Literary Analysis : Aleksander Nikitenko

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.

Stolypin was the Minister of Finance from 1906 to 1911 under the reign of Nicholas II. He was in charge of the agricultural reforms and his goal was to create a peasants’ middle class to create enterprise and lead to improve agricultural yields. He believed that if the peasants could become property owners, the government would gain their support and make

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

All serfs were farmers. Serfs had poor shelter and lacked a diet. Most serfs lived in small homes made of stones, with roofs made of clay tiles or shingles. They had hard dirt floors and slept on straw mattresses that were on the floor. They had some furniture such as stools benches and a table (Cels 9). Peasants often ate bread and had pottage which was like a soup. Pottage was flavored with various types of vegetables. Since peasants weren't that wealthy, they rarely ate meat because it was expensive to buy and keep animals. Small amounts of chicken, pork and beef were considered treats (Cels 9). Serfs children often helped the parents around the house. Young children that were peasants normally played with toys such as dolls, carts, horses,whistles,

the people’” but many others disagreed . They felt that he was manipulating the family. This only added to the discontent and secrecy surrounding the family. Many people did not like how isolated the family was, not only from everyday Russians, but also the aristocracy. This made Nicholas an incapable leader because he separated himself to a large extent from Russian society. His shyness added to the list of reasons why he was a bad leader for Russia which lead to the end of the Old Regime.

In The Reforming Tsar: The Redefinition of Autocratic Duty in Eighteenth  Century Russia, Cynthia Whittaker argues that depending on the historical, cultural and contextual period, there can be demarcated two types, both distinctive and contrasting, of Russian sovereigns, namely the “good tsar” and the “reforming tsar”. The scholar juxtaposes the two models of monarchs against the backdrop of “medieval” versus “modern” type of governance. According to it the “good tsar” typology, which is typical for the earlier Muscovy realm, defines the ruler as pious and inert, characterized by its liturgical form and static nature of the rule. The “good tsar” is bound to uphold Orthodoxy, preserve and control public order, help the poor and the underdogs

amazing tales of a Russian girl, who was born with the wealth and privileges, exposed

In their society and circumstances both slaves and serfs were the bottom of the social class. They were unfairly treated, and punished if they did something wrong. “...he was deprived of all protection against the abuse of seignorial authority, which was exercised without restraint…” (Melbourne) Both also worked long hours and needed to do whatever their owner or master told them to do. If they had children, they automatically became either slaves or serfs. When the factory industry in Russia was introduced and domestic and foreign trade increased, the area and population of Russia also increased, making landowners wanting to have more land, and therefore needing more serfs. (Blum, 3-12) The serfdom population of Russia was over one-third of its total population.

The reign of Peter the Great has been a source of considerable historical debate for many contemporary and traditional historians. Especially, the transformation he made to Russian culture, politics and economic, which arguably changed the foundations of society. Thus, the interval of some three hundred years has allowed us to access Peter the Great 's reforms more accurately but we must consider that Russia during the late 17th century existed in different ethical and social circumstances to our own contemporary society as to make it almost a foreign civilisation. Judgements about Peter the Great using today 's political and moral perspectives may have to be tempered unless we are accused of historical and cultural relativism. Therefore, we must be careful in analysing the impact that his many reforms caused and the lasting nature that they had on the very foundations of Russian society.

Andrei eventually got out of being a serf, gained a high education, and went to university to become a lawyer. What made this unusual is his background, he was a serf, but now a highly intelligent person, not slave. Shortly after, there was an altercation between him and a professor, where the professor misunderstood Andrei and forcefully took him out of his class. This caused an outrage, because of the teacher's origin. They did not speak fluent Russian, and the students found this altercation to be absurd.

These various punishments were often carried out to punish slaves for not doing their work, or simply for assert dominance. In Russia, the treatment of serfs were frequent and just as vicious as the slaves. According to Steven L. Hoch, in Petrovoskoe, a serf estate in Russia, “at least 79 percent of the adult males [serfs] were flogged, 24 percent more than once” from September 1826 through August 1828. In addition, the serfs were also subjected to being forcibly recruited into the army, being exiled, confinement, and forcing them to wear iron collars around their necks. The most serious punishment however, seemed to be the most innocuous: shaving half of a serf man’s hair and beard. In Serfdom and Social Control, the shaving was used in the most extreme cases and was considered “a particularly odious form of discipline”. The bailiffs in charge of the serfs used punishment to keep

Today in the modern society, the struggles that teenagers experience is whether or not they should wear the cherry or purple lip-gloss to “that” party everyone is going to attend or maybe their cell phone is broken and they simply cannot live without checking what food their friends are eating for dinner. Yet, these struggles seem insignificant when compared to the problems children throughout Russia experienced after the Russian Revolution. During this time period, surviving was a daily struggle for the bezprizorni, orphaned children abandoned on the streets of Russia with little to no food, shelter, and warmth. Many of these individuals looked towards their leaders for guidance and protection during these times of adversity. An example of

Life as a serf or peasant was not easy. Serfs were bound to their lord's land and required to do services for him. Although they could not be sold like slaves, they had no freedom (Ellis and Esler 219-244). Peasants farmed for the goods that the lord and his manor needed. They went through difficult hardship because of this. Peasants were heavily taxed and had to provide for themselves the goods that they needed (“The Middle Ages”). According to the medieval law, the peasants were not considered to 'belong to' themselves (“The Middle Ages”). Although serfs were peasants and had relatively the same duties and similar rights, what differentiated a peasant from a serf was that a peasant was not bound to the land (“The Middle Ages”). Peasants had no schooling and no knowledge of the outside world (Ellis and Esler 219-244). They rarely traveled more than a couple miles outside of their villages. All members of a peasant family, including children, tended crops, farmed, and did some sort of work to help out (Ellis and Esler 224). Very few peasants lived past the age of 35 because of hunger in the winter and the easy development and transmission of disease (Ellis and Esler 224).

However, many peasants, although liberated, remained in their state of peasants following the old regime. These men are symbolized by Firs, an old servant for whom freedom was insignificant. He stays loyal, working in the Cherry Orchard as a serf since he had no other opportunities in life. Firs and Lohpakin on one side contrast Madame Ranevsky and Gayef her brother. The first two portraying two different ways in which emancipation affected peasants, and the last two, showing how the emancipation affected Russian aristocracy.

Fortunately for Smirnov, his family was ambitious. The success of uncle Grigoriy who made enough money to buy his own freedom inspired a young Pyotr to move to Moscow and pursue his own liberation. It was from Grigoriy that Pyotr was inducted into the world of entrepreneurship. Smirnov’s story is one of fierce