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
  • Satisfactory Essays

    In July 1918, the royal Romanov line was suddenly and brutally ended by the Bolsheviks. The Romanov family had ruled the Russian Empire for over three centuries. The Romanovs reign was one of strict tyranny. Tsar Nicholas II of Russia made one big step toward a more equal Russia by freeing the serfs but because the serfs owned no land they had little to no money still. After WWI when nicholas led Russia to a crushing defeat there was lots of unrest throughout Russia. I think that the main reason the Tsar was forced to abdicate the throne and then was slaughtered is that he made a more equal Russia but in doing so he made the serfs more impoverished than ever, that he had led Russia into multiple wars that had ended badly and that the technology…

    • 151 Words
    • 1 Page
    Satisfactory Essays
  • Powerful Essays

    Summary: Romanov Dynasty

    • 4116 Words
    • 17 Pages

    “The daily work of a monarch he found intolerably boring”-Kerensky. In a tsarist autocracy, all power and wealth is controlled and distributed by the tsar. The center of the tsarist autocracy was the person of the tsar himself, a sovereign with absolute authority. The rights of state power in their entire extent belonged to the tsar. Power was further entrusted by him to persons and institutions, acting in his name, by his orders, and within the limits laid down for them by law. The purpose of the system was to supposedly benefit the entire country of Russia. “Autocracy is a superannuated form of government that may suit the needs of a Central African tribe, but not those of the Russian people, who are increasingly assimilating the culture of the rest of the world. That is why it is impossible to maintain this form of government except by violence.” -Nicolai Tolstoy. Unlike western monarchies who were subjugated in religious matters to the Pope, the Tsar of the Russian Empire was the supreme authority on religious. Another key feature was related to patrimonialism. In Russia the tsar owned a much higher proportion of the state (lands, enterprises, etc.) than did Western monarchs. The tsarist autocracy had many supporters within Russia. “Be more autocratic than Peter the Great and sterner than Ivan the Terrible.” -Tsarina…

    • 4116 Words
    • 17 Pages
    Powerful 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
  • Satisfactory Essays

    Many of the opposition fled to other European countries where they continued to plot against the Tsar. This shows how Alexander lll had caused Russia to go back in progress politically by exiling all of their possible contenders. This allowed the Tsar to have much more control over Russia much like before Alexander ll reign. The persecution of Jews caused many to join radical parties and organisations. This shows us how there was not even the slightest bit of democracy within Russia, and how Alexander lll had caused Russia to go back in progress. Another major problem in Russia was the growing population of peasants. This caused famines within Russia in 1892 and 1893. This famine was a cause of many peasants death which shows how Russia did not have the money or resources to keep up with their growing population. This showed a lack in progress as they could not even support their country’s people with…

    • 794 Words
    • 4 Pages
    Satisfactory Essays
  • Best Essays

    After the three partitions of Poland in 1772, 1793, and 1795, there were many more Jews in the Russian empire. The Pale of Settlement was a region in imperial Russia where the Jews were given permanent dwelling. The leaders of Russia were called Czars and they had complete power over the entire empire. This essay will discuss three Russian Czars, Nicholas I, Alexander II, and Alexander III and the impact they had on the Jews. The different levels of tolerance of these Czars to the Jews greatly influenced the quality of Jewish life at the time.…

    • 1562 Words
    • 7 Pages
    Best Essays
  • Powerful Essays

    Alexander ll became Tsar in 1855 after succeeding Tsar Nicholas l and was regarded as a “liberator” throughout his time as Tsar, until an attempted assassination attempt on him in 1866 were he turned more reactionary. Alexander ll was assassinated in March 1881, he was not radical and believed in a slow and progressive change, due to this he gathered much opposition to him and was eventually killed by The Peoples Will, and this kicked off ‘the era of great reforms’ [5].…

    • 3481 Words
    • 14 Pages
    Powerful Essays
  • Good Essays

    Draft ESSAY

    • 1114 Words
    • 3 Pages

    An aspect of the Soviet Union that changed between 1801 and 1939 was the shift of the government from a czar ruled totalitarian government to a more distributed communist government. In March of 1801, Paul I was killed and his son Alexander I of Russia was appointed the ruler. Czar Alexander I was not too harsh of a leader. He led a government that was not too strict upon its people unlike his father. But this changed when the next czar came into power, Nicholas I in 1825. Anybody who was leading or supporting the Decembrist Revolt was executed. Nicholas I undid everything that Alexander I did. He censored media, ran secret police, and exiled 150,000 people. Alexander II was the next one in power who was extremely different from Nicholas I. He freed the serfs but did not let them leave. But he did allot power to the people by creating local councils called Zemstvos to give them control of their land and women the right to vote. Alexander III went back into a strict totalitarian government, censoring media and deploying secret police. Alexander III also wanted all Russian minorities to speak Russian and convert to Russian Orthodox. Russian Jews were specifically targeted; they had to live in ghettos and eventually many Jews fled to the United States. The last of the czars in this time period, Nicholas II, came into power in 1894. A decade after his appointment, over three thousand workers grouped outside the czar’s palace asking for reforms. The czar was not home, but he still did not approve the order to fire at the protestors. In order to bring back his name, he enabled a national assembly called Duma that would allow the people of Russia to elect. As one of his reforms, he gave more land to…

    • 1114 Words
    • 3 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

    The writer agrees with Denise that Alexander the Great led his troops to win several battles .However, the writer believes that Alexander the Great was both effective and efficient in this battle by the way he used his strategy and planning against King Darius troops.…

    • 92 Words
    • 1 Page
    Satisfactory Essays
  • Better Essays

    Decembrists Revolt

    • 1583 Words
    • 7 Pages

    In the early nineteenth century, Napoleon Bonaparte was conquering much of Europe and was beginning to move his way towards Russia. After Napoleon fled Russia, Alexander led his troops across Europe to beat Napoleon and free the different countries from the French rule. Most of the Russian army had never left Russia and they quickly saw how much more advanced Western Europe was compared to Russia. They were confused as to how the west, who had underwent many years of war and oppression from Napoleon, still lived better than they did. There was a new hope for a constitution since they fought for the rest of Europe and gave them back their freedom, Alexander would grant the same freedoms to the Russians and they had restored their faith in the government and Alexander.…

    • 1583 Words
    • 7 Pages
    Better 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
  • Powerful Essays

    The Last of the Romanovs

    • 3074 Words
    • 13 Pages

    The first person to impact the fall of Imperial Russia was Nicholas II, the last Russian Emperor. In particular, Nicholas’ coronation marked the beginning of a downward spiral for the Romanov family. Tsar Nicholas II was born on May 6, 1868 and was the eldest son of Alexander III (Levykin, 1999). Nicholas II had to assume the throne earlier than the Russian population would have liked. Nicholas’ father fell ill in the spring of 1894 and his health never fully recovered. On October 20th, 1894, Alexander III died of nephritis, forcing Nicholas to become the next Tsar of Russia at a young age (Lincoln, 1976). After the untimely death of his father, Nicholas was in dismay about becoming Tsar of Russia, a position he never really wanted. This is exemplified when Nicholas II refers to being the Tsar as, “the awful job I have feared all my life” (Massie, 1967, p. 59). To further Nicholas’ fears, the Russian people and government believed he didn’t have enough political training to rule Russia effectively (Harcave, 1968).…

    • 3074 Words
    • 13 Pages
    Powerful 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
  • 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