Trying to preserve autocracy 1855–1894 (AQA A-Level History): Model Answers
'By 1881, the emancipation of the serfs had brought profound social change in Russia.' Assess the validity of this view.
When Alexander II passed the Emancipation Edict in 1861, it seemed to be the greatest social upheaval in Russian history. Russia's economy was serf-driven relying on grain exports to service its budding industrial sector however, the abolition changed very little. Whether he was influenced by enlightened bureaucrats such as brothers Dimitri and Nicholas Milyutin or feared being usurped from below makes little difference; the emancipation of the serfs marked a great turning point in Russian history. From autocracy and severity to reform and the fall of Tsardom. However, very little actually changed as a result of the abolition as the serfs were still thralls in all but name.
The emancipation did grant serfs some freedoms. When the 22 million serfs were freed in 1861, they gained the ability to travel and many sought work in cities after selling the allotted land which paved the way to an industrial Russia. In addition, serfs were now allowed to marry who they wanted when before they were forced to marry who their lord demanded. Due to the powers given to the Zemstvo in the 19862 and 1870 local government reforms, primary education was free and provided by the state, This led to much higher literacy rates as triple the number of primary schools were built by 1881 and double the number of children attended primary education. This led to the formation of a more educated peasant class and allowed them to read Socialist books smuggled into the country by factors such as collectivisation. This led to a more progressive-minded society however it was limited in scope. Despite this, many peasants still floundered in impoverished, rural areas and not much actually changed for them.
In reality, despite the few freedoms the peasantry were offered very little changed for the day-to-day existence of the former serfs. Despite being allotted land from their former owners' estates, many allocations were too small to subsist on. Zemsvo Survey during the 1880s found that 2/3rds of peasants couldn't feed their families without going into debt. This was due to still being tied to the Mir who promoted backwards farming techniques and redemption payments to the state as recompense for their freedom which spaned for the next 49 years at 7% interest. These were passed on to the children of debt holders which was likely as the life expectancy at the time for a peasant was 27 years for a male and 29 years for a female compared to 45 in more developed countries such as the UK. This forced peasants to sell their small allotments of land in order to seek out a meagre existence lest they fall even deeper into debt.
Overall, the former serfs had it rough. Redemption payments coupled with poor yields left many peasants to starve leaving some worse off than under serfdom; at least as thralls, they had the legal right to be fed and housed. The emancipation left many peasants as landless labourers who felt dejected by the very edict that was meant to free them.
Not everyone from the emancipation. A new class of peasants known as the kulaks emerged. With the help of the peasant land bank established by Finance Minister Von Reutern, they were able to escape debt. This allowed them to make vast profits, employing peasants and selling the surplus grain to the state or abroad. These kulaks were generally hated by the former serfs as they were seen as exploitive but many were in fact jealous of the success the kulaks' achieved. In this highly stratified society, which formerly consisted of nobles and serfs, the kulaks were a fresh addition to this class structure who didn't fit into either group showing a notable social shift. The emergence of the kulak class would not have been possible without emancipation as it created the opportunity for enterprise due to the availability of land. The kulaks helped pave the way to the formation of a middle-class between the nobles and the peasantry.
Overall, there was quite a large societal upheaval as a result of the emancipation. Firstly it created a culture of reformation which enabled other reforms such as the local government reform to take place. In addition, it kickstarted Russia's industrial revolution as serfs were now free to travel to cities however the full impact of this would not be seen until after 1881.
Finally although not much improved for the former serfs as they were still slaves in all but name, they did get some freedoms which allowed for the emergence of kulaks, Therefore society was greatly impacted by the emancipation of the serfs
Examiners Comment:
This is a Level 5 response.
This script is fully analytical, and it has an excellent focus on the issue of social change arising from the emancipation of the serfs to 1881. The argument is sceptical of the extent of social change in this period which shows a very good understanding of key features and concepts. The answer is balanced, dealing with both change and continuity. The supporting information is well selected and precise, for example, the evidence of the size of land holdings and the continued obligations of the serfs after 1861. The development of the kulaks as a 'fresh addition' to the class structure is well explained and further strengthens the evaluation of social change after emancipation. There are both implicit and explicit links to the further legislation which followed emancipation, as well as an awareness of the wider consequence of industrialisation, which is recognised to be limited by 1881. There is a well-substantiated judgement.