Top-Rated Free Essay
Preview

to what extent was Alexander successful in tackling the problems of the tsarist regime?

Better Essays
2108 Words
Grammar
Grammar
Plagiarism
Plagiarism
Writing
Writing
Score
Score
to what extent was Alexander successful in tackling the problems of the tsarist regime?
To what extent was Alexander successful in tackling the problems of the tsarist regime?
When Alexander III became the tsar, Russia was in a crisis following the assassination of Alexander II. The problems that Tsar was facing were that many different groups wanted to change the political system, as not everyone agreed with the autocracy system of government in Russia. To solve this he had to get rid of all political parties and political opposition. Also he had to get rid of anyone who had or wanted political control. Alexander II’s liberals ministers, M,T. Loris-Melikov and N.P. Lgnatiev left the office, and were replaced with Alexandra III own mistiers, Pobedonostsev, chief procurator of the Holy Synod of the Russia Orthodox Church. Also he had to make sure that all power was given only to the Tsar, so he had to restrict the Zemstvas power, because the Zemstva meant that all power of the tsar was spread out to cities and towns. Furthermore, the organisation, the ‘Peoples Will’ needed to be destroyed as it was a threat to Tsar’s power, so immediately he destroyed the ‘Peoples Will’. He then introduced the Statute of State Security. This allowed the government to arrest and trial any political opponent without a jury. This gave the Tsar complete power. In addition, Russia was a huge multi-racial empire with 55% Russian and the rest Ukrainians, Polish, Jews and more. Because of these races Alexander III wanted to make sure that Russia remained Russian. He did this by a policy of ‘Russification’. This policy made Russian the official language. This meant all documents were in Russia. However this policy affected many people including the Jews. Finally, Russia’s main problem was financially. Russia was physically the largest in size and population, but was almost the most economically underdeveloped. Alexandra III had to increase its economic wealth in order to maintain its armed forces and to maintain its position as a Great Power. He did this by his finance ministers, Nikolia Bunge, Vyshnegradsky and Sergei Witte. Alexander III finance ministers introduced laws which helped peasants with their tax and gave better land to the peasants.
In Russia there were many groups that wanted political reforms. The moderates included liberals that supported peaceful change to get freedom of the press. The extremists, like the ‘Peoples Will’, wanted to only destroy tsar’s rule and give power to the people. However the extremist had no plan on how this could be achieved which made their ideas hard to come to pass. This shows how powerful and strong the Tsar is and how weak the other are. Other groups wanted economic and political power to be handed to the peasants. Also areas like Poland, they wanted to create their own national state. These ideas and beliefs from these different groups would anger Alexandra III, because he wanted only the tsar to gain all the power. This is why he restricted the Zemstvas power as the Zemstvas power meant that all power was to be spread out to towns. Alexander III wanted Russia back to a doctoral style of government, so he knew it was important for these supported political reforms to be repressed.
Firstly Alexandra III had to get rid of anyone who had or wanted political control. Alexander II’s liberals ministers, M,T. Loris-Melikov and N.P. Lgnatiev left the office, and were replaced with Alexandra III own mistiers, Pobedonostsev, chief procurator of the Holy Synod of the Russia Orthodox Church. He was the person who mastermind Alexander’s manifesto. The manifesto decaled that all political power lay in the Tsar which was what the tsar wanted. Pobedonostsev was the kind of person that Alexander wanted, because Pobedonostsev believed that politically and social stability lay in support for autocracy, the Russian Orthodox Church and Russian nationalism.
Furthermore, the organisation, the ‘Peoples Will’ needed to be destroyed as it was a threat to Tsar’s power, so immediately he destroyed the ‘Peoples Will’. He then introduced the Statute of State Security. This set up government-controlled courts. This allowed the government to arrest and trial any political opponent without a jury. This solved the Tsars problem of opponents being a threat to the tsars, because all political opponents were arrested without jury which leaves Russia with no opponents, so all power is laid within the Tsar. He believed that god gave him this role so it’s important to maintain this role. The government also prevented the spread of radical and liberal ideas. Russia slowly seemed to become like a dictatorship as all newspapers and foreign books were censored to stop the dangerous foreign ideas, such as democracy and parliamentary government. This may convey how Russia is becoming a dictatorship and what the Tsar wanted. Alexander III got what he wanted and controlled everything by increasing the university fees, to exclude all but the wealthy. Finally all self governed universities were under government control.
Alexander main focus was to solve the problems of the Tsars regime, however these polices did not destroy the ‘Peoples Will’ and other extremists groups, because they continued to work underground. This shows that these policies were not successful, because the ‘Peoples Will’ and extremists made an attempt to assassinate Alexander III and were brave to continue their beliefs, which could show that Alexander III is not that strong as he makes it out to be and that there is some power within the people. Alexandra III solutions may have worked but not for a long term as ‘Peoples Will’ and extremists still existed to try destroying the Tsars rule.
Russia was a huge multi-racial empire with 55% Russian and the rest Ukrainians, Polish, Jews and more. Because of these races Alexander III wanted to make sure that Russia remained Russian and also to bring unity and cohesion. Alexander III did this by a policy of ‘Russification’. This policy made Russian the official language. This meant all documents were in Russia; furthermore other languages were forbidden in school. These shows how loyal the Tsar is to its own empire and to Russia; however it also could show how mean and cruel the Tsar is to its own people, because this policy affected them badly. This policy did not benefit most parts of Russia as it was mainly European countries. Poland and the Baltic lands of Estonia, Latvia, and Lithuanian were affected as there language was not Russia so it made their lives so much harder. In addition this policy affected the Jews the most as they suffered the most under Alexander III. There were organised attacks on the Jews during the regimen of Alexander III. These attacks were known as ‘pogroms’. These attacks were approved or organised by the government, which shows how much power the tsar has and what he can do. These attacks involved rape, rob, kill and mob Jews. This caused Jews to flee to America and to the western countries.
The policy of Russification was successful in tackling the problem of the Tsar as the main language was Russian, which shows and gives total control to the Tsar. Also all languages are forbidden in a school, which insures that Russian is the main language. All documents are in Russia, which could suggest the total control. Also the Tsar is not bothered who the policies affects as long as it gives him total power in Russia. This suggests that the tsarist regime is succeeding. In addition this policy was not successful in bringing Russia to unity and cohesion because thousands of Jews fled Russia for new lives in North America and Western Europe.
Pobedonostev began to undo many reforms that were introduced by Alexandra II. In 1889 the government created the post of ‘Land Captains’ to enforce local laws, replacing the locally elected justices of peace. ‘Land Captains’ are elected people from the landed classes and were appointed by the minister of the interior. They were made member of the local government bodies and had the most political power. This is why the zemstva was restricted. This increased the central control as all press was censored, and there was no political activity. The tsar had all the power and he controlled it.
The increased central control was successful as it took all the control and censored all press and gave no right to express political activities. Russia was firmly back under the control of the tsar, which shows how successful tsarist regime was.
Finally Russia’s main problem was financially. Russia was physically the largest in size and population, but was almost the most economically underdeveloped. Alexandra III had to increase its economic wealth in order to maintain its armed forces and to maintain its position as a Great Power. He did this by his finance ministers, Nikolia Bunge, Vyshnegradsky and Sergei Witte. Firstly Nikolia Bunge introduced laws in 1882, which reduced the tax burden on peasants. Also he established a Peasant Land Bank, which offered loan facilities to peasants to help them increase the size of their landholdings and make them more productive.
Then Nikolia Bunge resigned and was replaced by Ivan Vyshnegradsky who offered financial incentives for peasants to migrate to the eastern lands of Siberia. This helped to take pressure off the demand for land, but did not help the catastrophic famine of 1891. He then started to finance Russian economic development from foreign loans. Alexander III finance minsters rapidly helped the economic development of Russia in the 1890s, which shows that the problems of the Tsar regime improved. These polices to help the financial reform had been successful, because the increase in economics by 8% helped to maintain its armed forces which puts Russia in a position of a great power.
In conclusion Alexander had re-established the autocratic power of the Tsar however; you would also say he was not fully successful. This was done with Alexander III regime solutions. Alexander III minsters helped by introducing laws that reduced the tax burden on peasants. They also established a Peasant Land Bank, which offered loan facilities to peasants to help them increase the size of their landholdings and make them more productive. However, this may seem successful but towards the end of his regime in the countryside peasant outbursts increased due to increasing land shortage. The peasant population continued to grow and their problems seemed to be worse than before. This clearly shows that Alexander III solution were not long term as his son Nicholas II had to be in power during when Russia was in a massive state.
Moreover little was done to solve the agriculture problem that suffered serious neglect and the Famine was still a huge problem. Alexander main focus was to solve the problems of the Tsars regime however these polices did not destroy the ‘Peoples Will’ and other extremists groups, because they continued to work underground. This shows that these policies were not successful, because the ‘Peoples Will’ and extremists made an attempt to assassinate Alexander III, which could show that Alexander III is not that strong as he makes it out to be and that there is some power within the people. Alexandra III solutions may have worked but not for a long term as ‘Peoples Will’ and extremists still existed to try destroying the Tsars rule. Financially Russia improved as there was a greater significance to the longer term economic development of Russia; vyshnegradsky began to finance Russian economic development from foreign loans. Most of these loans were from Britain and France, which are one the strongest allies, which could show how strong Russia is getting, because Russia is getting involved with the great allies. The foundation was laid for the rapid economic development of Russia which began in the 1890s under his success as finance minister, Sergei Witte.
Alexander IIIs repressive polices clearly had a dramatic long-term effect on his own dynasty. This could suggest that his solutions and repression were successful in his regime because he got what he wanted but not what the people wanted which caused problems after when he died. This suggests that the tsarist regime is succeeding. The policy ‘Russification’ insured that the largest multi-ethnic country, Russia was not divided but unity and Russian. In addition this policy was not successful in bringing Russia to unity and cohesion, because thousands of Jews fled Russia for new lives in North America and Western Europe. This was caused by the organised attacks made on them by the government. Overall Alexander III was not successful in tackling the problems of the tsarist regime in some areas but in other areas he was successful, like in the financial reform.

You May Also Find These Documents Helpful

  • Good Essays

    Another thing that had changed in Alexander III’s reign to make Russia seem unrecognisable in 1894 compared with 1881 was that the idea of reform was strongly opposed by him so Russia appeared to moving backwards instead of forwards in all aspects. Alexander III introduced a Manifesto that stated that the Tsar would be in charge of all political power. It presented a very conservative Russia where political and social stability was to be controlled and supported by autocracy, Russian nationalism and the Russian Orthodox Church. This shows how Russia had changed to become recognisable in 1894 because any idea of a constitution was rejected by the Tsar and represented Conservative ideas in his decision making. Russia…

    • 824 Words
    • 4 Pages
    Good Essays
  • Good Essays

    All state leaders across the whole period held qualities that didn’t please the whole of the population in Russia. During the reign of Alex II, the government showed some strength with controlling opposition from the peasantry through the emancipation of the serfs in 1861. It was thought that to prevent revolt from below, this was a key movement that had to be made, and therefore prevented future unrest and opposition. However, the new liberated serfs had to deal with more laws concerning land ownership with led to further unrest and repression in the peasantry by the state. The state moreover, appeased the most vocal critics but in such a way that allowed dissenters to express themselves in the knowledge that Tsar’s decision would be final. Compared to Nicholas II’s reign, this showed a decisive leading technique, as Nicholas’s style was more conservative, and showed weakness, relying on others’ advice to fuel his decisions. A key failure throughout his period was the mixed rule attempt with the Duma introduced from 1906 to 1917, it is arguable that Nicholas II made concessions only to keep opposition temporarily at bay and that his aim was to uphold the principle of autocracy.…

    • 1646 Words
    • 7 Pages
    Good Essays
  • Good Essays

    Essay On Tsarist Autocracy

    • 1209 Words
    • 5 Pages

    The Tsarist autocracy has succeeded for more than three hundred years, but the Russian Revolution that occurred on November 1917 ended the long term autocracy. During this time period, Tsar Nicholas II was the leader of Russia and indeed the last one. He caused Russia’s downfall and made many Russians frustrated about the government. The Tsar did not acknowledge the nation's problems and failed to improve the lives of the citizens. As the Russians struggled with limited rights and lack of help from Nicholas II, they had to make a move. Although peasant unrest led to the Russians protesting and rebelling against the country, the Russian Revolution occurred because of Tsar Nicholas II’s weak leadership, in which he failed to accomplished the Russian’s goals, horribly managed the military, and thought that the system should not change.…

    • 1209 Words
    • 5 Pages
    Good Essays
  • Good Essays

    The Tsarist system of government underwent many changes throughout the years of 1881-1914. Both Alexander III and Nicholas II created several modifications, being both good and bad, to the government during these years. Alexander III created mostly negative changes, due to him being seen as a reactionary, whereas Nicholas II created mainly positive changes to the government as a result of the 1905 revolution. These changes can be categorised into political, economic and social modifications.…

    • 1624 Words
    • 7 Pages
    Good Essays
  • Good Essays

    The policies of Russia that Alexander II had refused to acknowledge, or even strived to end, were revisited by the new Tsar and people felt as though he was fairer and had ears to hear the voices of his people. They felt as though the new Alexander was more involved with the welfare of his people and so Opposition to his reign was reduced, as the people who had previously been ignored, were now listened to and their opinions met with acknowledgement.…

    • 1217 Words
    • 5 Pages
    Good Essays
  • Satisfactory Essays

    Tsar Alexander III was forced onto the throne after his father’s assassination in 1881. He had fears of maybe having the same fate of his father, therefore leading onto him making changes to the Tsarist regime bringing it back to a doctoral style of government. Alexander wanted to ensure that all power was again entrusted to the Tsar and to do this he had to restrict the zemstva’s power as the zemstva meant the power of the Tsar was spread to separate towns. He did this by replacing the locally elected justices of peace for land captains. Land captains are elected people from the landed classes and were appointed by the minister of the interior. Alexander wanted to retain central control. Alexander also needed to get rid of any political opposition; he started off by getting rid of anyone who wanted political control. He got rid of all his father’s ministers and brought in his own this includes Pobedonostsev. Pobedonostsev was the one who created the manifesto which declared the Tsar absolute political power. Alexander wanted to ensure his that the group ‘the Peoples Will’ was destroyed. He then introduced the statute of state security. This allowed the government to arrest and trial any political opponent without a jury.…

    • 586 Words
    • 3 Pages
    Satisfactory Essays
  • Good Essays

    How successful was opposition to the tsarist regime between 1861 and 1881 in achieving its aims?…

    • 751 Words
    • 2 Pages
    Good Essays
  • Good Essays

    Alexander III faced the problem of keeping this large multi ethnic empire together. At the same time, he needed to maintain his own supreme political power – which was difficult, because his father, Alexander II, had begun reforms which raised expectations of major change within Russia.…

    • 1625 Words
    • 7 Pages
    Good Essays
  • Good Essays

    In 1855, when Alexander II, son of Nicholas I, came to power as Tsar of Russia he was faced by many problems. Russia, being the backwards place it was needed reform. The gap between the noble class and the peasant class was enormous and causing problems. The serfs were being treated horribly; the legal system and educational system were in desperate need of changes. There were also governmental issues that needed to be addressed. Russia could use as much reform as possible; Alexander II saw these needs and made every effort to fulfill them in the name of fatherland.…

    • 1071 Words
    • 3 Pages
    Good Essays
  • Powerful Essays

    The first thing that Alexander III did when he came into power to contradict his fathers reforms was to recall the decision of creating the constitution. Alexander III was a firm believer of the absolute power and judgment that autocracy and Russian history owned, he felt that Russia should stick to their traditional rules and the way things were run. Alexander put thins in to change this but Alexander III would not allow this and so reversed some of what he had done to make sure the Russian tradition stayed in place. He felt that a democratic Parliament was such a western way to think, NOT Russian. He preferred the principles of personal rule and he was so firm on this, he distrusted the bureaucracy. This lead to him wanting to be around conservative ministers such a Pobodenostev because he knew that if he was surrounded by the right people with the same mind has him, they too would want to reverse the reforms of Alexander II unlike the ones that he usually were with which was a mix of conservative and Liberal ministers that were influencing the changes in the first place.…

    • 1426 Words
    • 6 Pages
    Powerful Essays
  • Best Essays

    Alexander II came into the throne in 1855 right in the middle of Crimean war, so he was unable to save the Russians from military defeat. However the war taught him a valuable lesson in the form of an idea. This idea was reform. Alexander II realized through the humiliation that was suffered that if he ever wanted to have stability, as well as peace at home and to be honored abroad then military and domestic reforms needed to…

    • 2900 Words
    • 12 Pages
    Best Essays
  • Good Essays

    Nicholas II came into the throne with a mutual attitude as his grandfather, Alexander II. He listened to ministers who recognised the necessity of economic modernisation, but failed to see the potential degree of political change if implemented. Albeit, Tsar Nicholas II’s idea of Russia’s future was one of modernisation and economic development, however with the combination of the political system that still retained the traditional features of autocracy, it looked potentially slim. The Tsar failed to recognise and adapt to the social and economic changes that had taken place. Expressions such as the emancipation under the great reforms of 1860 that made peasants freer and more prosperous gave birth to various political groups, which could no longer tolerate the Tsar’s unquestionable autocratic obedience as acceptable. These social and economic changes were largely accountable for the great revolutionary outburst in 1905. The defiance wasn’t only coming from the side of peasants and the urban workforce in general, but also from the literate middleclass who could no longer stand the autocratic state, consequenting in the establishment of secret political groups and opposition to the Tsar Nicholas II such as social democrats, comprising of Bolsheviks, Mensheviks as well as Kadets and many other social revolutionaries. The…

    • 843 Words
    • 4 Pages
    Good Essays
  • Good Essays

    Tsar Nicholas II couldn’t stop the progression of revolution as he came to rule at a difficult time. He was out of touch with his people and was known as a leader that was no good, weak, hesitant; and extremely hard-headed. Tsar Nicholas II was at the time mainly concerned with his family issues instead of being focused on the political issues. He was also not prepared to efficiently rule a country where there was a massive variety of people with different languages, race, religion; and culture. It is reported that during Nicholas’s earlier years while his father was still in power, that he found government meetings boring and was not interested in the affairs of state. The Tsar wanted the country to still be ruled as an autocracy where the peasants and the working class had extremely below average standard of living, while the royal family live in a life filled with riches and extravagances.…

    • 966 Words
    • 4 Pages
    Good Essays
  • Good Essays

    When Alexander III came into power earlier than he expected in 1881, he faced many problems that he needed to overcome. The reforms left by his father put his own supreme political power at risk and he had the problem of keeping the large multi-ethnic empire together. Also, he faced opposition from extremist groups such as the ‘People’s Will’ so he had the constant fear of being assassinated like his father was. He had three main beliefs to overcome these problems; repressing opponents, undoing the reforms of his father and restoring Russia’s position internationally and also restoring Russia’s national identity. Alexander III aimed to repress his opponents with the University Statute of 1887. He wanted to destroy the People’s Will and stop the spread of radical ideas and one of the ways he tried to do this was by severely restricting universities. Fees were increased to incredibly high prices meaning that only the very wealthy could afford to go there and the universities became government run so losing their self-government. Also, the Church controlled secondary schools so that no poor people could enter them and consequently not get into a university. This showed the short-sightedness of the Tsarist government as these changes led to rebellion. The statute did not destroy the People’s Will and in 1887 they made an attempt at assassination. The Okhrana killed the elder brother of future Bolshevik leader Alexander Ulyanov and this prompted him in 1918 to order the murder of Alexander III’s son Nicholas II and his entire family. Alexander III also needed to undo the reforms made by his father and he aimed to do this by introducing the Zemstva Act of 1890. Pobedonostsev began to undo many of the reforms…

    • 881 Words
    • 4 Pages
    Good Essays
  • Powerful Essays

    The debate on whether Alexander II was a Tsar Liberator is one which divides the opinion of many historians who examine Russian history. Alexander II introduced many reforms during his reign which revolutionised the political, social and economic landscape of Russia and were considered by many as ‘liberating’. My definition of ‘to liberate’ is to set free, either from oppression, confinement or indeed foreign control. Did Tsar Alexander do this and to what extent? The Emancipation of Serfs in 1861 is probably considered his most liberating action of his reign and is considered by (M.S Anderson) to be “The greatest single liberating measure in history”. Furthermore, his judiciary reforms which aimed to modernise the Russian legal system while attain parity with the western powers were also considered as very liberal actions. His military reforms which abolished military colonies and reduced the length of service favoured the ordinary working men. His political reforms while creating local governance and promoting devolution to an extent allowed the people to have more of a say. While is revolutionary educational reforms which opened up the educational system and allowed for less educational censorship which again links in to the reduced censorship of the pres which allowed the press to discuss government policy in 1865. These can all be argued to liberating actions, nevertheless was this due to circumstances of the times or was Alexander II a true liberator of his people?…

    • 1695 Words
    • 7 Pages
    Powerful Essays