Tsar and religious foundations. This had been true for centuries; in 1861, however, this was all changed when Tsar Alexander II emancipated the serfs and gave them freedom from ownership. Alexander's decision was based on many reasons, and did not have the desired consequences, for the serfs at least. Therefore, it is possible to question Alexander's motives for such large reform, which this essay will do and will also look at why the emancipation,

In fact in 1859 there were in Russia 23 millions of serfs. Alexander made up his mind to abolish it from above before that it would be done from below, through revolution. In 1861 serfdom was emancipated and this was the most important event in 19th century of Russian history. On the other way Alexander III after his father’s dead regarding the serfdom’s reforms decided to reduce the peasant representation in zemstva and the peasant representatives were appointed and no longer elected. Also the “Peasant Land Bank” was created to buy land from the lords and all the children from the lower-class were banned from secondary education. The Tsar, by a new statute in 1890, gave to the provincial governors ‘supervision over the correctness and legality of zemstvo institutions’. The reforms of the government are connected to the abolition of the serfdom. Russia was an under governed society, having many fewer civil servants than Britain. It was essential that local people, therefore, filled administrative roles. In 1864 Tsar Alexander II introduced new bodies in Russia, called zemstva. Zemstva were local governments located in outside city areas and the people who ran them were elected by the people from the village. The Tsar gave them power for make small reforms because he wanted to maintain his autocratic rule everywhere. The members were chosen by three electoral colleges,

For three centuries before the revolution, life in Russia was not peaceful. It was cold, hard, and bitter instead. “The end of serfdom was a major event in Russia; yet it just wasn 't enough.”, in 1861. Serfdom, under feudalism, is the the status of peasants in which they are bound to a lord, or master, works on their land, and can be sold like property. Despite serfs being given ‘freedom’, Russia was mostly ruled by the czar and nobles. The average person was, and stayed, poor. Therefore, World War I was not the main cause of the Russian revolution. This outdated feudal class structure, inability to modernize, lack of peace, and czars’ inept leaderships lead to the Russian Revolution.

Stephen Hoch in a study that he conducted on a small Russian village called Petrovskie makes some insightful inferences about the serf system there. In Russia, as well as Europe in the 17th century, the serfs were ?managed? in a way that more closely represented exploitation. Very little was invested in improving the state of the land that they cultivated and instead the emphasis was placed on compelling the serfs to produce more. Meanwhile the landowner merely reaped the benefits and rarely reinvested in the venture. This study is relevant because it was taking place at the same time as the Manifesto was being written.[v] The system led to a series of revolutions because as Hoch deduced, ?Serf behavior and attitudes were in fact an integrated human response to the ecological constraints at work in the society and to the inhumane degradation of being reduced to property.?[vi]

Alexander II, was a good hearted, unselfish leader who wanted even the poor peasants and serfs of Russia to have a grand life. Tsar Alexander II freed serfs, with a sign of his name on the Emancipation Manifesto. Further, he expanded the railroad system which created a boost in the economic life in a hitherto predominantly feudal agricultural society (Mosse); this helped Russia establish and gain more territory. The great Russian tsar, an innovator; during his reign, which began in 1855 he abolished serfdom, expanded the rail system, reformed the aged judicial system, and liberated Bulgaria. Tsar Alexander II of Russia assassinated (Mosse) in St. Petersburg in 1881.