After the Reform: Reaction under Alexander II

Why did Alexander stop reforming? April 4, 1866 saw Alexander survive an assassination attempt. Dimitrii Karakozov, a student of noble blood, had attempted to shoot the tsar, but the bullet had gone wide. National rejoicing at the miraculous escape followed, but then Alexander’s ministers sat down to reflect on what had gone wrong – had all the tsar’s reforming instincts led only to this?

The attempt on Alexander’s life was only one event that undermined his confidence in his reforming mission. Others included: The death of his son and heir in 1865; A new relationship with a mistress, Caterina Dolgoruki which mentally and physically distanced him from reforming elements within his own family. These events gave conservatives and churchmen the ammunition with which to attack reformist policies which they had never liked.

According to the modern historian Richard Pipes: The Emperor faced the solid opposition of the rank and file of the bureaucracy as well as that of his son and the new heir-apparent, the future Alexander III. The radicals unwittingly assisted this conservative party. Every time they made an attempt on the life of the tsar or assassinated some high official, opponents of political reform could press for more stringent police measures and further postponement of basic reforms. The terrorists could not have been more effective in scuttling political reform had they been on the police payroll.

First steps: The conservatives were not against all of the changes that Alexander II had initiated. Reforms of the economy and army were seen as essential. However, they persuaded Alexander to crack down in three key areas: Education, The police and the law courts, Ethnic minorities.

Education Dmitrii Tolstoy was placed in charge of education. He was a staunch Orthodox believer and had a reputation as a pillar of conservatism. He reduced the zemstva’s powers over education and returned the Church to a position of prominence in rural schools. Higher schools (gymnazzi) were ordered to follow a traditional curriculum. From 1871, only students from these schools were allowed to access university – students from technical schools were limited to higher technical institutions, away from ‘corrupting’ influences. Government control was also extended over what could be taught in universities – more liberal courses which encouraged critical thought such as Literature, Science and History were forced out, whilst Maths, Latin and Divinity were encouraged. Censorship was again tightened in the later 1870s and strict control was exercised over extra-curricular activities. Therefore, although there was an extension of public education throughout Alexander II’s reign, education came to be seen as another way of enforcing tsarist control, rather than as a way of helping people to better themselves. Academics and students who wanted more freedom to pursue their own studies were forced to attend universities abroad.

The police and the law courts Pyotr Shuvalov worked the strengthen the police and stepped up the activities of the Third Section who were responsible for rooting out subversion. Konstantin Pahlen as Minister of Justice held open ‘show’ trials as an attempt to deter others. Some of these failed as many defendants were acquitted. Passionate speeches given by the defence were reported in the press and gave revolutionaries plenty of publicity. This led to political crimes being transferred to military courts in 1878, where the trials could be held in secret.

Ethnic Minorities A rebellion in Poland in 1863, which was only crushed after fierce fighting, persuaded the authorities that non-Russian peoples were a danger to the Empire. This gave rise to the policy of Russification. A more hostile attitude to Poles, Finns, Jews and other minorities became apparent after The result was a growth in the number of discontented intellectuals within Russia.

Conclusion The late 1870s proved a time of political crisis in Russia with famine and the beginnings of an industrial recession. Searches and arrests were stepped up. In 1879 and again in February 1880 there were further attempts on the tsar’s life. Alexander was shaken by these attempts and set up a commission to investigate ways of reducing revolutionary activity. Some immediate relaxation occurred, and a constitution was suggested. Alexander planned to discuss this with his ministers, but was killed by a bomb on the day of the meeting – March 13, 1881.

How far were the domestic reforms of Alexander II mere window dressing by a Tsar whose main intention was to prevent more radical change? (24 marks) Introduction: Decide your argument and stick to it. Was there real substance to his reforms or merely an attempt to protect autocracy? Motives for reform: what were Alexander’s intentions? Just to prevent ‘revolution from below?’ Consider other motives e.g. Military/economic progress/moral. Substance of reform: Did things actually change? What remained after the ‘reaction’? Why was there a reaction? Did things go further than Alexander intended? Conclusion: were the reforms mere window dressing? Did anything actually challenge autocracy? Was Alexander’s motive to protect the regime and everything else was incidental?