DOCSLIB.ORG

Alexander III

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Alexander III Alexander III • Was Alexander II’s son from his first marriage • Influences: Alexander III was influenced less by his father then by his tutor Konstantin Pobedonostsev Influenced his views on conservatism Konstantin Pobedonostsev • Was against democracy but supported autocracy • Democracy: a system of government in which people choose their rulers by voting for them in elections • Autocracy: a form of government which the ruler (the autocrat) exercises absolute political power, unlimited by other factors such as a parliament or a constitution. • Supporter of Orthodoxy and opposed other religions • Was against nationalities other than Russian within the Russian empire Universal Manhood Suffrage • The right that all males over the age of consent have to vote, in order to choose a government or national leader. • Pobedonostsev considered the UMS: • A ‘fatal error’ • ‘among the falsest of political principles’ • Parlimentarianism ‘triumph of egoism’ • Freedom of press- ‘one of the falsest institutions of our time’ Nikolai Denilyevski • Also influence Alexander II but not as much as Pobedonostsev • “‘Prophet’ of the new temper in Russian thought, and especially in Russian foreign policy.” – Europe 1870-1991 p 61 • In 1871 wrote the book Russia and Europe • Rejects the idea of westernization • Suggests focusing pan-Slavism • Pan-Slavism: A political doctrine which advocated the political union of all Slav peoples. This was widely viewed in other European states as a cover for the political ambitions of Russia • Less aggressive then old Slavism Conservative Legislation 1882-1892 • Assassination of previous tsar led to the replacement of some government officials • Example: Mikhail Loris-Melikov was replaced by Nikolai Ignatiev who was later replaced by Dmitri Tolstoy • The office of justice of peace was replaced by the Land Commandant (zemsky nachalnik) Qualifications included: • Being a noble • The person had to support the administrative and judicial authority in their local area • It had more power than the secret police • Laws restricted rights to vote • Rural and urban areas had laws that restricted who could vote • St. Petersburg- the amount of voters was reduced from from 21000 to 7000. Education during the reactionary period • Minister of Education was I.V. Delyanov • Opposed educational reforms of Alexander II Universities/ Schools: • Reduced autonomy • Raised tuition fees • Made sure that only the children of nobles would be able to attend school • Schools under the local cleregy: • Only schools that kept their autonomy and could continue to educate as they wished Consequences: • World-renowned elite that disguised illiteracy rates in Russia: • Pavlov, Mendeleiev, Chekhov, Tolstoy, Gorky, Klyuchevsky, and Tchaikovsky • 79% of the Russian population was illiterate o Russification • The attempting to suppress the local characteristics of various regions within the Empire, and spread Russian characteristics to all the Tsar’s subjects • Russians were a minority and made up only 45% of the population, the remaining 55% was other nationalities • This meant that in order for the Russians to have power they had to russify the other nations within the Empire People were separated into three groups by historian J.N. Westwood Disloyal • Poles • Ukrainians • Tartars • Georgians Loyal • Finland • Armenia • Baltic territories of Estonia • Latvia • Lithuania Jews • Conditions were worse under Alexander III • Was illegal to live in the pale • The pale was an area in western Russia to which Jewish settlement was legally restricted. It had been established in the 18th century by Catherine the Great. Also known as the Pale of Settlement • Anti-Semitism arose from the orthodox church • Anti-Semitism is the hostility of Jews or the Jewish religion (Judaism) Were blamed for • The polish rebellion • The assassination of Alexander III Government supported pogroms • Pogroms are violent attacks upon Jewish communities and upon their property • May 1881 215 disturbances occurs • 1905 in Odessa, Ukraine around 500 Jews were killed Restrictions • Were not allowed to trade during Christian holy days • This weakened merchants as they did not trade during their holy days • The 10% of Jew in education were given strict rules to follow Solutions There were two outlets to the abuse 1. Zionist movement A form of Jewish nationalism which advocated the establishment of a Jewish state 2. The Bund A Jewish socialist organization Was one of the factors in the development of revolutionary socialism. Russification was a ‘dissolving agent’ ironically it was supposed to reduce nationalism but it increased it. .
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Cultural Policies in Russian Museums Olga Zabalueva
    Cultural Policies in Russian Museums Olga Zabalueva The self-archived postprint version of this journal article is available at Linköping University Institutional Repository (DiVA): http://urn.kb.se/resolve?urn=urn:nbn:se:liu:diva-147666 N.B.: When citing this work, cite the original publication. Zabalueva, O., (2017), Cultural Policies in Russian Museums, Museum International, 69(3-4), 38-49. https://doi.org/10.1111/muse.12171 Original publication available at: https://doi.org/10.1111/muse.12171 Copyright: Wiley (24 months - No Online Open) http://eu.wiley.com/WileyCDA/ Cultural Policies in Russian Museums by Olga Zabalueva The actual definition of the museum is articulated around different roles: the preservation of tangible and intangible heritage in addition to research on and communication of knowledge. Consequently, visitors need to trust museums with their interpretation of reality. Historical or national museums hold a central role, insofar as they strongly influence the identity of entire nations. In this article, I will study the ways in which heritage is used to construct politically engaged collective memories and contemporary Russian cultural policies, which promote such uses. In particular, I will analyse the transformation of the 2013-2016 Moscow Manege exhibitions into an entertainment centre called ‘Russia––my (hi)story’, which is promoted by the Russian Orthodox Church and supported by the authorities. Another case presented herein is the Gulag History Museum in Moscow. My aim is to demonstrate how the cultural heritage is being ‘applied’ to construct historical narratives of the difficult past and what is the relation of cultural policies implemented by the state to this process.
    [Show full text]
  • Alexander III (1881-1894)
    Alexander III (1881-1894) Monuments to Alexander III Study the two monuments of Alexander III • They were erected after Alexander III’s death in the reign of Nicholas II (1909 and 1912) • Nicholas II approved of both, although one in particular is said to have caused a public scandal. Which do you prefer and why? Can these monuments tell us anything about the nature of Alexander III’s rule? This statue was built for Moscow, Nicholas II’s favoured capital: “The Tsar’s giant figure was a mannequin without human expression, a monolithic incarnation of autocratic power. It was straight backed on its throne, hands on knees, encumbered with all the symbols of tsarist authority – the crown, the sceptre and orb, the imperial robe and full military dress…in the manner of a pharaoh with nothing to think about except the source of his own illimitable power.” (O Figes, p16) This statue was erected in St Petersburg: “such an ingenious and formidable representation of autocracy in human form that after the revolution the Bolsheviks decided to leave it in place as a fearful reminder of the old regime…The rider and horse had been made to appear so heavy and solid that it seemed impossible for them to move.” (O Figes, p15) What happened to the other statue? Alexander’s Manifesto of Unshakeable Autocracy Find and highlight the following words: • Autocracy • Hereditary What do these • Sovereignty • Divine words mean? • Subjects How many times do they appear? Using these key words to help you, summarise the main theme of the speech in a sentence.
    [Show full text]
  • The Russian Orthodox Church
    Conflict Studies Research Centre C109 The Russian Orthodox Church Dr Mark A Smith The Russian Orthodox Church’s socio-political role in Russia has increased significantly since 1991. The ROC is not a state church, but is close to being a quasi-state church. The Putin leadership is happy to promote the Church’s role, seeing it as an important part of post-Soviet Russia’s national identity. The Russian Orthodox Church (ROC) was the state church in Tsarist Russia, and freedom of belief for non-Orthodox believers was severely restricted. The Russian Orthodox Church was moreover seen as an integral part of Imperial Russia’s national identity: “Orthodoxy, Autocracy, and Nationality”.1 Although Church-State links were formally broken in Soviet times, the ROC was effectively a tool of the Soviet state. In the post-Soviet era, the ROC has sought to redefine its identity; it has had to adapt to a new socio-political environment in which although it no longer faces the constraints imposed by an authoritarian atheistic state, it has to face the challenges of both western consumerism and proselytism from other churches and sects. Although the ROC is no longer a state church, it is clearly the most important church within Russian society, and does have a special relationship with the state. Orthodoxy, unlike Catholicism and Protestantism, does not have a dualistic conception of Church and State. In Russian Orthodoxy, church and state are seen as part of an organic religious and political community, united by blood and soil.2 Orthodoxy has always been seen as a central part of the Russian national idea.
    [Show full text]
  • Orthodox Political Theologies: Clergy, Intelligentsia and Social Christianity in Revolutionary Russia
    DOI: 10.14754/CEU.2020.08 ORTHODOX POLITICAL THEOLOGIES: CLERGY, INTELLIGENTSIA AND SOCIAL CHRISTIANITY IN REVOLUTIONARY RUSSIA Alexandra Medzibrodszky A DISSERTATION in History Presented to the Faculties of the Central European University In Partial Fulfilment of the Requirements for the Degree of Doctor of Philosophy CEU eTD Collection Budapest, Hungary 2020 Dissertation Supervisor: Matthias Riedl DOI: 10.14754/CEU.2020.08 Copyright Notice and Statement of Responsibility Copyright in the text of this dissertation rests with the Author. Copies by any process, either in full or part, may be made only in accordance with the instructions given by the Author and lodged in the Central European Library. Details may be obtained from the librarian. This page must form a part of any such copies made. Further copies made in accordance with such instructions may not be made without the written permission of the Author. I hereby declare that this dissertation contains no materials accepted for any other degrees in any other institutions and no materials previously written and/or published by another person unless otherwise noted. CEU eTD Collection ii DOI: 10.14754/CEU.2020.08 Technical Notes Transliteration of Russian Cyrillic in the dissertation is according to the simplified Library of Congress transliteration system. Well-known names, however, are transliterated in their more familiar form, for instance, ‘Tolstoy’ instead of ‘Tolstoii’. All translations are mine unless otherwise indicated. Dates before February 1918 are according to the Julian style calendar which is twelve days behind the Gregorian calendar in the nineteenth century and thirteen days behind in the twentieth century.
    [Show full text]
  • Responses to Old Catholicism in Late Imperial Russia
    ACTA SLAVICA IAPONICA, TOMUS 41, PP. 91–109 Saving the Selves or Saving the Others? Responses to Old Catholicism in Late Imperial Russia Mikhail Suslov INTRODUCTION This paper examines Messianic thought in Russia through political and theo- logical debates on the Old Catholic movement. The Old Catholic Church emerged as a reaction to the first Vatican Council (1870) with the program of reconnecting with the Lutheran, Anglican and Orthodox Churches on the theo- logical foundation, laid out by the Church fathers and Church councils of the first ten centuries of Christianity. The Old Catholic question, which initially appeared as one of purely ecclesiological and perhaps theological interest, was broadly aired and discussed by literally every significant Russian public figure in the 1870s–1900s. Although Old Catholicism per se and its relations with the Russian Orthodox Christianity have not been successful to date,1 it induced the crystallization of a network of sympathizers in the Russian Empire. For them, Old Catholicism was a means to voice their discontent with the official Church and to shape their alternative visions about Russian Orthodoxy in world histo- ry. The Old Catholic movement stirred up religious and geopolitical hopes and initiated important ideological and theological discussions, which revolved around such questions as, what is Russia’s role in the world, and how can reli- gious principles be implemented in everyday life.2 1 In 1987 the Orthodox-Old Catholic dialogue resulted in a principal agreement on theo- logical grounds. However, palpable practical consequences did not follow. The process stalled also because the Old Catholics adopted the female priesthood, and thereby alien- ated themselves from the Russian Orthodox Church.
    [Show full text]
  • Alexander-Davey on Pipes, 'Russian Conservatism and Its Critics: a Study in Political Culture'
    H-Russia Alexander-Davey on Pipes, 'Russian Conservatism and Its Critics: A Study in Political Culture' Review published on Saturday, December 1, 2007 Richard Pipes. Russian Conservatism and Its Critics: A Study in Political Culture. New Haven: Yale University Press, 2005. xv + 216 pp. $30.00 (cloth), ISBN 978-0-300-11288-7. Reviewed by Ethan Alexander-Davey (Department of Slavonic Studies, University of Cambridge) Published on H-Russia (December, 2007) Russian Autocracy and Its Critic There is no disputing the contemporary relevance of the topic that Richard Pipes has chosen for his latest book, Russian Conservatism and Its Critics. Since the collapse of the USSR, Russian academics, journalists, and politicians have shown great interest in the theory and practice of conservatism in general and Russian conservatism in particular. In 2004, the philosophy faculty of St. Petersburg State University founded the Center for the Study of Conservatism, which holds an annual conference and has assisted in the publication of books and articles on the theory and history of Russian conservatism and its significance for post-Soviet Russia. Academics and journal writers in Moscow and Voronezh have been producing monographs and publishing new editions of classic works of Russian conservatism for several years now. Most significantly, members of President Vladimir Putin's administration now appear to be seeking inspiration, or at the very least ideological justification, for their policies in classic works of Russian conservatism, especially those of
    [Show full text]
  • THE RISE and FALL of the BLACK HUNDRED by Jacob Langer Department of History Duke Univers
    CORRUPTION AND THE COUNTERREVOLUTION: THE RISE AND FALL OF THE BLACK HUNDRED by Jacob Langer Department of History Duke University Date:_______________________ Approved: ___________________________ Marty Miller, Supervisor ___________________________ Donald Raleigh ___________________________ Warren Lerner ___________________________ Alex Roland Dissertation submitted in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy in the Department of History in the Graduate School of Duke University 2007 ABSTRACT CORRUPTION AND THE COUNTERREVOLUTION: THE RISE AND FALL OF THE BLACK HUNDRED by Jacob Langer Department of History Duke University Date:_______________________ Approved: ___________________________ Marty Miller, Supervisor ___________________________ Donald Raleigh ___________________________ Warren Lerner ___________________________ Alex Roland An abstract of a dissertation submitted in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy in the Department of History in the Graduate School of Duke University 2007 Copyright by Jacob Langer 2007 Abstract This dissertation analyzes the ideology and activities of the Black Hundred movement at the end of the Imperial period in Russia (1905-1917). It seeks to explain the reasons for the sudden, rapid expansion of Black Hundred organizations in 1905, as well as the causes of their decline, which began just two years after their appearance. It further attempts to elucidate the complex relationship between the Black Hundred and Russian authorities, including the central government and local officials. The problem is approached by offering two distinct perspectives on the Black Hundred. First, a broad overview of the movement is presented. The focus here is on the headquarter branches of Black Hundred organizations in St. Petersburg, but these chapters also look at the activities of many different provincial branches, relating trends in the provinces to events in the center in order to draw conclusions about the nature of the overall movement.
    [Show full text]
  • The Grotesque Aesthetics of Tolstoy's Resurrection
    KU ScholarWorks | http://kuscholarworks.ku.edu Please share your stories about how Open Access to this article benefits you. Estranged and Degraded Worlds: The Grotesque Aesthetics of Tolstoy’s Resurrection. by Ani Kokobobo 2012 This is the published version of the article, made available with the permission of the publisher. The original published version can be found at the link below. Kokobobo, Ani. (2010) Estranged and Degraded Worlds: The Grotesque Aesthetics of Tolstoy’s Resurrection. Tolstoy Studies Journal, 24, 1-14. Published version: http://go.galegroup.com/ps/i.do?id=GALE%7CA32 5496164&v=2.1&u=ksstate_ukans&it=r&p=LitRC&sw=w&asid=c58f0 91cba4f4b6c97d9a8b9e2fb4b48 This work has been made available by the University of Kansas Libraries’ Office of Scholarly Communication and Copyright. -*12-7 23"'#1-30,* -*3+#STRST -*12-7 23"'#1 An annual refereed publication of the Tolstoy Society "'2-0TTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTT'!&#*T #,,#0 !',,!'*," 3 1!0'.2'-,,%#+#,2TTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTT3*'#%'1!&)3 "'2-0'*11'12,!#TTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTT 4'"(-312-, )-.7#"'2',%11'12,!#TTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTT(,,&)&.+, ,' *'-%0.&7"'2-01TTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTT-1#.& !&*#%#*Q0', '8-4 "'2-0'* ,-0"S ,"0#5 -,1)-4 /,'4#01'27 -$ 1225Q )07* +#01-, 30',!#2-, /,'4#01'27Q 4'!&0" 5312$1-, ,0,0" )-**#%# ," )-*3+
    [Show full text]
  • Holy Russia in Modern Times: an Essay on Orthodoxy and Cultural Change*
    HOLY RUSSIA IN MODERN TIMES: AN ESSAY ON ORTHODOXY AND CULTURAL CHANGE* Alas, ‘love thy neighbor’ offers no response to questions about the com- position of light, the nature of chemical reactions or the law of the conservation of energy. Christianity, . increasingly reduced to moral truisms . which cannot help mankind resolve the great problems of hunger, poverty, toil or the economic system, . occupies only a tiny corner in contemporary civilisation. — Vasilii Rozanov1 Chernyshevski and Pobedonostsev, the great radical and the great reac- tionary, were perhaps the only two men of the [nineteenth] century who really believed in God. Of course, an incalculable number of peasants and old women also believed in God; but they were not the makers of history and culture. Culture was made by a handful of mournful skeptics who thirsted for God simply because they had no God. — Abram Tertz [Andrei Siniavskii]2 What defines the modern age? As science and technology develop, faith in religion declines. This assumption has been shared by those who applaud and those who regret it. On the one side, for example, A. N. Wilson laments the progress of unbelief in the last two hundred years. In God’s Funeral, the title borrowed from Thomas Hardy’s dirge for ‘our myth’s oblivion’, Wilson endorses Thomas Carlyle’s doleful assessment of the threshold event of the new era: ‘What had been poured forth at the French Revolution was something rather more destructive than the vials of the Apocalypse. It was the dawning of the Modern’. As Peter Gay comments in a review, ‘Wilson leaves no doubt that the ‘‘Modern’’ with its impudent challenge to time-honoured faiths, was a disaster from start to finish’.3 On the other side, historians * I would like to thank the following for their useful comments on this essay: Peter Brown, Itsie Hull, Mark Mazower, Stephanie Sandler, Joan Scott, Richard Wortman and Reginald Zelnik.
    [Show full text]
  • Oliver Smith Studies in Russian and Slavic Literatures, Cultures and History
    Oliver Smith Studies in Russian and Slavic Literatures, Cultures and History Series Editor: Lazar Fleishman (Stanford Universtity) Oliver Smith Boston 2011 Library of Congress Cataloging-in-Publication Data Smith, Oliver, Ph. D. Vladimir Soloviev and the spiritualization of matter / Oliver Smith. p. cm. -- (Studies in Russian and Slavic literatures, cultures, and history) Includes bibliographical references (p. ) and index. ISBN 978-1-936235-17-9 (hardback) 1. Solovyov, Vladimir Sergeyevich, 1853-1900. 2. Matter. 3. Spirit. I. Title. B4268.M35S65 2010 197--dc22 2010047543 Copyright © 2011 Academic Studies Press All rights reserved ISBN 978-1-936235-17-9 Book design by Ivan Grave On the cover: Th e Portrait of Vladimir Soliviev, by Ivan Kramskoy (a fragment). 1885 Published by Academic Studies Press in 2011 28 Montfern Avenue Brighton, MA 02135, USA [email protected] www.academicstudiespress.com Effective December 12th, 2017, this book will be subject to a CC-BY-NC license. To view a copy of this license, visit https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0/. Other than as provided by these licenses, no part of this book may be reproduced, transmitted, or displayed by any electronic or mechanical means without permission from the publisher or as permitted by law. The open access publication of this volume is made possible by: This open access publication is part of a project supported by The Andrew W. Mellon Foundation Humanities Open Book initiative, which includes the open access release of several Academic Studies Press volumes. To view more titles available as free ebooks and to learn more about this project, please visit borderlinesfoundation.org/open.
    [Show full text]
  • By Konstantin Petrovich Pobedonostsev on the Issue of a Constitution
    A Speech by Konstantin Petrovich Pobedonostsev on the Issue of a Constitution Delivered on 8 March 1881 in the Winter Palace, St. Petersburg Konstantin Pobedonostsev (1827-1907) was the foremost representation of reactionary political thought in late imperial Russia. An accomplished lawyer and tutor for the future Alexander III, in 1880 Pobedonostsev became chief procurator of the Holy Synod, the highest administrative position in the Russian Orthodox Church. He also served as a member of the State Council, a central legislative body of the autocracy. The speech reproduced below was given on 8 March 1881, just a week after radical terrorists succeeded, after numerous attempts, in assassinating Emperor Alexander II. At that very time, the Emperor had been contemplating the approval of a plan for political reform produced by interior minister Count M. T. Loris-Melikov (for the memorandum on that plan see the reading on electronic reserve), and the new Emperor accordingly took up the issue a week after his father's assassination. The speech is produced here on the basis of the recollections of one of those present at the discussion, and therefore it remains difficult to state with any certainty that these were the exact words of Pobedonostsev. Nonetheless, the sentiments expressed below seem broadly consistent with Pobedonostsev's views as we know them from other sources, and at the very least they tell us how his views were recalled by others who had contact with him. Your Majesty! By oath and by conscience I am obliged to express all that is on my soul. I find myself not only in a state of confusion, but also one of despair.
    [Show full text]
  • Olga Maiorova Curriculum Vitae
    Olga Maiorova Curriculum Vitae Office: University of Michigan Department of Slavic Languages and Literatures 812 E. Washington, 3040 Modern Languages Building Ann Arbor, MI 48104 Tel. (734) 647-2133 E-mail: [email protected] Education: Ph.D., Russian Language and Literature, Moscow State University, 1985 MA, Russian Language and Literature, Moscow State University, 1975-1980 Employment: Director, University of Michigan, Center for Russian, East European, and Eurasian Studies, 2011- 2014 Associate Professor, University of Michigan, the Department of Slavic Languages and Literatures, 2009- present Assistant Professor, University of Michigan, the Department of Slavic Languages and Literatures, 2001-2009 Senior Research Fellow, Institute of World Literature, Russian Academy of Sciences, Moscow, "Literaturnoe Nasledstvo" Department, 1992-1998 Research Fellow, Institute of World Literature, Russian Academy of Sciences, Moscow, "Literaturnoe Nasledstvo" Department, 1987-1992 Senior Research Fellow, Moscow State University, Institute of World Culture, 1996-2001 (part- time) Instructor of History of Russian Poetry, Shchukin College of Theater Arts, Moscow, 1986-1987 Instructor of Russian Literature, Moscow State University, Department for Preparing Students of Humanities Departments, 1983-1985 Publications: Book: From the Shadow of Empire: Defining the Russian Nation through Cultural Mythology, 1855-1870s (Madison: University of Wisconsin Press, 2010; included in the series Studies of the Harriman Institute, Columbia University). Edited Books: Aleksei K. Tolstoi, Poeziia. Dramaturgiia. Proza [Poetry. Drama. Prose]. Editing, introduction and commentaries by Ol’ga Maiorova. Moscow: Slovo, 2001, 616 p. [Introduction: “‘Sluzha tainstvennoi otchizne…’. Literaturnaia sud’ba A.K.Tolstogo” [Serving a mysterious fatherland: A. K. Tolstoi’s literary fate], 5-15; commentaries, 587-610]. Second edition. Moscow: Slovo, 2008.
    [Show full text]