Alexander II is succeeded by his eldest son, Tsesarevich Nicholas Alexandrovich

Greetings, fellow historians of the Internet!

This being my first venture into the weird and wonderful universe and alternate universes that is this forum, I should perhaps write a few words of introduction.

As some of you might gather from my username, I am interested in Russian history and especially Imperial Russia (1721-1917), but my interest in Russian history and politics is pretty much from Rurik to the present day.

While studying 19th century Russia and the reforms of Alexander II, I often wondered how different history might have been had his eldest son, the Tsesarevich Nikolai, not died somewhat unexpectedly in 1865. Nikolai was liberally educated and could have been expected to continue with his father's reform programme, unlike his younger brother, the eventual successor Alexander III.

What I have done is sketched out a list of scenarios that might stem from Nicholas II's succession following Alexander II's assassination in 1881. While it is possible to argue that the problems facing Russia were so great that the tsarist regime was eventually going to collapse, I intend to demonstrates that under a reforming tsar who was genuinely concerned about the welfare of his subjects, the radical elements in Russian society would have been much weaker by the turn of the century.

The plot is by no means 100% fixed, and comments are welcome so I could improve the timeline. My intention is to develop each scenario with more details and be able to justify the developments in the timeline.
 
Tsar Nicholas II

Nicholas the Great: 1843-1920
Emperor of All the Russias: 1881-1920

On 13 March 1881, Tsar Alexander II of Russia was returning from inspecting the troops when his carriage was blown up by terrorists from the left-wing group People's Will. The mortally wounded tsar, his legs shattered by the bomb, was rushed to the Winter Palace by his attendants. Within a matter of minutes, the Tsar Liberator bled to death, surrounded by members of his family.

Among those who had gathered by the tsar's deathbed was the 38-year-old Nicholas Alexandrovich. Nikha, as he was known to the family, was the eldest son of Alexander II and had been Tsesarevich since his father became emperor in 1855. As his father drew on his last agonising breath, Nikha became Nicholas II, Emperor of All the Russias.

In order to understand the reasons behind Russia's extraordinary success in the late 19th and early 20th centuries, the decisions taken by Tsar Nicholas must be considered as the most influential factor. After some hesitation, the new tsar approved Count Loris-Melikov's proposals for an assembly with representatives elected from the regions. Although this institution was only an advisory body, Nicholas would seek to carry out its recommendations, or at least send official to remote parts of the country to make further investigations.

The tsar was keen to stimulate Russian economic productivity by restricting the obligations that had been placed on the peasants under the terms of the emancipation agreement. The emancipation dues were abolished and local landowners were encouraged to consolidate their holdings to stimulate agricultural productivity. As landowners discovered that it was more cost effective to employ machines than to pay peasants to farm the land, many peasants migrated to the cities to work in Russia's growing manufactories.
Over the course of the first twenty years of Nicholas's reign, the Russian economy grew by 8% a year on average, and by the turn of the century Russia had made significant progress catching up with the economies of Britain, Germany and France. Although small numbers of radical anarchists remained keen on overthrowing the monarchy, the liberal tsar was loved by the Russian people. Nicholas showed a genuine concern for the plight of his subjects and would often work long into the night on reform proposals.

Naturally, the conservative elements within the nobility and the tsar's own court were dismayed by the radical nature of Nicholas's reforms. It was rumoured that high level government officials were planning to engineer a coup to replace Nicholas with his brother, the Grand Duke Alexander Alexandrovich. Nicholas was aware of such rumours but knew that Alexander would never consider such a venture. He responded by decreeing that all government ministers with more than ten years of ministerial experience would be granted the title of Knyaz and forced into retirement upon reaching the age of 70. This policy gave conservatives the prestige they desired, but reduced their influence on state affairs.

Meanwhile, the expansion of the education system created a new generation of liberal nobles who became government officials dedicated to carrying out the tsar's reforms. In the early 1900s, two talented brothers from Simbirsk emerged to occupy top government posts. In 1901 Alexander Ulyanov was appointed Minister of Education. More remarkably, two years later his younger brother Vladimir was appointed to replace Count Witte as Finance Minister. Vladimir Ulyanov implemented the tax reform which ended noble exemptions on taxation.

On the foreign policy front, Russia's position appeared to be stable. Nicholas had withdrawn from the League of Three Emperors, and instead sought rapprochement with France and Britain. Although wary of Russian ambitions in central and eastern Asia, both powers were impressed by the progress of political reform in Russia. Nicholas's Russian Empire would also serve as a powerful ally against an increasingly assertive German Empire.

In response to the increasing threats posed by Germany and its Austrian ally, a project to modernise the Imperial Army was carried out by Minister of War Grand Duke Alexei Alexandrovich. By the time the project was completed in 1912 in time for the 100th anniversary of Russia's victory in the Patriotic War against Napoleon, Russian military capacity increased by more than fifty percent thanks to financial and technological assistance from its French ally.

Although Grand Duke Alexei did not live to see the completion of his army reforms, he is rightly considered to be the architect for Russia's victory against the Central Powers. Despite Russia's early setbacks in 1914 and 1915, the action on the Eastern Front had significantly reduced the pressure on Russia's British and French allies. By 1916 the arms factories in Tula were able to meet the increased demand for artillery shells. The army's commander-in-chief Grand Duke Alexander Alexandrovich emerged as a modern-day Kutuzov. The 69-year-old Grand Duke took gave few orders, but the conscript soldiers were impressed by his resemblance to a common muzhik. Meanwhile, talented divisional generals such as Brusilov, Yudenich and Kornilov achieved notable successes against the Austrians and the Ottomans.

The triumph of the Allies by the end of 1917 was not absolute, but the terms of the Treaty of Gatchina achieved many of the allied goals. The British Empire took control of Germany's colonial possessions, Alsace-Lorraine was returned to France and East Prussia was incorporated into Russian Poland. Prime Minister Stolypin proved a tough negotiator and achieved large gains. In addition to acquiring Galicia from the Austro-Hungarian Empire, Russia's greatest triumph was the fulfilment of a longstanding objective, the conquest of Constantinople from the Ottomans, renamed Tsargrad by the new authorities. Russian control of the city was contingent on allowing Britain and France full access and trading rights, which was readily granted. By 1918, the Russian Empire could be considered the third most powerful nation in the world after Britain and the United States of America.

Nicholas was glad to have won the war, which led some to call him 'Nicholas the Great', but the death toll on both sides during three years of war had caused him immense distress. His advisors He suffered a series of strokes towards the end of 1918 and increasingly government duties were taken over by the heir, Tsesarevich Alexei Nikolaevich. The elderly tsar was also forced to deal with the absence of his beloved second son Konstantin, whom he had sent to serve as governor of Tsargrad. Konstantin's assassination in Tsargrad in late June of 1920 was a devastating blow to the tsar. In the morning of July 24, after almost 40 years on the throne, Tsar Nicholas II died peacefully in his sleep. It would be up to Tsar Alexei II to deal with the consequences of Russia's southward expansion.
 
Alexander II's OTL successor wasn't as reactionary as he later became originally. However Alexander II's assassination pushed his predisposition to conservativism to reactonarism. It really drive themed everyone how blatantly Alexander II had been attacked. It probably best if Alexander II does peacefully.
 
Also just read your first post, and I like the style. But you are going a bit fast and it seems like the butterflies should produce a more different if no unrecognizable WWI. Also Constantinople is unlikely to be given to Russia. Because it's contrary to centuries of French/British policy.
 
Alexander II's OTL successor wasn't as reactionary as he later became originally. However Alexander II's assassination pushed his predisposition to conservativism to reactonarism. It really drive themed everyone how blatantly Alexander II had been attacked. It probably best if Alexander II does peacefully.

From my understanding, while Tsesarevich during the latter years of Alexander II's reign, Alexander III had already emerged as the unofficial spokesman for the conservative opposition to his father (though this was also caused by his dismay at the tsar's relationship with Ekaterina Dolgorukaya). I suppose that after 1866 (when Alexander II became the target of some assassination attempts), he would have made sure the new heir to the throne was more conservative.

This is not to say that Alexander III did not become more reactionary given the circumstances of his father's death, but in my mind Tsar Nicholas could simultaneously embark on liberal reforms while isolating and cracking down on a small number of revolutionaries.
 
Also just read your first post, and I like the style. But you are going a bit fast and it seems like the butterflies should produce a more different if no unrecognizable WWI. Also Constantinople is unlikely to be given to Russia. Because it's contrary to centuries of French/British policy.

Yes, it does go fast but it is only intended as a broad sketch of the outlines and I intend to develop it with more details.

I considered moving WWI to an earlier date, but even with a strengthened Russian military it wouldn't have been able to mobilise quickly and effectively against Germany in the first year of the war. And in my timeline the war ends with a negotiated peace rather than with a capitulation from the Central Powers (hence the German and Austro-Hungarian Empires remain intact).

You say that giving Constantinople to Russia is unlikely to happen, but according to Radzinsky's biography of Alexander II, leading European powers were prepared to allow it to happen as early as 1878 were it not for a diplomatic blunder on the part of Gorchakov. During WWI the British and French subscribed to Russian war aims, though British and French ambitions means that Russia would have to grant trade concessions.
 
Top