THE EMANCIPATION OF THE SERFS
- Decision to emancipate 51 million serfs in 1861 = the Tsar’s own liberal ideas
- Free serfs have a greater incentive to work – move to towns to work in industry – prosperity
- Followed by a series of other reforms (army, local Gov, judiciary, education) = nickname the Tsar liberator
- TERRENCE EMMONS: Emancipation was a piece of ‘state-directed’ manipulation of society that aimed to ‘strengthen social & political stability’ rather than as a product of ‘liberal’ thinking from an Enlightened Tsar who cared about his subjects
- Edict & reforms were government driven & produced serious long term and short term ‘stresses and strains’
- Reforms were intended to maintain tsarist authority
- Backfired – created division between the Tsar & landed gentry on whom the government relied
- Reforms weakened faith in the Tsar (wasn’t capable of leading effective change & created a desire for ‘popular participation in government’
MOTIVES FOR REFORM
- brother , aunt & miyultin brothers who were in Gov had been committed to the abolition of serfdom for a while – helped to fuel determination
- Increase in peasant uprisings since the 1840s alarmed him
- Humiliation of the Crimean was main catalyst
- Dmitry Miyultin pleaded for reform, to ‘Strengthen the State and restore dignity’ – army must be modernised & only a free population would provide the labour needed to improve military
- A II released political prisoners, relaxed censorship lessened restrictions on foreign travel & university entrance, cancelled tax debts & restored rights of Poland & Catholic Church
- 1861 Emancipation Edict – initially only applied to private serfs, state serfs emancipated in ‘66
- Freed serfs required to pay redemption payment s for 49 years & had to remain in the commune(Mir) until paid off
- Mir made responsible for distributing the allotments, controlling farming, collecting & paying taxes
- Volosts were in charge of supervising the mirs
- POST 1863: Volosts had their own courts, replacing landlords’ jurisdiction over serfs
- Kulaks did well from land allocations, bought extra land to produce surplus grain to export
- Others who got a passport and left the Mir raised living standard by finding work in industrial cities
- Some landowners used compensation to get out of debt/ some individuals made profits through investment in industry
- Land allocations were not fair, landowners kept the best land for themselves
- Mir system was traditional – technical backwardness persisted (1878 – 50% of peasantry was capable of producing a surplus)
- Loss of former benefits, restrictions on travel, burden for redemption payment made rural life difficult
- Resentment of kulaks lead to violent outbreaks
- Landowners resented loss of influence = wave of student protests & riots
MILITARY REFORMS (1874-75)
- POSITIVES
- Conscription made compulsory for all classes from age of 21, length of service reduced from 25 -15 years
- Less severe punishments & system of military colonies abandoned
- Better provisions & health care
- Modern weaponry introduced
- Military college set up to provide better training
- Literacy into the army improved
- Mass army education campaigns in ‘70s-90s
- NEGATIVES
- Better off found substitutes to take their place in the army
- Officer class remained aristocratic
- Problems of supply & leadership continued
LOCAL GOVERNMENT REFORMS (1864-70)
- POSITIVES
- Elected local councils (zemstvo) est. (district & provincial)
- Chosen through electoral colleges (separate colleges for nobles, townspeople, Church & peasants)
- Nobility still dominated
- Zemstvo given power to improve public services (roads, public health, schools, prisons) & develop industrial projects & administer relief in time of need
- 1870: reform extended to towns (had dumas)
1905: STATE DUMA 1870: TOWN DUMA
- Raised the hopes of intelligentsia who wanted a representative National Assembly
- Power of zemstvo strictly limited (no control over state & local tax)
- Provincial governors take control of the law & can even overturn zemstva
- Zemstvo composed of men who understood the locality and its needs
- NEGATIVES
- Never truly people’s assemblies
- Attracted doctors lawyers teachers & scientist who used meetings as an opportunity to debate political issues & criticise central government = rise of opposition
JUDICIARY REFORMS (1864)
- POSITIVES
- Pre-emancipation: no jury no lawyers & no examination of witness & guilty until proven innocent, judge’s decision is final
- New system modelled on the west:
- Equality before the law, single system of local, provincial & national courts
- Innocent until proven guilty & could employ a lawyer to defend themselves
- Criminal cases heard before barristers & jury
- Judges appointed by Tsar & given training & pay
- Local Justices of the Peace elected every three years, independent from political control
- Courts were open to the public
- National trials recorded in a government newspaper
- NEGATIVES
- Articulate lawyers criticised the regime
- New juries sometimes acquitted because they sympathised with their plight
- Trial by jury never est. in Poland
- Ecclesiastical & military courts excluded from reform
- Peasantry in Volosts courts treated differently than higher class
EDUCATION REFORMS (1863-64)
- POSITIVES
- Emancipation increased need from basic literacy & numeracy in peasants
- Universities given to the opportunity to govern themselves & appoint their own staff
- Responsibility for schooling given to zemstvo (previously owned by Church)
- Primary & secondary school extended
- Schools were open to all regardless of class & sex allowed women in non-vocation post 1870)
- NEGATIVES
- New independence increased number of radical & militant thinkers
- Post 1866 – necessary to reassert Gov control
CENSORSHIP REFORMS (1858-1870)
- POSITIVES
- initial relaxation of press censorship
- Restrictions on publisher’s reduced
- Foreign publication permitted w/Gov approval
- Press was allowed to print editorials w/comment on Gov policy
- Led to short-lived growth in # of books journals & newspaper
- # of books published 1020 in 1855 – 10,691 in 1894
- NEGATIVES
- Growth in critical writing brought re-tightening
A II reforms taught that change was possible, but expectation raised & not fulfilled = autocracy in danger