In 1861 in Russia, Tsar Alexander II decreed the emancipation edict of serfs. In theory, this should have given perfect freedom to the millions of serfs and state peasants in Russia. The reasons he did so can be seen in the years leading up to the Emancipation Declaration. Say no to plagiarism. Get a tailor-made essay on "Why Violent Video Games Shouldn't Be Banned"? Get an original essay Defeat in the Crimean War revealed a weakness in the structure of the state that the men who ruled Russia had barely perceived or did not suspect at all, and which they feared would destroy the empire if it were not remedied immediately. The war cost Russia 600,000 lives. While St. Petersburg could boast of commanding the largest army in Europe, bad roads, antiquated weapons and low morale prevented the effective use of that extraordinary potential power, but far more serious was a great wave of peasant unrest, which spread across much of the country. The defeat demonstrated to the ruling tsarist autocracy that Russia had fallen dangerously behind its Western neighbors, making it vulnerable to future attacks and invasions. Many liberal thinkers worked long and hard on the reasons for Russia's great defeat. Looking at Western models and contrasting Russian society, one element remained outstanding: the continued existence of serfdom in Russia. Whether out of genuine progressive beliefs or simply the need for an effective conscript army as the next war developed, Alexander II began a period of reform. in Russia with the emancipation of the serfs of February 19, 1861. Alexander's second reason was that the emancipation could subsequently be used as a way to advance Russian reform policy. If the liberation of the serfs was to be achieved in Russia, the feudal power of the nobility would have to be diminished and civil rights guaranteed to the peasants. In this scenario it would be necessary to introduce further reforms in the local administration and courts to protect the rights of the peasants as they were no longer under the exclusive jurisdiction of the landowner. Emancipation, according to Alexander, would create an economic utopia and pave the way for reform in other sectors of Russian society. The liberation of the serfs was largely the personal responsibility of the Tsar. Alexander's reform ideas tended to be met with general apathy throughout Russia by some key sectors of society; especially the aristocracy and nobility who control not only the peasants but also the economy, could benefit from the liberation. It was precisely this carelessness, caused by the nobility, that strengthened the tsar's decision to free the serfs, if only to distance them from uneconomic landowners, since wage labor was more efficient and profitable for the agrarian economy than forced labor. . Alexander was not entirely without support, but after the nobility showed disinterest in the Tsar's request in March 1856 for ideas on emancipation, it was left to Alexander's liberal intelligentsia in the press and universities to promote the policy. The Orthodox Church was too conservative to promote drastic changes and the official classes were too satisfied with existing power and privileges; even the serfs themselves lacked the coherence necessary to show real enthusiasm for emancipation. Thus, it can be seen that the character of Alexander II and his frustration with the apathy of the landowners towards his proposals, strengthened hisdetermination to apply some momentum and motivation to the reform process. What is less clear is what impact External Europe had on the Tsar and his political decisions. Alexander's first public expression of will regarding the issue of serfdom was the negotiations in Paris at the end of the Crimean War. Alexander may have seen emancipation as a way to restore Russia's influence among other great powers in Europe in the wake of its military defeat. By informing European states of his intention to emancipate Alexander they may have hoped to receive recognition of his economic reforms and perhaps attract trade and investment from other countries. So another motive for emancipation may have been his general desire to see the Russian economy thriving and competitive on the continent. With a deficit of 307 million rubles in 1856, these concerns were central to his policy. Considerable evidence of improvement can be noted in Russian agricultural trade in the generation following emancipation. The average annual export of grain increased from 86 million between 1861-65 to 136 million, from 1866-70 and again to 286.5 million from 1876-80. A common argument used by the Tsar for the emancipation of the serfs was that the liberation was a way of containing peasant unrest. It is true that there have been two recent revolts on the Black Sea and that the number of epidemics has been increasing: - in 1826-34, there were 148 outbreaks. The nobility was the class within Russian society that Alexander was most afraid of offending as they held the highest administrative positions and had previously been responsible for the downfall of certain tsars. Therefore, the compensation policy aimed to please the landowners whose serfs would be freed. However, initially it was the individual landowners who were most at risk of a potential uprising, and Alexander, insofar as he wanted to avoid unrest, used this motive to exploit the fears of the nobility. This served to plant the idea of ​​a peasant revolt in the minds of the nobility so that they would be more willing to see the emancipation of the serfs as a way to maintain the dependent status of the peasants to avoid the emergence of a peasantry. It was more of a ploy to ensure that the nobility accepted and did not reject the reform policy than a genuine fear of revolution on the part of the Tsar himself. Although he was no friend of civil unrest, the influence of this factor was less important than others. In theory, the Emancipation Edict should have given freedom to millions of state serfs and peasants, but upon closer inspection, this was not true. The actual terms of the Emancipation Edict granted the peasants a limited amount of freedom in terms of rights, but in other ways they would see new restrictions imposed on them. They were now given the right to trade, act as they wished, and marry whoever they wanted. liked it. This in itself is an achievement, as other forms of slavery had been abolished in the rest of the world years earlier, so Russia had finally caught up with the modernizing world in this respect. The argument is even more compelling when we think about the freedom they gained from brutal and oppressive landowners. Cases of landowners brutally torturing their subjects were destined never to happen again, as was the exile of serfs to Siberia. Previously, farmers had complete job security. They had all access to common land, woods and pastures, and good fertile soil. The exploitation they suffered was very limited and rare. Only one hundred and seven peasants were sent to Siberia every year, out of a population of twenty million serfs. Sexual exploitation was.