Encyclopedia of Russian History

Подождите немного. Документ загружается.

Alexander’s most liberal friends formed a Secret

Committee to help the young emperor plan sweep-

ing reforms for Russia. The committee consisted of

Prince Adam Czartoryski, Count Paul Stroganov,

Count Victor Kochubei, and Nikolai Novosiltsev.

During the first few years of his reign, Alexander

improved the status of the Senate, reorganized the

government into eight departments, and estab-

lished new universities at Dorpat, Kazan, Kharkov,

and Vilna. He also increased funding for secondary

schools. Alexander did not, however, end serfdom

or grant Russia a constitution. This series of re-

forms was brought to an end by Russian involve-

ment in the Napoleonic Wars.

In 1807, following the Treaty of Tilsit, Mikhail

Speransky became Alexander’s assistant, and em-

phasis was again placed on reform. With Speran-

sky’s guidance, Alexander created an advisory

Council of State. Speransky was also responsible

for an elementary school reform law, a law re-

quiring applicants for the higher ranks of state ser-

vice to take a written examination, and reforms in

taxation. In addition, Speransky created a proposal

for reorganizing local government and for creating

a national legislative assembly. Speransky’s re-

forms aroused a storm of criticism from Russian

conservatives, especially members of the imperial

family. Alexander dismissed Speransky in 1812 just

prior to resuming the war against Napoleon. In his

place Alexander chose Alexei Arakcheyev, an advi-

sor with a much different outlook, to assist him

for the remainder of his reign.

NAPOLEONIC WARS

The most momentous event of Alexander’s reign

was Russia’s involvement in the Napoleonic Wars.

Alexander began his reign by proclaiming Russian

neutrality in the European conflict. However, dur-

ing 1804 Russian public opinion became increas-

ingly anti-French as a result of an incident in

Baden—the homeland of Empress Elizabeth. The

Duc d’Enghien, a member of the French royal fam-

ily, was kidnapped from Baden, taken to France,

and executed by the French government. Alexan-

der and the Russian court were outraged by this

act. The following year the Third Coalition was

formed by Britain, Russia, and Austria. On De-

cember 2, 1805, Napoleon defeated a combined

Russian and Austrian army at the Battle of Auster-

litz. The Russians suffered approximately 26,000

casualties. After two major losses by their Pruss-

ian ally, the Russians were again resoundingly de-

feated at the Battle of Friedland in June 1807. This

battle resulted in about 15,000 Russian casualties

in one day. Following the defeat at Friedland, the

Russians sued for peace.

The terms of the resulting Treaty of Tilsit were

worked out by Alexander and Napoleon while they

met on a raft anchored in the Nieman River. Ac-

cording to the agreement, Russia and France be-

came allies, and Russia agreed to participate in the

Continental System, Napoleon’s blockade of British

trade. A secondary Franco-Prussian treaty, also

agreed upon at Tilsit, reduced Prussian territory,

but perhaps saved Prussia. The Treaty of Tilsit was

extremely unpopular with the Russian nobility,

who suffered economically from the loss of exports

to Britain. In addition, Russian and French foreign

policy aims differed over the Near East, the Balkans,

and Poland.

By June 1812, the Tilsit agreement had broken

down, and Napoleon’s army invaded Russia. Ini-

tially, the Russian forces were under the command

of Generral Barclay de Tolley. The Russians suf-

fered several defeats, including the loss of the city

of Smolensk, as Napoleon’s forces moved deeper

into Russia. Alexander then gave command of the

Russian army to Field Marshal Mikhail Kutuzov.

Kutuzov continued the policy of trading space for

time and keeping the Russian army just out of

reach of Napoleon’s forces. Finally, under pressure

from Russian public opinion, which was critical of

the continuous retreats, Kutuzov took a stand on

September 7, 1812, at the village of Borodino, west

of Moscow. The ensuing Battle of Borodino was

one of the epic battles of European history.

Napoleon’s forces numbering about 130,000, faced

about 120,000 Russian troops. During the one-

day battle some 42,000 Russian casualties oc-

curred, with about 58,000 casualties among the

Napoleonic forces. Each side claimed victory, al-

though the Russian forces retreated and allowed

Napoleon to enter Moscow unchallenged.

Napoleon believed that the occupation of

Moscow would bring an end to the war with Rus-

sia. Instead, Napoleon’s forces entered the city to

find that most of Moscow’s inhabitants had fled

and that Alexander refused to negotiate. To make

matters worse, a few hours after the Napoleonic

army arrived in Moscow, numerous fires broke

out in the city, causing perhaps three-quarters of

the city’s structures to burn down. Responsibility

for the burning of Moscow has been disputed.

Napoleon apparently believed that the fires were set

on the orders of Count Fyodor Rostopchin, the gov-

ernor-general of the city. The Russian public, on

ALEXANDER I

ENCYCLOPEDIA OF RUSSIAN HISTORY

the other hand, blamed careless French looters. The

burning of Moscow had the effect of creating a

swell of Russian patriotism and solidifying the de-

termination of the Russians to resist Napoleon’s

forces.

After little more than a month in occupation,

faced with insufficient food and shelter, Napoleon

abandoned the burned-out shell of Moscow and re-

treated westward. The Russian army was able to

maneuver the Napoleonic forces into retreating

along the same route by which they had entered

Russia, thus ensuring that there would be little or

no fodder available for the horses and a shortage

of supplies for the men. The shortage of provisions,

combined with the onslaught of winter and con-

tinued harassment by Cossacks and peasant gueril-

las, resulted in the destruction of Napoleon’s army

without Kutuzov subjecting the Russian troops to

another pitched battle.

Alexander insisted upon continuing the war af-

ter the last French troops had left Russian soil. A

new coalition was formed among Russia, Austria,

and Prussia. Their combined forces defeated

Napoleon at the Battle of Leipzig in October 1813.

By March 1814, Russian troops were in Paris.

Alexander played a central role in the diplomatic

negotiations that determined the form of the Bour-

bon restoration in France and the initial disposition

of Napoleon on Elba. Alexander was also a key fig-

ure at the Congress of Vienna where the bound-

aries of the European states were redrawn.

HOLY ALLIANCE AND MYSTICISM

In September 1815, Russia, Austria, and Prussia

signed the Holy Alliance at Alexander’s urging. The

Holy Alliance envisioned a Europe in which Chris-

tian principles would form the basis for interna-

tional relations. Although the Holy Alliance had no

practical effect, it provides a picture of Alexander’s

state of mind at that time.

Alexander had been a religious skeptic since his

days as a student of Samborsky and LaHarpe. How-

ever, in November 1812, Alexander joined the Russ-

ian Bible Society headed by his friend Prince

Alexander Golitsyn. The Russian Bible Society

sought to translate and distribute Russian language

scriptures. During 1814 Empress Elizabeth intro-

duced Alexander to the mystic Johann Jung-

Stilling. However, Alexander’s immersion into

mysticism began in earnest when he met Livonian

Baroness Julie von Krudener in 1815. The height

of her influence occurred in September 1815, when

Alexander staged a massive review of Russian

troops on the plain of Vertus in France. As part of

the ceremony, seven altars were erected and a

Te Deum was celebrated. The Holy Alliance was

signed a few weeks later. Alexander lost interest in

von Krudener when he returned to Russia late in

1815.

MILITARY COLONIES

AND LATTER YEARS

Alexander relied increasingly on Arakcheyev to

oversee the day-to-day business of running the

Russian empire. Arakcheyev’s notable, though du-

bious, achievement was the creation of military

colonies. The military colonies were an experiment

in regimented agriculture. The underlying idea was

to create a military reserve by organizing villages

of peasant-soldiers who would be ready to fight

when needed but who would also be self-support-

ing. The peasants were to wear uniforms, live pre-

cisely regimented lives in identical cottages, and

farm their fields with parade ground precision. In-

dividual preference was not taken into considera-

tion when marriage partners were selected, and

women were ordered to bear one child per year.

Brutal penalties deterred deviations from the rules.

The last years of Alexander’s reign were marred

by uprisings in Arakcheyev’s military colonies and

the rebellion of the Semenovsky Regiment. Alexan-

der’s government became increasingly repressive.

Censorship was intensified, tighter control was

placed over the universities, and landlords were

given more power over the fate of their serfs. Un-

der the influence of Archimandrite Photius, Alexan-

der moved away from mysticism and closer to the

Russian Orthodox Church. Masonic lodges were

closed, and the Russian Bible Society was blocked

from its goal of distributing Bibles in Russian. The

reign which had begun with the hope of liberal re-

forms had moved full circle and ended as a bastion

of repression.

In the fall of 1825 Alexander accompanied Em-

press Elizabeth to Taganrog when her doctors or-

dered her to leave St. Petersburg and move to a

warmer climate. Alexander became ill on October

27 while touring the Crimea. He died on December

1, 1825, in Taganrog. Although Alexander’s body

was returned to St. Petersburg for burial, the closed

casket gave rise to rumors that Alexander had not

died. A legend developed that a Siberian holy man

by the name of Fyodor Kuzmich was Alexander liv-

ing incognito.

ENCYCLOPEDIA OF RUSSIAN HISTORY

ALEXANDER I

See also: CATHERINE II; ELIZABETH; HOLY ALLIANCE;

NAPOLEON I; PAUL I; SPERANSKY, MIKHAIL MIKHAILO-

VICH

BIBLIOGRAPHY

Grimstead, Patricia Kennedy. (1969). The Foreign Minis-

ters of Alexander I: Political Attitudes and the Conduct

of Russian Diplomacy, 1801–1825. Berkeley: Univer-

sity of California Press.

Lincoln, W. Bruce. (1981). The Romanovs. New York: The

Dial Press.

Palmer, Alan. (1974). Alexander I, Tsar of War and Peace.

New York: Harper and Row.

Riasanovsky, Nicholas V. (1984). A History of Russia, 6th

ed. New York: Oxford University Press.

Troyat, Henri. (1982). Alexander of Russia, Napoleon’s

Conqueror, tr. Joan Pinkham. New York: Dutton.

EAN

K. B

ERGER

ALEXANDER II

(1818–1881), tsar and emperor of Russia from

1855 to 1881.

Alexander Nicholayevich Romanov is largely

remembered for two events—his decision to eman-

cipate the serfs and his assassination at the hands

of revolutionaries. That the same tsar who finally

ended serfdom in Russia would become the only

tsar to be assassinated by political terrorists illus-

trates the turbulence of his time and its contradic-

tions.

EDUCATION AND THE

GREAT REFORMS

Alexander was born in Moscow on April 17, 1818,

the oldest son of Nicholas I. His education, unlike

that of his father, prepared him for his eventual

role as tsar from an early age. Initially his up-

bringing consisted primarily of military matters.

Nicholas had his son named the head of a hussar

regiment when Alexander was a few days old, and

he received promotions throughout childhood.

When he was six, Captain K. K. Merder, the head

of a Moscow military school, became his first tu-

tor. Merder was a career army man who combined

a love for the military with a compassion for

others. Both qualities attracted the tsarevich and

shaped his outlook. Alexander also received in-

struction from Vasily Zhukovsky, the famous

poet, who crafted a plan for education that stressed

virtue and enlightenment. The young tsarevich

made journeys throughout the Russian Empire and

in Europe, and in 1837 he became the first emperor

to visit Siberia, where he even met with Decem-

brists and petitioned his father to improve their

conditions. During his trip to Europe in 1838

Alexander fell in love with a princess from the

small German state of Hesse-Darmstadt. Although

Nicholas I desired a better match for his son,

Alexander married Maria Alexandrova in April

1841. They would have eight children, two of

whom died young. Their third child, Alexander,

was born in 1845 and eventually became the heir.

Nicholas I included his son in both the sym-

bolic and practical aspects of governing. Nicholas

had not received training for his role and believed

that he was unprepared for the responsibilities of

a Russian autocrat. He did not want Alexander to

have a similar experience, and he included his son

in the frequent parades, military spectacles, and

other symbolic aspects central to the Nicholavan

political system. Alexander loved these events and

he took pleasure in participating at the numerous

exercises held by Nicholas I. In several important

respects, this military culture shaped Alexander’s

beliefs about ruling Russia.

ALEXANDER II

ENCYCLOPEDIA OF RUSSIAN HISTORY

Alexander II, the Tsar Liberator. © A

RCHIVE

HOTOS

, 530 W

EST

TREET

, N

ORK

, NY 10001.

Alexander also became a member of imperial

councils, supervised the operation of military

schools, and even presided over State Council meet-

ings when his father could not. In 1846, Nicholas

named Alexander chairman of the Secret Commit-

tee on Peasant Affairs, where the tsarevich demon-

strated support of the existing socio-political order.

In short, Alexander grew up in a system that

stressed the necessity of an autocrat for governing

Russia and he learned to worship his father from

an early age. His education and training gave no

indication of the momentous decisions he would

make as tsar.

Few would have predicated the circumstances

in which Alexander became emperor. Nicholas I

died in 1855 amidst the disastrous Crimean War.

Russia’s eventual loss was evident by the time of

Nicholas’s death, and the defeat did much to un-

dermine the entire Nicholaven system and its ide-

ology of Official Nationality. Alexander had

absorbed his father’s belief in the autocracy, but he

was forced by the circumstances of war to adopt

policies that would fundamentally change Russia

and its political system.

Alexander became emperor on February 19,

1855, a day that would reappear again during the

course of his reign. His coronation as Russian Em-

peror took place in Moscow on August 26, 1856.

Between these two dates Alexander grappled with

the ongoing war, which went from bad to worse.

Sevastopol, the fortified city in the Crimea that be-

came the defining site of the war, fell on Septem-

ber 9, 1855. Alexander began peace negotiations and

signed the resulting Treaty of Paris on March 30,

1856. Russia lost its naval rights in the Black Sea

in addition to 500,000 soldiers lost fighting the war.

The prestige of the Russian army, which had ac-

quired almost mythical status since 1812, dissipated

with defeat. The events of the first year of his reign

forced Alexander’s hand—Crimea had demonstrated

the necessity for reform, and Alexander acted.

Immediately after the war, Alexander uttered

the most famous words of his reign when he an-

swered a group of Moscow nobles in 1856 who

asked about his intention to free the serfs: “I can-

not tell you that I totally oppose this; we live in

an era in which this must eventually happen. I be-

lieve that you are of the same opinion as I; there-

fore, it will be much better if this takes place from

above than from below.” Alexander’s words speak

volumes about the way in which the tsar conceived

of reform—it was a necessity, but it was better to

enact change within the autocratic system. This

blend of reform-mindedness with a simultaneous

commitment to autocracy became the hallmark of

the era that followed. Once he had decided on re-

form, Alexander II relied on the advice of his min-

isters and bureaucracies. Nevertheless, Alexander

did much to end serfdom in Russia, an act his pre-

decessors had failed to enact.

The process of emancipation was a complicated

and controversial affair. It began in 1856, when

Alexander II formed a secret committee to elicit pro-

posals for the reform and did not end until 1861,

when the emancipation decree was issued on Feb-

ruary 19. In between these two dates Alexander

dealt with a great deal of debate, opposition, and

compromise. Emancipation affected twenty million

serfs and nearly thirty million state peasants, or 8

percent of the Russian population. By contrast,

four million slaves were freed in the United States

in 1863. Although the end result did not fully sat-

isfy anyone, a fundamental break had been made

in the economy and society of Russia. Even Alexan-

der Herzen, who had labeled Nicholas I as a “snake

that strangled Russia,” exclaimed: “Thou hast con-

quered, Galilean!” Because of Alexander’s role, he

became known as the Tsar-Liberator.

Once emancipation had been completed, Alexan-

der proceeded to approve further reforms, often re-

ferred to by historians as the Great Reforms. The

tsar himself did not participate as much in the

changes that came after 1861, but Alexander ap-

pointed the men who would be responsible for

drafting reforms and gave the final approval on the

changes. Between 1864 and 1874 Alexander pro-

mulgated a new local government reform (creating

the zemstvo), a new judicial reform, educational re-

forms, a relaxed censorship law, and a new mili-

tary law. All were carried out in the new spirit of

glasnost, or “giving voice,” that Alexander advo-

cated. The tsar relied on officials who had been

trained during his father’s years on the throne, and

thus the reforms are also associated with the names

of Nicholas Milyutin, Petr Valuev, Dmitry Mi-

lyutin, and other “enlightened bureaucrats.” Addi-

tionally, Russians from all walks of life debated the

reforms and their specifics in an atmosphere that

contrasted starkly with Nicholas I’s Russia.

This new spirit brought with it a multitude of

reactions and opinions. Alexander, a committed au-

tocrat throughout the reform era, had to deal with

rebellions and revolutionaries almost immediately

after launching his reforms. These reactions were

ALEXANDER II

ENCYCLOPEDIA OF RUSSIAN HISTORY

a natural product of the more relaxed era and of

the policies Alexander advocated, even if he did not

foresee all of their consequences. In particular,

Alexander’s decision to reform Russia helped to fuel

a revolt in Poland, then a part of the Russian Em-

pire. Polish nationalism in 1863 led to a Warsaw

rebellion that demanded more freedoms. In the face

of this opposition, Alexander reacted in the same

manner as his father, brutally suppressing the re-

volt. Unlike his father, however, Alexander did not

embark on a policy of Russification in other areas

of the Empire, and even allowed the Finnish par-

liament to meet again in 1863 as a reward for loy-

alty to the empire.

At home, the reform era only served to em-

bolden Russians who wanted the country to en-

gage in more radical changes. The educated public

in the 1850s and 1860s openly debated the details

of the Great Reforms and found many of them

wanting. As a result of his policies, Alexander

helped to spawn a politically radical movement that

called for an end to autocracy. A group that called

itself “Land and Liberty” formed in Russia’s uni-

versities and called for a more violent and total rev-

olution among the Russian peasantry. A similar

group known as the Organization made calls for

radical change at the same time. On April 6, 1866,

a member of this group, Dmitry Karakazov, fired

six times at Alexander while he walked in the Sum-

mer Garden but spectacularly missed. Although the

reform era was not officially over, 1866 marked a

watershed in the life of Alexander II and his coun-

try. The tsar did not stay committed to the path

of reform while the opposition that the era had un-

leashed only grew.

LATER YEARS

Alexander had let loose the forces that eventually

killed him, but between 1866 and 1881 Russia ex-

perienced many more significant changes. Karaka-

zov’s attempt on Alexander’s life came during a

period of domestic turmoil for Alexander. The year

before, the tsar’s eldest son, Nicholas, died at the

age of twenty-two. Three months after the assas-

sination attempt, Alexander began an affair with

an eighteen-year old princess, Ekaterina Dolgo-

rukaia, which lasted for the remainder of his life

(he later married her). Responding to the growing

revolutionary movement, Alexander increased the

powers of the Third Section, the notorious secret

police formed by Nicholas I. The reform era and the

initial spirit associated with it had changed irrevo-

cably by 1866 even if it had not run its course.

Alexander began to concentrate on his role as

emperor during the late 1860s and 1870s. In par-

ticular, he engaged in empire building and eventu-

ally warfare. He oversaw the Russian conquest of

Central Asia that brought Turkestan, Tashkent,

Samarkand, Khiva, and Kokand under Russian con-

trol. The gains in Central Asia came with a diplo-

matic cost, however. Expansion so near to the

borders of India ensured that England looked on

with increasing alarm at Russian imperialism, and

during this period a “cold war” developed between

the two powers.

Russia also pursued a more aggressive stance

toward the Ottoman Empire, in part fueled by the

rise of pan-Slavism at home. When Orthodox sub-

jects rebelled against Turkey in 1875, numerous

Russians called on the tsar to aid their fellow Slavs.

Alexander, reluctant at first, eventually gave in to

public opinion, particularly after Ottoman forces

in 1876 slaughtered nearly thirty thousand Bul-

garians who had come to aid the insurgents. Rus-

sia declared war on April 12, 1877. Although

Russia experienced some difficulty in defeating the

Turks, particularly at the fortress of Plevna, the

ALEXANDER II

ENCYCLOPEDIA OF RUSSIAN HISTORY

Tsar Alexander II. © H

ULTON

-D

EUTSCH

OLLECTION

/CORBIS

war was presented to the Russian public as an at-

tempt to liberate Orthodox subjects from Muslim

oppression. Alexander’s image as liberator featured

prominently in the popular prints, press reports,

and other accounts of the war. When Russian

forces took Plevna in December 1877, they began

a march to Istanbul that brought them to the gates

of the Turkish capital. In the Caucasus, the final

act took place on February 19, 1878, when Russ-

ian forces “liberated” the Turkish city of Erzerum.

Russia and the Ottoman Empire signed the Treaty

of San Stefano in March, which guaranteed mas-

sive Russian gains in the region. Alexander once

more appeared to fulfill the role of Tsar-Liberator.

Alarmed by these developments, the European

powers, including Russia’s Prussian and Austrian

allies, held an international conference in Berlin.

Alexander saw most of his gains whittled away in

an effort to prevent Russian hegemony in the

Balkans. The resulting confusions helped to sow

the seeds for the origins of World War I, but also

provoked widespread disillusionment in Russia.

Alexander considered the Berlin Treaty to be the

worst moment in his career.

Alexander’s domestic troubles only increased

after 1878. The revolutionaries had not given up

their opposition to the progress and scope of re-

form, and many Russian radicals began to focus

their attention on the autocracy as the major im-

pediment to future changes. A new Land and Free-

dom group emerged in the 1870s that called for all

land to be given to the peasants and for a govern-

ment that listened to “the will of the people.” By

the end of the decade, the organization had split

into two groups. The Black Repartition focused on

the land question, while the People’s Will sought

to establish a new political system in Russia by as-

sassinating the tsar. After numerous attempts, they

succeeded in their quest on March 1, 1881. As

Alexander rode near the Catherine Canal, a bomb

went off near the tsar’s carriage, injuring several

people. Alexander stepped out to inspect the dam-

age when a second bomb landed at his feet and ex-

ploded. He was carried to the Winter Palace, where

he died from massive blood loss.

Ironically, or perhaps fittingly, Alexander II

was on his way to discuss the possibility of estab-

lishing a national assembly and a new constitu-

tion. This final reform would not be completed, and

Alexander’s era ended with him. The tsar’s son and

grandson, the future Alexander III and Nicholas II,

were at the deathbed, and the sight of the autocrat

dying as a result of his reforms would shape their

respective rules. As Larissa Zakharova has con-

cluded, the act of March 1 initiated the bloody trail

to Russia’s tragic twentieth century. Alexander II’s

tragedy became Russia’s.

See also: BERLIN, CONGRESS OF; BLACK REPARTITION;

CRIMEAN WAR; EMANCIPATION ACT; NICHOLAS I;

PARIS, CONGRESS AND TREATY OF 1856; PEOPLE’S WILL,

THE; RUSSO-TURKISH WARS; SERFDOM; ZEMSTVO

BIBLIOGRAPHY

Eklof, Ben; Bushnell, John; and Zakharova, Larissa, eds.

(1994). Russia’s Great Reforms, 1855–1881. Bloom-

ington: Indiana University Press.

Field, Daniel. (1976). The End of Serfdom: Nobility and Bu-

reaucracy in Russia, 1855–1861. Cambridge, MA:

Harvard University Press.

Lincoln, W. Bruce. (1990). The Great Reforms: Autocracy,

Bureaucracy, and the Politics of Change in Imperial Rus-

sia. DeKalb: Northern Illinois University Press.

Moss, Walter. (2002). Russia in the Age of Alexander II,

Tolstoy, and Dostoyevsky. London: Anthem Press.

Mosse, Werner. (1962). Alexander II and the Moderniza-

tion of Russia. NY: Collier.

Rieber, Alfred. (1971). “Alexander II: A Revisionist View”

Journal of Modern History. 43: 42–58.

Tolstoy, Leo. (1995). Anna Karenina. Oxford, UK: Oxford

University Press.

Wortman, Richard. (2000). Scnearios of Power: Myth and

Ceremony in Russian Monarchy, Vol. 2: From Alexan-

der II to the Abdication of Nicholas II. Princeton, NJ:

Princeton University Press.

Zakharova, Larissa. (1996). “Emperor Alexander II,

1855–1881.” In The Emperors and Empresses of Rus-

sia: Rediscovering the Romanovs, ed. Donald Raleigh.

Armonk, NY: M. E. Sharpe.

TEPHEN

M. N

ORRIS

ALEXANDER III

(1845–1894), Alexander Alexandrovich, emperor of

Russia from March 1, 1881 to October 20, 1894.

The second son of Alexander Nikolayevich

(Alexander II), the heir to the Russian throne, the

future Alexander III was born in the Winter Palace

in St. Petersburg in February 1845. He was one of

six brothers and was educated alongside Nicholas

(b. 1843) who, after the death of Nicholas I in 1855,

became the heir to the throne. One of the most im-

ALEXANDER III

ENCYCLOPEDIA OF RUSSIAN HISTORY

portant parts of their education was schooling in

military matters. This was especially important for

Alexander, who was expected to occupy his time

with the army and never to have to undertake any-

thing other than ceremonial duties. His situation

changed dramatically in 1865 when Nicholas died

from meningitis and Alexander became heir to his

father, Alexander II. The prospect of the twenty-

year-old Alexander becoming emperor horrified his

tutors. He had been a dogged pupil, displaying no

great spark of intelligence, and had shown no real

maturity during his studies. But after his brother’s

death, a major effort was made to enhance Alexan-

der’s education to prepare him properly to become

emperor. His contemporaries commented on his

honesty and decency, but they also noted Alexan-

der’s obstinacy and his reluctance to change his

mind. For Alexander himself, his marriage in 1866

to the Danish princess Dagmar was more impor-

tant than education. She had been engaged to his

brother Nicholas before his death, and marriage to

Alexander was seen by both sides as an “alliance,”

rather than being a love-match. But the marriage

turned out to be extremely happy and Maria Fyo-

dorovna (as his wife was known in Russia) became

an important support to her husband. Alexander

was devoted to his family and enjoyed being with

his five children: Nicholas (b.1868), George (b.

1871), Xenia (b. 1875), Mikhail (b. 1878), and Olga

(b. 1882).

An assassination attempt on Alexander II in

1866 brought home to the new heir to the throne

the gravity of his status. He did not relish the

prospect of becoming emperor, but nevertheless

engaged in the official duties that were required

of him with determination and interest. While his

father was implementing the Great Reforms of the

1860s and 1870s, the heir to the throne was de-

veloping views that conflicted fundamentally with

those of Alexander II. The young Alexander be-

lieved firmly in the dominance of the Russian au-

tocracy and was deeply opposed to any attempt

to weaken the autocrat’s grip on the country. He

was especially keen to see Russian interests pre-

vail across the empire and wanted severe treat-

ment for national minority groups, such as the

Poles, that tried to assert their autonomy. These

views were reinforced by Alexander’s experience

of the Russo-Turkish War of 1877–1878. He ar-

gued strongly in favor of Russian intervention in

support of the Slav population of the Ottoman

Empire and fought alongside Russian troops. The

war strengthened his belief in the danger of weak

authority and this was especially relevant to Rus-

sia itself at the end of the 1870s. Terrorist activ-

ity was increasing and Alexander wrote in his

diary of the “horrible and disgusting years” that

Russia was going through. There were repeated

attempts on the emperor’s life and, in March

1881, terrorists from the People’s Will group

threw a bomb at Alexander II and succeeded in

killing him. The emperor died, horribly injured, in

the arms of his wife and son.

The assassination of the Tsar-Liberator con-

firmed the new Alexander III in his deeply conser-

vative views. He moved very swiftly to distance

himself from the policies and ethos of his father.

The new emperor showed no mercy toward his fa-

ther’s killers, rejecting all appeals for clemency for

them. In the immediate aftermath of the assassi-

nation, legislation was introduced giving the gov-

ernment wide use of emergency powers. At the

time of his death, Alexander II had been about to

approve the establishment of a national consulta-

tive assembly, but the new emperor very quickly

made it clear that he would not permit limitations

on autocratic rule, and the project was abandoned.

The new emperor and his family moved out of St.

ALEXANDER III

ENCYCLOPEDIA OF RUSSIAN HISTORY

Tsar Alexander III. © A

RCHIVO

CONOGRAFICO

, S.A./CORBIS

Petersburg to live in the palace at Gatchina, a grim

fortress-like building associated with Paul I. It was

clear that the whole tone of Alexander III’s reign

was to be different. Instead of the European-orien-

tated reforms of Alexander II, the new emperor was

determined to follow the “Russian path,” which he

understood to be a forceful autocracy, proudly na-

tional in its actions and with the Orthodox Church

providing a link between emperor and the people.

Many of Alexander II’s ministers and advisers were

rapidly removed from office and were replaced by

men with impeccable conservative credentials.

Prime amongst them were Konstantin Pobedonos-

tsev, officially only procurator-general of the Holy

Synod (the lay official who governed the Orthodox

Church), but who played a key role in guiding pol-

icy across a wide range of areas, and Dmitry Tol-

stoy, minister of internal affairs for most of the

1880s. The non-Russian nationalities of the empire

were subjected to cultural and administrative Rus-

sification. This was especially fierce in the Baltic

provinces of the empire, where the use of the Russ-

ian language was made compulsory in the courts

and in local government and where the local Ger-

man-speaking university was compelled to provide

teaching in Russian. This approach also included

encouraging non-Orthodox peoples to convert to

the Orthodox religion, sometimes by offering them

incentives in the form of land grants. In Poland,

most education had to be provided in Russian and

the Roman Catholic Church could only exist under

considerable restrictions.

Alexander III and his ministers also tried to claw

back some elements of the Great Reforms of the

1860s that had seemed to set Russia on the path

toward a more open political system. The post of

justice of the peace, established by the legal reform

of 1864, was abolished in most of Russia in 1889

and its legal functions transferred to the new post

of land captain. This official had very wide powers

over the peasantry and was intended to strengthen

the hold that the government had over its rural

population. The land captain became a much-

disliked figure in much of peasant Russia. The gov-

ernment also limited the powers of the zemstvos

that had been established in the 1860s. These elected

local councils had been given responsibility for the

provision of many local services and “zemstvo lib-

eralism” had become a thorn in the side of the au-

tocracy, as some local councils had pressed for the

principle of representative government to be ex-

tended to national government. Alexander III acted

to narrow the franchise for zemstvo elections and

to restrict the amount of taxation that the zem-

stvo could levy. These moves were intended to

neuter the zemstvo and reduce the influence they

could have on the population, but Alexander never

dared go so far as to actually abolish the local coun-

cils. This typified the problems facing Alexander III.

While he wanted to return to the traditional ethos

of Russian autocracy, he was forced to recognize

that, in practical terms, he could not turn the clock

back. The reforms of the 1860s had become so

firmly embedded in Russian society that they could

not simply be undone. All that the emperor could

do was to ensure that the iron fist of autocracy

was wielded as effectively as possible.

Some of Alexander’s policies made matters

more difficult for the autocracy. At the end of the

1880s, the government’s economic policies became

oriented toward stimulating industrial growth. A

major part in this was played by Sergei Witte, who

had made his career in the railway industry before

coming to work in government, and who became

minister of finance in 1892. Witte deeply admired

Alexander III and believed that Russia could be both

an autocracy and a successful industrial power. The

government, however, failed to recognize the so-

cial and political consequences of the industrial

boom that Russia enjoyed during the 1890s and

the new industrial working class began to flex its

muscles and to demand better working conditions

and political change. The emperor also had a per-

sonal interest in Russia’s foreign policy. His Dan-

ish wife helped him develop an instinctive distrust

of Germany and the 1880s witnessed Russia’s

gradual disengagement from its traditional alliance

with Germany and Austria. There were important

economic reasons for Russia’s new diplomatic di-

rection: Industrial growth required investment

from abroad and the most promising source of cap-

ital was France. In 1894 Russia and France signed

an alliance that was to be significant both for its

part in stimulating Russian industry and for the

way in which it began the reshaping of Europe’s

diplomatic map as the continent began to divide

into the two groups that would sit on opposite sides

during World War I. Alexander III did not live long

enough to see the results of his work. Despite his

large frame and apparent strength, he developed

kidney disease and died at the age of forty-nine in

October 1894.

See also: AUTOCRACY; ALEXANDER II; INDUSTRIALIZA-

TION; NICHOLAS I; RUSSO-TURKISH WARS; WITTE,

SERGEI YULIEVICH

ALEXANDER III

ENCYCLOPEDIA OF RUSSIAN HISTORY

BIBLIOGRAPHY

Chernukha, Valentina Chernukha. (1996). “Emperor

Alexander III.” In The Emperors and Empresses of Rus-

sia: Rediscovering the Romanovs, ed. Donald Raleigh.

New York: M.E. Sharpe.

Zaionchkovskii, Petr. (1976). The Russian Autocracy un-

der Alexander III. Gulf Breeze, FL: Oriental Research

Partners

ETER

ALDRON

ALEXANDER MIKHAILOVICH

(1301–1339), prince of Tver and grand prince of

Vladimir.

Alexander Mikhailovich was the second son of

Michael Yaroslavich. In 1326, after Khan Uzbek

had executed Alexander’s elder brother Dmitry,

Alexander became prince of Tver and received the

patent for the grand princely throne of Vladimir.

The Novgorodians also welcomed him as their

prince. The following year Uzbek sent his cousin

Chol-Khan to Tver, but the latter’s oppressive mea-

sures incited the citizens to revolt. Other towns

joined them in massacring Tatar agents, troops,

and merchants. In 1328 the khan therefore pun-

ished Alexander for the revolt of his subjects by

making his rival for Vladimir, Ivan I Danilovich

“Kalita” of Moscow, grand prince. The khan also

gave him a large Tatar force with which he devas-

tated Tver. Alexander sought refuge in Novgorod

but on this occasion the townspeople turned him

away. He fled to Pskov where the citizens, who

were seeking independence from Novgorod, invited

him to be their prince and refused to hand him over

to the khan. Kalita, who was determined to destroy

Tver as a political rival, had Metropolitan Feognost

excommunicate Alexander and the people of Pskov.

In 1329 Alexander fled to Lithuania in order to free

Pskov from the Church’s ban. But after some two

years he returned to Pskov, where he ruled until

1337. In that year the khan summoned him to the

Golden Horde and reinstated him in Tver. Subse-

quently many boyars deserted him and fled to

Moscow to help Kalita fight for the grand princely

throne. In 1339 the khan summoned Alexander

to Saray and executed him on October 22nd

or 28th of that year. After Alexander’s death, Tver

declined in importance, and the prince of Moscow

became the most powerful ruler in northeast

Russia.

See also: GOLDEN HORDE; GRAND PRINCE; IVAN I; MET-

ROPOLITAN; NOVGOROD THE GREAT

BIBLIOGRAPHY

Fennell, John L. I. (1968). The Emergence of Moscow

1304–1359. London: Secker & Warburg.

Martin, Janet. (1995). Medieval Russia 980–1584. Cam-

bridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.

ARTIN

IMNIK

ALEXANDER YAROSLAVICH

(1220–1263), known as Alexander Nevsky, prince

of Novgorod, grand prince of Vladimir, grand

prince of Kiev, and progenitor of the princes of

Moscow.

Born around 1220, Alexander was the grand-

son of Vsevolod Yurevich “Big Nest.” Between the

years 1228 and 1233 he and his elder brother, Fy-

odor, ruled Novgorod in the name of their father

Yaroslav of Pereyaslavl Zalessky. After Fyodor’s

death in 1233, Alexander’s younger brother Andrei

helped him to expand Novgorod’s lands and to in-

crease the prince’s control over the town. In 1238

the Tatars invaded Suzdalia but bypassed Nov-

gorod. Nevertheless, the town’s expansion into the

neighboring Finnish lands was challenged by the

Swedes and by German Knights (the Order of

Livonian Swordbearers, joined later by the Teutonic

Order). In 1240, when the Swedes marched against

Novgorod, Alexander and a small force confronted

the enemy at the river Neva and routed them. He

thereby secured Novgorod’s outlet to the Baltic Sea

and earned the sobriquet “Nevsky” (of the Neva).

After his brilliant victory, he quarreled with the

Novgorodians and withdrew to Pereyaslavl Za-

lessky. But less than a year later the Germans seized

Pskov and threatened Novgorod’s commerce, there-

with forcing the citizens to bring back Nevsky on

his terms. He arrived in 1241 and began reclaim-

ing Novgorod’s lost territories, including neigh-

boring Pskov. He confronted the main force of

Teutonic Knights on the frozen Lake Chud (Lake

Peypus) where, on April 5, 1242, he defeated them

in the famous “battle on the ice.” The next year the

Knights and the Novgorodians concluded peace.

This allowed Nevsky to continue asserting Nov-

gorod’s jurisdiction over the Finns and to wage war

against the encroaching Lithuanians.

ALEXANDER YAROSLAVICH

ENCYCLOPEDIA OF RUSSIAN HISTORY

After his father died in 1246, Nevsky visited

Khan Batu in Saray who sent him to the Great Khan

at Karakorum in Mongolia. He came home in 1249

as the grand prince of Kiev and of all Rus, includ-

ing Novgorod, to which he returned. However, his

younger brother Andrei received the patrimonial

domain of Vladimir on the Klyazma. After Nevsky

visited the Golden Horde in 1252, the khan sent a

punitive force against Andrei because he had re-

belled against the khan. The Tatars drove him out

of Vladimir. Nevsky succeeded him and gained ju-

risdiction over Suzdalia and Novgorod. Because he

was a subservient vassal, the khan let him cen-

tralize his control over the other towns of Suzdalia.

He also served the khan faithfully by suppressing

opposition to the khan’s policies, with the help of

the Tatar army. Nevertheless, after the citizens of

many towns rebelled against the Tatar census tak-

ers, Nevsky interceded, evidently successfully, on

behalf of his people. In 1262, on his fourth visit to

the Golden Horde, he fell ill. While returning home

he became a monk and died at Gorodets on the

Volga on November 14, 1263.

Although Nevsky’s valor was generally ad-

mired, his collaboration with the Tatars was criti-

cized by his contemporaries and by historians.

Metropolitan Cyril, however, exonerated the prince

in his “Life of Alexander Nevsky,” and the church

canonized him during the reign of Tsar Ivan IV (the

Terrible).

See also: ANDREI YAROSLAVICH; BATU; GOLDEN HORDE;

IVAN IV; KIEVAN RUS; NOVGOROD THE GREAT;

VSEVOLOD III

BIBLIOGRAPHY

Fennell, John. (1983). The Crisis of Medieval Russia,

1200–1304. London: Longman.

Martin, Janet. (1995). Medieval Russia, 980–1584. Cam-

bridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.

Vernadsky, George. (1953). The Mongols and Russia. New

Haven: Yale University Press.

ARTIN

IMNIK

ALEXANDRA FEDOROVNA

(1872–1918), wife of Tsar Nicholas II and last em-

press of Russia.

Alexandra Fedorovna Romanova was at the

center of the political drama that led to the down-

fall of the Russian monarchy in 1917. A princess

of the grand duchy of Hesse-Darmstadt in Ger-

many and granddaughter of England’s Queen Vic-

toria, she lost her mother and younger sister to

diphtheria when she was still a child, and she re-

sponded to this loss by turning inward. This ten-

dency toward isolation intensified after her 1894

marriage to Nicholas, when her principles came

into conflict with the reality of Russian court life.

Scandalized by the seeming decadence of the aris-

tocracy, she withdrew from society, eliciting the

scorn of the Russian social elite.

Alexandra dedicated most of her time to her

four daughters (Olga, Tatiana, Maria, and Anasta-

sia) and her son, Alexei, who was born in 1904.

Soon after the birth of this long-awaited male heir

to the throne, it was discovered that Alexei had he-

mophilia. His illness became Alexandra’s primary

concern. Grigory Yefimovich Rasputin, a self-styled

holy man, managed to stop Alexei’s bleeding and

thus became important to the royal family.

Rasputin’s closeness to the ruling family led to

speculation about his influence over political deci-

sions and to disdain for the royal family among

the educated layers of society. With the start of

World War I, which pitted Russia against Germany,

Alexandra’s German background further con-

tributed to her unpopularity. Many accused her of

heading a German faction in the government. Al-

though these charges were groundless, they served

to undermine the authority of the monarchy, thus

helping pave the way for the February Revolution

of 1917. The Bolsheviks brutally murdered the en-

tire royal family in July 1918.

The negative image of Alexandra shaped by her

detractors has given way to more objective, though

not always dispassionate, accounts of her life. She

is most often portrayed as a tragic figure and as a

dedicated wife and mother. In 1981, the Russian

Orthodox Church Abroad canonized Alexandra,

along with her family, for accepting death with

faith in God and humility, and the Moscow Patri-

archate of the Russian Orthodox Church followed

suit in 2000.

See also: ALEXEI NIKOLAYEVICH; NICHOLAS II; RASPUTIN,

GRIGORY YEFIMOVICH; ROMANOV DYNASTY

BIBLIOGRAPHY

Kozlov, Vladimir A., and Khrustalev, Vladimir M., eds.

(1997). The Last Diary of Tsaritsa Alexandra. New

Haven: Yale University Press.

ALEXANDRA FEDOROVNA

ENCYCLOPEDIA OF RUSSIAN HISTORY