Alexander II and the Era of Reform 1855–1881

The reign of Alexander II (1855–1881) represents one of the most significant periods of reform in Russian history. Often called the 'Tsar Liberator', Alexander II introduced sweeping changes that transformed Russian society, yet his reforms ultimately satisfied neither conservatives nor radicals. Understanding the nature, extent, and limitations of his reforms is essential for evaluating the broader question of whether Russia was capable of modernising from above without revolution.

---

The Context of Reform

Alexander II came to power in 1855 during the Crimean War (1853–1856), a conflict that brutally exposed Russia's backwardness compared to the industrialised powers of Western Europe.

Russia's Weaknesses Revealed by the Crimean War

Area	Problem
Military	Russia's serf-based army was poorly equipped and badly led; soldiers carried smoothbore muskets against rifled weapons
Transport	Russia had no railways to the Crimea; supplies took months to arrive by road
Industry	Russia could not produce modern weapons or equipment in sufficient quantities
Medicine	Casualty rates from disease far exceeded those from combat
Morale	Serf soldiers had little motivation to fight; desertion was common

The Treaty of Paris (1856) was a humiliation. Russia lost its right to maintain a fleet on the Black Sea, ceded territory at the mouth of the Danube, and saw its claim to protect Orthodox Christians in the Ottoman Empire denied.

Key Definition: Autocracy — a system of government in which one person (the Tsar) holds absolute power, unrestricted by law, constitution, or parliament. Russia's autocratic system was the defining feature of its political structure throughout this period.

As the historian W. Bruce Lincoln has argued, the Crimean defeat created an 'era of great reforms' by demonstrating that Russia's social and economic backwardness threatened its very survival as a great power. Reform was not an act of liberal idealism but of strategic necessity.

---

The Emancipation of the Serfs 1861

The single most important reform of Alexander II's reign was the Emancipation Edict of 19 February 1861, which freed approximately 23 million serfs — roughly one-third of the entire Russian population.

Why Emancipation?

The motivations for emancipation were complex and overlapping:

1. Military necessity — Serfdom produced an ineffective conscript army; free labour was needed for a modern military
2. Economic modernisation — Serfdom was inefficient; free labour was needed for industrialisation
3. Social stability — Peasant revolts were increasing (over 700 incidents between 1826 and 1854)
4. Moral arguments — A growing educated elite regarded serfdom as morally indefensible
5. International pressure — Russia was the last major European power to retain serfdom

Alexander II famously told the Moscow nobility in 1856: 'It is better to abolish serfdom from above than to wait until it begins to abolish itself from below.'

The Terms of Emancipation

Provision	Detail
Personal freedom	Serfs were freed from bondage to their landlords
Land allocation	Serfs received land, but often less than they had previously farmed
Redemption payments	Peasants had to pay for their land over 49 years at rates that often exceeded the land's market value
The mir	Land was held communally by the village commune (mir), not by individual peasants
Tied to the land	Peasants could not leave the mir without permission; internal passports restricted movement
Temporary obligation	Until redemption agreements were finalised, peasants remained in a 'temporarily obligated' status

Historiographical Debate: Was Emancipation a Success?

Historians disagree profoundly about the impact of emancipation:

• Terence Emmons argues that emancipation was a genuine attempt at social transformation but was fatally undermined by the financial burden placed on the peasantry
• David Saunders emphasises that emancipation was primarily motivated by the needs of the state (military and economic) rather than humanitarian concern
• W. Bruce Lincoln contends that the reform, despite its limitations, was 'the greatest single piece of state-directed social engineering in modern European history before the twentieth century'

Exam Tip: When evaluating emancipation, always consider the distinction between the intention of the reform and its practical impact. The strongest answers will argue that while emancipation removed the legal institution of serfdom, it failed to create a free and prosperous peasantry — and may actually have worsened conditions for many.

Limitations of Emancipation

The reality of emancipation fell far short of peasant expectations:

• Land hunger — Peasants often received smaller plots than they had farmed as serfs (the 'cut-offs' were returned to landlords)
• Financial burden — Redemption payments were crippling; many peasants paid more than the land was worth
• The mir system — Communal ownership prevented efficient farming and tied peasants to their villages
• Strip farming — The traditional system of scattered strips remained, preventing agricultural modernisation
• Population growth — Rising population meant that per-capita land holdings actually decreased after emancipation

---

Judicial, Military, and Local Government Reforms

Alexander II's programme extended well beyond emancipation. He introduced a series of reforms designed to modernise Russia's institutions.

Judicial Reform (1864)

The judicial reform was arguably the most successful of Alexander II's changes:

Feature	Detail
Open courts	Trials were held in public for the first time
Trial by jury	Juries of peers decided cases, reducing arbitrary state power
Independent judiciary	Judges were appointed for life and could not be dismissed by the government
Equality before the law	All social classes were theoretically subject to the same laws
Professional lawyers	A trained legal profession was established
Justices of the Peace	Local magistrates were elected to handle minor cases

However, political cases remained outside the reformed courts, and the government retained the power to try political offenders in closed military tribunals. The historian W. Bruce Lincoln called the judicial reform 'the most successful of all the Great Reforms', as it created genuine institutions of civil society.

Military Reform (1874)

War Minister Dmitry Milyutin introduced sweeping changes:

• Universal conscription replaced the old system of recruiting only from the peasant class
• Service was reduced from 25 years to 6 years active duty plus 9 years in the reserve
• Corporal punishment was reduced (though not eliminated)
• Military education was improved
• Modern weapons were gradually introduced

Zemstva (Local Government Reform, 1864)

• Elected zemstva (local councils) were established at district and provincial level
• They were responsible for roads, schools, hospitals, and public health
• Voting was weighted heavily in favour of the nobility and landowners
• Zemstva had no power over taxation or policing
• They represented the first experience of elected self-government in Russian history

Key Definition: Zemstva (singular: zemstvo) — elected local councils established in 1864, responsible for local services such as education, healthcare, and road maintenance. They were dominated by the gentry but provided important experience in self-government.

Educational Reform

• Universities were granted greater autonomy (University Statute of 1863)
• Student numbers increased significantly
• Censorship was relaxed (though not abolished)
• However, increased education created a larger intelligentsia that became increasingly critical of autocracy

---

The Growth of Opposition

Paradoxically, Alexander II's reforms stimulated rather than satisfied demands for change. The relaxation of censorship and expansion of education created a politically aware intelligentsia that demanded further reform.

The Populist Movement (Narodniki)

The Populist movement emerged in the 1860s and 1870s, driven by idealistic young intellectuals who believed that Russia's future lay with the peasant commune.

Phase	Detail
'Going to the People' (1874)	Thousands of students went to the countryside to educate and radicalise the peasantry; the peasants were largely indifferent or hostile, and many students were arrested
Land and Liberty (1876)	A more organised movement that combined propaganda with peasant agitation
Split (1879)	Land and Liberty split into Black Repartition (continued peaceful propaganda) and People's Will (Narodnaya Volya), which embraced terrorism

People's Will and the Assassination of Alexander II

People's Will believed that assassinating the Tsar would trigger a popular revolution. After several failed attempts (including bombing the Winter Palace dining room in 1880), they succeeded on 1 March 1881.

Alexander II was killed by a bomb thrown by Ignacy Hryniewiecki as he rode through St Petersburg. Ironically, on the morning of his assassination, Alexander had approved proposals by Count Loris-Melikov that would have introduced limited consultative assemblies — sometimes described as the first steps toward a constitution.

Exam Tip: The assassination of Alexander II is a crucial turning point. It demonstrates the tragic irony of reform: by opening up Russian society, Alexander created the very forces that destroyed him. His death ensured that his successor, Alexander III, would pursue a policy of reaction and repression. Always consider the counterfactual — what might have happened had Alexander lived and implemented the Loris-Melikov proposals?

---

Assessment: Change and Continuity under Alexander II

What Changed?

• Serfdom was legally abolished
• A modern judicial system was created
• Local self-government was introduced through the zemstva
• The army was modernised
• Education expanded significantly
• Censorship was partially relaxed

What Stayed the Same?

• Autocracy remained intact — the Tsar retained absolute power
• The peasantry remained poor, land-hungry, and tied to the commune
• Political parties remained illegal
• The secret police continued to operate
• The nobility retained enormous social and economic privileges
• Industrialisation had barely begun

The Fundamental Contradiction

The central tension of Alexander II's reign was the attempt to modernise society while preserving autocracy. As the historian David Saunders has argued, this was ultimately an impossible combination: modern institutions such as an independent judiciary and elected local councils were incompatible with a political system that concentrated all power in the hands of one man.

Exam Tip: The question of whether reform or revolution was more likely to modernise Russia is central to the entire breadth study. Alexander II's experience suggests that reform from above was possible but generated demands that the autocratic system could not accommodate without fundamental political change.

---

Key Dates

Date	Event
1855	Alexander II becomes Tsar during the Crimean War
1856	Treaty of Paris ends the Crimean War
1861	Emancipation of the serfs
1863	University Statute grants greater academic freedom
1864	Judicial reform; zemstva established
1874	Military reform (universal conscription); 'Going to the People' movement
1876	Land and Liberty founded
1879	People's Will formed
1 March 1881	Alexander II assassinated

---

Summary

Alexander II's reforms were the most ambitious programme of change attempted by any Tsar. They transformed the legal, social, and institutional landscape of Russia. Yet they failed to resolve the fundamental tensions within Russian society: the gap between rich and poor, the contradiction between modernisation and autocracy, and the growing demands of an educated population for political participation. His assassination marked the end of reform from above and the beginning of a period of reaction that would, in turn, contribute to the revolutionary crises of the early twentieth century.