Alex II & Emancipation

• Influences on Alexander II’s Views on Serfdom:

  • Alexander II’s views on serfdom may have been influenced by various factors, including his tutor Vasily Zhukovsky, his travels around the Empire during his father Nicholas I’s reign, and the political circle of progressive nobles known as the ‘Party of St Petersburg Progress’ at his court.
• Influences on Alexander II’s Views on Serfdom

  While it’s uncertain which specific influence played a predominant role, individuals such as his brother, Grand Duke Konstantin, his aunt, Grand Duchess Elena Pavlovna, and other “enlightened bureaucrats” like the Milyutin brothers, who advocated for the abolition of serfdom, likely contributed to Alexander’s determination to act.
• • Nikolai Alexander Milyutin (1818-1872):

  • Influential voice in the Ministry of Internal Affairs, advocating reform within the Slavophile tradition.

  • Played a significant role in drafting the terms of the Emancipation Edict from 1859 to 1861.

  • Supported the establishment of the Zemstvo system.
• Dmitry Alekseyevich Milyutin (1816-1912):

  • Trained in a military academy and gained recognition as a military scholar.

  • Analyzed the reasons behind Russia’s defeat in the Crimean War.

  • Served as Minister of War from 1861 to 1881, implementing military reforms.

  • Received the title of count in recognition of his services for military reform.
• Milyutin brothers Shared Views:

  • Believed that serfdom hindered Russia’s economic progress, weakened its Great Power status, and was morally wrong.

  • Their views were in line with those of the Russian intelligentsia
• Emancipation aims

  
• • Alexander’s Tendencies:

  • Alexander II’s natural inclinations leaned towards conservatism rather than liberalism.

  • He may not have been entirely persuaded by arguments against serfdom.
• Alarm over Peasant Uprisings:

  • The rise in peasant uprisings since the 1840s would have undoubtedly concerned Alexander.

  • While serf disorder didn’t pose a direct threat to the autocracy, it strengthened the case for emancipation.
• • Rise in Disorder:

  • Between 1840 and 1844, there were fewer than 30 outbreaks of disorder per year on privately owned estates.

  • However, over the next 15 years, this figure more than doubled.
• Causes of Increase:

  • Landowners pushed peasants to produce more or pay higher rents to maintain their own incomes, contributing to the rise in disorder.

  • Protests against military conscription during the Crimean War also fueled unrest.
• Post-War Tensions:

  • Disturbances did not subside after the end of the Crimean War in 1856.

  • Alexander II’s delay in announcing the freedom of serfs conscripted to fight increased tensions, as it was customary for the Tsar to declare their freedom at the end of a war.
• • Catalyst for Action:

  • The humiliations and inefficiencies of the Crimean War served as the main catalyst for reform.

  • Dmitry Milyutin, Minister of War from 1861 to 1881, advocated for reform to strengthen the State and restore dignity. He believed that modernizing the army required a free population to provide labor.
• Alexander II’s Determination:

  • Alexander II was determined to maintain the tsarist autocracy while feeling pressure for reform.

  • He began his reign by releasing political prisoners, pardoning the Decembrists, and initiating various liberalizing measures such as relaxing censorship, easing restrictions on travel and university entrance, cancelling tax debts, and restoring some rights to Poland and the Catholic Church.
• Emancipation Measure:

  • In March 1856, Alexander II tasked a small group of nobles with producing suggestions for an emancipation measure, following up on his initial liberal actions.
• Redemption payment: serfs were required to pay money in exchange for their freedom, 49 years
• Volost

  A volost was a peasant community consisting of several villages or hamlets. These were administrative areas, of between 200 and 3000 people, comprising a number of mirs. They were run by an assembly of representatives from the mirs.

  They had their own courts from 1863, managed by ex-serfs under the control of government officials and a noble 'peace officer.
• Kulak: a prosperous landed peasant
• • Emancipation Process:

  • In 1858-59, Alexander II toured the countryside, delivering pro-emancipation speeches to gain noble support for emancipation.

  • The Emancipation Edict was not finalized until February 1861 and came into force during Lent of that year.
• Scope of the Edict:

  • Initially, the 1861 Emancipation Edict applied only to privately owned serfs, with state serfs receiving freedom in 1866.

  • Freed serfs were granted freedom and an allotment of land, while landowners received government compensation.
• Redemption Payments:

  • Freed serfs were required to make redemption payments to the government over 49 years for their land.

  • They were obligated to remain within their peasant commune (mir) until these payments were completed.
• Responsibilities of the Mir and Volosts:

  • The mir was tasked with distributing allotments, controlling farming, and managing tax collection and payment on behalf of peasants.

  • Volosts were established to supervise the mirs and ran their own courts from 1863, replacing landlords’ jurisdiction over serfs.
• Transition Period:

  • There was a two-year period of temporary obligation before freedom was granted, during which allocations were determined.

  • Landowners retained meadows, pasture, woodland, and a personal holding, while open fields were given to the mirs.
• Challenges and Delays:

  • The abolition of serfdom proved to be a massive undertaking, taking longer than expected to implement.

  • Around 15% of peasants remained temporarily obligated to their landlords until 1881, when redemption became compulsory.
• • Effects on Peasants:

  • Some peasants, known as kulaks, benefited from land allocations by buying additional land and producing surplus grain for export.

  • Others improved their living standards by finding work in industrializing cities or obtaining passports to leave the mir.
• Effects on Landowners:

  • Some landowners used compensation to pay off debts, while others invested in industry.

  • However, many peasants felt cheated due to unfair land allocations, leading to resentment.
• Challenges of Land Allotments:

  • Small allotments hindered adoption of new farming methods and were further divided among heirs, perpetuating subsistence farming and technical backwardness.

  • By 1878, only 50% of the peasantry could produce a surplus.
• Difficulties of Rural Life:

  • Loss of former benefits, travel restrictions requiring internal passports, and redemption payments made rural life challenging.

  • Resentment of kulaks often led to violent outbreaks in the countryside.
• Resentment and Unrest:

  • Landowners also resented their loss of influence, leading to protests and riots in St. Petersburg, Moscow, and Kazan.
• • Effects on Peasants:

  • Some peasants, known as kulaks, benefited from land allocations by buying additional land and producing surplus grain for export.

  • Others improved their living standards by finding work in industrializing cities or obtaining passports to leave the mir.
• Effects on Landowners:

  • Some landowners used compensation to pay off debts, while others invested in industry.

  • However, many peasants felt cheated due to unfair land allocations, leading to resentment.
• Challenges of Land Allotments:

  • Small allotments hindered adoption of new farming methods and were further divided among heirs, perpetuating subsistence farming and technical backwardness.

  • By 1878, only 50% of the peasantry could produce a surplus.
• Difficulties of Rural Life:

  • Loss of former benefits, travel restrictions requiring internal passports, and redemption payments made rural life challenging.

  • Resentment of kulaks often led to violent outbreaks in the countryside.
• Resentment and Unrest:

  • Landowners also resented their loss of influence, leading to protests and riots in St. Petersburg, Moscow, and Kazan.
• • Military Reforms (1874-75):

  • Dmitry Milyutin led reforms to create a smaller, more professional, efficient, and cost-effective army.

  • Compulsory conscription was introduced for all classes from the age of 21, with reduced active service from 25 to 15 years and 10 years in reserves.

  • Punishments were eased, and the system of military colonies was abolished, with improvements in provisioning and medical care.
• Military reforms:

  • Modern weaponry was adopted, and a new command structure established.

  • Military colleges were established to train non-noble officers.

  • Literacy within the army improved through mass army education campaigns.
• Challenges and Limitations:

  • While these reforms were improvements, wealthier individuals found substitutes to serve in their place during campaigns in the 1870s-90s.

  • The officer class remained predominantly aristocratic, leading to issues of supply and leadership.
• Outcome:

  • Despite reforms, the army struggled in conflicts, such as the war against Turkey (1877-78), and suffered defeats against Japan in 1904-05 and Germany in 1914-17.
• • War against Turkey (1877-78):

  • Following the losses of the Crimean War, Russia entered a war in 1877 to support Balkan states fighting against Turkish rule.

  • In March 1878, Russia concluded the Treaty of San Stefano with Turkey after intense fighting, creating a large Bulgaria under Russian protection.
• War against Turkey:

  However, Britain and Austria-Hungary, alarmed by Russia’s gains, compelled Russia to accept the Treaty of Berlin in July 1878.

  • The Treaty of Berlin split up Bulgaria, reflecting the balance of power concerns among European nations.
• Electoral Colleges:

  • In an electoral college system, individuals vote for representatives who then cast votes on their behalf.

  • Peasants, nobles, townspeople, and the Church each elected members to their respective electoral colleges.

  • These electoral colleges then voted for nominee(s) to sit on the zemstvo, a local government assembly.