Better Emancipation of Russia Serfs

As I recall, there were three paths proposed in 1861 for the repeal of serfdom:

1. Full emancipation. All serfs immediately gain the land they live on and all of it's rights and are allowed to move to cities or work in their farms. The boyars would no longer be able to enserf the peasantry, only hire them.

2. No emancipation. The serfs gain no land, and remain serfs with the only added bonus of being able to move away - and even that was planned to be pretty terrible, you'd be supervised to only take the essentials needed from your home and then basically kicked out to the nearest village and your previously held land confiscated by the landowner.

3. Limited emancipation. The serfs gain their land, but it is still held by their suzerain and they remain serfs until they pay it out (not something most peasants could do, given that they're peasants and all). Of course, they can also just leave for the cities, but then all of their former land gets confiscated by the landowner. This was the OTL choice taken.

The problem with taking option 1 is that the conservative parts of aristocracy were highly against it.
 
As I recall, there were three paths proposed in 1861 for the repeal of serfdom:

1. Full emancipation. All serfs immediately gain the land they live on and all of it's rights and are allowed to move to cities or work in their farms. The boyars would no longer be able to enserf the peasantry, only hire them.

2. No emancipation. The serfs gain no land, and remain serfs with the only added bonus of being able to move away - and even that was planned to be pretty terrible, you'd be supervised to only take the essentials needed from your home and then basically kicked out to the nearest village and your previously held land confiscated by the landowner.

3. Limited emancipation. The serfs gain their land, but it is still held by their suzerain and they remain serfs until they pay it out (not something most peasants could do, given that they're peasants and all). Of course, they can also just leave for the cities, but then all of their former land gets confiscated by the landowner. This was the OTL choice taken.

The problem with taking option 1 is that the conservative parts of aristocracy were highly against it.

How absolute was the Tsardom at this time? Assuming that Alexander went ahead with option 1, what would he be looking at in terms of resistance?
 
How absolute was the Tsardom at this time? Assuming that Alexander went ahead with option 1, what would he be looking at in terms of resistance?
Absolute absolute. I'm not exactly sure at how much resistance he'd see, though. Probably some. The aristocracy feared that a full-blown emancipation will create a proletariat that can cause an 1848-esque revolt in Russia.
 
Absolute absolute. I'm not exactly sure at how much resistance he'd see, though. Probably some. The aristocracy feared that a full-blown emancipation will create a proletariat that can cause an 1848-esque revolt in Russia.

Is there any chance that Alexander decides to push it through?
 
Part of the emancipation deal, if I recall correctly, had the land the serfs worksed on divided between them an the nobles that used to own them, about a third of the land going to the serfs. Rather predictably, the serfs tended to receive the least fertile third, which meant that they could barely make enough of a profit to buy their freedom. Making deals for the freedom in exchange for settling in the East might have aided the situation, both for them and those who remain who now have more land and less competition, but not a lot of people and supplies could reach into the Russian interior without railroads, and agricultural policy was for nerds, anyway, so nobody bothered.
 

PhilippeO

Banned
How absolute was the Tsardom at this time? Assuming that Alexander went ahead with option 1, what would he be looking at in terms of resistance?

Assassination.

it was unlikely nobles would force a constitution/limit on Tsar, absolute monarchy is widely accepted and religiously justified, but they can change the Tsar.
 
Absolute absolute. I'm not exactly sure at how much resistance he'd see, though. Probably some. The aristocracy feared that a full-blown emancipation will create a proletariat that can cause an 1848-esque revolt in Russia.

Absolute monarchy means that the monarch can decide what he wants, not that everybody is going to respect this decision. Important difference.
 
We might even see an outhright noble revolution. Think of how the Brazilian aristocracy overthrew the monarchy just because the emperor decided to free the slaves.
 
The Russian aristocracy was quite weak without the emperor. A 'revolution' on their part would be a bit of a farce, I think, and would just make sitting ducks of them. Assassination, yet - some among their number could go for it, but it's by no means certain this assassination would succeed. Nor that they would necessarily choose such a radical and dangerous step.

I rather imagine a great deal of groveling, and trying to weasel out individual exceptions (with mixed success).
 
Top