Alexander II Research Paper

Traditionally it is assumed that he was a reactionary, unlike the reformer his father, Alexander II, had been. However, as so often the case, this interpretation of Alexander III’s rule is undisputed. There is much reason to believe that despite some different policies, ultimately both men wanted to reach the same goals. Alexander III unquestionably did undermine the reforming policies of his father, but the underlying reasons for this are not so obvious.
“The reign of Alexander II, which began with bright promise, and changed to dreary stagnation, ended in tragedy. The Tsar-liberator was a victim of the unsolved conflict between social reform and the dogma of political autocracy”. This is a quote taken from Seton Watson, a famous historian,
Little was traded or exported; the emperors had little interest in European affairs. Different also in this aspect, Alexander II planned and built almost 14000 miles of railway by 1881, to not only increase military power, but also successfully export grain. Banks were established and settlement limitations on Jews were lifted.
He had never been a military man, possibly because he had lived through and seen Russia’s defeat in the Crimean war. Despite, or maybe because of, this he reformed a great deal in this field; most importantly, the military conscription was lowered from 25 to only 6 years. Military service was no longer a punishment for crime, and social class (officially) no longer made a difference to military drafts.
Alexander II also drastically reformed the local government and legal system. He created the Zemstvos, to which members were elected; nevertheless, it was still dominated by property owners. Power of the nobles further decreased, as they lost their roles as judges and a new system with public proceedings was initiated. In addition, it was made sure that the same laws applied to all classes and that the jury system and judges were independent of the government.
Alexander also liberalized education and curriculums, he founded gymnasiums (where history was not allowed to be taught) and the Zemstvos had the right to open primary
It quickly became clear that his approach to Russian politics was different to that of his father’s, at least to that of his earlier years.
There is no question about the completely different attitude Alexander III had to Alexander II. The temperament or the credentials needed to rule a nation at this time in history was far from everything Alexander III had. He preferred the principles of personal rule, holding on to the absolute monarchy and fearing change, he also distrusted bureaucracy. Had he assumed role of his father, the Revolution might have been avoided.
Alexander III was much more conservative than his father had been. He had a strong Orthodox faith and dismissed all other religions, just as he dismissed all other nationalities. Going against what Alexander II had worked hard for, for many years he attempted to reinstate all the lost power of the nobles, he wanted to attack and abolish the Zemstvos. He reinstated the power of the nobility, by assigning specific areas land captains in 1889, which essentially absolutely governed over certain provinces. The rights of the Zemstvos were reduced in 1890, when the local government was once again taken over by the