The impact of crimean war and impetus to reform
The war itself
- Lasted just under 2 and half years (5 October 1853 – 30 March 1856)
- It began as a dispute between Russia and the ottoman empire and whilst they could
stand up against this once France and Britain joined the war their weaknesses were
clearly exposed.
- 1854 defeat at battle of Alma
- Then a costly year long siege in which russia was forced to withdraw from the
symbolic Sevastopol base
- Alexander II forced to negotiate surrender and sign the treaty of Paris.
- 400,000 dead and 80,000 wounded (very high) but most of these deaths were from
poor conditions not military action
- Russia diminished as a European power
- Shift from 1812 where they had defeated Napoleon to now was disconcerting
Problems
- The empire was so big that the army was spread too thinly with only 100,000 being
spared for Sevastopol defence
- Equipment out of date
- Supply chain corrupt
- Cost of training and supplying an army of 1.8 million, in 1860 army believed to take
up ⅓ of the government's income
- Lack of quality officers
Slavophiles vs westernisers
- Ongoing intellectual debate over russia's future
- Slavophiles: a russian-dominated slavic traditional world
- Westernisers: felt traditional russian ways could hold back progress
- The crimean war was proof of Russia's backwardness
- The war and Alexander's more European education appeared to encourage a more
westernising attitude. But it was also crucial for Alexander to maintain his autocracy
Army reforms 1861
All of Alexander's chief advisors in the first half of his reign were military men.
- General Rotovsev: his brother in charge of Navy, handled emancipation of the serfs
- Dimitry Milyutin: a professor of military history was made minister of war. He pushed
through military reforms having studied the defeat at crimea.
To remain a world power and be able to defend itself, Russia had to modernise its army.
- Previously conscription was 25 years, a life sentence for peasants as the government
was reluctant to return serfs to the village where they may use their skills to spark
discontent, after emancipation this was deemed not necessary.
- Universal conscription introduced: all social classes liable for military service age 21.
¼ would then be chosen to serve.
, - Service time reduced to 15 years,
- Administration reorganised into fifteen military districts with more autonomy given to
district commanders making it easier to coordinate troops.
- Officer training improved. Military schools set up to educate officers and leadership
became more open to lower classes.
- Modern rifles and artillery introduced
- Reduction in offences that warranted corporal punishment and flogging abolished
- Conditions improved for ordinary soldiers, they were housed in barracks
Consequences of these reforms
- Reforms were a genuine attempt to break down class privilege and create an army
based on merit, therefore a smaller and more professional army was produced.
HOWEVER still high proportion of nobility among officers, Alexander III later
restricted entry to officer training to mainly nobility, royal family members often
appointed to military roles they were unsuited for and a fully professional army would
pose a threat to the tsars autocracy as its the main way in which they maintained
control.
- Significant saving in government expenditure as smaller army
- Reforms opposed by nobility who wanted their sons in officer roles and nor mixing
with lower classes as well as merchants who didn't want their sons forced into
military service.
- Still reliant on peasant conscripts who were illiterate and uneducated which reduced
the effectiveness of their training.
Judicial reforms 1864
Key problems with old system:
- Notorious for its corruption, delay and inefficiency.
- Most judges had no legal training and many were illiterate. All evidence was written
meaning court secretaries held huge power and they relied on bribes to maintain
their lifestyle.
- Judges would adjudicate on certain rules: word of a noble taken over a peasants and
word of a man over that of a woman
- Judge and defendant never meet, written evidence unreliable and left unchallenged
- Police corrupt with huge power and very amenable to bribes
- Overly harsh sentences
- No juries
- Lack of lawyers
- Social class held huge influence in court.
Main features of reforms
- Based on concepts drawn from western systems
- System simplified to comprise only a few layers of courts, each area has its own
courts, system becomes faster and more efficient.
- Judges paid good salaries and couldn't be removed for delivering a verdict
government didn't like
- Civil and criminal courts became open to public and proceedings reported
The war itself
- Lasted just under 2 and half years (5 October 1853 – 30 March 1856)
- It began as a dispute between Russia and the ottoman empire and whilst they could
stand up against this once France and Britain joined the war their weaknesses were
clearly exposed.
- 1854 defeat at battle of Alma
- Then a costly year long siege in which russia was forced to withdraw from the
symbolic Sevastopol base
- Alexander II forced to negotiate surrender and sign the treaty of Paris.
- 400,000 dead and 80,000 wounded (very high) but most of these deaths were from
poor conditions not military action
- Russia diminished as a European power
- Shift from 1812 where they had defeated Napoleon to now was disconcerting
Problems
- The empire was so big that the army was spread too thinly with only 100,000 being
spared for Sevastopol defence
- Equipment out of date
- Supply chain corrupt
- Cost of training and supplying an army of 1.8 million, in 1860 army believed to take
up ⅓ of the government's income
- Lack of quality officers
Slavophiles vs westernisers
- Ongoing intellectual debate over russia's future
- Slavophiles: a russian-dominated slavic traditional world
- Westernisers: felt traditional russian ways could hold back progress
- The crimean war was proof of Russia's backwardness
- The war and Alexander's more European education appeared to encourage a more
westernising attitude. But it was also crucial for Alexander to maintain his autocracy
Army reforms 1861
All of Alexander's chief advisors in the first half of his reign were military men.
- General Rotovsev: his brother in charge of Navy, handled emancipation of the serfs
- Dimitry Milyutin: a professor of military history was made minister of war. He pushed
through military reforms having studied the defeat at crimea.
To remain a world power and be able to defend itself, Russia had to modernise its army.
- Previously conscription was 25 years, a life sentence for peasants as the government
was reluctant to return serfs to the village where they may use their skills to spark
discontent, after emancipation this was deemed not necessary.
- Universal conscription introduced: all social classes liable for military service age 21.
¼ would then be chosen to serve.
, - Service time reduced to 15 years,
- Administration reorganised into fifteen military districts with more autonomy given to
district commanders making it easier to coordinate troops.
- Officer training improved. Military schools set up to educate officers and leadership
became more open to lower classes.
- Modern rifles and artillery introduced
- Reduction in offences that warranted corporal punishment and flogging abolished
- Conditions improved for ordinary soldiers, they were housed in barracks
Consequences of these reforms
- Reforms were a genuine attempt to break down class privilege and create an army
based on merit, therefore a smaller and more professional army was produced.
HOWEVER still high proportion of nobility among officers, Alexander III later
restricted entry to officer training to mainly nobility, royal family members often
appointed to military roles they were unsuited for and a fully professional army would
pose a threat to the tsars autocracy as its the main way in which they maintained
control.
- Significant saving in government expenditure as smaller army
- Reforms opposed by nobility who wanted their sons in officer roles and nor mixing
with lower classes as well as merchants who didn't want their sons forced into
military service.
- Still reliant on peasant conscripts who were illiterate and uneducated which reduced
the effectiveness of their training.
Judicial reforms 1864
Key problems with old system:
- Notorious for its corruption, delay and inefficiency.
- Most judges had no legal training and many were illiterate. All evidence was written
meaning court secretaries held huge power and they relied on bribes to maintain
their lifestyle.
- Judges would adjudicate on certain rules: word of a noble taken over a peasants and
word of a man over that of a woman
- Judge and defendant never meet, written evidence unreliable and left unchallenged
- Police corrupt with huge power and very amenable to bribes
- Overly harsh sentences
- No juries
- Lack of lawyers
- Social class held huge influence in court.
Main features of reforms
- Based on concepts drawn from western systems
- System simplified to comprise only a few layers of courts, each area has its own
courts, system becomes faster and more efficient.
- Judges paid good salaries and couldn't be removed for delivering a verdict
government didn't like
- Civil and criminal courts became open to public and proceedings reported
