Alexander the second. Alexander II Reign of Alexander II

Egor BOTMAN (?-1891). Emperor Alexander II. 1875.
Reproduction from the site http://lj.rossia.org/users/john_petrov/

Detailed biography

ALEXANDER II Nikolaevich Romanov - Sovereign Emperor and Autocrat of All Russia in 1855 - 1881. Son of Emperor Nicholas 1 and Empress Alexandra Feodorovna. Genus. 17 Apr 1818 Accessed the throne on February 18. 1855 Crowned on August 26th. 1856

1) from April 16 1841 daughter of Louis the Second, Grand Duke of Hesse-Darmstadt, ve. Duchess Maximilian-Welhelmina-Augusta-Sophia-Maria, Empress Maria Alexandrovna (b. July 27, 1824 + May 22, 1880);

2) from July 6, 1880, Princess Ekaterina Mikhailovna Dolgorukova, Your Serene Highness Princess Yuryevskaya (b. 1847 + 1922).

It is known that the birth of Alexander attracted special attention from the entire Russian society. His father, Grand Duke Nikolai Pavlovich, the third son of Emperor Paul I, occupied at that time a more than modest position and did not even think about the throne. However, since both older brothers did not have male heirs, the Romanov family seemed to receive a long-awaited continuation in the person of his son.

The parents of the future emperor were very different people, but Alexander much more inherited the character of his mother. He grew up as a soft, sensitive, even sentimental boy. Feelings and experiences always played a big role in his life. The firmness and unyielding authority inherent in Nikolai Pavlovich were never the hallmarks of his son. As a child, Alexander was distinguished by his liveliness, speed and intelligence. Educators noted his warmth, sensitivity, cheerful disposition, courtesy, sociability, good manners and handsome appearance. But at the same time, they recognized that the Tsarevich lacked perseverance in achieving his goals, that he easily gave in to difficulties, and lacked character and will.

At the age of six, Alexander's upbringing was entrusted to a purely military man - Captain Merder. He was a military officer, awarded for his bravery at Austerlitz, and a participant in all the battles of the 1806-1807 campaign. Contemporaries unanimously spoke of him as a highly moral, kind person, possessing a clear and inquisitive mind and a strong will. In general, the choice turned out to be successful. Having become emperor, Nicholas immediately took care of the general education of his heir and chose Zhukovsky as his mentor. The poet took the appointment with the greatest responsibility. Within six months, he drew up a special “Teaching Plan” designed for 12 years and approved by Nicholas 1. This pedagogical treatise was a detailed program of moral education and training.

The set of subjects proposed by Zhukovsky included the Russian language, history, geography, statistics, ethnography, logic, philosophy, mathematics, natural science, physics, mineralogy, geology, the law of God, languages: French, German, English and Polish. Much attention was paid to drawing, music, gymnastics, fencing, swimming and sports in general, dancing, manual work and recitation. Twice a year, exams were held for the heir, often in the presence of the sovereign himself, who was generally pleased with the success of his son and the diligence of the teachers. But the emperor believed that military sciences should become the basis for his son’s upbringing, and this had to be taken into account. Already at the age of 11, Alexander commanded a company, at 14, for the first time as an officer, he led a platoon during the exercises of the 1st Cadet Corps. Since 1833, they began teaching him a course in fortification and artillery. A year later, the teaching of military subjects was further strengthened to the detriment of other disciplines.

At the same time, the crown prince began to be involved in state affairs. Since 1834, he had to attend meetings of the Senate, in 1835 he was introduced to the Synod, and in 1836 he was promoted to major general and included in Nicholas's retinue. These years were also the “final period of study,” when the highest state dignitaries taught practical courses to the future emperor. Speransky conducted “conversations about laws” for a year and a half, the famous Russian financier Kankrin made a “brief overview of Russian finance”, Advisor to the Ministry of Foreign Affairs Baron Vrunov introduced the heir to the basic principles of Russian foreign policy, starting with the reign of Catherine II, and finally, a military historian and the theorist General Jomini taught Russian military policy in French. In the spring of 1837, together with his classmates Patkul and Vielgorsky, Alexander passed the final exams, taking a solid first place among his capable peers.

Immediately after this, on May 2, Alexander set off on his first big journey through his native country, which he was to, if not get to know, then at least see, in order to imagine what and who he was destined to rule when his time came. The trip continued until the end of the year. During this time, Alexander visited many cities, was in the south, reached the Urals and Siberia itself. For the next three months, the Tsarevich was intensively engaged in military affairs, finance and diplomacy, preparing for his trip abroad. At the same time, he experienced a very strong love interest. The subject of his passion was his maid of honor Olga Kalinovskaya. According to Countess Fersen, she was not at all distinguished by beauty, but she had insinuatingness and tenderness. Alexander was already ready to give up the throne in order to marry her. Having learned about this, Nikolai considered it best to hurry up with his son’s trip abroad, especially since one of its goals was precisely to find a bride for the heir. At the end of April, Alexander set off on a long journey again. Over the course of the year, he visited Scandinavia, Austria, and traveled around all Italian and German states.

On March 13, 1839, the heir stopped for the night in a small Darmstadt surrounded by gardens and parks, where there was no stop along his route. The Traube Hotel was rented especially for the Tsarevich, since Alexander categorically refused to spend the night in the castle of the Duke of Hesse (he was very tired of visits to numerous German princes and dreamed of getting to Holland faster). However, in the evening he went to the opera, and here in the theater hall he was met by the entire ducal family. The Duke's daughter Maria, who was only 15 years old at the time, greatly impressed Alexander with her beauty and grace. After the performance, he accepted the invitation to dinner, talked a lot, laughed and, instead of rushing to leave, agreed to have breakfast with the Crown Prince. During these hours, Maria completely charmed the Tsarevich and, going to bed, he said to the adjutants Kaverin and Orlov accompanying him: “This is who I have dreamed of all my life. I will only marry her.” He immediately wrote to his father and mother, asking their permission to propose to the young princess of Hesse. Nikolai agreed.

Alexander spent the month of May in London, where he was warmly received by the English aristocracy, visited parliament, the horse races, Oxford, the Tower, the docks on the Thames, the Bank of England and Westminster Abbey. But his most vivid memories were associated with 19-year-old Queen Victoria. On June 23, he returned to St. Petersburg and here again became interested in Olga Kalinovskaya: he was very amorous, and his parents had to take this into account. The Emperor hastened to marry Kalinovskaya to the husband of her late sister, the wealthy Polish magnate Count Irinej Oginsky. Only then, on March 4, 1840, did Alexander go to Darmstadt to pick up his bride. He returned to Russia with her and his parents, who met them in Poland in early September. On December 5, Maria was baptized according to the Orthodox rite and became Grand Duchess Maria Alekseevna. The wedding took place on April 16, 1841. Everyone who wrote about Alexander’s wife paid tribute to her beauty and wonderful spiritual qualities. Tyutcheva, who met her 12 years later, recalled: “Despite her tall stature and slenderness, she was so thin and fragile that at first glance she did not give the impression of a beauty; but she was unusually graceful, with that very special grace that can be found on old German paintings, in the Madonnas of Albrecht Dürer, combining a certain severity and dryness of forms with a peculiar grace in movements and poses, thanks to which in their entire being one feels an elusive charm and, as it were, a glimpse of the soul through the shell of the body. In no one have I ever observed more than in the princess, this spiritual and chaste grace of ideal abstraction. Her features were not correct. Her wonderful hair was beautiful, her delicate complexion, her large blue, slightly protruding eyes, looking meekly and soulfully... It was, first of all, her soul extremely sincere and deeply religious... The princess's mind was like her soul: subtle, graceful, insightful, very ironic..."

Upon returning from the trip, Alexander became involved in government activities. Since 1839, he has been present at meetings of the State Council, and since 1840, also at meetings of the Committee of Ministers. In 1841 - 1842 he was already a member of these highest government institutions. Finally, in 1842, on the occasion of the two-month departure of Nicholas 1 from the capital, Alexander was entrusted with the decision of all state affairs. In subsequent years this became the rule. In 1846, Nicholas made his son chairman of the Secret Committee on the Peasant Question. At the same time, the heir performed military positions. In 1844 he received a full general, in 1849 he became the chief commander of military educational institutions and took command of the Guards Corps, and in 1852 he was promoted to commander-in-chief of the Guards and Grenadier Corps. In 1850, Alexander went to the Caucasus to get acquainted with military operations. Overall, as always, it was a parade tour of the garrisons. Only in Dagestan did the Tsarevich witness a battle with the Chechens; he could not resist and galloped behind the chain under enemy fire.

All these years before his accession to the throne, Alexander always tried to accurately and faithfully carry out the orders of the emperor. He did not commit any independent actions, did not express any political ideas. He apparently shared all the conservative views of his father and, working, for example, in the Peasant Committee, did not reveal any liberal intentions. Even outwardly he tried to be like his father. Tyutcheva, who got to know Alexander closely in 1853, wrote: “His facial features were correct, but sluggish and not clear enough, his eyes were large, blue, but his gaze was not very spiritual; in a word, his face was inexpressive and there was even something unpleasant in it in those cases when in public he considered himself obliged to assume a solemn and majestic appearance. He adopted this expression from his father, from whom it was natural, but on his face it gave the impression of an unsuccessful mask. On the contrary, when the Grand Duke was in the family or in circle of close people and when he allowed himself to be himself, his whole face was illuminated with kindness, a friendly and gentle smile, which made him really likable.At that time, when he was still the heir, this last expression was predominant with him; later , as an emperor, he considered himself obliged to almost always assume a stern and impressive appearance, which in him was only a poor copy. This did not give him the charm that Emperor Nicholas possessed in his time, and deprived him of that which was given to him by nature and with which he could so easily attract hearts."

During his lifetime, Emperor Nicholas completely overshadowed and suppressed his son with his personality. He always remained only an obedient executor of his parent’s will, but on February 18, 1855, Nikolai died suddenly. The next day Alexander ascended the throne. He took power at a difficult moment, when it was obvious to everyone that Russia was doomed to defeat in the Crimean War. Amazement, resentment, pain, anger and irritation reigned in society. The first years of his reign became a harsh school of political education for Alexander. It was then that he fully felt all the discontent accumulated in society and drank all the bitterness of cruel and fair criticism.

Not immediately, but only after much hesitation and mistakes, he came across the road that Russia was supposed to take. At first, no intention to carry out reforms is visible in Alexander at all. The day after taking power, February 19, 1855, he declared in the State Council that he recognized himself as the successor of the “wishes and views” of “our unforgettable parent,” and on February 23, at a reception of the diplomatic corps, he definitely promised to adhere to the political principles of his father and uncle. He did not even want to hear about the conclusion of peace, rightly considering the proposed conditions humiliating and unacceptable for Russia. But his firmness could not last long - the circumstances were too unfavorable to rule in the old way. In August, Sevastopol fell - it was a terrible blow. They say that Alexander cried when he received the fatal news. He himself went south, observed the construction of bastions around Nikolaev, examined the fortifications around Ochakov and Odessa, and visited the main army headquarters in Bakhchisarai. But all efforts were in vain. Russia could not continue the war. It found itself isolated in the international arena, its internal strength was undermined, and discontent swept through all layers of society.

Possessing a sound and sober mind, a certain flexibility, and not at all prone to fanaticism, Alexander, under the pressure of circumstances and without any program, began to make new decisions that did not fit into the old system and even directly opposed to it. He took the path of liberation reforms not because of his convictions, but as a military man on the throne, who realized the “lessons” of the Crimean War, as an emperor and autocrat, for whom the prestige and greatness of the state stood above all else.

The contours of this new course emerged gradually. On December 3, 1855, the Supreme Censorship Committee was closed. The ban imposed by Nicholas 1 on the printed word was lifted - so great was the need of society to speak out. One after another, new independent publications began to emerge. Glasnost was the first manifestation of the thaw that came soon after Alexander's accession to the throne. The restrictions introduced in universities after 1848 were also abolished.

In March 1856, with the active participation of Prince Gorchakov, the Peace of Paris was concluded. It cost Russia the Black Sea Fleet, but it was still much less shameful than one might have expected. Soon after the signing of peace, the remaining military settlements were abolished, and the period of military service was reduced from 25 to 15 years.

On August 14, the royal family left the Nikolaevsky station by train to Moscow and on August 26, the coronation took place in the Assumption Cathedral. On the occasion of the holiday, Alexander abolished conscription for three years, forgave arrears, amnestied or eased the fate of a large number of criminals, including the Decembrists. The surviving participants in the uprising were given back their estates and titles.

It is difficult to say when Alexander finally realized that serfdom had become obsolete, but the fact that he became convinced of this soon after his accession to the throne is beyond doubt. It remained to decide how to implement this grandiose reform. In March 1856, shortly after the conclusion of peace, the emperor went to Moscow. The Moscow governor-general, the famous serf owner Count Zakrevsky, petitioned Alexander about the desire of the local nobility to present themselves to the sovereign due to a rumor that had spread among him that the government was plotting the abolition of serfdom.

The emperor received the Moscow provincial leader of the nobility, Prince Shcherbatov, with district representatives and told them: “There are rumors that I want to announce the liberation of serfdom. This is unfair... You can say this to everyone right and left. I said the same thing to the leaders who were me in St. Petersburg. But I won’t tell you that I am completely against this. We live in such an age that over time this should happen. I think that you are of the same opinion with me; therefore, it is much better for this to happen from above, than from below." The Emperor asked him to think about this and make his proposals.

On January 3, 1857, a new secret committee of closest confidants was formed to consider the issue of abolishing serfdom. At the beginning of December of the same year, a circular was sent out on behalf of the Minister of the Interior, in which it was proposed to form committees in each province to discuss this important issue. By mid-July 1858, committees were opened in all provinces. They worked for about a year, developing local regulations on the organization of life of landowner peasants. In February 1859, the first secret committee for peasant affairs received a public official existence as the main leader of the undertaking. As the projects developed by the provincial committees began to arrive, editorial commissions were formed under him, which were supposed to give final development to the provincial projects. On October 10, 1860, Alexander ordered to transfer the developments to the main committee, and on January 28, 1861, the first meeting of the State Council was held, which was supposed to approve the project. Speaking at it, Alexander said that it was no longer possible to postpone the work of liberating the peasants, that it was necessary to complete it in February in order to declare the will to begin field work. But despite the direct support of the sovereign, the project met with serious opposition in the State Council. In the end, Alexander approved it, contrary to the opinion of the majority of the members. On February 19, the final text of the law on the emancipation and arrangement of the life of peasants, as well as the Highest Manifesto on this, were signed, and on March 5, the manifesto was read in all churches.

Thus the great work of abolishing serfdom was accomplished. When assessing the peasant reform, it should be remembered that it was what it could only be at that time, that is, a compromise between the two main classes of Russian society: the nobles and the peasants. As a result of the reform, the peasants received much more than what the overwhelming mass of feudal landowners wanted to give them, but much less than what they themselves expected from it after so many years of conversations. If we remember that among the reform projects submitted by provincial committees in 1859, almost a third were those in which the liberation of peasants was completely rejected, and in a third of others it was proposed to liberate peasants without land, if we add to this that the members of the drafting commission (who are all , by the way, were nobles) did not include in the final version of the law many semi-feudal shackles with which the landowners wanted to tie their former serfs hand and foot, then one cannot help but admit that the law of February 19, 1861 had a colossal progressive significance and was, according to Klyuchevsky, one of the most important acts of Russian history. And truly, Alexander’s personal merit in this is enormous. He should be recognized as the main driver of the reform, for he began it alone, without yet having assistants in the government or family, and completed it, despite the stubborn resistance of the landowners and senior officials. He put a lot of his energy into this matter, personally traveling around the provinces and trying to soften the bitterness of the landowners: he convinced, persuaded, and shamed. In the end, thanks to his personal authority, the most liberal option for liberation possible at that time (with land for ransom) was approved.

But on the other hand, the financial situation in which the peasants found themselves after liberation was so inconsistent with their real needs that many of them, after a few years, were brought to the brink of complete poverty. The emperor was well aware that the peasants were dissatisfied with the reduction of plots, high duties and redemption payments, but he did not consider it possible to concede on this issue. Speaking on August 15, 1861 in Poltava before the peasant elders, Alexander categorically stated: “I am hearing rumors that you are looking for another will. There will be no other will like the one I gave you. Do what the law and the Regulations require. Work and work. Be obedient to the authorities and landowners." He remained true to this opinion until the end of his life.

The liberation of the peasants significantly changed all the foundations of Russian state and social life. It created a new populous social class in the central and southern regions of Russia. Previously, to manage it, they were content with the power of the landowners. Now the state had to manage the peasants. The old Catherine's institutions, which established noble self-government in the districts, were no longer suitable for the new multi-class district population. It was necessary to create anew the local administration and court. The abolition of serfdom, therefore, inevitably led to other transformations. In the first half of the 60s, university reform, local government reform were successively carried out, a new all-class court was created and censorship control was softened. Despite all the limitations and incompleteness of the reforms carried out, they had enormous progressive significance for Russia. Many of the fetters that tied the country's development were removed. This was the key to Russia's industrial success. The construction of railways, encouraged in every possible way by the government, became a serious stimulus to economic life under Alexander. Soon about 20 thousand miles of railway tracks were built. This influenced the development of industry and trade. Trade turnover with neighboring countries has increased tenfold. The number of commercial and industrial enterprises, factories and factories has increased noticeably. Credit institutions also appeared - banks, headed by the State Bank in 1860. Russia began to gradually lose the character of a patriarchal agricultural state.

But many years passed before Russian society realized the correctness of the chosen course. Alexander had to fully drink the bitterness of disappointment, familiar to many great reformers. Instead of the gratitude he might have expected to receive from his subjects, the emperor was subjected to severe criticism. Some reproached him for the fact that in his reforms he crossed the line of what was permitted and took the path disastrous for Russia, others, on the contrary, believed that the sovereign was too slow in introducing new institutions and that even in his reforms he was more reactionary than liberal.

Actually, both of them were right. Social and state order in Nicholas Russia was maintained through military force, undisguised national oppression and brutal censorship. As soon as the regime was softened, Russia began to be shaken by national uprisings and revolutionary ferment. New ideas, penetrating all layers of society, gradually corroded loyal feelings. Since 1862, revolutionary proclamations have appeared calling for the overthrow of the autocracy and an equal division of the land. For the first time, the authorities and society felt themselves opposed to each other.

At the same time, the national liberation movement on its northwestern outskirts revived. As soon as the orders established by Nicholas 1 in the Kingdom of Poland were slightly softened by Alexander, a strong patriotic movement for the independence of Poland began. All attempts to find a compromise, satisfying the most modest demands of the opposition, did not yield results; concessions were regarded as evidence of the weakness of the authorities, which should be taken advantage of. In January 1863, the underground movement turned into an armed uprising, which began with rebel attacks on soldiers from a number of garrisons. Having exhausted all possibilities of negotiations, Alexander finally decided on tough measures. In the summer of 1863, he recalled Grand Duke Constantine from Poland, appointing Count Berg in his place, and sent Muravyov, known for his penchant for drastic measures, to the northwestern provinces as governor-general. The use of a huge regular army against the rebels, death sentences for those involved in the murders - all this made it possible to quite quickly stabilize the situation on the western outskirts of Russia.

A decade of tireless work has not passed without a trace. Since 1865, fatigue, even some apathy, has been noticed in Alexander. Transformative activity is weakening, and although the initiated reforms continue to be steadily implemented, new initiatives are becoming rare. Personal misfortunes and attempts on the life of the sovereign, which followed one after another with terrible methodicality, also played a significant role here.

In April 1865, Alexander suffered a severe blow both as a man and as an emperor. In Nice, his eldest son Nikolai, a young man who had just turned 21, had successfully completed his education, found a bride, and intended to begin government activities as an assistant and future successor to his father, died of spinal meningitis. The emperor's second son, Grand Duke Alexander Alexandrovich, was declared the new heir to the throne. Both in ability and education, he frankly did not correspond to his high purpose. The Emperor could not help but feel anxious about the future of Russia. It was still possible to try to fill in the gaps in the training course (and this was done), but the time was already lost, because we were talking about an established twenty-year-old person.

The death of Grand Duke Nicholas had the most serious impact on the Empress. She loved him especially, was involved in his education, and invariably invited him to evenings in her living room. There was a deep inner connection between mother and son. After her son died in her arms, the empress became isolated in her grief, and her health deteriorated even more.

The married life of Alexander and his Wife had not been going well for a long time. Perhaps the death of her son dealt her the final fatal blow. During the first twenty years of their marriage, Maria Alexandrovna gave birth to eight children. Meanwhile, her health was not strong from the very beginning. Numerous births weakened him even more. After forty, the empress began to suffer from acute heart attacks. Doctors strongly advised Maria Alexandrovna to abstain from marital relations, and like his father, Alexander at the age of forty turned out to be a straw widower. One after another, he changed several mistresses. Among them are Princess Alexandra Dolgorukaya, Zamyatina, Labunskaya, Makarova, Makova and Wanda Carozzi. All of these were impeccable beauties (Alexander was known from his youth as a connoisseur and lover of women), but they could not fill the void that somehow imperceptibly arose around the emperor.

And Alexander still didn’t feel like an old man at all. The French poet Théophile Gautier, who saw him shortly after the death of his son, described his appearance as follows: “The sovereign’s hair was cut short and well framed his high and beautiful forehead. His facial features are amazingly regular and seem to have been carved by a sculptor. His blue eyes especially stand out thanks to the brown tone of his face, weather-beaten time of long travels. The outline of the mouth is so thin and defined that it resembles a Greek sculpture. The facial expression is majestic, calm and soft, from time to time adorned with a gracious smile."

In the spring of 1865, Alexander began a new, most stormy romance in his life, which was destined to become his last. Walking in the Summer Garden, he noticed a young girl, graceful, fashionably dressed, with a blush all over her cheek, and large, radiant eyes. It was eighteen-year-old Princess Ekaterina Dolgorukova. The Emperor had known her for a long time, since 1857, when she was still a little girl. Now, fascinated by her fresh beauty, he began to court her, getting more and more carried away. He managed to gradually awaken reciprocal feelings, but the lovers' relationship remained platonic for a long time; they had to go through many trials before their attraction turned into an all-consuming passion.

On April 4, 1866, Alexander, having finished his usual walk through the Summer Garden, went out of the gate to get into the carriage. Suddenly a young man approached him, grabbed a revolver and pointed it straight at his chest. The attack was so unexpected that it should have ended tragically, but the cap-taker Osip Komissarov, who was standing nearby, managed to hit the killer in the hand. The bullet flew past. The gendarmes grabbed the assassin and brought him to the emperor's carriage. "You're polish?" - Alexander asked first of all. “Russian,” the terrorist replied. "Why did you shoot at me?" - the emperor was surprised. “You deceived the people,” he answered, “you promised them land, but didn’t give it.” The arrested person was taken to the 3rd department. It soon became clear that the revolutionary's name was Dmitry Karakozov. He was a member of the "Moscow Circle", one of the fragments of Chernyshevsky's previously destroyed "Land and Freedom". The circle consisted of pupils and students who were preparing for a violent coup and actively promoting socialist teachings. 36 people were put on trial in the Karakozov case. All of them were sentenced to hard labor and exile, and Karakozov himself was hanged on September 3 on the Smolensk field.

An attempt of this kind was the first in Russian history and therefore made a huge impression on his contemporaries. It had no less a strong effect on the emperor. After the obvious success of the reforms (which few people dared to believe in ten years earlier), it was extremely difficult to suddenly find ourselves face to face with such intolerance, aggressiveness and misunderstanding. The assassination attempt on April 4 marked a certain change both in the emperor himself and in his policies. Alexander suddenly seemed to be exhausted and tired. “The sovereign was really constantly in a nervous irritation,” Golovnin later recalled, “he seemed extremely sad and frightened and inspired condolences.” From this time began the “protective” period of Alexander’s reign, when he was more concerned not so much with new reforms as with maintaining the achieved position. Even some reactionary traits began to appear in politics, although there was no obvious turn to the past. The government closed the most radical magazines, Sovremennik and Russkoe Slovo. The Minister of Education Golovnin and the St. Petersburg governor Suvorov - people of moderate liberal orientation - were removed; the chief of gendarmes, Prince Dolgorukov, resigned. The first place went to Count Muravyov, appointed head of the Investigative Commission, and Prince Gagarin, the creator of the Special Commission to develop measures to strengthen internal peace. General Trepov became the governor of St. Petersburg, and the III department was headed by the young and energetic Count Shuvalov, who soon became the sovereign’s closest and most trusted man.

In the spring of the same 1866, Ekaterina Dolgorukova’s mother died. Fearing loneliness, the princess reached out with all her heart to Alexander, who was old enough to be her father. On the night of June 1st to 2nd in Peterhof, in the Babigon pavilion, their first love date took place. Parting with his beloved, Alexander made a promise that he would marry her as soon as he became free. According to the testimony of the maid of honor of the Empress Alexandra Tolstoy, the court soon learned about the emperor’s new novel and at first regarded it as just another hobby. “I did not take into account,” wrote Tolstaya, “that his advanced age increased the danger, but most of all, I did not take into account the fact that the girl to whom he turned his gaze was a completely different type than those with whom he was carried away before. .. Although everyone saw the emergence of a new hobby, they were not at all worried, even those closest to the emperor did not expect a serious turn in the matter. On the contrary, everyone was very far from suspecting that he was capable of a real love affair; a romance that was brewing in secret. They only saw what was happening before our eyes - walks with frequent, seemingly random meetings, exchanges of glances in theater boxes, etc., etc. They said that the princess was pursuing the emperor, but no one yet knew that they saw each other not only in public, but also in other places - by the way, with her brother, Prince Mikhail Dolgoruky, married to an Italian."

Much later they learned that Alexander was meeting with Dolgorukova in the Winter Palace itself, in the former office of Nicholas 1, which had a separate entrance directly from the square and a secret staircase connecting it with Alexander’s apartments. Society clearly did not approve of the new relationship: the authority of the empress in the eyes of the world was extremely great, they pitied her, secretly condemned the emperor and loudly grumbled about the princess. Catherine's elder brother was married to the beautiful Neapolitan Marquise de Cercemaggiore. Having learned about the scandalous relationship between her sister-in-law and the sovereign, she hastened to take her to Italy. Perhaps Alexander, realizing his guilt before his wife, wanted to get rid of his feeling in this way, but it turned out to be stronger than him. During the six-month separation, love only grew stronger. Alexander's new meeting with Catherine took place under extraordinary, even romantic circumstances.

On May 16, 1867, the emperor and his two sons, Alexander and Vladimir, left for France for the World Exhibition. On May 20, the royal family arrived in Paris, where they were met by Napoleon III. Alexander settled in the Elysee Palace in the same apartments that were occupied by Alexander 1 in 1814. In honor of the distinguished guest, a ball and a performance at the Opera were given in the Tuileries, followed by a visit to the exhibition. But it soon became clear that Alexander had not come to Paris for this at all. “As it became known later,” wrote Alexandra Tolstaya, “the true purpose of the trip was a meeting with Princess Dolgorukova, who was at that time in Paris with her Daughter-in-law. Even Count Shuvalov, who cannot be called naive and who had at his disposal all the possibilities for that , in order to be more aware, made this discovery only in hindsight. The situation soon became clear, his eyes were finally opened to the threat that this connection posed, and this is how. He himself told me about it in the following terms: “On the first On the day of our arrival in Paris, the sovereign went to the Opera Comique, but did not stay there long, finding the performance boring. We returned with him to the Elysee Palace, happy that we could finally rest after a hard day. Between eleven o'clock and midnight the Emperor knocked on Count Adlerberg's door. “I’ll take a walk,” he said, “there’s no need to accompany me, I’ll manage on my own, but please, dear, give me some money.” - "How much do you need?" - “I don’t even know, maybe a hundred thousand francs?”

Adlerberg immediately informed me of this strange incident, and since I had at my disposal my own agents (not to mention the French police), who were supposed to follow the sovereign from afar wherever he went, I remained almost calm. We returned to our rooms, of course, forgetting about sleep, expecting the emperor's return any minute. But when midnight struck, then one and two, and he did not appear, I was overcome with anxiety, I ran to Adlerberg and found him also alarmed. The most terrible assumptions flashed through our souls.

The police agents, who were tasked with keeping a very delicate watch on the emperor, could lose sight of him, and he, having little knowledge of the layout of the Parisian streets, could easily get lost and lose his way to the Elysee Palace. In short, the thought of the Emperor, alone at such a late hour in the street with a hundred thousand francs in his pocket, made us endure nightmare hours. The idea that he could be visiting someone did not even occur to us; as you see, this proves our complete ignorance of the main motives of his actions.

Finally, at three o'clock in the morning, he returned, not even realizing that we had been awake waiting for him. What happened to him that night? Going out into the street, the emperor hired a cab, bent down under a lantern, read some address, at which he ordered the cab driver to take him to Rampar Street, number such and such. Having arrived at the place, he got off the fiacre and walked through the gate into the courtyard of the house. He was gone for about twenty minutes, during which the police watched in amazement as he fussed unsuccessfully with the gate. The Emperor did not know that he had to pull the rope to open the door, and he was trapped. Fortunately, the surveillance agent realized what was going on. Pushing the gate, he quickly walked deeper into the courtyard past the emperor, as if not paying attention to him, and thus gave the emperor the opportunity to leave. The cab driver had the wrong number, and the house indicated by the emperor turned out to be two steps away. This time he entered unhindered. While Adlerberg and I were shaking with fear, the emperor was probably calmly drinking tea in the company of two ladies. "One of them was Princess Ekaterina Dolgorukova, the other was her daughter-in-law. On subsequent evenings, the princess secretly visited the emperor at the Elysee Palace, entering through the gate on rue Gabriel and avenue Marigny.

It was not in vain that Shuvalov was worried about Alexander’s safety. French society was hostile towards Russia. When Alexander appeared on the streets of Paris, bold demonstrative cries were often heard: “Long live Poland!” Polish emigrants staged demonstrations every now and then. On May 25, a review of troops was held in honor of the Russian sovereign on the Longchamp Field. Upon its completion, Alexander, Napoleon and the retinues of both emperors slowly and solemnly drove towards the city through the Bois de Boulogne. Both emperors were sitting in an open carriage when suddenly a shot was heard. The bullet hit the horse of the French horseman. The terrorist was captured. It turned out to be Polish emigrant Anton Berezovsky.

The second attempt had a depressing effect on Alexander. All the signs of regret and sympathy, all the efforts of the French Emperor and Empress Eugenie could not dispel his bad mood. It was further aggravated by unsuccessful negotiations: despite outward courtesy, Napoleon refused to reconsider the terms of the humiliating Paris Peace Treaty of 1856, according to which Russia was prohibited from maintaining a fleet in the Black Sea.

Alexander returned to St. Petersburg with the firm intention of never being separated from his beloved again. In addition to the large, official family, he seemed to have acquired a second, “small” one. In September 1872, Princess Catherine informed the emperor that she was pregnant. In due time, she gave birth to a boy, who was named George. The following year, daughter Olga was born.

This scandalous story not only tormented the sick empress, but also caused indignant rumors among the courtiers. The sons were also worried, fearing that their side brothers and sisters would someday claim their rights. Count Shuvalov considered it his duty to report to Alexander about the general discontent that arose due to the sovereign’s connection with Dolgorukova. The Emperor listened to Shuvalov coldly and made him understand that he would not allow anyone to interfere in his personal life. From that time on, the position of the all-powerful favorite began to shake, and in 1874 Alexander suddenly sent Shuvalov as ambassador to London. In the same year, he granted his illegitimate children the title of His Serene Highness Princes of Yurievsky.

After the Peace of Paris, which was perceived by the entire Russian society as a national humiliation, Russia's foreign policy prestige fell extremely low. Alexander had to spend a lot of effort before he returned to his state the weight that it had before the Crimean War. Only after going through the shame of defeat, Alexander was able to decide on reforms, but he never forgot the main goal of these reforms - to revive the military power of the Russian Empire. It is reported that, while presiding over one meeting in 1863, the sovereign said: “Seven years ago I committed one act at this table, which I can define because I did it: I signed the Treaty of Paris, and it was cowardice.” And, hitting the table with his fist, he said: “Yes, it was cowardice, and I will not repeat it!” This episode sharply characterizes the severity of the bitter feeling hidden by the sovereign. Neither he nor Gorchakov forgot the humiliation of 1856. The goal of Russian foreign policy from that time on was the destruction of the Treaty of Paris. The remedy is the restoration of destroyed military power. Military items under Alexander absorbed the lion's share of the budget. The implementation of military reform was entrusted to Count Dmitry Milyutin, who remained Minister of War throughout the reign of Alexander. Milyutin introduced new principles for recruiting troops, created a different structure for them, and paid a lot of attention to rearmament of the army and restructuring of the military education system. In 1874, a statute on universal military conscription was adopted, which completed the reform of Russian society. Service in the army turned from a heavy class service of the peasantry into a civic duty, equal for all classes, and Russia received a modern army, equipped and organized according to the European model. Very little time passed, and Alexander had to test it in combat conditions.

The situation in the East worsened in 1875, when an uprising broke out against the Turks in the Serb-populated Turkish regions of Bosnia and Herzegovina, and then in Bulgaria. Alexander found himself in an extremely difficult situation. On the one hand, all the leading ministers: foreign affairs, military and finance - convinced him of the need to maintain neutrality. It was obvious that Russia would encounter opposition from all European powers, primarily England and Austria, that the war would require enormous expenses, and that its outcome was very doubtful, since the Turkish army received an abundance of modern weapons from England. But on the other hand, he had to reckon with the powerful pressure of public opinion, which demanded immediate military assistance to the Serbs and Bulgarians. Could the emperor show restraint when such excitement and unprecedented patriotic enthusiasm reigned in society?

On April 12, 1877, war was declared. Trying to maximize the prestige of the imperial power and the reigning family, Alexander attracted almost all the adult grand dukes to participate in the campaign. The Tsar's brother, Grand Duke Nikolai Nikolaevich, was appointed commander-in-chief in the Balkans, and another brother, Mikhail, was appointed commander-in-chief on the Caucasian front. The heir commanded the Rushchuk detachment. Alexander’s youngest son, Vladimir, was also at the front. Alexander himself stayed in the Balkans from May to December 1877. He had no intention of interfering with the command, but considered it his duty to be in the rear of the army, where the wounded were. He said, leaving the capital: “I am going as a brother of mercy.”

In June, the Russian army crossed the Danube and began the siege of Plevna, defended by a strong Turkish garrison. The Turks defended themselves with exceptional tenacity, made daring attacks, inflicting heavy damage on the Russians. At one time it seemed that the war would end in nothing and that they would have to return across the Danube in shame. With each passing month, the murmur of dissatisfaction intensified both in the army and in Russia. Count Milyutin wrote in September: “The troops do not lose heart; however, one can hear murmurs against the authorities. In Russia, this murmur takes on the character of general displeasure; both the army authorities and the sovereign himself are loudly condemned. They do not hide their indignation at the fact that positions in the army have been distributed great princes, as if the whole campaign was being done only to provide an opportunity for members of the royal house to decorate themselves with St. George's crosses... Evil tongues, even in the retinue of the sovereign, loudly say that the war is being waged according to the model of the Red-Rural maneuvers. Russia, in St. Petersburg itself, intend to provide the sovereign with an address to persuade him to return to his capital." It seemed to many that by leaving the emperor would ease the situation of the generals. But it is obvious that Alexander could not return to Russia, leaving the army in such a difficult situation. He felt on his shoulders a heavy burden of responsibility for the outcome of this war, and the understanding that much was happening and being done wrong was the cause of many griefs and disappointments for him. Colonel Hasenkampf wrote in his diary in September: “... For the first time I understood the full depth of the tragedy of the sovereign’s position. It became clear to me that he really cannot help but remain in the theater of military operations. He needs to see and hear for himself everything that is here is being done, otherwise there is not and cannot be a moment of peace for his tormented soul. He is physically weak and mentally torn: he was deceived in his best expectations, disappointed and upset by the failures of his noblest efforts for the good of his people; he lost faith in people. And despite this "What majestic simplicity and what deep humility! All of Russia and everyone around us is grumbling and looking for scapegoats for all the failures and disappointments - one sovereign does not complain about anything, does not reproach or blame anyone, but only prays and cries. I watched followed him all day: it was clear that every nerve of him was tense, that he was all turned into painful expectation, that there was mortal melancholy in his soul. And despite this, not a reproach to anyone, not even a dissatisfied look..."

The emperor patiently endured the difficulties of camp life, bad roads and lack of sleep. He walked around the wards of the wounded, consoled the despairing, rewarded those who distinguished themselves and encouraged everyone. Finally, in mid-November, a turning point came. On November 16, the Russians took Kare in Transcaucasia, and on November 28, Plevna fell. Inspired by this victory, Russian troops crossed the Balkans to Romania in the winter. City after city surrendered, entire corps of Turkish troops capitulated. The advanced detachments occupied Philippopolis and Andrianople and were approaching Istanbul. The Sultan asked for peace. In February 1878, a preliminary peace treaty was concluded in the town of Saint-Stefano. Under this treaty, Turkey recognized the independence of Montenegro, Serbia and Romania, agreed to the formation of a special principality of Bulgaria from its Bulgarian and Macedonian regions; pledged to carry out reforms in Bosnia and Herzegovina. Turkey ceded back to Russia the mouth of the Danube, which was separated from it in 1856, and, in addition, the cities of Batum and Kare in Transcaucasia.

But England and Austria categorically refused to recognize the terms of this peace. Relations between these powers and Russia had become so strained that a new European war was about to begin. With German mediation, a peace congress began in Berlin. But the peace terms proposed by Bismarck were not aimed in favor of Russia. Under pressure from all European diplomacy, Prince Gorchakov had to agree to concessions. Acquisitions by Serbia and Montenegro were reduced; instead of a unified Bulgaria, two Bulgarian regions were created - the Principality of Bulgaria and the autonomous province of Eastern Rumelia, both under the leadership of Turkey. Serbia and Romania were recognized as independent kingdoms. Bosnia and Herzegovina came under Austrian control. Thus, the consequences of the war for the liberation of the Balkan Slavs turned out to be unsatisfactory. Military success was not accompanied by a corresponding political result. Russia did not achieve its goals and remained completely isolated, without allies and friends. That is why in Russian society the Eastern War and the Congress of Berlin caused feelings of dissatisfaction and disappointment.

Chancellor Prince Gorchakov himself, who represented Russia at the congress, admitted in a note to Alexander: “The Berlin Congress is the darkest page in my career.” The Emperor noted: “And in mine too.” This was the end of the war, on which more than a billion rubles were spent (with a total budget of 600 million in 1878) and for the sake of which domestic finances were completely upset. Alexander returned to Russia older. All witnesses to his life at that time unanimously say that he lost weight, became haggard and hunched over. Maurice Paleologue wrote about the state of the sovereign at the end of 1878: “At times he was overcome by a heavy melancholy, reaching the point of deep despair. He was no longer interested in power; everything that he tried to accomplish ended in failure. None of the other monarchs wanted his happiness more people: he abolished slavery, abolished corporal punishment, established trial by jury, carried out wise and liberal reforms in all areas of government. Unlike other kings, he never sought the bloody laurels of glory. How much effort did he spend to avoid the Turkish war imposed on him by his people! And after its end, he prevented a new military conflict... What did he receive as a reward for all this? From all over Russia, reports came to him from governors who reported that the people, deceived in their aspirations, blamed the tsar for everything. And police reports reported an alarming growth of revolutionary ferment. With a troubled soul, he involuntarily rushed to the only person who had sacrificed his honor, worldly pleasures and successes for him, “the man who thought about his happiness and surrounded him with signs of passionate adoration.”

Soon after his return, Alexander ordered the preparation of apartments in the Winter Palace for Princess Dolgorukova and her children. They were located directly below his rooms. For ease of communication between floors, an elevator was installed. The emperor already needed the constant presence of this woman so much that he became completely indifferent to the opinion of the world and his terminally ill wife. Meanwhile, attempts on Alexander's life became more and more daring. A third attempt to kill him was made on April 20, 1879. At ten o'clock in the morning the sovereign took his usual walk: he walked along Millionnaya, Winter Canal and Moika, and then turned to Guards Headquarters Square. Here he came across a tall young man in an official's cap. Having missed him, Alexander turned around and saw a revolver in the hands of the stranger. Instantly realizing what was happening, he rushed to run in zigzags towards the Pevchesky Bridge. The killer rushed after him, shooting as he went. Before he was captured, he managed to shoot five times, but did not hit even once. The shooter turned out to be a former student of St. Petersburg University, 33-year-old Alexander Solovyov. A short time later, the Supreme Court sentenced him to death. He was hanged on May 28. Although Soloviev belonged to an underground socialist circle, the assassination attempt was his personal matter. But in August, the death sentence was handed down to the emperor by the Executive Committee of the People's Will. From that moment on, the hunt for Alexander took on more severe forms.

In December 1879, terrorists staged an explosion on the route of the royal train from Livadia to Moscow. By mistake, they detonated a bomb not under the imperial train, but under the one on which the royal retinue was traveling. Alexander himself remained unharmed, but he understood that with each new attempt the chances of salvation became less and less. Petersburg was too large and the police could not guarantee the safety of all members of the imperial family outside their palaces. The Grand Dukes asked the sovereign to move to Gatchina, but Alexander flatly refused to leave the capital and change the routes of his daily walks and Sunday parades of the guard troops. Subsequent events showed that the emperor could no longer feel safe in the palace. On February 5, 1880, at six and a half o'clock in the evening, when Alexander, surrounded by his family, was talking in his apartment with the Empress's brother, Prince Alexander of Hesse and his son Alexander of Bulgaria, who had arrived in St. Petersburg, a terrible blow was heard: the walls trembled, the lights went out, the smell, bitter and stuffy, filled the palace. Alexander realized that this was another assassination attempt. His first movement was to run to the rooms of Ekaterina Dolgorukova. Fortunately, she was alive and ran into him on the stairs.

What happened? Several pounds of dynamite, it turns out, were detonated under the main guard room, where eight soldiers were killed and forty-five wounded. The terrorists hoped that the explosion would destroy the royal dining room, where the emperor was supposed to be dining with his relatives at that very time. To the chagrin of the revolutionaries, the sovereign was half an hour late for dinner. However, the explosion still did not overcome the strong palace building; Only the floor of the dining room sank, furniture fell and glass burst. The guardhouse was destroyed - just under the dining room.

A few days after the explosion, Alexander convened an emergency meeting in the Winter Palace. He was gloomy, hunched over, blackened and spoke in a hoarse, cold voice. Among the general confusion, only Count Loris-Melikov, a military general, hero of the Turkish war and conqueror of Kars, who had served as Kharkov governor-general for the last year, inspired some optimism in the emperor. He managed to quite successfully fight the revolutionaries in his province, and Alexander put him at the head of the extraordinary Supreme Administrative Commission with broad, almost dictatorial powers.

The emperor and the heir saw in Loris-Melikov, first of all, a “steady hand” capable of establishing “order.” But it was obvious that this goal could no longer be achieved by harsh measures alone. Although society condemned the savage methods of struggle of the Narodnaya Volya, it fully sympathized with the ideals for which they began the terror. The emperor’s inner circle also understood this. It was necessary to convince the moderate, enlightened part of society that the government was still able to carry out reforms. Therefore, Loris-Melikov tried, first of all, in his explanations with public figures and publicists to convince everyone that the reaction was over and that the reforms would continue. The main thing in Loris-Melikov’s plans was the plan to establish a very limited representative body under the emperor.

Although Alexander did not like everything in Loris-Melikov’s program, he gradually began to agree with his arguments. The emperor felt tired of the burden of power and was ready to place at least part of this burden on other shoulders. In addition, personal affairs occupied Alexander at this time almost more than state affairs. In May 1880, Empress Maria Alexandrovna died. Alexander decided that the time had come to fulfill the promise he made to Princess Dolgorukova fourteen years ago. The wedding took place on July 6 in the Great Tsarskoye Selo Palace in one of the small rooms where they set up a camp altar - an ordinary table. Only Count Adlerberg, two adjutant generals on duty and the maid of honor Shebeko, the confidant of this love from the very first day of its inception, were present at the wedding. Bogdanovich writes that Alexander got married in civilian dress, saying: “This is not an emperor, but a private person who corrects a mistake he has made and restores the reputation of a young girl.” On the same day, he granted his wife the title of His Serene Highness Princess Yuryevskaya and granted her all the rights enjoyed by members of the imperial family.

Immediately after the wedding, Alexander and his wife went to Crimea, to Livadia, for the entire summer and autumn. He wanted to give those around him time to get used to the emperor’s new wife and to live in an atmosphere of relative peace with his family. A legend has been preserved that he was going to carry out the state reforms planned by Loris-Melikov, and then abdicate the throne in favor of the crown prince and leave for Nice to lead the life of a private person.

Trying to improve relations with his eldest son, who was deeply offended by his father’s hasty marriage, Alexander summoned him to Crimea. But Princess Yuryevskaya occupied the chambers of her predecessor in the Livadia Palace, and this turned out to be an intolerable insult for the Tsarevich and his wife. Reconciliation did not take place. The heir avoided meeting his stepmother at the dinner table, so the emperor had to divide the week into days on duty: if his son was having dinner with him, then his wife did not appear in the dining room; if she was at the table, Alexander Alexandrovich went for a walk. At the end of November, Alexander and his family returned to St. Petersburg, where Princess Yuryevskaya settled in luxurious apartments of the Winter Palace, specially decorated for her.

On January 28, 1881, Count Loris-Melikov submitted a report to Alexander, in which he finally outlined his program. Its most significant part was the creation of two deputy commissions from representatives of the nobility, zemstvos and cities, as well as government officials to consider finance and administrative bills, which then went to the general commission, and from it to the State Council, supplemented by deputies. Alexander immediately rejected the idea of ​​​​introducing elected representatives to the State Council, preliminary approved the rest of the plan, but, as was his custom, ordered the matter to be considered in meetings with a narrow composition. A week later, the first such meeting was held by the emperor himself and fully approved of Loris-Melikov’s report. All that remained was to prepare a government message and publish it for public information. The project was submitted to the emperor, who preliminarily approved it and on the morning of March 1 ordered the convening of the Council of Ministers to finalize the text of the message. Valuev, one of the last dignitaries who worked with the emperor that day, made the most favorable impression of his mood. “It’s been a long, long time since I’ve seen the sovereign in such a good spirit and even looking so healthy and kind,” he recalled the next day.

Alexander did not make the decision easily, but as soon as he accepted it, he felt relieved. Of course, the importance of the proposed reform cannot be overestimated - the introduction of a constitution in Russia was still very far away, but still it meant a new step towards the liberal restructuring of the state. Who knows - had Alexander managed to implement the Loris-Melikov program in full, and perhaps the history of Russia would have taken a completely different path. But he was not destined to continue his endeavors - the time allotted to him came to an end.

Having finished with his business, Alexander after breakfast went to Manezh for a divorce, and then to the Mikhailovsky Castle to visit his beloved cousin. According to the testimony of Chief of Police Dvorzhitsky, who accompanied the emperor that day, Alexander left the castle at two hours and ten minutes and ordered to return to Zimny ​​along the same road. Having passed Engineering Street, the coachman turned onto the Ekaterininsky Canal and set off the horses at a gallop, but before he had even driven a hundred fathoms, a deafening explosion was heard, from which the sovereign’s carriage was severely damaged and two Cossack escorts were wounded, as well as a peasant boy who happened to be nearby. After driving a few more steps, the emperor's carriage stopped. Dvorzhitsky helped the sovereign get out of the carriage and reported that the terrorist Rysakov, who threw the bomb, had been detained. Alexander was completely calm and answered the excited questions of those around him: “Thank God, I’m not wounded.” Dvorzhitsky offered to continue the journey in his sleigh. Alexander said: “Okay, just show me the criminal first.” Looking at Rysakov, who was already being searched by the guards, and learning that he was a tradesman, the emperor slowly walked towards the Theater Bridge. Dvorzhitsky again asked to get into the sleigh. Alexander answered: “Okay, just show me the place of the explosion first.” They went back. At this time, another terrorist threw a second bomb right at the feet of the emperor. When Dvorzhitsky, stunned by the explosion, ran up to Alexander, he saw that both of his legs were completely crushed and blood was flowing profusely from them.

At least two dozen dead and wounded lay around. Scattered everywhere were pieces of torn clothing, sabers and epaulettes, parts of human bodies, fragments of a gas lamp, the frame of which had been bent by the explosion. Alexander only managed to say: “Help!” - and lost consciousness. He was put in Dvorzhitsky's sleigh and, accompanied by Grand Duke Mikhail Nikolaevich, taken to Zimny, where he died at about half past three from loss of blood, without ever regaining consciousness.

Shortly after the funeral, Tyutcheva wrote in her diary, comparing the murdered emperor with Alexander III, his son, who began his reign: “Seeing him, you understand that he recognizes himself as an emperor, that he accepted the responsibility and prerogatives of power. To his father, the late emperor, always lacked precisely this instinctive sense of his position, faith in his power; he did not believe in his power, no matter how real it was. He suspected opposition everywhere and, irritated by his own doubts, began to create this resistance around himself. Thanks to this, despite Despite his kindness, he was feared more than loved, and, despite his humility, only flatterers had influence over him, which is why at the end of his life he was so poorly surrounded and fell into the hands of bad people. Feeling weak, he did not trusted himself, but trusted others even less; in the people he used, he preferred nonentities, because he thought that such people were easier to dominate and easier to direct, whereas, on the contrary, they were more prone to deception and flattery. This weakness of character of the late sovereign made him so inconsistent and ambiguous in all his words, actions and relationships, and this, in the eyes of all of Russia, discredited the power itself and led the country to the state of that deplorable anarchy in which we find ourselves at the present time. The wonderful reforms of the reign of Alexander II, the gentleness and generosity of his character should have ensured him the enthusiastic love of his people, and yet he was not a popular sovereign in the true sense of the word; the people did not feel attracted to him, because he himself completely lacked a national and popular string, and in gratitude for all the benefits he showed to Russia, in the majestic worship shown to his memory, one feels the influence of reason rather than the direct impulse of the masses. Human nature is such that it values ​​people more for themselves than for their deeds. In character and intelligence the late emperor was inferior to the deeds he had accomplished. He was truly exalted by the inexhaustible kindness and generosity of his heart, but this kindness could not replace the strength of character and intelligence of which he was deprived."

Perhaps this posthumous assessment of Alexander by one of his intelligent and observant contemporaries, who knew the court and the royal family well, really contains the key to the ill-fated fate of the emperor-liberator and the amazing fact that, having done more for Russia than all his ancestors after Peter the Great, he for this he did not deserve either the love of his contemporaries or the gratitude of his descendants.

He was buried in St. Petersburg, in the Peter and Paul Cathedral.

All the monarchs of the world. Russia. 600 short biographies. Konstantin Ryzhov. Moscow, 1999.

Coronation:
Predecessor:	Nicholas I
Successor:
Heir:	Nicholas (before 1865), after Alexander III
Religion:	Orthodoxy
Birth:
Buried:	Peter and Paul Cathedral
Dynasty:	Romanovs
	Nicholas I
	Charlotte of Prussia (Alexandra Fedorovna)
	1) Maria Alexandrovna 2) Ekaterina Mikhailovna Dolgorukova
	From the 1st marriage, sons: Nicholas, Alexander III, Vladimir, Alexey, Sergei and Pavel, daughters: Alexandra and Maria, from the 2nd marriage, sons: St. book Georgy Alexandrovich Yuryevsky and Boris daughters: Olga and Ekaterina
Autograph:
Monogram:

Reign of Alexander II

Big title

Beginning of reign

Background

Judicial reform

Military reform

Organizational reforms

Education reform

Other reforms

Autocracy reform

Economic development of the country

The problem of corruption

Foreign policy

Assassinations and murder

History of failed attempts

Results of the reign

Saint Petersburg

Bulgaria

General-Toshevo

Helsinki

Częstochowa

Monuments by Opekushin

Interesting Facts

Film incarnations

(April 17 (29), 1818, Moscow - March 1 (13, 1881, St. Petersburg) - Emperor of All Russia, Tsar of Poland and Grand Duke of Finland (1855-1881) from the Romanov dynasty. The eldest son of first the grand ducal, and since 1825, the imperial couple Nikolai Pavlovich and Alexandra Feodorovna.

He entered Russian history as a conductor of large-scale reforms. Honored with a special epithet in Russian pre-revolutionary historiography - Liberator(in connection with the abolition of serfdom according to the manifesto of February 19, 1861). Died as a result of a terrorist attack organized by the People's Will party.

Childhood, education and upbringing

Born on April 17, 1818, on Bright Wednesday, at 11 o'clock in the morning in the Bishop's House of the Chudov Monastery in the Kremlin, where the entire imperial family, excluding the uncle of the newborn Alexander I, who was on an inspection trip to the south of Russia, arrived in early April for fasting and celebrating Easter ; A 201-gun salvo was fired in Moscow. On May 5, the sacraments of baptism and confirmation were performed over the baby in the church of the Chudov Monastery by Moscow Archbishop Augustine, in honor of which Maria Feodorovna was given a gala dinner.

He received a home education under the personal supervision of his parent, who paid special attention to the issue of raising an heir. His “mentor” (with the responsibility of leading the entire process of upbringing and education and the assignment to draw up a “teaching plan”) and teacher of the Russian language was V. A. Zhukovsky, a teacher of the Law of God and Sacred History - the enlightened theologian Archpriest Gerasim Pavsky (until 1835), military instructor - Captain K. K. Merder, as well as: M. M. Speransky (legislation), K. I. Arsenyev (statistics and history), E. F. Kankrin (finance), F. I. Brunov (foreign policy) , Academician Collins (arithmetic), C. B. Trinius (natural history).

According to numerous testimonies, in his youth he was very impressionable and amorous. So, during a trip to London in 1839, he fell in love with the young Queen Victoria (later, as monarchs, they experienced mutual hostility and enmity).

Beginning of government activities

Upon reaching adulthood on April 22, 1834 (the day he took the oath), the heir-tsarevich was introduced by his father into the main state institutions of the empire: in 1834 into the Senate, in 1835 he was introduced into the Holy Governing Synod, from 1841 a member of the State Council, in 1842 - the Committee ministers.

In 1837, Alexander made a long trip around Russia and visited 29 provinces of the European part, Transcaucasia and Western Siberia, and in 1838-1839 he visited Europe.

The future emperor's military service was quite successful. In 1836 he already became a major general, and from 1844 a full general, commanding the guards infantry. Since 1849, Alexander was the head of military educational institutions, chairman of the Secret Committees on Peasant Affairs in 1846 and 1848. During the Crimean War of 1853-1856, with the declaration of martial law in the St. Petersburg province, he commanded all the troops of the capital.

Reign of Alexander II

Big title

By God's hastening grace, We, Alexander II, Emperor and Autocrat of All Russia, Moscow, Kiev, Vladimir, Tsar of Astrakhan, Tsar of Poland, Tsar of Siberia, Tsar of Tauride Chersonis, Sovereign of Pskov and Grand Duke of Smolensk, Lithuania, Volyn, Podolsk and Finland, Prince of Estonia , Livlyandsky, Kurlyandsky and Semigalsky, Samogitsky, Bialystok, Korelsky, Tver, Yugorsky, Perm, Vyatka, Bulgarian and others; Sovereign and Grand Duke of Novagorod Nizovsky lands, Chernihiv, Ryazan, Polotsk, Rostov, Yaroslavsky, Beloozersky, Udorsky, Obdorsky, Kondian, Vitebsky, Mstislav and all northern countries, lord and sovereign Iverskiy, Kartalinsky, Georgia and Kabardinsky lands and Armenian regions, Cherkassky regions. and the Mountain Princes and other hereditary Sovereign and Possessor, Heir of Norway, Duke of Schleswig-Holstin, Stormarn, Ditmarsen and Oldenburg, and so on, and so on, and so on.

Beginning of reign

Having ascended the throne on the day of the death of his father on February 18, 1855, Alexander II issued a manifesto that read: “In the face of the invisibly co-present God, we accept the sacred scope of always having as one goal the well-being of OUR Fatherland. May we, guided and protected by Providence, who has called US to this great service, establish Russia at the highest level of power and glory, may the constant desires and views of OUR August predecessors PETER, KATHERINE, ALEXANDER, the Blessed and Unforgettable, be fulfilled through US OUR Parent. "

On the original His Imperial Majesty's own hand signed ALEXANDER

The country faced a number of complex domestic and foreign policy issues (peasant, eastern, Polish and others); finances were extremely upset by the unsuccessful Crimean War, during which Russia found itself in complete international isolation.

According to the journal of the State Council for February 19, 1855, in his first speech to the members of the Council, the new emperor said, in particular: “My unforgettable Parent loved Russia and all his life he constantly thought about its benefits alone. In His constant and daily labors with Me, He told Me: “I want to take for myself everything that is unpleasant and everything that is difficult, just to hand over to You a Russia that is well-ordered, happy and calm.” Providence judged otherwise, and the late Emperor, in the last hours of his life, told me: “I hand over My command to You, but, unfortunately, not in the order I wanted, leaving You with a lot of work and worries.”

The first of the important steps was the conclusion of the Paris Peace in March 1856 - on conditions that were not the worst in the current situation (in England there were strong sentiments to continue the war until the complete defeat and dismemberment of the Russian Empire).

In the spring of 1856, he visited Helsingfors (Grand Duchy of Finland), where he spoke at the university and the Senate, then Warsaw, where he called on the local nobility to “give up dreams” (fr. pas de rêveries), and Berlin, where he had a very important meeting for him with the Prussian king Frederick William IV (his mother’s brother), with whom he secretly sealed a “dual alliance,” thus breaking the foreign policy blockade of Russia.

A “thaw” has set in in the socio-political life of the country. On the occasion of the coronation, which took place in the Assumption Cathedral of the Kremlin on August 26, 1856 (the ceremony was led by Metropolitan of Moscow Philaret (Drozdov); the emperor sat on the ivory throne of Tsar Ivan III), the Highest Manifesto granted benefits and concessions to a number of categories of subjects, in particular, the Decembrists , Petrashevites, participants in the Polish uprising of 1830-1831; recruitment was suspended for 3 years; in 1857, military settlements were liquidated.

Abolition of serfdom (1861)

Background

The first steps towards the abolition of serfdom in Russia were taken by Emperor Alexander I in 1803 with the publication of the Decree on Free Plowmen, which spelled out the legal status of freed peasants.

In the Baltic (Baltic Sea) provinces of the Russian Empire (Estonia, Courland, Livonia), serfdom was abolished back in 1816-1819.

According to historians who specifically studied this issue, the percentage of serfs to the entire adult male population of the empire reached its maximum towards the end of the reign of Peter I (55%), during the subsequent period of the 18th century. was about 50% and increased again by the beginning of the 19th century, reaching 57-58% in 1811-1817. For the first time, a significant reduction in this proportion occurred under Nicholas I, by the end of whose reign it, according to various estimates, was reduced to 35-45%. Thus, according to the results of the 10th revision (1857), the share of serfs in the entire population of the empire fell to 37%. According to the population census of 1857-1859, 23.1 million people (of both sexes) out of 62.5 million people inhabiting the Russian Empire were in serfdom. Of the 65 provinces and regions that existed in the Russian Empire in 1858, in the three above-mentioned Baltic provinces, in the Land of the Black Sea Army, in the Primorsky region, the Semipalatinsk region and the region of the Siberian Kyrgyz, in the Derbent province (with the Caspian region) and the Erivan province there were no serfs at all; in another 4 administrative units (Arkhangelsk and Shemakha provinces, Transbaikal and Yakutsk regions) there were also no serfs, with the exception of several dozen courtyard people (servants). In the remaining 52 provinces and regions, the share of serfs in the population ranged from 1.17% (Bessarabian region) to 69.07% (Smolensk province).

During the reign of Nicholas I, about a dozen different commissions were created to resolve the issue of abolishing serfdom, but all of them were ineffective due to the opposition of the nobility. However, during this period, a significant transformation of this institution took place (see article Nicholas I) and the number of serfs sharply decreased, which facilitated the task of the final abolition of serfdom. By the 1850s A situation arose where it could have happened without the consent of the landowners. As historian V.O. Klyuchevsky pointed out, by 1850 more than 2/3 of noble estates and 2/3 of serfs were pledged to secure loans taken from the state. Therefore, the liberation of the peasants could have occurred without a single state act. To do this, it was enough for the state to introduce a procedure for the forced redemption of mortgaged estates - with the payment to the landowners of only a small difference between the value of the estate and the accumulated arrears on the overdue loan. As a result of such a redemption, most of the estates would pass to the state, and the serfs would automatically become state (that is, actually free) peasants. It was precisely this plan that was hatched by P.D. Kiselev, who was responsible for the management of state property in the government of Nicholas I.

However, these plans caused strong discontent among the nobility. In addition, peasant uprisings intensified in the 1850s. Therefore, the new government formed by Alexander II decided to speed up the solution to the peasant issue. As the Tsar himself said in 1856 at a reception with the leader of the Moscow nobility: “It is better to abolish serfdom from above than to wait until it begins to abolish itself from below.”

As historians point out, in contrast to the commissions of Nicholas I, where neutral persons or specialists on the agrarian issue predominated (including Kiselev, Bibikov, etc.), now the preparation of the peasant issue was entrusted to large feudal landowners (including the newly appointed ministers of Lansky , Panin and Muravyova), which largely predetermined the results of the agrarian reform.

The government program was outlined in a rescript from Emperor Alexander II on November 20 (December 2), 1857 to the Vilna Governor-General V. I. Nazimov. It provided for: the destruction of the personal dependence of the peasants while maintaining all the land in the ownership of the landowners; providing peasants with a certain amount of land, for which they will be required to pay quitrents or serve corvee, and, over time, the right to buy out peasant estates (a residential building and outbuildings). In 1858, to prepare peasant reforms, provincial committees were formed, within which a struggle began for measures and forms of concessions between liberal and reactionary landowners. The fear of an all-Russian peasant revolt forced the government to change the government program of peasant reform, the projects of which were repeatedly changed in connection with the rise or decline of the peasant movement, as well as under the influence and participation of a number of public figures (for example, A. M. Unkovsky).

In December 1858, a new peasant reform program was adopted: providing peasants with the opportunity to buy out land and creating peasant public administration bodies. To consider projects of provincial committees and develop peasant reform, editorial commissions were created in March 1859. The project drawn up by the Editorial Commissions at the end of 1859 differed from that proposed by the provincial committees by increasing land allotments and reducing duties. This caused discontent among the local nobility, and in 1860 the project included slightly reduced allotments and increased duties. This direction in changing the project was preserved both when it was considered by the Main Committee for Peasant Affairs at the end of 1860, and when it was discussed in the State Council at the beginning of 1861.

The main provisions of the peasant reform

On February 19 (March 3), 1861 in St. Petersburg, Alexander II signed the Manifesto on the abolition of serfdom and the Regulations on peasants emerging from serfdom, which consisted of 17 legislative acts.

The main act - “General Regulations on Peasants Emerging from Serfdom” - contained the main conditions of the peasant reform:

• Peasants ceased to be considered serfs and began to be considered “temporarily obliged”.
• The landowners retained ownership of all the lands that belonged to them, but were obliged to provide the peasants with “sedentary estates” and field allotment for use.
• For the use of allotment land, peasants had to serve corvee or pay quitrent and did not have the right to refuse it for 9 years.
• The size of the field allotment and duties had to be recorded in the statutory charters of 1861, which were drawn up by the landowners for each estate and verified by the peace intermediaries.
• The peasants were given the right to redeem the estate and, by agreement with the landowner, the field allotment; before this was done, they were called temporarily obliged peasants; those who exercised this right, until the full redemption was carried out, were called “redemption” peasants. Until the end of the reign of Alexander II, according to V. Klyuchevsky, more than 80% of former serfs fell into this category.
• The structure, rights and responsibilities of peasant public administration bodies (rural and volost) and the volost court were also determined.

Historians who lived in the era of Alexander II and studied the peasant question commented on the main provisions of these laws as follows. As M.N. Pokrovsky pointed out, the entire reform for the majority of peasants boiled down to the fact that they ceased to be officially called “serfs”, but began to be called “obligated”; Formally, they began to be considered free, but nothing changed in their position: in particular, the landowners continued, as before, to use corporal punishment against the peasants. “To be declared a free man by the tsar,” the historian wrote, “and at the same time continue to go to corvée or pay quitrent: this was a glaring contradiction that caught the eye. The “obligated” peasants firmly believed that this will was not real...” The same opinion was shared, for example, by the historian N.A. Rozhkov, one of the most authoritative experts on the agrarian issue of pre-revolutionary Russia, as well as a number of other authors who wrote about the peasant issue.

There is an opinion that the laws of February 19, 1861, which meant the legal abolition of serfdom (in legal terms of the second half of the 19th century), were not its abolition as a socio-economic institution (although they created the conditions for this to happen over the following decades ). This corresponds to the conclusions of a number of historians that “serfdom” was not abolished in one year and that the process of its abolition lasted for decades. In addition to M.N. Pokrovsky, N.A. Rozhkov came to this conclusion, calling the reform of 1861 “serfdom” and pointing to the preservation of serfdom in subsequent decades. Modern historian B.N. Mironov also writes about the gradual weakening of serfdom over several decades after 1861.

Four “Local Regulations” determined the size of land plots and duties for their use in 44 provinces of European Russia. From the land that was in the use of peasants before February 19, 1861, sections could be made if the peasants' per capita allotments exceeded the maximum size established for the given area, or if the landowners, while maintaining the existing peasant allotment, had less than 1/3 of the total land of the estate left.

Allotments could be reduced by special agreements between peasants and landowners, as well as upon receipt of a gift allotment. If peasants had plots of less than a small size, the landowner was obliged to either cut off the missing land or reduce duties. For the highest shower allotment, a quitrent was set from 8 to 12 rubles. per year or corvee - 40 men's and 30 women's working days per year. If the allotment was less than the highest, then the duties were reduced, but not proportionally. The rest of the “Local Provisions” basically repeated the “Great Russian Provisions”, but taking into account the specifics of their regions. The features of the Peasant Reform for certain categories of peasants and specific areas were determined by the “Additional Rules” - “On the arrangement of peasants settled on the estates of small landowners, and on benefits to these owners”, “On people assigned to private mining factories of the Ministry of Finance”, “On peasants and workers serving work at Perm private mining factories and salt mines”, “About peasants serving work in landowner factories”, “About peasants and courtyard people in the Land of the Don Army”, “About peasants and courtyard people in the Stavropol province”, “ About peasants and courtyard people in Siberia”, “About people who emerged from serfdom in the Bessarabian region”.

The “Regulations on the Settlement of Household People” provided for their release without land, but for 2 years they remained completely dependent on the landowner.

The “Regulations on Redemption” determined the procedure for peasants buying land from landowners, organizing the redemption operation, and the rights and obligations of peasant owners. The redemption of a field plot depended on an agreement with the landowner, who could oblige the peasants to buy the land at his request. The price of land was determined by quitrent, capitalized at 6% per annum. In case of redemption by voluntary agreement, the peasants had to make an additional payment to the landowner. The landowner received the main amount from the state, to which the peasants had to repay it annually for 49 years with redemption payments.

According to N. Rozhkov and D. Blum, in the non-black soil zone of Russia, where the bulk of serfs lived, the redemption value of land was on average 2.2 times higher than its market value. Therefore, in fact, the redemption price established in accordance with the reform of 1861 included not only the redemption of the land, but also the redemption of the peasant himself and his family - just as previously serfs could buy their freed land from the landowner for money by agreement with the latter. This conclusion is made, in particular, by D. Blum, as well as the historian B.N. Mironov, who writes that the peasants “bought not only the land... but also their freedom.” Thus, the conditions for the liberation of peasants in Russia were much worse than in the Baltic states, where they were liberated under Alexander I without land, but also without the need to pay a ransom for themselves.

Accordingly, under the terms of the reform, peasants could not refuse to buy out the land, which M.N. Pokrovsky calls “compulsory property.” And “to prevent the owner from running away from her,” writes the historian, “which, given the circumstances of the case, could have been expected, it was necessary to place the “released” person in such legal conditions that are very reminiscent of the state, if not of a prisoner, then of a minor or feeble-minded person in prison. under guardianship."

Another result of the reform of 1861 was the emergence of the so-called. sections - parts of the land, averaging about 20%, which were previously in the hands of peasants, but now found themselves in the hands of landowners and were not subject to redemption. As N.A. Rozhkov pointed out, the division of land was specially carried out by the landowners in such a way that “the peasants found themselves cut off by the landowner’s land from a watering hole, forest, high road, church, sometimes from their arable land and meadows... [as a result] they were forced to rent the landowner’s land land at any cost, on any terms." “Having cut off from the peasants, according to the Regulations of February 19, lands that were absolutely necessary for them,” wrote M.N. Pokrovsky, “meadows, pastures, even places for driving cattle to watering places, the landowners forced them to rent these lands only for work , with the obligation to plow, sow and harvest a certain number of acres for the landowner.” In memoirs and descriptions written by the landowners themselves, the historian pointed out, this practice of cuttings was described as universal - there were practically no landowners’ farms where cuttings did not exist. In one example, the landowner “bragged that his segments covered, as if in a ring, 18 villages, which were all in bondage to him; As soon as the German tenant arrived, he remembered atreski as one of the first Russian words and, renting an estate, first of all inquired whether this jewel was in it.”

Subsequently, the elimination of sections became one of the main demands not only of peasants, but also of revolutionaries in the last third of the 19th century. (populists, Narodnaya Volya, etc.), but also most revolutionary and democratic parties at the beginning of the 20th century, until 1917. Thus, the agrarian program of the Bolsheviks until December 1905 included the liquidation of landowner plots as the main and essentially the only point; the same demand was the main point of the agrarian program of the I and II State Duma (1905-1907), adopted by the overwhelming majority of its members (including deputies from the Menshevik, Socialist Revolutionary, Cadets and Trudoviks parties), but rejected by Nicholas II and Stolypin. Previously, the elimination of such forms of exploitation of peasants by landowners - the so-called. banalities - was one of the main demands of the population during the French Revolution.

According to N. Rozhkov, the “serfdom” reform of February 19, 1861 became “the starting point of the entire process of the origin of the revolution” in Russia.

The “Manifesto” and “Regulations” were published from March 7 to April 2 (in St. Petersburg and Moscow - March 5). Fearing the dissatisfaction of the peasants with the conditions of the reform, the government took a number of precautions (relocation of troops, sending members of the imperial retinue to places, appeal of the Synod, etc.). The peasantry, dissatisfied with the enslaving conditions of the reform, responded to it with mass unrest. The largest of them were the Bezdnensky uprising of 1861 and the Kandeyevsky uprising of 1861.

In total, during 1861 alone, 1,176 peasant uprisings were recorded, while in 6 years from 1855 to 1860. there were only 474 of them. The uprisings did not subside in 1862, and were suppressed very cruelly. In the two years after the reform was announced, the government had to use military force in 2,115 villages. This gave many people a reason to talk about the beginning of a peasant revolution. So, M.A. Bakunin was in 1861-1862. I am convinced that the explosion of peasant uprisings will inevitably lead to a peasant revolution, which, as he wrote, “essentially has already begun.” “There is no doubt that the peasant revolution in Russia in the 60s was not a figment of a frightened imagination, but a completely real possibility...” wrote N.A. Rozhkov, comparing its possible consequences with the Great French Revolution.

The implementation of the Peasant Reform began with the drawing up of statutory charters, which was largely completed by mid-1863. On January 1, 1863, peasants refused to sign about 60% of the charters. The purchase price of the land significantly exceeded its market value at that time, in the non-chernozem zone on average 2-2.5 times. As a result of this, in a number of regions there was an urgent effort to obtain gift plots and in some provinces (Saratov, Samara, Ekaterinoslav, Voronezh, etc.), a significant number of peasant gift-holders appeared.

Under the influence of the Polish uprising of 1863, changes occurred in the conditions of the Peasant Reform in Lithuania, Belarus and Right Bank Ukraine - the law of 1863 introduced compulsory redemption; redemption payments decreased by 20%; peasants who were dispossessed of land from 1857 to 1861 received their allotments in full, those dispossessed of land earlier - partially.

The peasants' transition to ransom lasted for several decades. By 1881, 15% remained in temporary obligations. But in a number of provinces there were still many of them (Kursk 160 thousand, 44%; Nizhny Novgorod 119 thousand, 35%; Tula 114 thousand, 31%; Kostroma 87 thousand, 31%). The transition to ransom proceeded faster in the black earth provinces, where voluntary transactions prevailed over compulsory ransom. Landowners who had large debts, more often than others, sought to speed up the redemption and enter into voluntary transactions.

The transition from “temporarily obligated” to “redemption” did not give the peasants the right to leave their plot - that is, the freedom proclaimed by the manifesto of February 19. Some historians believe that the consequence of the reform was the “relative” freedom of the peasants, however, according to experts on the peasant issue, the peasants had relative freedom of movement and economic activity even before 1861. Thus, many serfs left for a long time to work or trade hundreds miles from home; half of the 130 cotton factories in the city of Ivanovo in the 1840s belonged to serfs (and the other half - mainly to former serfs). At the same time, a direct consequence of the reform was a significant increase in the burden of payments. The redemption of land under the terms of the reform of 1861 for the vast majority of peasants lasted for 45 years and represented real bondage for them, since they were not able to pay such amounts. Thus, by 1902, the total amount of arrears on peasant redemption payments amounted to 420% of the amount of annual payments, and in a number of provinces exceeded 500%. Only in 1906, after the peasants burned about 15% of the landowners' estates in the country during 1905, the redemption payments and accumulated arrears were canceled, and the "redemption" peasants finally received freedom of movement.

The abolition of serfdom also affected appanage peasants, who, by the “Regulations of June 26, 1863,” were transferred to the category of peasant owners through compulsory redemption under the terms of the “Regulations of February 19.” In general, their plots were significantly smaller than those of the landowner peasants.

The law of November 24, 1866 began the reform of state peasants. They retained all the lands in their use. According to the law of June 12, 1886, state peasants were transferred to redemption, which, unlike the redemption of land by former serfs, was carried out in accordance with market prices for land.

The peasant reform of 1861 entailed the abolition of serfdom in the national outskirts of the Russian Empire.

On October 13, 1864, a decree was issued on the abolition of serfdom in the Tiflis province; a year later it was extended, with some changes, to the Kutaisi province, and in 1866 to Megrelia. In Abkhazia, serfdom was abolished in 1870, in Svaneti - in 1871. The conditions of the reform here retained the remnants of serfdom to a greater extent than under the “Regulations of February 19”. In Azerbaijan and Armenia, peasant reform was carried out in 1870-1883 and was no less enslaving in nature than in Georgia. In Bessarabia, the bulk of the peasant population was made up of legally free landless peasants - tsarans, who, according to the “Regulations of July 14, 1868,” were allocated land for permanent use in exchange for services. The redemption of this land was carried out with some derogations on the basis of the “Redemption Regulations” of February 19, 1861.

The peasant reform of 1861 marked the beginning of the process of rapid impoverishment of the peasants. The average peasant allotment in Russia in the period from 1860 to 1880 decreased from 4.8 to 3.5 dessiatines (almost 30%), many ruined peasants and rural proletarians appeared who lived on odd jobs - a phenomenon that practically disappeared in the middle XIX century

Self-government reform (zemstvo and city regulations)

Zemstvo reform January 1, 1864- The reform consisted in the fact that issues of local economy, collection of taxes, approval of the budget, primary education, medical and veterinary services were now entrusted to elected institutions - district and provincial zemstvo councils. The elections of representatives from the population to the zemstvo (zemstvo councilors) were two-stage and ensured the numerical predominance of the nobles. Vowels from the peasants were a minority. They were elected for a term of 4 years. All matters in the zemstvo, which concerned primarily the vital needs of the peasantry, were carried out by landowners, who limited the interests of the other classes. In addition, local zemstvo institutions were subordinated to the tsarist administration and, first of all, to the governors. The zemstvo consisted of: zemstvo provincial assemblies (legislative power), zemstvo councils (executive power).

Urban reform of 1870- The reform replaced the previously existing class-based city administrations with city councils elected on the basis of property qualifications. The system of these elections ensured the predominance of large merchants and manufacturers. Representatives of big capital managed the municipal utilities of cities based on their own interests, paying attention to the development of the central quarters of the city and not paying attention to the outskirts. Government bodies under the 1870 law were also subject to the supervision of government authorities. The decisions adopted by the Dumas received force only after approval by the tsarist administration.

Historians of the late XIX – early XX centuries. commented on the self-government reform as follows. M.N. Pokrovsky pointed out its inconsistency: in many respects, “self-government by the reform of 1864 was not expanded, but, on the contrary, narrowed, and, moreover, extremely significantly.” And he gave examples of such a narrowing - the resubordination of local police to the central government, prohibitions on local authorities from establishing many types of taxes, limiting other local taxes to no more than 25% of the central tax, etc. In addition, as a result of the reform, local power was in the hands of large landowners (while previously it was mainly in the hands of officials reporting directly to the tsar and his ministers).

One of the results was changes in local taxation, which became discriminatory after the completion of the self-government reform. Thus, if back in 1868 peasant and landowner land were subject to local taxes approximately equally, then already in 1871 local taxes levied on a tithe of peasant land were twice as high as the taxes levied on a tithe of landowner land. Subsequently, the practice of flogging peasants for various offenses (which previously was mainly the prerogative of the landowners themselves) spread among zemstvos. Thus, self-government in the absence of real equality of classes and with the defeat of the majority of the country’s population in political rights led to increased discrimination against the lower classes by the upper classes.

Judicial reform

Judicial Charter of 1864- The Charter introduced a unified system of judicial institutions, based on the formal equality of all social groups before the law. Court hearings were held with the participation of interested parties, were public, and reports about them were published in the press. Litigants could hire lawyers for their defense who had a legal education and were not in public service. The new judicial system met the needs of capitalist development, but it still retained the imprints of serfdom - special volost courts were created for peasants, in which corporal punishment was retained. In political trials, even with acquittals, administrative repression was used. Political cases were considered without the participation of jurors, etc. While official crimes remained beyond the jurisdiction of general courts.

However, according to contemporary historians, the judicial reform did not produce the results that were expected from it. The introduced jury trials considered a relatively small number of cases; there was no real independence of judges.

In fact, during the era of Alexander II, there was an increase in police and judicial arbitrariness, that is, something opposite to what was proclaimed by the judicial reform. For example, the investigation into the case of 193 populists (the trial of the 193 in the case of going to the people) lasted almost 5 years (from 1873 to 1878), and during the investigation they were subjected to beatings (which, for example, did not happen under Nicholas I neither in the case of the Decembrists, nor in the case of the Petrashevites). As historians have pointed out, the authorities kept those arrested for years in prison without trial or investigation and subjected them to abuse before the huge trials that were created (the trial of 193 populists was followed by the trial of 50 workers). And after the trial of the 193s, not satisfied with the verdict passed by the court, Alexander II administratively tightened the court sentence - contrary to all the previously proclaimed principles of judicial reform.

Another example of the growth of judicial arbitrariness is the execution of four officers - Ivanitsky, Mroczek, Stanevich and Kenevich - who in 1863-1865. carried out agitation in order to prepare a peasant uprising. Unlike, for example, the Decembrists, who organized two uprisings (in St. Petersburg and in the south of the country) with the aim of overthrowing the Tsar, killed several officers, Governor-General Miloradovich and almost killed the Tsar’s brother, four officers under Alexander II suffered the same punishment ( execution), like 5 Decembrist leaders under Nicholas I, just for agitation among the peasants.

In the last years of the reign of Alexander II, against the backdrop of growing protest sentiments in society, unprecedented police measures were introduced: the authorities and police received the right to send into exile any person who seemed suspicious, to conduct searches and arrests at their discretion, without any coordination with the judiciary , bring political crimes to the courts of military tribunals - “with their application of punishments established for wartime.”

Military reform

Milyutin's military reforms took place in the 60-70s of the 19th century.

Milyutin's military reforms can be divided into two conventional parts: organizational and technological.

Organizational reforms

Report of the War Office 01/15/1862:

• Transform the reserve troops into a combat reserve, ensure that they replenish the active forces and free them from the obligation to train recruits in wartime.
• The training of recruits will be entrusted to the reserve troops, providing them with sufficient personnel.
• All supernumerary “lower ranks” of the reserve and reserve troops are considered on leave in peacetime and called up only in wartime. Recruits are used to replenish the decline in the active troops, and not to form new units from them.
• To form cadres of reserve troops for peacetime, assigning them garrison service, and to disband internal service battalions.

It was not possible to quickly implement this organization, and only in 1864 did a systematic reorganization of the army and a reduction in the number of troops begin.

By 1869, the deployment of troops to the new states was completed. At the same time, the total number of troops in peacetime compared to 1860 decreased from 899 thousand people. up to 726 thousand people (mainly due to the reduction of the “non-combat” element). And the number of reservists in the reserve increased from 242 to 553 thousand people. At the same time, with the transition to wartime standards, new units and formations were no longer formed, and units were deployed at the expense of reservists. All troops could now be brought up to wartime levels in 30-40 days, while in 1859 this required 6 months.

The new system of troop organization also contained a number of disadvantages:

• The organization of the infantry retained the division into line and rifle companies (given the same weapons, this made no sense).
• Artillery brigades were not included in the infantry divisions, which negatively affected their interactions.
• Of the 3 brigades of cavalry divisions (hussars, uhlans and dragoons), only the dragoons were armed with carbines, and the rest did not have firearms, while all the cavalry of European states was armed with pistols.

In May 1862, Milyutin presented Alexander II with proposals entitled “The main grounds for the proposed structure of military administration in districts.” This document was based on the following provisions:

• Abolish the division in peacetime into armies and corps, and consider the division to be the highest tactical unit.
• Divide the territory of the entire state into several military districts.
• Place a commander at the head of the district, who will be entrusted with supervision of the active troops and command of local troops, and also entrust him with the management of all local military institutions.

Already in the summer of 1862, instead of the First Army, the Warsaw, Kiev and Vilna military districts were established, and at the end of 1862 - Odessa.

In August 1864, the “Regulations on Military Districts” were approved, on the basis of which all military units and military institutions located in the district were subordinate to the Commander of the District Troops, thus he became the sole commander, and not an inspector, as was previously planned (with all artillery units in the district reported directly to the chief of artillery of the district). In the border districts, the Commander was entrusted with the duties of the Governor-General and all military and civil power was concentrated in his person. The structure of the district government remained unchanged.

In 1864, 6 more military districts were created: St. Petersburg, Moscow, Finland, Riga, Kharkov and Kazan. In subsequent years, the following were formed: the Caucasian, Turkestan, Orenburg, West Siberian and East Siberian military districts.

As a result of the organization of military districts, a relatively harmonious system of local military administration was created, eliminating the extreme centralization of the War Ministry, whose functions were now to exercise general leadership and supervision. Military districts ensured the rapid deployment of the army in the event of war; with their presence, it became possible to begin drawing up a mobilization schedule.

At the same time, reform of the War Ministry itself was underway. According to the new staff, the composition of the War Ministry was reduced by 327 officers and 607 soldiers. The volume of correspondence has also decreased significantly. It can also be noted as positive that the Minister of War concentrated in his hands all the threads of military control, but the troops were not completely subordinate to him, since the heads of military districts depended directly on the tsar, who headed the supreme command of the armed forces.

At the same time, the organization of the central military command also contained a number of other weaknesses:

• The structure of the General Staff was built in such a way that little space was allocated to the functions of the General Staff itself.
• The subordination of the main military court and the prosecutor to the Minister of War meant the subordination of the judiciary to the representative of the executive branch.
• The subordination of medical institutions not to the main military medical department, but to the commanders of local troops, had a negative impact on the organization of medical treatment in the army.

Conclusions of organizational reforms of the armed forces carried out in the 60-70s of the 19th century:

• During the first 8 years, the Ministry of War managed to implement a significant part of the planned reforms in the field of army organization and command and control.
• In the field of army organization, a system was created that could, in the event of war, increase the number of troops without resorting to new formations.
• The destruction of the army corps and the continued division of infantry battalions into rifle and line companies had a negative effect in terms of combat training of troops.
• The reorganization of the War Ministry ensured relative unity of military administration.
• As a result of the military district reform, local government bodies were created, excessive centralization of management was eliminated, and operational command and control of troops and their mobilization were ensured.

Technological reforms in the field of weapons

In 1856, a new type of infantry weapon was developed: a 6-line, muzzle-loading, rifled rifle. In 1862, more than 260 thousand people were armed with it. A significant part of the rifles were produced in Germany and Belgium. By the beginning of 1865, all infantry were rearmed with 6-line rifles. At the same time, work continued to improve rifles, and in 1868 the Berdan rifle was adopted for service, and in 1870 its modified version was adopted. As a result, by the beginning of the Russian-Turkish War of 1877-1878, the entire Russian army was armed with the latest breech-loading rifled rifles.

The introduction of rifled, muzzle-loading guns began in 1860. The field artillery adopted 4-pound rifled guns with a caliber of 3.42 inches, superior to those previously produced in both firing range and accuracy.

In 1866, weapons for field artillery were approved, according to which all batteries of foot and horse artillery must have rifled, breech-loading guns. 1/3 of the foot batteries should be armed with 9-pounder guns, and all other foot batteries and horse artillery with 4-pounder guns. To re-equip the field artillery, 1,200 guns were required. By 1870, the rearmament of field artillery was completely completed, and by 1871 there were 448 guns in reserve.

In 1870, artillery brigades adopted high-speed 10-barrel Gatling and 6-barreled Baranovsky canisters with a rate of fire of 200 rounds per minute. In 1872, the 2.5-inch Baranovsky rapid-firing gun was adopted, in which the basic principles of modern rapid-firing guns were implemented.

Thus, over the course of 12 years (from 1862 to 1874), the number of batteries increased from 138 to 300, and the number of guns from 1104 to 2400. In 1874, there were 851 guns in reserve, and a transition was made from wooden carriages to iron ones.

Education reform

During the reforms of the 1860s, the network of public schools was expanded. Along with classical gymnasiums, real gymnasiums (schools) were created in which the main emphasis was on teaching mathematics and natural sciences. The University Charter of 1863 for higher educational institutions introduced partial autonomy of universities - the election of rectors and deans and the expansion of the rights of the professorial corporation. In 1869, the first higher women's courses in Russia with a general education program were opened in Moscow. In 1864, a new School Charter was approved, according to which gymnasiums and secondary schools were introduced in the country.

Contemporaries viewed some elements of the education reform as discrimination against the lower classes. As the historian N.A. Rozhkov pointed out, in real gymnasiums, introduced for people from the lower and middle classes of society, they did not teach ancient languages ​​(Latin and Greek), unlike ordinary gymnasiums that existed only for the upper classes; but knowledge of ancient languages ​​was made mandatory when entering universities. Thus, access to universities was actually denied to the general population.

Other reforms

Under Alexander II, significant changes took place regarding the Jewish Pale of Settlement. Through a series of decrees issued between 1859 and 1880, a significant part of Jews received the right to freely settle throughout Russia. As A.I. Solzhenitsyn writes, the right of free settlement was given to merchants, artisans, doctors, lawyers, university graduates, their families and service personnel, as well as, for example, “persons of the liberal professions.” And in 1880, by decree of the Minister of Internal Affairs, it was allowed to allow those Jews who settled illegally to live outside the Pale of Settlement.

Autocracy reform

At the end of the reign of Alexander II, a project was drawn up to create a supreme council under the tsar (including major nobles and officials), to which part of the rights and powers of the tsar himself were transferred. We were not talking about a constitutional monarchy, in which the supreme body is a democratically elected parliament (which did not exist and was not planned in Russia). The authors of this “constitutional project” were the Minister of Internal Affairs Loris-Melikov, who received emergency powers at the end of the reign of Alexander II, as well as the Minister of Finance Abaza and the Minister of War Milyutin. Alexander II approved this plan two weeks before his death, but they did not have time to discuss it at the Council of Ministers, and a discussion was scheduled for March 4, 1881, with subsequent entry into force (which did not take place due to the assassination of the Tsar). As the historian N.A. Rozhkov pointed out, a similar project for reform of the autocracy was subsequently presented to Alexander III, as well as Nicholas II at the beginning of his reign, but both times it was rejected on the advice of K.N. Pobedonostsev.

Economic development of the country

Since the early 1860s. An economic crisis began in the country, which a number of historians associate with Alexander II’s refusal of industrial protectionism and the transition to a liberal policy in foreign trade. Thus, within several years after the introduction of the liberal customs tariff in 1857 (by 1862), cotton processing in Russia fell 3.5 times, and iron smelting decreased by 25%.

The liberal policy in foreign trade continued further, after the introduction of a new customs tariff in 1868. Thus, it was calculated that, compared with 1841, import duties in 1868 decreased on average by more than 10 times, and for some types of imports - even 20-40 times. According to M. Pokrovsky, “customs tariffs of 1857-1868. were the most preferential that Russia enjoyed in the 19th century...” This was welcomed by the liberal press, which dominated other economic publications at the time. As the historian writes, “financial and economic literature of the 60s provides an almost continuous chorus of free traders...” At the same time, the real situation in the country’s economy continued to deteriorate: modern economic historians characterize the entire period until the end of the reign of Alexander II and even until the second half of the 1880s. as a period of economic depression.

Contrary to the goals declared by the peasant reform of 1861, agricultural productivity in the country did not increase until the 1880s, despite rapid progress in other countries (USA, Western Europe), and the situation in this most important sector of the Russian economy also only worsened. For the first time in Russia, during the reign of Alexander II, periodically recurring famines began, which had not occurred in Russia since the time of Catherine II and which took on the character of real disasters (for example, mass famine in the Volga region in 1873).

Liberalization of foreign trade led to a sharp increase in imports: from 1851-1856. to 1869-1876 imports increased almost 4 times. If previously Russia's trade balance was always positive, then during the reign of Alexander II it worsened. Beginning in 1871, for several years it was reduced to a deficit, which by 1875 reached a record level of 162 million rubles or 35% of export volume. The trade deficit threatened to cause gold to flow out of the country and depreciate the ruble. At the same time, this deficit could not be explained by the unfavorable situation in foreign markets: for the main product of Russian exports - grain - prices on foreign markets from 1861 to 1880. increased almost 2 times. During 1877-1881 The government, in order to combat the sharp increase in imports, was forced to resort to a series of increases in import duties, which prevented further growth of imports and improved the country's foreign trade balance.

The only industry that developed rapidly was railway transport: the country's railway network was growing rapidly, which also stimulated its own locomotive and carriage building. However, the development of railways was accompanied by many abuses and a deterioration in the financial situation of the state. Thus, the state guaranteed the newly created private railway companies full coverage of their expenses and also the maintenance of a guaranteed rate of profit through subsidies. The result was huge budget expenditures to support private companies, while the latter artificially inflated their costs in order to receive government subsidies.

To cover budget expenses, the state for the first time began to actively resort to external loans (under Nicholas I there were almost none). Loans were attracted on extremely unfavorable conditions: bank commissions amounted to up to 10% of the borrowed amount, in addition, loans were placed, as a rule, at a price of 63-67% of their face value. Thus, the treasury received only a little more than half of the loan amount, but the debt arose for the full amount, and annual interest was calculated from the full amount of the loan (7-8% per annum). As a result, the volume of government external debt reached 2.2 billion rubles by 1862, and by the beginning of the 1880s - 5.9 billion rubles.

Until 1858, a fixed exchange rate of the ruble to gold was maintained, following the principles of monetary policy pursued during the reign of Nicholas I. But starting in 1859, credit money was introduced into circulation, which did not have a fixed exchange rate to gold. As indicated in the work of M. Kovalevsky, during the entire period of the 1860-1870s. To cover the budget deficit, the state was forced to resort to issuing credit money, which caused its depreciation and the disappearance of metal money from circulation. Thus, by January 1, 1879, the exchange rate of the credit ruble to the gold ruble fell to 0.617. Attempts to reintroduce a fixed exchange rate between the paper ruble and gold did not yield results, and the government abandoned these attempts until the end of the reign of Alexander II.

The problem of corruption

During the reign of Alexander II there was a noticeable increase in corruption. Thus, many nobles and noble persons close to the court established private railway companies, which received state subsidies on unprecedentedly preferential terms, which ruined the treasury. For example, the annual revenue of the Ural Railway in the early 1880s was only 300 thousand rubles, and its expenses and profits guaranteed to shareholders were 4 million rubles, thus, the state only had to maintain this one private railway company annually to pay an additional 3.7 million rubles from his own pocket, which was 12 times higher than the income of the company itself. In addition to the fact that the nobles themselves acted as shareholders of the railway companies, the latter paid them, including persons close to Alexander II, large bribes for certain permits and resolutions in their favor

Another example of corruption can be the placement of government loans (see above), a significant part of which was appropriated by various financial intermediaries.

There are also examples of “favoritism” on the part of Alexander II himself. As N.A. Rozhkov wrote, he “unceremoniously treated the state chest... gave his brothers a number of luxurious estates from state lands, built them magnificent palaces at public expense.”

In general, characterizing the economic policy of Alexander II, M.N. Pokrovsky wrote that it was “a waste of funds and effort, completely fruitless and harmful for the national economy... The country was simply forgotten.” Russian economic reality of the 1860s and 1870s, wrote N.A. Rozhkov, “was distinguished by its crudely predatory character, the waste of living and generally productive forces for the sake of the most basic profit”; The state during this period “essentially served as a tool for the enrichment of the Gründers, speculators, and, in general, the predatory bourgeoisie.”

Foreign policy

During the reign of Alexander II, Russia returned to the policy of all-round expansion of the Russian Empire, previously characteristic of the reign of Catherine II. During this period, Central Asia, the North Caucasus, the Far East, Bessarabia, and Batumi were annexed to Russia. Victories in the Caucasian War were won in the first years of his reign. The advance into Central Asia ended successfully (in 1865-1881, most of Turkestan became part of Russia). After long resistance, he decided on a war with Turkey in 1877-1878. Following the war, he accepted the rank of Field Marshal (April 30, 1878).

The meaning of annexing some new territories, especially Central Asia, was incomprehensible to part of Russian society. Thus, M.E. Saltykov-Shchedrin criticized the behavior of generals and officials who used the Central Asian war for personal enrichment, and M.N. Pokrovsky pointed out the meaninglessness of the conquest of Central Asia for Russia. Meanwhile, this conquest resulted in great human losses and material costs.

In 1876-1877 Alexander II took personal part in concluding a secret agreement with Austria in connection with the Russian-Turkish War of 1877-1878, the consequence of which, according to some historians and diplomats of the second half of the 19th century. became the Berlin Treaty (1878), which entered Russian historiography as “defective” in relation to the self-determination of the Balkan peoples (which significantly curtailed the Bulgarian state and transferred Bosnia-Herzegovina to Austria).

In 1867, Alaska (Russian America) was transferred to the United States.

Growing public discontent

Unlike the previous reign, which was almost not marked by social protests, the era of Alexander II was characterized by growing public discontent. Along with the sharp increase in the number of peasant uprisings (see above), many protest groups emerged among the intelligentsia and workers. In the 1860s, the following arose: S. Nechaev’s group, Zaichnevsky’s circle, Olshevsky’s circle, Ishutin’s circle, the Earth and Freedom organization, a group of officers and students (Ivanitsky and others) preparing a peasant uprising. During the same period, the first revolutionaries appeared (Petr Tkachev, Sergei Nechaev), who propagated the ideology of terrorism as a method of fighting power. In 1866, the first attempt was made to assassinate Alexander II, who was shot by Karakozov (a lone terrorist).

In the 1870s these trends intensified significantly. This period includes such protest groups and movements as the circle of Kursk Jacobins, the circle of Chaikovites, the Perovskaya circle, the Dolgushin circle, the Lavrov and Bakunin groups, the circles of Dyakov, Siryakov, Semyanovsky, the South Russian Union of Workers, the Kiev Commune, the Northern Workers' Union, the new organization Earth and Freedom and a number of others. Most of these circles and groups until the end of the 1870s. engaged in anti-government propaganda and agitation only from the late 1870s. a clear shift towards terrorist acts begins. In 1873-1874 2-3 thousand people (the so-called “going to the people”), mainly from among the intelligentsia, went to the countryside under the guise of ordinary people in order to propagate revolutionary ideas.

After the suppression of the Polish uprising of 1863-1864 and the attempt on his life by D.V. Karakozov on April 4, 1866, Alexander II made concessions to the protective course, expressed in the appointment of Dmitry Tolstoy, Fyodor Trepov, Pyotr Shuvalov to the highest government posts, which led to a tightening of measures in the field of domestic policy.

Increasing repression by police authorities, especially in relation to “going to the people” (the trial of the 193 populists), caused public outrage and marked the beginning of terrorist activity, which subsequently became widespread. Thus, the assassination attempt by Vera Zasulich in 1878 on the St. Petersburg mayor Trepov was undertaken in response to the mistreatment of prisoners in the trial of 193. Despite the irrefutable evidence that the assassination attempt had been committed, the jury acquitted her, she was given a standing ovation in the courtroom, and on the street she was greeted by an enthusiastic demonstration of a large crowd of people gathered at the courthouse.

Over the following years, assassination attempts were carried out:

1878: - against the Kyiv prosecutor Kotlyarevsky, against the gendarme officer Geiking in Kyiv, against the chief of gendarmes Mezentsev in St. Petersburg;

1879: against the Kharkov governor, Prince Kropotkin, against the chief of gendarmes, Drenteln, in St. Petersburg.

1878-1881: a series of assassination attempts took place on Alexander II.

By the end of his reign, protest sentiments spread among different strata of society, including the intelligentsia, part of the nobility and the army. The public applauded the terrorists, the number of terrorist organizations themselves grew - for example, the People's Will, which sentenced the Tsar to death, had hundreds of active members. Hero of the Russian-Turkish War of 1877-1878. and the war in Central Asia, the commander-in-chief of the Turkestan army, General Mikhail Skobelev, at the end of Alexander’s reign, showed sharp dissatisfaction with his policies and even, according to the testimony of A. Koni and P. Kropotkin, expressed his intention to arrest the royal family. These and other facts gave rise to the version that Skobelev was preparing a military coup to overthrow the Romanovs. Another example of the protest mood towards the policies of Alexander II can be the monument to his successor Alexander III. The author of the monument, sculptor Trubetskoy, depicted the tsar sharply besieging the horse, which, according to his plan, was supposed to symbolize Russia, stopped by Alexander III at the edge of the abyss - where the policies of Alexander II led it.

Assassinations and murder

History of failed attempts

Several attempts were made on Alexander II's life:

• D. V. Karakozov April 4, 1866. When Alexander II was heading from the gates of the Summer Garden to his carriage, a shot was heard. The bullet flew over the emperor’s head: the shooter was pushed by the peasant Osip Komissarov, who was standing nearby.
• Polish emigrant Anton Berezovsky on May 25, 1867 in Paris; the bullet hit the horse.
• A.K. Solovyov on April 2, 1879 in St. Petersburg. Solovyov fired 5 shots from a revolver, including 4 at the emperor, but missed.

On August 26, 1879, the executive committee of Narodnaya Volya decided to assassinate Alexander II.

• On November 19, 1879, there was an attempt to blow up an imperial train near Moscow. The emperor was saved by the fact that he was traveling in a different carriage. The explosion occurred in the first carriage, and the emperor himself was traveling in the second, since in the first he was carrying food from Kyiv.
• On February 5 (17), 1880, S. N. Khalturin carried out an explosion on the first floor of the Winter Palace. The emperor had lunch on the third floor; he was saved by the fact that he arrived later than the appointed time; the guards (11 people) on the second floor died.

To protect state order and fight the revolutionary movement, on February 12, 1880, the Supreme Administrative Commission was established, headed by the liberal-minded Count Loris-Melikov.

Death and burial. Society's reaction

March 1 (13), 1881, at 3 hours 35 minutes in the afternoon, died in the Winter Palace as a result of a fatal wound received on the embankment of the Catherine Canal (St. Petersburg) at about 2 hours 25 minutes in the afternoon on the same day - from a bomb explosion (the second in the course of the assassination attempt ), thrown at his feet by Narodnaya Volya member Ignatius Grinevitsky; died on the day when he intended to approve the constitutional draft of M. T. Loris-Melikov. The assassination attempt occurred when the emperor was returning after a military divorce in the Mikhailovsky Manege, from “tea” (second breakfast) in the Mikhailovsky Palace with Grand Duchess Catherine Mikhailovna; The tea was also attended by Grand Duke Mikhail Nikolaevich, who left a little later, having heard the explosion, and arrived shortly after the second explosion, giving orders and commands at the scene. The day before, February 28 (Saturday of the first week of Lent), the emperor, in the Small Church of the Winter Palace, together with some other family members, received the Holy Mysteries.

On March 4, his body was transferred to the Court Cathedral of the Winter Palace; On March 7, it was solemnly transferred to the Peter and Paul Cathedral in St. Petersburg. The funeral service on March 15 was led by Metropolitan Isidore (Nikolsky) of St. Petersburg, co-served by other members of the Holy Synod and a host of clergy.

The death of the “Liberator”, killed by the Narodnaya Volya on behalf of the “liberated”, seemed to many to be the symbolic end of his reign, which led, from the point of view of the conservative part of society, to rampant “nihilism”; Particular indignation was caused by the conciliatory policy of Count Loris-Melikov, who was viewed as a puppet in the hands of Princess Yuryevskaya. Right-wing political figures (including Konstantin Pobedonostsev, Evgeny Feoktistov and Konstantin Leontyev) even said with more or less directness that the emperor died “on time”: had he reigned for another year or two, the catastrophe of Russia (the collapse of the autocracy) would have become inevitable.

Not long before, K.P. Pobedonostsev, appointed Chief Prosecutor, wrote to the new emperor on the very day of the death of Alexander II: “God ordered us to survive this terrible day. It was as if God's punishment had fallen on unfortunate Russia. I would like to hide my face, go underground, so as not to see, not to feel, not to experience. God, have mercy on us. "

The rector of the St. Petersburg Theological Academy, Archpriest John Yanyshev, on March 2, 1881, before the funeral service in St. Isaac's Cathedral, said in his speech: “The Emperor not only died, but was also killed in His own capital... the martyr’s crown for His sacred Head is woven on Russian ground, among His subjects... This is what makes our grief unbearable, the illness of the Russian and Christian heart incurable, our immeasurable misfortune our eternal shame!

Grand Duke Alexander Mikhailovich, who at a young age was at the bedside of the dying emperor and whose father was in the Mikhailovsky Palace on the day of the assassination attempt, wrote in his emigrant memoirs about his feelings in the days that followed: “At night, sitting on our beds, we continued to discuss the catastrophe of the past Sunday and asked each other what would happen next? The image of the late Sovereign, bending over the body of a wounded Cossack and not thinking about the possibility of a second assassination attempt, did not leave us. We understood that something incommensurably greater than our loving uncle and courageous monarch had gone with him irrevocably into the past. Idyllic Russia with the Tsar-Father and his loyal people ceased to exist on March 1, 1881. We understood that the Russian Tsar would never again be able to treat his subjects with boundless trust. He will not be able to forget the regicide and devote himself entirely to state affairs. The romantic traditions of the past and the idealistic understanding of Russian autocracy in the spirit of the Slavophiles - all this will be buried, along with the murdered emperor, in the crypt of the Peter and Paul Fortress. Last Sunday’s explosion dealt a mortal blow to the old principles, and no one could deny that the future of not only the Russian Empire, but the entire world, now depended on the outcome of the inevitable struggle between the new Russian Tsar and the elements of denial and destruction.”

The editorial article of the Special Supplement to the right-wing conservative newspaper “Rus” on March 4 read: “The Tsar has been killed!... Russian tsar, in his own Russia, in his capital, brutally, barbarously, in front of everyone - with a Russian hand... Shame, shame on our country! Let the burning pain of shame and grief penetrate our land from end to end, and let every soul tremble in it with horror, sorrow, and the anger of indignation! That rabble, which so impudently, so brazenly oppresses the soul of the entire Russian people with crimes, is not the offspring of our simple people themselves, nor their antiquity, nor even the truly enlightened newness, but the product of the dark sides of the St. Petersburg period of our history, apostasy from the Russian people, treason its traditions, principles and ideals."

At an emergency meeting of the Moscow City Duma, the following resolution was unanimously adopted: “An unheard-of and terrifying event occurred: the Russian Tsar, liberator of peoples, fell victim to a gang of villains among a people of many millions, selflessly devoted to him. Several people, the product of darkness and sedition, dared to encroach with a sacrilegious hand on the centuries-old tradition of the great land, to tarnish its history, the banner of which is the Russian Tsar. The Russian people shuddered with indignation and anger at the news of the terrible event.”

In issue No. 65 (March 8, 1881) of the official newspaper St. Petersburg Vedomosti, a “hot and frank article” was published that caused “a stir in the St. Petersburg press.” The article, in particular, said: “Petersburg, located on the outskirts of the state, is teeming with foreign elements. Both foreigners, eager for the disintegration of Russia, and leaders of our outskirts have built their nest here. [St. Petersburg] is full of our bureaucracy, which has long lost the sense of the people’s pulse. That’s why in St. Petersburg you can meet so many people, apparently Russians, but who reason as enemies of their homeland, as traitors to their people.”

An anti-monarchist representative of the left wing of the Cadets, V.P. Obninsky, in his work “The Last Autocrat” (1912 or later), wrote about the regicide: “This act deeply shook up society and the people. The murdered sovereign had too outstanding services for his death to pass without a reflex on the part of the population. And such a reflex could only be a desire for a reaction.”

At the same time, the executive committee of Narodnaya Volya, a few days after March 1, published a letter which, along with a statement of “execution of the sentence” to the tsar, contained an “ultimatum” to the new tsar, Alexander III: “If the government’s policy does not change , revolution will be inevitable. The government must express the will of the people, but it is a usurper gang.” Despite the arrest and execution of all the leaders of Narodnaya Volya, terrorist acts continued in the first 2-3 years of the reign of Alexander III.

The following lines by Alexander Blok (poem “Retribution”) are dedicated to the assassination of Alexander II:

Results of the reign

Alexander II went down in history as a reformer and liberator. During his reign, serfdom was abolished, universal military service was introduced, zemstvos were established, judicial reform was carried out, censorship was limited, and a number of other reforms were carried out. The empire expanded significantly by conquering and incorporating the Central Asian possessions, the North Caucasus, the Far East and other territories.

At the same time, the economic situation of the country worsened: industry was struck by a protracted depression, and there were several cases of mass starvation in the countryside. The foreign trade deficit and public external debt reached large sizes (almost 6 billion rubles), which led to a breakdown in monetary circulation and public finances. The problem of corruption has worsened. A split and acute social contradictions formed in Russian society, which reached their peak towards the end of the reign.

Other negative aspects usually include the unfavorable results of the Berlin Congress of 1878 for Russia, exorbitant expenses in the war of 1877-1878, numerous peasant uprisings (in 1861-1863: more than 1150 uprisings), large-scale nationalist uprisings in the kingdom of Poland and the North-Western region ( 1863) and in the Caucasus (1877-1878). Within the imperial family, the authority of Alexander II was undermined by his love interests and morganatic marriage.

Assessments of some of Alexander II's reforms are contradictory. Noble circles and the liberal press called his reforms “great.” At the same time, a significant part of the population (peasantry, part of the intelligentsia), as well as a number of government figures of that era, negatively assessed these reforms. Thus, K.N. Pobedonostsev at the first meeting of the government of Alexander III on March 8, 1881 sharply criticized the peasant, zemstvo, and judicial reforms of Alexander II. And historians of the late XIX - early XX centuries. they argued that the real liberation of the peasants did not occur (only a mechanism for such liberation was created, and an unfair one at that); corporal punishment against peasants (which remained until 1904-1905) was not abolished; the establishment of zemstvos led to discrimination against the lower classes; Judicial reform was unable to prevent the growth of judicial and police brutality. In addition, according to specialists on the agrarian issue, the peasant reform of 1861 led to the emergence of serious new problems (landowners, the ruin of the peasants), which became one of the reasons for the future revolutions of 1905 and 1917.

The views of modern historians on the era of Alexander II were subject to dramatic changes under the influence of the dominant ideology, and are not settled. In Soviet historiography, a tendentious view of his reign prevailed, resulting from general nihilistic attitudes toward the “era of tsarism.” Modern historians, along with the thesis about the “liberation of the peasants,” state that their freedom of movement after the reform was “relative.” Calling the reforms of Alexander II “great,” they at the same time write that the reforms gave rise to “the deepest socio-economic crisis in the countryside,” did not lead to the abolition of corporal punishment for peasants, were not consistent, and economic life in 1860-1870 -e years was characterized by industrial decline, rampant speculation and farming.

Family

• First marriage (1841) with Maria Alexandrovna (07/1/1824 - 05/22/1880), nee Princess Maximiliana-Wilhelmina-Augusta-Sophia-Maria of Hesse-Darmstadt.

• The second, morganatic, marriage with a long-time (since 1866) mistress, Princess Ekaterina Mikhailovna Dolgorukova (1847-1922), who received the title Your Serene Highness Princess Yuryevskaya.

Alexander II's net worth as of March 1, 1881 was about 12 million rubles. (securities, State Bank tickets, shares of railway companies); In 1880, he donated 1 million rubles from personal funds. for the construction of a hospital in memory of the Empress.

Children from first marriage:

• Alexandra (1842-1849);
• Nicholas (1843-1865);
• Alexander III (1845-1894);
• Vladimir (1847-1909);
• Alexey (1850-1908);
• Maria (1853-1920);
• Sergei (1857-1905);
• Pavel (1860-1919).

Children from a morganatic marriage (legalized after the wedding):

• His Serene Highness Prince Georgy Alexandrovich Yuryevsky (1872-1913);
• Your Serene Highness Princess Olga Alexandrovna Yuryevskaya (1873-1925);
• Boris (1876-1876), posthumously legitimized with the surname “Yuryevsky”;
• Your Serene Highness Princess Ekaterina Alexandrovna Yuryevskaya (1878-1959), married to Prince Alexander Vladimirovich Baryatinsky, and then to Prince Sergei Platonovich Obolensky-Neledinsky-Meletsky.

In addition to the children from Ekaterina Dolgoruky, he had several other illegitimate children.

Some monuments to Alexander II

Moscow

On May 14, 1893, in the Kremlin, next to the Small Nicholas Palace, where Alexander was born (opposite the Chudov Monastery), it was laid, and on August 16, 1898, solemnly, after the liturgy in the Assumption Cathedral, in the Most High presence (the service was performed by Metropolitan of Moscow Vladimir (Epiphany) ), a monument to him was unveiled (the work of A. M. Opekushin, P. V. Zhukovsky and N. V. Sultanov). The emperor was sculptured standing under a pyramidal canopy in a general's uniform, in purple, with a scepter; the canopy made of dark pink granite with bronze decorations was crowned with a gilded patterned hipped roof with a double-headed eagle; The chronicle of the king's life was placed in the dome of the canopy. Adjacent to the monument on three sides was a through gallery formed by vaults supported by columns. In the spring of 1918, the sculptural figure of the Tsar was thrown off the monument; The monument was completely dismantled in 1928.

In June 2005, a monument to Alexander II was inaugurated in Moscow. The author of the monument is Alexander Rukavishnikov. The monument is installed on a granite platform on the western side of the Cathedral of Christ the Savior. On the pedestal of the monument there is the inscription “Emperor Alexander II. He abolished serfdom in 1861 and freed millions of peasants from centuries of slavery. Conducted military and judicial reforms. He introduced a system of local self-government, city councils and zemstvo councils. Ended the many years of the Caucasian War. Liberated the Slavic peoples from the Ottoman yoke. Died on March 1 (13), 1881 as a result of a terrorist attack.”

Saint Petersburg

In St. Petersburg, at the site of the death of the Tsar, the Church of the Savior on Spilled Blood was erected using funds collected throughout Russia. The cathedral was built by order of Emperor Alexander III in 1883-1907 according to a joint project by architect Alfred Parland and Archimandrite Ignatius (Malyshev), and consecrated on August 6, 1907 - on the day of the Transfiguration.

The tombstone installed over the grave of Alexander II differs from the white marble tombstones of other emperors: it is made of gray-green jasper.

Bulgaria

In Bulgaria, Alexander II is known as Tsar Liberator. His manifesto of April 12 (24), 1877, declaring war on Turkey, is studied in a school history course. The Treaty of San Stefano on March 3, 1878 brought freedom to Bulgaria after five centuries of Ottoman rule that began in 1396. The grateful Bulgarian people erected many monuments to the Tsar-Liberator and named streets and institutions throughout the country in his honor.

Sofia

In the center of the Bulgarian capital, Sofia, on the square in front of the People's Assembly, stands one of the best monuments to the Tsar-Liberator.

General-Toshevo

On April 24, 2009, a monument to Alexander II was inaugurated in the city of General Toshevo. The height of the monument is 4 meters, it is made of two types of volcanic stone: red and black. The monument was made in Armenia and is a gift from the Union of Armenians in Bulgaria. It took Armenian craftsmen a year and four months to make the monument. The stone from which it is made is very ancient.

Kyiv

In Kyiv from 1911 to 1919 there was a monument to Alexander II, which was demolished by the Bolsheviks after the October Revolution.

Kazan

The monument to Alexander II in Kazan was erected on what became Alexander Square (formerly Ivanovskaya, now May 1) near the Spasskaya Tower of the Kazan Kremlin and was inaugurated on August 30, 1895. In February-March 1918, the bronze figure of the emperor was dismantled from the pedestal, until the end of the 1930s it lay on the territory of the Gostiny Dvor, and in April 1938 it was melted down to make brake bushings for tram wheels. The “Labor Monument” was first built on the pedestal, then the monument to Lenin. In 1966, a monumental memorial complex was built on this site, consisting of a monument to Hero of the Soviet Union Musa Jalil and a bas-relief to the heroes of the Tatar resistance in Nazi captivity of the “Kurmashev group”.

Rybinsk

On January 12, 1914, the laying of a monument took place on Red Square in the city of Rybinsk - in the presence of Bishop Sylvester (Bratanovsky) of Rybinsk and the Yaroslavl governor Count D.N. Tatishchev. On May 6, 1914, the monument was unveiled (work by A. M. Opekushin).

Repeated attempts by the crowd to desecrate the monument began immediately after the February Revolution of 1917. In March 1918, the “hated” sculpture was finally wrapped and hidden under matting, and in July it was completely thrown off the pedestal. First, the sculpture “Hammer and Sickle” was placed in its place, and in 1923 - a monument to V.I. Lenin. The further fate of the sculpture is unknown; The pedestal of the monument has survived to this day. In 2009, Albert Serafimovich Charkin began working on recreating the sculpture of Alexander II; The opening of the monument was originally planned in 2011, on the 150th anniversary of the abolition of serfdom, but most townspeople consider it inappropriate to move the monument to V.I. Lenin and replace it with Emperor Alexander II.

Helsinki

In the capital of the Grand Duchy of Helsingfors, on Senate Square in 1894, a monument to Alexander II, the work of Walter Runeberg, was erected. With the monument, the Finns expressed gratitude for strengthening the foundations of Finnish culture and, among other things, for recognizing the Finnish language as the state language.

Częstochowa

The monument to Alexander II in Częstochowa (Kingdom of Poland) by A. M. Opekushin was opened in 1899.

Monuments by Opekushin

A. M. Opekushin erected monuments to Alexander II in Moscow (1898), Pskov (1886), Chisinau (1886), Astrakhan (1884), Czestochowa (1899), Vladimir (1913), Buturlinovka (1912), Rybinsk (1914) and in other cities of the empire. Each of them was unique; According to estimates, “the Czestochowa monument, created with donations from the Polish population, was very beautiful and elegant.” After 1917, most of what Opekushin created was destroyed.

• And to this day in Bulgaria, during the liturgy in Orthodox churches, during the great entrance of the liturgy of the faithful, Alexander II and all the Russian soldiers who fell on the battlefield for the liberation of Bulgaria in the Russian-Turkish War of 1877-1878 are remembered.
• Alexander II is the current current head of the Russian state who was born in Moscow.
• The abolition of serfdom (1861), carried out during the reign of Alexander II, coincided with the beginning of the American Civil War (1861-1865), where the struggle for the abolition of slavery is considered its main cause.

Film incarnations

• Ivan Kononenko (“Heroes of Shipka”, 1954).
• Vladislav Strzhelchik (“Sofya Perovskaya”, 1967).
• Vladislav Dvorzhetsky (“Yulia Vrevskaya”, 1977).
• Yuri Belyaev (“The Kingslayer”, 1991).
• Nikolai Burov (“The Emperor’s Romance”, 1993).
• Georgy Taratorkin (“The Emperor’s Love”, 2003).
• Dmitry Isaev (“Poor Nastya”, 2003-2004).
• Evgeny Lazarev (“Turkish Gambit”, 2005).
• Smirnov, Andrey Sergeevich (“Gentlemen of the Jury”, 2005).
• Lazarev, Alexander Sergeevich (“The Mysterious Prisoner”, 1986).
• Borisov, Maxim Stepanovich (“Alexander II”, 2011).

Lecture outline

Lecture No. 10 Reforms of Alexander II and their influence on the further development of Russia

Literature

Control questions

1. What are the features of the socio-economic development of Russia in the first half of the twentieth century? What historical facts indicate the inconsistency of this process?

2. Who was the inspirer of the reforms and who pursued conservative policies during the reign of Alexander I? What is the meaning of the so-called. the policy of “Arakcheevism” in the last years of the reign of Alexander I?

3. What consequences did the Patriotic War of 1812 and the foreign campaigns of the Russian army of 1813 - 1814 have for Russia?

4. Describe the features of liberation thought in Russia in the first half of the twentieth century.

5. What are the reasons for Russia’s defeat in the Crimean War?

1. Arslanov R. A., Kerov V. V., Moseikina M. N., Smirnova T. M. History of Russia. Minimum educational requirement for applicants: Academic. allowance. - M., 2001.

2. Bokhanov A. N., Zakharova L. G., Mironenko S. V. and others. Russian autocrats. 1801 - 1917. - M., 1994.

3. Georgiev V. A., Georgieva N. G. History of Russia. - M., 2006.

4. Ilyin V.V., Panarin A.S., Akhiezer A.S. Reforms and counter-reforms in Russia: Cycles of the modernization process. - M., 1996.

5. Ryzhov K. All the monarchs of the world. Russia. (600 short biographies). - M., 1999.

Purpose of the lecture: to form students' knowledge about the causes, progress and consequences of liberal reforms of the 60s and 70s. XIX century in Russia and their impact on the subsequent development of the country; social movement in the second half of the 19th century; characteristic features and features of the development of capitalism in the post-reform period

1. Alexander II the Liberator (1855 - 1881). Reforms of the 60s - 70s. XIX century

2. Foreign policy of Alexander II.

3. Domestic and foreign policy of Alexander III the Peacemaker (1881 - 1894).

4. Ideological struggle and social movement in the second half of the 19th century.

5. Features of the modernization of post-reform Russia.

The crisis caused by the Crimean War, increased serf exploitation, the peasant movement, and the general backwardness of the country put peasant reform on the agenda. Reform became not only necessary, but also inevitable.

At the end of 1857, on the instructions of Alexander II, noble committees were established in the provinces to draw up reform projects. The government program was determined by the end of 1858.

February 19, 1861 Alexander II signed the “Manifesto on the Abolition of Serfdom.” The main result of the reform was the personal liberation of the peasant. Peasants received the right to own property, engage in commercial and industrial activities, and move to other classes. However, the peasants paid a high price for liberation from the landowners. The peasants were freed with land, but the size of the peasant allotment had to be determined by agreement between the landowner and the peasants. If before the reform

Since the peasants had more land than was provided for by the act of February 19, the surplus (“cuts”) was given to the landowners. The peasants were given land of poorer quality and inconvenient location. To become land owners, peasants had to pay ransom significantly exceeding the market value of the land. Since the peasants had no money, the state acted as an intermediary. It gave the landowners up to 80% of the redemption amount. The peasants were required to repay this debt with interest over 49 years. Redemption payments canceled only after the revolution of 1905-1907. During this time, the peasants paid the treasury and landowners 2 billion rubles, while the market price of the land remaining with the peasants was 0.5 billion rubles.

However, even 20% of the redemption amount turned out to be beyond the reach of many peasants. Peasants were also considered temporarily obliged and for the use of the plots they had to serve the previous duties - corvée or quitrent. The temporary obligation was liquidated in 1881.

Historical significance of the reform. Peasants received personal freedom, civil and property rights. The reform cleared the way for the development of capitalism in Russia. However, it retained many feudal remnants that hampered the capitalist development of the village.

As a result of the reform, the size of peasant plots decreased significantly; in addition, the peasant could not sell his plot without the consent of the community. On the other hand, many landowners also felt the negative consequences of the reform: many of them went bankrupt because they could not adapt to the new conditions of farming. Another consequence of the peasant reform was a significant influx of peasants into the cities, since many peasants, having received their plots, were also unable to work in the new conditions and went to work in the cities. This gave impetus to the development of industrial production, as bankrupt peasants went to work, first of all, at industrial enterprises. In the years following the reform, production at metallurgical, mining, and machine-building plants increased sharply.

Here we must take into account that this traditional point of view causes serious controversy in modern historiography. After all, indeed, the state made every effort to prevent the proletarianization of the peasantry. For this reason, the peasants were freed with land, so the community was endowed with police functions. The bureaucrats were convinced that the proletarian was an extremely dangerous element, a source of instability in the country. In order to prevent the growth of the proletariat, the government put obstacles to the flow of labor into factories and factories.

The next step after resolving the peasant issue was the reform of local government. In accordance with the decree issued at the beginning of 1864, local government bodies were introduced at the provincial and district levels - zemstvo. The composition of the zemstvo was determined by property qualifications from three categories of citizens - landowners, townspeople and peasants. Their term of office was set at 3 years. The executive bodies of zemstvos became zemstvo councils. According to the creators of zemstvos, the new bodies were supposed to solve local issues related to education, medical care, etc. At the same time, even the solution to these local issues was strictly controlled by the governor. In 1864 it was carried out and Judicial reform. According to the new rules of judicial records management, unified judicial bodies have emerged in Russia, functioning on a classless basis. The trial was to be based on an adversarial basis, and the court itself was declared independent of the executive authorities. In addition, jury trials were introduced. The highest judicial body was the Senate, which had the right to overturn court decisions. Volost courts were specially created for peasants. In addition, cases concerning the military and clergy were subject to consideration by separate courts.

In 1870 it was carried out urban reform. According to the City Regulations, an estateless body of local government in cities was created - the Duma, the executive body of which was declared to be the city government, headed by the mayor. As in the case of zemstvos, the decisions of the city duma were controlled by the governor and the minister of internal affairs. Elections to the Duma were held according to property qualifications from the same 3 categories of citizens (curias). The councils were in charge of issues of medicine, education, local tax system, trade relations, etc.

In 1862 the government carried out financial reform. Its implementation was largely connected with the implementation of redemption payments for peasant land plots. To repay payments, foreign investments were attracted and some taxes were increased. In addition, since 1862, control over the expenditure of budget funds has been tightened (a new body, the State Control, was specially created for control). An attempt was also made to carry out a monetary reform, which consisted in the fact that government credit papers could be exchanged for silver and gold. However, this was possible only at first due to foreign investment, the influx of which began to noticeably decline by the mid-1860s. To revive the economic situation, the State Bank was created, and it was also allowed to create private banks, which were also supposed to support economic growth.

1864 was also the year of the beginning education reforms.

Back in the late 1850s. Women's gymnasiums were created, and subsequently higher women's courses based on university programs began to appear. In 1864, the autonomous status of universities was restored, which gave higher education institutions relative freedom in deciding educational issues and the policy of appointing teaching staff. Gymnasiums were divided into classical and real with a period of study of 7 years. In addition, zemstvo and Sunday schools appeared.

The initiator of another reform - military(1862) became Minister of War YES. Milyutin. The whole country was divided into military districts, which was supposed to make governance more efficient. The size of the army was reduced. In addition, a program was developed to introduce new weapons (which was due to the failures during the recent Crimean War). To improve the qualifications of the military, special military educational institutions (gymnasiums and colleges, as well as academies) were created. WITH 1874 recruitment into the army was cancelled. To replace this outdated principle of recruiting military personnel, universal conscription was introduced, to which men were subject from the age of 21.

The reforms carried out by Alexander II were progressive in nature. They began to lay the foundation for the evolutionary path of development of Russia. A logical continuation of the reforms of the 60s and 70s. XIX century could be the adoption of the moderate constitutional proposals developed in the late 1870s. Minister of Internal Affairs General M. T. Loris-Melikov. However, the murder of Emperor Alexander II by the Narodnaya Volya on March 1, 1881 changed the general direction of the government course.

EMPEROR ALEXANDER II NIKOLAEVICH

The eldest son of Emperor Nikolai Pavlovich and Empress Alexandra Feodorovna. Born in Moscow on April 17, 1818. Declared heir to the Russian throne on December 12, 1825, crown prince on August 30, 1831.

Alexander’s mentor was the poet V.A. Zhukovsky, teacher - General K.K. Merder. Merder assumed this important position on June 12, 1824, when the Grand Duke was barely 6 years old, and fulfilled it with tireless diligence for 10 years. There is no doubt that the influence of this highly humane educator on the young heart of his pupil was most beneficial. No less beneficial was the influence of the famous poet Vasily Andreevich Zhukovsky, the leader of his class studies. There is no doubt that Zhukovsky, with his overall influence, contributed to the preparation of his pupil for the future liberation of the peasants.

Upon reaching adulthood, the heir to the crown prince traveled around Russia, accompanied by Kavelin, Zhukovsky and the adjutant Yuryevich. He was the first of the royal family to visit Siberia in 1837, and the result of this visit was a mitigation of the fate of political exiles. Later, while in the Caucasus, the Tsarevich distinguished himself during an attack by the highlanders, for which he was awarded the Order of St. George, 4th degree.

Portrait of Alexander II. Artist Egor Botman. 1856

In 1838, Alexander Nikolaevich traveled around Europe and, in the family of Grand Duke Ludwig of Hesse-Darmstadt, chose Princess Maximiliana Wilhelmina Augusta Sophia Maria (born July 27, 1824) as his wife. Upon arrival in Russia on December 5, 1840, she received holy confirmation according to the statutes of the Russian Orthodox Church with the name of Grand Duchess Maria Alexandrovna. The betrothal followed the next day, and on April 16, 1841 the marriage took place.

From the marriage of Emperor Alexander II with Maria Alexandrovna, children were born: Grand Duchess Alexandra Alexandrovna (born August 19, 1842), Grand Duke, heir, Tsarevich Nikolai Alexandrovich (born September 8, 1843), Grand Duke Alexander Alexandrovich, future Emperor Alexander III (born February 26, 1845), Grand Duke Vladimir Alexandrovich (born April 10, 1847), Grand Duke Alexei Alexandrovich (born January 2, 1850), Grand Duchess Maria Alexandrovna (born October 5, 1853), Grand Duke Sergei Alexandrovich (born April 29, 1857), Grand Duke Pavel Alexandrovich (born September 21, 1860).

After the death of his wife, since 1880, Alexander II was in a morganatic marriage with Princess E.M. Yuryevskaya (Dolgorukaya), with whom he had four children.

While still an heir, Alexander Nikolaevich participated in government affairs. In the last years of the reign of Emperor Nicholas, during his travels, the Tsarevich repeatedly replaced his august parent. In 1848, during his stay at the Vienna, Berlin and other courts, he carried out various important diplomatic assignments. Having taken military educational institutions under his management, Alexander Nikolaevich took special care of their needs and the improvement of teaching and education.

The accession of Alexander II to the throne on February 19, 1855 occurred under very difficult circumstances. The Crimean War, where Russia had to deal with the combined forces of almost all the major European powers, took an unfavorable turn for Russia. Despite, however, his love of peace, which was also known in Europe, Alexander II expressed his firm determination to continue the fight and achieve an honorable peace. Up to 360 thousand militia people were recruited, the same amount was given in three recruitment kits. The steadfastness and courage of the Russian troops in defending Sevastopol aroused enthusiastic surprise even from their enemies. The names of Kornilov, Nakhimov and other commanders were covered with unfading glory. Finally, however, the terrible action of enemy artillery, which destroyed our fortifications and carried away thousands of people every day, and the combined assault of Sevastopol by all allies, carried out on August 27, 1855, forced the Russian troops to leave the southern part of the city. The fall of Sevastopol, however, did not bring significant benefit to the enemy.

On the other hand, the Russians were partly rewarded with success in Asia Minor: Kars - this impregnable fortress, reinforced by the British - was taken by General Muravyov with his entire large garrison on November 16, 1855. This success gave us the opportunity to show our readiness for peace. The Allies, also tired of the war, were willing to enter into negotiations, which began through the Vienna Court. Representatives of seven powers (Russia, France, Austria, England, Prussia, Sardinia and Turkey) gathered in Paris, and on March 18, 1856, a peace treaty was concluded. The main conditions of this treaty were the following: navigation on the Black Sea and the Danube is open to all merchant ships, entry into the Black Sea, the Bosporus and the Dardanelles is closed to warships, with the exception of those light warships that each power maintains at the mouth of the Danube for provision on it free swimming. Russia and Turkey, by mutual agreement, maintain an equal number of ships in the Black Sea. Russia, in order to ensure free navigation along the Danube, cedes to the Danube principalities part of its territory near the mouth of this river. She also promises not to fortify the Åland Islands. Christians in Turkey are compared in rights with Muslims, the Danube principalities come under the general protectorate of Europe.

The Paris peace, although unfavorable for Russia, was still honorable for her in view of such numerous and strong opponents. However, its disadvantageous side - the limitation of Russia's naval forces on the Black Sea - was eliminated during the life of Alexander II with a statement dated October 19, 1870.

The Crimean War exposed many internal ulcers of our Fatherland and showed the complete failure of the previous way of life. It turned out that a complete economic and social reconstruction of many parts of Russia was necessary. But on the path of any improvement, serfdom stood as an inexorable obstacle. The need for reform became palpable and urgent. And with the advent of peace, a new era of internal renewal was not slow to begin. Already in the concluding words of the highest manifesto of March 19, 1856, which announced the end of the Crimean War, an entire program of future activities of the Tsar-Liberator was expressed: “With the help of heavenly Providence, which has always benefited Russia, may its internal prosperity be established and improved; Let truth and mercy reign in her courts; May the desire for enlightenment and all useful activities develop everywhere and with new strength, and may everyone, under the shadow of laws that are equally fair and equally protective for everyone, enjoy the fruit of innocent labors in the world.”

On the day of coronation, August 26, 1856, the sovereign's new manifesto was marked by a number of favors. Recruitment was suspended for three years, all government arrears, charges, etc. were forgiven. Punishments for various criminals, including state criminals, who participated in the uprising of December 14, 1825 and in secret societies of that time were released or at least commuted. . The admission of young Jews to recruits was canceled, and recruitment between the latter was ordered to be carried out on a general basis, etc.

But all these private measures, greeted with enthusiasm by Russia, were only the threshold of those fundamental reforms that marked the reign of Alexander II. First of all, the issue of serfdom had to be resolved, which, as was obvious to everyone, was the main root of all other shortcomings of our Fatherland. The idea of ​​the need to free the peasants, and, moreover, with a land allotment, prevailed already during the time of Emperor Nicholas I. The entire intelligentsia treated serfdom as a shameful evil. Literature continued in this sense the glorious tradition of Radishchev. It is enough to mention the names of Griboyedov, Belinsky, Grigorovich, Turgenev. But the mood of the intelligentsia, which was predominantly noble, did not prevent the fact that when the question in any form came up for class discussion among the nobles, it met with resistance in this environment...

Proclamation of the coronation of Alexander II on Red Square. Artist V.S. Sadovnikov. 1856

Emperor Alexander II, upon ascending the throne, was convinced that the liberation of the peasants should take place during his reign. This was the general mood of the intelligentsia, and even among the peasants themselves there was a vague premonition of the approaching “will.” The decrees on the militia of 1854 and at the beginning of 1855 caused significant unrest in nine provinces, as peasants en masse expressed their desire to join the militia, considering service in the militia to be a transition to “freedom.”

When the sovereign spoke in Moscow about the need and timeliness of the emancipation of the serfs, all of Russia was seized with enthusiastic, joyful hopes... In 1856, a special secret committee was established, and on January 3, 1857, had its first meeting under the direct supervision and chairmanship of the emperor, whose task was there should have been a consideration of decrees and proposals on serfdom.

Meanwhile, on August 18, 1857, a petition was received from the nobility of three Lithuanian provinces to free the peasants, but with the landowners retaining the right to land. In response to this petition, the highest rescript was given to the Vilna, Grodno and Kovno governors-general, in which the sovereign allowed the nobility of each of the named provinces to establish a committee that would develop a project for improving the life of the peasants. In the same year, the same permission was given to the St. Petersburg and Nizhny Novgorod nobility, and the next year to the nobles of Moscow and other provinces.

Finally, on February 19, 1861, a great manifesto followed, constituting the glory of the Tsar-Liberator - a manifesto on the liberation of the 22 million peasant population from serfdom.

The liberation of the landowner peasants took place on the following principles. First of all, it was declared obligatory for the landowner to allocate to his former peasants, in addition to the estate land, arable and hayfields, in the amounts specified in the regulations. Secondly, it was declared obligatory for peasants to accept the allotment and keep in their use, for the duties established in favor of the landowner, the worldly land allocated to them for the first nine years. After nine years, individual members of the community were given the right to both leave it and refuse to use field lands and lands if they bought out their estate. Thirdly, with regard to the size of the peasant allotment and the payments associated with it, according to general rules, it is customary to base it on voluntary agreements between landowners and peasants, for which a statutory charter is concluded through the mediators established by the situation, their congresses and provincial presences on peasant affairs.

Thus, the great reform was accomplished peacefully and without significant upheavals in the state mechanism, which since the time of Catherine II was considered next in line, but which they were still afraid to begin. Instead of 22 million enslaved people, a free peasant class was created with self-government within the community and volost. The rights granted to the landowner peasants by the regulation of February 19, 1861 were gradually extended to the palace, appanage, assigned and state peasants.

Among the administrative reforms, the most important place is also occupied by the provision on zemstvo institutions. Back on March 25, 1859, the highest order was given to transform the provincial and district departments: “When establishing the executive and investigative parts, enter into the consideration of the economic and administrative department in the district, which is now divided between several committees and part of it is part of the police department; in this regard, it is necessary to provide economic management in the district with greater unity, greater independence and greater trust; whereby it is necessary to determine the degree of participation of each class in the economic management of the district.”

The Zemstvo reform of 1864 was of fundamental importance, as a result of which local government bodies were created (provincial and district zemstvo assemblies and their executive bodies - provincial and district zemstvo councils).

In connection with the reform of zemstvo administration, the “City Regulations” approved on June 16, 1870, by which cities were granted significant self-government. The City Duma independently organizes city administration and economy, elects officials and assigns them salaries, establishes city fees, manages city property, spends funds, takes care of the external improvement of the city, its health, education and industry, charitable institutions, etc. , and the exact execution of the regulations issued by city public institutions must be strictly monitored by the police.

Among the reforms that marked the reign of Alexander II, one of the leading places undoubtedly belongs to judicial reform. This deeply thought-out reform had a strong and direct impact on the entire structure of state and public life. She introduced into it completely new, long-awaited principles: complete separation of judicial power from administrative and prosecutorial power, publicity and openness of the court, independence of judges and the legal profession. Already on September 29, 1862, the main provisions regarding the transformation of the judiciary were reviewed and approved by the sovereign. Then a special commission was established under the direct chairmanship of the Secretary of State, which, developing these provisions, drew up draft judicial statutes, which were then discussed in detail and corrected by the State Council. Finally, on November 24, 1864, the highest decree approved the Charter of criminal and civil proceedings and the Charter on punishments imposed by justices of the peace.

Kneeling prayer of Metropolitan Philaret and all those present at the sacred rite of coronation of Emperor Alexander II and Empress Maria Alexandrovna. Artist Vasily Timm

Military administration also underwent changes. Already at the beginning of the reign, military settlements were destroyed, the period of military service was reduced from 25 to 15 years, humiliating corporal punishment was abolished, and special attention was paid to raising the level of general education of army officers through reforms of military educational institutions. Further, due to the noticed shortcomings in the structure of military command, which stemmed from its excessive centralization, in 1862 the Ministry of War was given the highest order to subject the system of military command to a radical revision, bearing in mind the need to strengthen management at the locations of troops.

Another significant measure of transformation of the military structure was the Charter on Military Service published on January 1, 1874, according to which the entire male population of the empire, regardless of status, was subject to military service. Moreover, this duty consists of remaining in the ranks for 6 years, 9 years in the discharge and until the age of 40 in the militia. It must also be borne in mind that in 1867 a public court was also introduced in the army; judicial power was distributed between regimental courts, district courts and the main military court in St. Petersburg. The composition of the courts, excluding regimental ones, was supposed to be replenished with officers completing a course at the Military Law Academy.

Public education also attracted the attention of the sovereign. The publication of a new and general charter of Russian universities on June 18, 1863 was especially important in this regard. According to this charter, each university was entrusted to the trustee of the educational district, who was entrusted with government control, within the limits determined by the charter, over the independent orders of the university. Each university consists of a certain number of faculties, as components of one whole. The management of the educational part is entrusted to the faculties and the university council. Each faculty constitutes an independent faculty assembly of ordinary and extraordinary professors under the chairmanship of a dean, elected by them for three years. In addition, the content of professors, the number of departments and the funds of the university are increased.

On November 19, 1864, a new charter on gymnasiums also appeared, significantly modified and supplemented by the charter on June 19, 1871. According to these statutes, secondary educational institutions were divided into classical and real. Attention was also paid to women's education. Already in the 1860s, instead of the previous closed women's institutions, open ones began to be established, with the admission of girls of all classes. Finally, the need for higher women's education led to the establishment of pedagogical courses and higher women's courses in St. Petersburg, Moscow, Kyiv, Kazan and Odessa.

The great reforms of 1861–1874 created the preconditions for more dynamic social and economic development of Russia. Immediately after the abolition of serfdom, rapid growth in factory production, coal and oil production began. The railway network developed rapidly, increasing fifteen times between 1861 and 1881.

The reign of Alexander II, so rich in terms of internal reforms, was also marked in terms of foreign policy by a series of military actions, which ultimately again raised the temporarily diminished importance of Russia after the Crimean War. As a matter of fact, despite the fact that the matter of internal renewal absorbed almost all the attention of the government, especially in the first half of the reign of Alexander II, the war with external enemies went on almost continuously on the outskirts of the state. First of all, upon ascending the throne, the emperor had to end another war that he inherited from his previous reign, along with the Crimean one. It was a war with the Caucasian highlanders. This struggle, which has been going on for a long time, costing an enormous amount of effort and resources, has not yet produced any decisive results. Shamil, the leader of the highlanders, even pushed the Russians back from Dagestan and Chechnya.

At the end of the Crimean War, the sovereign appointed Prince Baryatinsky as commander-in-chief in the Caucasus, and things moved faster. Already in April 1859, Veden, the seat of Shamil, was taken, which entailed the subjugation of almost all of Dagestan to Russia. Shamil and his followers withdrew to the impregnable heights of Gunib, but were surrounded on all sides by Russian troops, and on August 25, after a decisive attack, they were forced to surrender. The Eastern Caucasus was thus conquered. There still remained the conquest of the Western Caucasus. Turkey took the mountaineers, as Muslims, under its protection and delivered weapons and reinforcements through its emissaries. England also collected money for the Circassians; the French ambassador in Constantinople clearly took their side.

Despite, however, all these difficulties, the work of conquering and gradually pushing the highlanders towards the sea moved forward, albeit slowly. At the beginning of 1863, Grand Duke Mikhail Nikolaevich was appointed governor of the Caucasus, and things moved forward quickly. On May 21, 1864, the Grand Duke was able to telegraph to the sovereign about the complete conquest of the Western Caucasus.

In the same year, two more major events took place - the pacification of Poland and the conquest of Turkestan.

After the suppression of the Polish uprising in 1831, Poland was in the position of a rebellious country, so that, next to the ordinary administration, there was also a special military-police department. Emperor Alexander II, having ascended the throne, destroyed this difference between the Poles and other Russian subjects. Amnesty was granted to political criminals, and the Poles received many benefits. Despite, however, all these benefits, in 1860 a series of demonstrations began against the Russians, which especially intensified in 1861. It even came to the point of a clash between the Polish people and Russian troops. An attempt was made on the life of the newly appointed governor of the Kingdom of Poland, Grand Duke Konstantin Nikolaevich, and the establishment of a new Polish government (Zhond) with a central people's committee was announced in all parts of the former Poland.

In view of all these threatening actions, the Russian government resorted to a decisive measure - it announced a general recruitment in the Kingdom of Poland not by lot, but by personal conscription, limiting it to the urban population and those rural residents who are not engaged in arable farming. This measure brought the revolutionary Polish party to the last degree of irritation, and at the beginning of 1863, when the recruitment announcement followed, the revolutionary committee called all Poles to arms. On the night of January 10-11, an attack was made on Russian troops. This enterprise, in general, failed. The uprising was suppressed.

At the same time, there was a struggle on the Asian border. Already during the reign of Emperor Nicholas I, the Russians had a firm foothold in Turkestan thanks to the subjugation of the Kirghiz. In 1864, as a result of the energetic and intensified actions of General Verevkin and Colonel Chernyaev, our frontier front line moved forward significantly. Having learned that the Bukhara emir intended to occupy Tashkent, which depended on Kokand, Chernyaev quickly moved to this city in 1865 and took it by storm. The fight with the emir continued until 1868, when Samarkand and Uzhgut were conquered. The emir was forced to reconcile and conclude an agreement according to which he provided Russian merchants with complete freedom of trade and abolished slavery in his possessions.

Portrait of Maria Alexandrovna, wife of Alexander II. Artist Ivan Makarov. 1866

Back in 1867, the Turkestan Governor-General was established from the Turkestan region with the annexation of the Semirechensk region. In 1871, Russian possessions were enriched by the annexation of Kuldja, and in 1875 Kokand itself was occupied. Even before the conquest of Kokand, the struggle with the Khiva Khan began. Under the protection of his waterless steppes, he did not pay attention to the treaty concluded with Russia in 1842, attacked Russian merchants, robbed them and took them captive. I had to resort to drastic measures. In 1873, three detachments moved towards Khiva from three different directions. Despite the 45-degree heat, the lack of water and all sorts of difficulties, Russian troops reached Khiva, captured the city and conquered the entire state in two weeks. Khan was forced to admit his dependence on the “White Tsar” and cede part of his possessions. He granted Russian merchants complete freedom of trade and exclusive navigation along the Amu Darya; their disputes with the Khivans had to be resolved by the Russian authorities.

On the eastern outskirts of Asia, during the reign of Alexander II, Russia also made quite important acquisitions, moreover, peacefully. According to the Aikhun Treaty, concluded with China in 1857, the entire left bank of the Amur was transferred to Russian possessions. Since then, rapid settlement of the Amur region began, settlements and even cities began to emerge one after another. In 1875, Japan ceded the part of Sakhalin that did not yet belong to us in exchange for the Kuril Islands, which we did not need at all at that time.

But there were also unfortunate miscalculations. Russia abandoned its former possessions in North America (Alaska) and ceded them to the United North American States for a rather insignificant amount of money.

After the Crimean War, Russia, busy with its own internal affairs, completely withdrew from Western European affairs for some time. So, in 1859, during the Austro-Italian conflict, Russia limited itself to only armed neutrality. During the Danish-Prussian War, Alexander II tried to be only a mediator and remained in the same neutral position during the Austro-Prussian War of 1866. The Franco-Prussian War of 1870 gave rise to the abolition of the unfavorable article of the Paris Peace, which did not allow us to have a fleet in the Black Sea.

Taking advantage of the defeat of France and the isolation of England, the Russian Chancellor Prince Gorchakov, in a circular dispatch dated October 19, 1870, stated that Russia no longer intended to constrain itself with the mentioned article, and the London Conference on March 1/13, 1871 recognized this change by striking out the article from the treaty.

In 1874, an uprising broke out in Bosnia and Herzegovina. The Turks suffered defeat after defeat. To calm the rebels, representatives of Russia, Germany and Austria-Hungary drew up a reform program for Turkey in Berlin. But the Turks, relying on England’s obvious sympathy for them, not only rejected this program, but boldly killed the French and German consuls in Thessaloniki, who stood up for one Bulgarian girl, and then, not being able to defeat the rebels in Bosnia and Herzegovina, attacked the defenseless Bulgaria. Since 1864, the Porte began to settle here Circassians who were being evicted from the Caucasus. Called the Bashi-Bazouks, they began to oppress the Bulgarian peasants, forcing them to work for themselves as serfs. The ancient hatred between Christians and Muslims flared up with renewed vigor. The massacre began. All of Europe was gripped by indignation. But this feeling had the strongest impact in Russia and other Slavic lands. Serbia and Montenegro stood up for the Bulgarians. General Chernyaev, the winner of Tashkent, took command of the Serbian army as a volunteer. Russian volunteers from all classes of society flocked to help the rebels, and public sympathy was expressed through all sorts of voluntary donations. Serbia, however, was not successful due to the numerical superiority of the Turks.

Emperor Alexander II, due to his characteristic peacefulness, wanted to avoid war and reach an agreement through diplomatic negotiations. But the Turks refused to fulfill even the mildest demands, counting on the support of England. War became inevitable. On April 12, 1877, our troops stationed near Chisinau were given the order to enter Turkey. On the same day, our Caucasian troops, of which Grand Duke Mikhail Nikolaevich was appointed commander-in-chief, entered the borders of Asian Turkey. The Eastern War of 1877–1878 began, covering the Russian soldier with unfading glory for his valor.

The Treaty of San Stefano on February 19, 1878, in addition to its direct goal - the liberation of the Balkan Slavs - brought good results to Russia. Russia acquired the Danube part of Bessarabia and the Turkish regions bordering Transcaucasia with the fortresses of Kars, Ardahan and Batum.

In 1880, the Supreme Administrative Commission was created with broad powers to deepen government reforms designed to strengthen the union of state and society. However, the reform plans of Alexander II were not destined to be fully realized...

From the second half of the 1860s, the life of the emperor was in constant danger. There were six failed attempts on his life, including the bombing of a Tsar's train in 1879 and the Winter Palace bombing in 1880.

On March 1, 1881, in St. Petersburg, on the banks of the Catherine Canal, Alexander II was mortally wounded by a member of the terrorist organization "People's Will" I.I. Grinevitsky.

On the terrible site of the murder of the great sovereign, the Church of the Resurrection of Christ (Savior on Spilled Blood) was erected. Temples and obelisks in memory of the Tsar-Liberator were built in other places of the Russian land.

Nicholas I with Tsarevich Alexander Nikolaevich in the artist’s studio in 1854. Artist Bogdan Villevalde. 1884

From the book Complete Course of Russian History: in one book [in modern presentation] author Klyuchevsky Vasily Osipovich

Alexander II Nikolaevich (1855–1881) The new emperor, and the last whose reign Klyuchevsky reviewed, ascended the throne on February 19, 1855, at the end of the unsuccessful Crimean War, which his father lost. Alexander II was known as a supporter of preservation

From the book Textbook of Russian History author Platonov Sergey Fedorovich

§ 171. Emperor Alexander III Alexandrovich (1881–1894) The main goal of his activities, Emperor Alexander III set the establishment of autocratic power and the shaken state order. This goal was to be achieved first of all by the firm suppression of any

author

Alexander II (1855–1881) On February 18, 1855, 37-year-old Alexander II ascended the Russian throne. The situation in the country was crisis. The requisitions of food, horses and fodder carried out during the Crimean War, and especially -

From the book The Forgotten History of the Russian Revolution. From Alexander I to Vladimir Putin author Kalyuzhny Dmitry Vitalievich

Alexander III (1881–1894) Under Alexander II, Russia moved from a completely stable unlimited autocracy to an equally stable constitutional regime, but with such a transition a stage of instability is inevitable, and therefore this is a very dangerous path: transforming and losing

From the book History of Rus' author author unknown

Alexander II the Liberator (1855–1881) Alexander II ended the difficult eastern war with the Parisian peace on very painful terms for Russia. Russia ceded to Turkey the mouth of the Danube, part of Bessarabia, Kars and pledged not to establish a fleet in the Black Sea. According to the Aigun Treaty with China

From the book History of Rus' author author unknown

Emperor Alexander III (1881–1894) Experienced in state affairs, already upon his accession to the throne, Emperor Alexander III showed a lot of firmness and self-control in governing the state. Emperor Alexander III cared a lot about the needs of the peasant class: He gave him

author Istomin Sergey Vitalievich

From the book I Explore the World. History of Russian Tsars author Istomin Sergey Vitalievich

From the book Favorites of the Rulers of Russia author Matyukhina Yulia Alekseevna

Alexander Vladimirovich Adlerberg (1818 - 1888) Alexander Vladimirovich Adlerberg is a Russian statesman, one of the favorites of Alexander II. Alexander Vladimirovich was born in St. Petersburg into a noble family. His father was Vladimir Fedorovich (Eduard Ferdinand

From the book Gallery of Russian Tsars author Latypova I. N.

From the book History of the Russian Prosecutor's Office. 1722–2012 author Zvyagintsev Alexander Grigorievich

From the book I Explore the World. History of Russian Tsars author Istomin Sergey Vitalievich

Emperor Alexander II - Liberator Years of life 1818–1881 Years of reign 1855–1881 Father - Nicholas I Pavlovich, Emperor of All Russia. Mother - Princess of Prussia Frederica-Louise-Charlotte-Wilhelmina, in Orthodoxy Alexandra Fedorovna. Future Emperor Alexander II

From the book I Explore the World. History of Russian Tsars author Istomin Sergey Vitalievich

Emperor Alexander III - Peacemaker Years of life 1845–1894 Years of reign - 1881–1894 Father - Alexander II Nikolaevich, Emperor of All Russia. Mother - Maximilian-Wilhelmina-Augusta-Sophia-Maria Princess of Hesse-Darmstadt, in Orthodoxy Maria Alexandrovna. Emperor

From the book State and Spiritual Leaders author Artemov Vladislav Vladimirovich

Alexander II (1818–1881) Alexander II, Russian Emperor since 1855, went down in the history of the country as the Tsar Liberator, who abolished serfdom. Alexander Nikolaevich Romanov is the eldest son of Emperor Nicholas I and Empress Alexandra Feodorovna. Emperor Alexander II

From the book The Assassination of Emperor Alexander II. Genuine court case author History Team of authors --

The case of the atrocity committed on March 1, 1881, the victim of which the late sovereign Emperor Alexander Nikolaevich fell victim to in Bose. Meeting of the Special Presence of the Governing Senate to judge cases of state crimes Composition of the presence: first present

From the book Life and Manners of Tsarist Russia author Anishkin V. G.

After the death of Nicholas I, the Russian throne was taken by his eldest son Alexander II(1855-1881) - Emperor of All Russia, Tsar of Poland and Grand Duke of Finland from the Romanov dynasty. He entered Russian history as a conductor of large-scale reforms (reforms of the 1860-1870s). Honored with a special epithet in Russian pre-revolutionary and Bulgarian historiography - Liberator(in connection with the abolition of serfdom and the victory in the Bulgarian War of Independence, respectively). Died as a result of a terrorist attack organized by the secret revolutionary organization "People's Will".

The main tasks of the internal policy of Alexander 2:

• preservation of autocracy;
• preservation of the privileges of the nobility;
• ensuring social stability, strengthening the internal situation by creating conditions for economic development;
• restoration of the country’s international prestige, including through reforms aimed at overcoming signs of Russia’s backwardness.

Reforms of the 1860-1870s

Peasant reform

Reasons for the reform:

• The labor of serfs was unproductive.
• Military-technical backwardness of Russia.
• Condemnation of serfdom by all layers of society.
• Fear of peasant uprisings.

Prerequisites for the reform:

■ 1857 The Secret Committee was created, which considered reform projects.
■ November 20, 1857 A rescript was signed to Nazimov, allowing the participation of landowners in the preparation of the reform.
■ 1858 The Secret Committee was transformed into the Main Committee.
■ 1859 An Editorial Commission was created, which considered all proposed projects to develop a single law.

• The peasants were freed with the land, but it did not immediately become their property. Before the redemption, the peasant was considered temporarily obligated and had to fulfill the previous duties - corvee and quitrent (abolished in 1882-1887).
• The size of the allotment and the ransom amount depended on the region.
• The existence of sections was allowed - surplus land, which went to the landowner if the pre-reform peasant allotment exceeded the post-reform one.
• The peasant paid the landowner a ransom (the cost was higher than market prices) for the full allotment: he had to pay about a quarter of the total cost of the land to the owner at a time. The landowner received the rest of the amount from the state, and the peasant repaid it over 49 years at 6% per annum (redemption payments were canceled in 1907),
• A peasant could receive 2.5 dessiatines of land (about 2.7 hectares) without ransom.
• The location of peasant plots was determined by the landowner, which caused the appearance of stripes.

Legal status of peasants

■ Civil rights: personal freedom, independence from the landowner, transition to other classes, independent marriage, freedom to choose an occupation, protection of one’s rights in court.
■ Property rights: independent transactions, acquisition and disposal of property, engaging in trade operations, choosing and conducting a fishery.
■ Political rights: participation in elected local government.

Consequences

• Formation of the labor market.
• Expansion of the consumer market.
• Preservation of semi-feudal order, which hampered the economic development of the country.
• Conditions for liberal reforms.
• The rise of the revolutionary democratic and liberal movement.
• The beginning of the modernization of the country.

Other reforms

University reform(1863) - granted universities broad autonomy.

Zemstvo reform(1864) introduced all-class elected bodies of local self-government - district and provincial zemstvos.

Judicial reform(1864) approved the classlessness of courts, introduced publicity of legal proceedings, adversarial proceedings, jury trials, and a magistrates' court.

School reform(1864) democratized the sphere of primary and secondary education and allowed the opening of women's gymnasiums.

Censorship reform(1865) abolished preliminary censorship for publications of more than 10 printed pages.

Urban reform(1870) established all-estate city councils, local city government bodies.

Military reform(1874) introduced universal military service for men from the age of 20, terms of service: in the army - 6 years (9 years in reserve), in the navy - 7 years (3 years in reserve).

Results and significance of reforms

Alexander II left a deep mark on the history of Russia. He managed to do what other autocrats did not dare to undertake - free the peasants from serfdom. The internal reforms of Alexander II are comparable in scale only to the reforms of Peter I. The social structure of society, the state, law, and socio-economic system changed.

The importance of reforms was that they made it possible to bring the country out of a deep economic and political crisis and gave impetus to its capitalist development without serious upheavals and social cataclysms.