Opinion about the activities of Alexander 3. Alexander III: Tsar-Peacemaker. changes in the Zemstvo reform under Alexander III
Many descriptions of the appearance of Alexander III have come down to us. Estimates of his activities in history are very diverse. He was a good family man, a kind person, but he did not bear the burden of power. He did not have the qualities that an emperor was supposed to have. Inside, Alexander felt this, he was constantly very critical of himself and his actions. This was the tragedy of the personality of the emperor in the history of Russia.
He reigned for thirteen years. Many argue that if it were not for the death of the heir to the throne, Nikolai Alexandrovich, then everything could have happened differently. Nikolai was a humane and liberal person, he could have carried out liberal reforms and introduced a constitution, and perhaps Russia could have avoided both the revolution and the further collapse of the empire.
The entire 19th century Russia spent in vain, it was time for transformations, but not a single monarch dared to do something grandiose. Alexander III was guided in his policy only by good intentions, he believed that I was conserving everything liberal, he was preserving the future of the dynasty and the empire as a whole.
Personality of Alexander III
Alexander Alexandrovich grew up in a large family. He was born in February 1845 as the third child. The girl Alexandra was born first, then Nikolai, and then Alexander. There were six sons, so there were no problems with heirs. Naturally, all attention was focused on Nikolai Alexandrovich as heir to the throne. Nikolai and Alexander studied literacy and military science together, and were enlisted in the guards regiments from birth. At the age of eighteen, Alexander already bore the title of colonel. Over time, the training of Nicholas and Alexander began to differ, naturally, the teachings of the heir were much broader.
At the age of sixteen, Nikolai reached his legal age and was settled in separate apartments in the Winter Palace. Then Nikolai visited Western Europe, where he underwent treatment, as he experienced back pain. In Denmark, he proposed to Princess Dagmar.
When he ended up in Nice, his mother Maria Alexandrovna came to see him, as his health condition did not improve. In April 1865, the heir became very ill, all the relatives and the bride and mother arrived in Nice. They managed to stay with Nikolai for only a few days. Alexander, mother Maria Alexandrovna and Nikolai's fiancee were always at the bedside. The Tsesarevich died on April 12, 1865, and Alexander Alexandrovich was proclaimed heir to the throne.
It was clear to everyone in the family that Alexander III did not succeed in state activities. Aunt Elena Pavlovna spoke more than once that the third brother, Vladimir Alexandrovich, was to become the heir to the throne. Brother Konstantin Nikolaevich spoke of the complete unwillingness of Alexander Alexandrovich to occupy the imperial throne. The new heir did not like to study, he liked military affairs, and he always preferred the game to teaching.
Alexander III Alexandrovich
When Alexander was proclaimed heir to the throne, he received the rank of major general and was appointed ataman of the Cossack troops. He was already a fully formed person, therefore, absolutely not ready for a new fate that unexpectedly fell on him. He began to intensively teach law, history, economics. Alexander himself was an honest, sincere, direct, clumsy and shy man. In October 1866, the wedding of Alexander and the former bride of his brother Nikolai took place, she received the name of Maria Feodorovna. Despite the fact that Alexander had feelings for Princess Meshcherskaya, and Maria Feodorovna for the late Tsarevich, their marriage turned out to be happy.
Alexander was the heir to the throne for 15 years. His views were right-wing and very nationalistic. and his son looked at national politics and some other things differently. Due to the unpopularity of some decisions of the emperor, like-minded people soon begin to group around the heir, and those who are representatives of other directions begin to listen to Alexander Alexandrovich III, since the future lies with him.
The real event for the heir was the Russian-Turkish war, he was in the territory of hostilities. The officers noted that Alexander was easy to communicate with, devoted his free time to archaeological excavations.
The heir participated in the creation of the Russian Historical Society. The society was supposed to attract people to study the history of the Fatherland, as well as to promote science in Russia. It specialized in the study of the history of Russia after the reign.
At the end of the 1870s. Alexander Alexandrovich's duties are expanding. When he leaves Petersburg, the heir is engaged in current state affairs. At this time, the state is in a period of crisis. There are more and more attempts by terrorists to change the situation by illegal means. The situation is complicated within the emperor's family. He transports his mistress E. Dolgoruky to the Winter Palace. The empress, who had long known about her husband's connection, was very offended. She was sick with consumption and in May 1880 she died in the palace all alone, was in Tsarskoe Selo with Ekaterina Dolgoruky.
The heir loved his mother very much and adhered to the reading of family ties, he was furious, he did not like the behavior of his father. Especially hatred intensified when the father soon married his mistress. Soon she and their children were moved to the Crimea. In order to improve relations with his stepmother, the father often invited his son there. In one visit, everything only worsened, because Alexander saw how his stepmother occupied his mother's rooms there.
Emperor Alexander III
On March 1, 1881, he approved the draft constitution of Loris-Melikov and scheduled a meeting for March 4. But on March 1, as a result of two explosions, he died. When Alexander III assumed power, he did not give any promises to continue his father's policy. In the first months, the emperor had to deal with many things: the funeral of his father, accession to the throne, the search for revolutionaries and the massacre of them. It should be noted that the emperor was ruthless to the murderers of his father, they were hanged.
Also, the problem was in the second family of the father. In his last letter, he instructed his son to take care of them. Alexander III wanted them to leave Petersburg, and conversations about this began with his stepmother. She and her children went to Nice, where she later lived.
In politics, Alexander III chose the path of autocratic power. The meeting on the Loris-Melikov project was held on March 8, and the project did not receive support. Alexander III spoke out that the project would usurp the rights of the monarch, thus he recognized Loris-Melikov as a politically unreliable official, which could have terrible consequences for the latter.
Some, despite the fear, spoke out about the timeliness and the need to introduce a constitution in Russia and change legislation. But the autocrat showed that he did not intend to breed a law-based state in Russia. Soon a manifesto "On the inviolability of autocracy" was created. By 1882, all representatives of "lousy liberalism" were ousted from state ministries, and in return for them, the closest associates of the current emperor sat in the offices. During his reign, the role of the State Council falls, it was reduced only to helping the emperor in the implementation of his intentions, he was always angry if some of his ideas were criticized in the State Council. In politics, Alexander III was like his grandfather. They both treated the state as an estate. He struggled with bureaucracy, with the extravagance of the royal court, tried to save money.
The imperial family grew, and the emperor went to reduce its representatives. Only the children and grandchildren of the emperor were grand dukes, and the rest became simply princes with imperial blood, thus their financial support was reduced.
He also carried out a number of counter-reforms, all the earlier liberal transformations of his father came to naught. The emperor went down in history as a "peacemaker king". During his reign, Russia did not wage wars. In foreign policy, Russia is moving away from cooperation with Germany and Austria. But it draws closer to France, then to England.
S.Yu. admired the emperor. Witte, the future Minister of Finance. He considered him to be the person who would be able to use and realize the entire economic potential of Russia. Witte also said that sooner or later Alexander would have come to liberal reforms anyway. But, unfortunately, he did not have enough time for this. In 1894, his illness nephritis worsened, and his health was getting worse. He became weaker, lost weight, memory also began to suffer. He died at the end of 1894 in the Crimea. The country was accepted by the eldest son Nicholas II, his father considered a man not ready for imperial power.
Alexander III video
Contemporaries about Alexander III
“Everyone describes Tsar Alexander III as a man with unusually simple manners and tastes… Lady Churchill writes that there are strange customs at the Russian court that hardly agree with the idea of an autocratic-despotic ruler. The sight of the king standing during dinner and talking to a young officer who remains seated at the table simply frightens us.” (Morning Post, 1880s)
“During the trip of Alexander III across Russia, once the tsar's train suddenly stopped at a small siding. One of the men gathered to stare saw Alexander, took off his hat and whispered: “That's it - the king!” And then he added the usual village swearing from deep excitement. The gendarme wanted to arrest him, but the tsar called the frightened peasant and gave him a 25-ruble note (where the image of the tsar was) with the words: “Here is my portrait for you as a keepsake.” (Walking anecdote-truth)
“Emperor Alexander III was of a completely ordinary mind, perhaps below average intelligence, below average abilities, below average education; in appearance he looked like a big Russian peasant from the central provinces. (S.Yu. Witte)
“Everyone knew about Emperor Alexander III that, not wanting any military laurels, the emperor would never compromise the honor and dignity of Russia entrusted to him by God 1 ”. (S.Yu. Witte)
“Alexander III was not a strong man, as many people think. This big, fat man was not, however, a “feeble-minded monarch” or a “crowned fool”, as V.P. calls him in his memoirs. Lamzdorf, but he was also not that insightful and intelligent sovereign, as they try to portray him 1 ”. (S.Yu. Witte)
“Alexander III led the Russian state ship in a different course than His father. He did not believe that the reforms of the 1960s and 1970s were an unconditional blessing, but tried to introduce into them those amendments that, in His opinion, were necessary for the internal balance of Russia. (S.S. Oldenburg)
Historians on the personality and reign of Alexander III
“This heavy-lifting tsar did not want the evil of his empire and did not want to play with it simply because he did not understand its position, and in general did not like the complex mental combinations that a political game requires no less than a card game. The government directly mocked the society, told it: “You demanded new reforms - the old ones will be taken away from you too.” (V.O. Klyuchevsky)
“Alexander III was not stupid. But he had that lazy and clumsy mind, which in itself is sterile. For a regimental commander such intelligence is sufficient, but for an emperor something else is needed.” (G.I. Chulkov)
“Speaking about the reign of Alexander III, it is appropriate to talk not about “counter-reforms”, but about adjusting the state course. The point is not that the emperor wanted to mechanically go back, but that the policy of the 60s was too “running ahead””. (A. Bokhanov)
“Limited, rude and ignorant, Alexander III was a man of extremely reactionary and chauvinistic views. However, in the field of economic policy, he had to reckon with the growth of capitalist elements in the country. (Great Soviet Encyclopedia)
“Alexander III did not have to be portrayed as narrow-minded and stupid, he was a bright personality. Before us is a man who organically fit into the circumstances of his time. He ruled the state surprisingly easily and naturally, while fully aware of the full responsibility of the monarch. The strongest side of his personality is honesty and decency.” (A. Bokhanov)
“Under Alexander III, Russia is experiencing a significant economic upsurge, which was closely related to the strengthening of the position of the private sector and the penetration of Western ideas about free enterprise into Russia. It was a remarkable period in the development of Russian society.” (D. Schimmelpenninck)
The reign of Emperor Alexander III (1881-1894) became a kind of historical pause - a time of reflection on the great transformations of the previous reign and a time of reaction that replaced the reformist onslaught of the previous century. In historical science, this time was called the counter-reforms.
This period was marked by a series of reactionary transformations aimed at revising the existing system of bourgeois legislation.
The concept of counter-reform has a broad meaning and includes not only reactionary laws, but the entire political course of the Russian autocracy.
The objective reason for this turn was the imperfection of reforms in the socio-economic and political fields. The highest organs of state power, the power of the monarch and the omnipotence of the bureaucracy remained outside the process of perestroika. During the reform, the desire to preserve autocracy triumphed. And this was a threat to the reforms themselves. And, finally, the mechanism for implementing reforms was weak, while feudal statehood was strong.
Alexander III sought to preserve the existing order, strengthen the position of the nobility, and prevent a revolution. The emperor's domestic policy was of a conservative, protective nature, which, however, did not exclude the protection of the interests of Russian industrial and commercial capital.
The reign of Alexander III was controversial: political reaction was combined with great economic achievements. This was fraught with shocks in the future. Nevertheless, it should be noted that the time of this reign was one of the most peaceful and stable in the history of Russia.
The measures of the government of Alexander III consisted in revising many of the achievements of the previous course in such important areas of life as the zemstvo, city government, courts, education and the press.
Personality of Alexander III
On March 1, 1881, after the assassination of Emperor Alexander II by terrorists, his son Alexander III ascended the throne. Alexander III was crowned on March 15, 1881 in the Assumption Cathedral of the Moscow Kremlin.
The reign of the son did not at all resemble the reign of his father, whom Alexander III did not even resemble in appearance. The late sovereign was handsome, possessed of refined manners, natural kindness and gentleness in personal relationships. The new emperor, according to the memoirs of a major political figure S.Yu. Witte, “looked like a big Russian peasant from the central provinces, the suit suited him best: a short fur coat, undershirt and bast shoes ... he was not handsome, in manners he was more or less bear-haired ; He was very tall, and for all his complexion, he was not particularly strong and muscular, but rather was somewhat fat and fat.
Alexander Alexandrovich did not count on the Russian crown either in childhood or in his early youth. The legitimate heir to the throne - his elder brother Nikolai Alexandrovich - died at the age of 22 from tuberculosis (in some sources - from consumption). Alexander Alexandrovich became crown prince at the age of 20, i.e. being a fully formed person.
Unlike his father, Alexander III was not a brave man. Fearing assassination attempts, he retired to Gatchina, to the palace of his great-grandfather Paul I, planned as an old castle, surrounded by ditches and protected by watchtowers (for which he received the nickname “Gatchinsky Prisoner”).
Growing up in an officer's environment, Alexander did not receive the education that a future emperor should have. They left much to be desired and the features of the upbringing of the young man. Alexander III was arrogant and rude, he treated people as soldiers subordinate to him. At one time, his father had excellent mentors, including the famous Russian poet V.A. Zhukovsky, who aspired to ensure that his pet would grow into a comprehensively educated, humane sovereign, who cares about the welfare of the people.
The spiritual mentor of Alexander III was the theoretician of autocracy, the chief prosecutor of the Holy Synod, K.P.
“Emperor Alexander III,” Witte wrote, “was of a completely ordinary mind, perhaps, one might say, below average, below average abilities, below average education ...” The shortcomings, however, were peculiarly compensated for by stubbornness, as well as the strength and firmness of his character. These qualities made themselves felt in the very first months of the reign.
Autocratic royalty was present in the powerful figure of Alexander III. Physically, he was extremely strong: he broke horseshoes, bent silver rubles. His character was calm, balanced, very firm, in rare cases he hesitated. And yet, for a statesman, intelligence and education are more important, the lack of which is noted by S. Yu. Witte, an apologist for autocracy, who is very difficult to suspect of hiding the truth about the tsar.
It would seem that the tsar had not so much data to successfully lead Russia.
However, Alexander III had one property unusual for Russian emperors: he did not envy someone else's mind, brought talented, extraordinary people closer to him and put him in the most important government posts (for example, the finance ministers N.Kh. Bunge (from 1881 to 1886), and .A. Vyshnegradsky (from 1888 to 1892), S. Yu. Witte (from 1892 to 1903), later - Chairman of the Committee of Ministers).
Compared to other emperors, Alexander III was not distinguished by an exaggerated interest in the army, he sought to save the country from wars.
During his 13-year reign, Russia did not participate in any war. An exception was the first and last military episode in the reign of this king - the victory of General A.V. Komarov over the Afghans in the battle of the Kushka River (1885).
None of the emperors of the 19th century was distinguished by such a commitment to everything Russian as Alexander III. This was also manifested in appearance: Russian clothes, a beard, trousers tucked into boots. Emphasized love for the Russian was combined in him with hostility towards "foreigners" - Poles, Finns, Jews, Armenians and representatives of other nationalities. The desire to emphasize everything Russian extended to economic policy, which was of a protectionist nature, contributing to the growth of national industry and trade.
Alexander III did not stand on ceremony in the diplomatic field in relations with other countries. This episode is typical. Once in Gatchina, while fishing, which the tsar loved very much, a diplomat from one of the great powers sought an urgent meeting with him. After this was reported to Alexander III, he replied: “When the Russian Tsar is fishing, Europe can wait.”
On March 1, 1881, after a terrorist attack committed by members of the revolutionary organization Narodnaya Volya, Emperor Alexander II died of severe wounds. The second son of the emperor, Alexander Alexandrovich, ascended the throne. Alexander III was crowned on March 15, 1881.
The future monarch was brought up in a military environment. Therefore, it is generally accepted that he did not receive a secular education, which was considered traditional and mandatory for his status, but was very efficient and physically incredibly strong.
The chief prosecutor of the Holy Synod, the famous theorist of the monarchy, who during the first months of Alexander's reign was the most influential person in the Russian government, was engaged in the upbringing of the young tsar.
Shocked by numerous attempts on his life and the tragic death of his father, realizing that Russia, which had begun to reform, plunged into a gloomy swamp of terror, at the beginning of his reign, the tsar was faced with the need to choose a new course of government. It was a time of confrontation between two parties: the liberal (wishing to continue the reforms begun by Alexander II) and the monarchist.
At the beginning of his reign, Alexander had to "maneuver" between the liberals and the supporters of the reaction. As a result, the idea of the constitutionality of the Russian Empire was rejected, and the tsar proclaimed a course to strengthen the monarchy, preserve traditions and reject the ideas of liberalism. At that time, public opinion, to which it was already customary to listen, could have any influence on the choice made by the new king.
But the inhumanly brutal terrorist attack on March 1, which resulted in the death of not only the monarch, but also several absolutely innocent people, did not cause in society the rise of revolutionary consciousness that the terrorists had expected. The traditional society, in anticipation of a harsh reaction from the authorities, quieted down and recoiled from the Narodnaya Volya. The assassination of the emperor caused panic confusion in society. Large-scale measures of search and inquiry led to the fact that soon all the surviving organizers and perpetrators of the terrorist attack were found, interrogated and convicted. Five participants in the assassination of the king were publicly executed. The hopes of the revolutionaries that the assassination of the tsar would cause an upsurge in the popular movement did not come true.
Alexander III, having studied the situation in society, decided to completely abandon the liberal plans of his father, heading for return to absolute monarchy. What influenced the course of thought of the young emperor? The main reason was the hunt that the terrorists staged on his father, not only the murder, but also the previous 6 assassination attempts. The new king decided to exclude the possibility of any threats to the monarchy.
Positive results of the reign of Alexander III
World. During his 13-year reign, the Russian Empire did not take part in any war. The only military episode was an exception - in 1885, near the Kushka River, units under the command of General A.V. Komarov defeated the Afghan troops.
Peace and tranquility within the country. The system of bodies that controlled the internal security of the state, during the reign of the 13th emperor and autocrat of the All-Russian, was improved and strengthened like never before. The main role in supporting the regime was played by the Police Department, whose activities acquired an unprecedented scope. By the mid-80s of the 19th century, terrorist activity in the country had completely ceased. For all the time there was only one successful terrorist act: in Odessa, in 1882, the prosecutor V.S. was killed. Strelnikov.
In 1886, with the active participation of A.I. Ulyanov, the elder brother of the future leader of the October Revolution, the “Terrorist faction” of the “Narodnaya Volya” was created, which consisted mainly of students from St. Petersburg University. The terrorists decided to kill the emperor on the anniversary of his father's death, timed to coincide with the attack on March 1. Thanks to strong operational positions, the internal security agencies prevented the assassination attempt. The organizers were detained, convicted and executed.
Economic recovery and prosperity. The tsar's desire to develop and emphasize everything Russian was extended to economic policy, which determined the growth of Russian industry and trade. For the first time in a long time, state revenues exceeded expenditures. During the period from 1881 to 1894, a real economic breakthrough was made in the country, and its own industry was created. The country modernized the army and navy (which the tsar recognized as the only real allies), became the world's largest food exporter. 114 ships were built: 17 ironclads and 10 armored cruisers. The army was put in order after the disorganization that occurred during the Russian-Turkish war of 1877-1878. The construction of the Great Siberian Railway began - the Chelyabinsk-Omsk-Irkutsk-Khabarovsk-Vladivostok railway line, about seven thousand kilometers long.
Making life easier for both peasants and workers. Measures taken to this end included, for example, the termination of the temporary obligation, the gradual abolition of the poll tax, and unsuccessful attempts to legitimize and put in order the relationship between workers and their employers. Redemption payments were lowered, the redemption of peasant plots was legalized, a peasant bank was created to be able to obtain loans for the purchase of land. The factory work of minors was limited, as well as night work of women and children.
Development of national culture. Grandiose in their significance, pricelessness and splendor, works of art from the time of Alexander III are an integral part of our spiritual “gold reserve”. According to S. Diaghilev, Alexander III became the best monarch for the national culture. A real upsurge began in literature, painting, music and ballet. The truly great Russian art, which glorified our country, began at that time.
The development of museum and historical activities and the spread of Russian culture. Alexander III took large-scale measures to develop historical knowledge about our Motherland. The activities of the Imperial Historical Society under the leadership of the emperor himself intensified. The Historical Museum in Moscow and the Patriotic Museum in Sevastopol were created. The first Siberian University was founded, the project of the Russian Archaeological Institute in Constantinople was created, the Russian Imperial Palestinian Society began to operate. Many Orthodox churches have been built around the world.
Intelligent foreign policy. Russia's position in the international arena was strengthened. Russia continued to acquire reliable partners and sought to maintain peace with all states. The territory of the state "grew up" by 430,000 square meters. km. Kazakhstan, the Kokand and Khiva khanates and the Emirate of Bukhara were annexed.
Negative results of the reign of Alexander III
Eliminate opportunities for local self-government independence. In the "City Regulations" of 1892, the city self-government bodies were included in the system of state institutions.
Reaction in education. In 1884, the university counter-reform was launched, aimed at educating a loyal mass of the intelligentsia. The university charter was introduced, the universities were deprived of autonomy. All curricula came under control. An order was issued by the Minister of Education, which became known as the “Law on the Cook's Children”. The regulation made it extremely difficult for children from the lower classes of society to enroll in gymnasiums and universities.
Domestic policy did not solve the fundamental problems in the life of workers and peasants. The measures taken to resettle the peasants turned out to be insufficient to solve the problem of land shortage. The workers did not receive the expected amount of social guarantees, besides, the creation of factory legislation was initiated, which, on the one hand, restrained the arbitrariness of the owners of the enterprise, but, on the other hand, excluded the freedom of speech of disgruntled workers.
Excesses in national politics. Here the emperor intensified Russification, suppressing the slightest manifestations of national movements. The development of all Russian was combined with the formation of hostility towards various “foreigners” - Poles, Finns, Jews, Armenians and representatives of other nationalities. The way to the gymnasium, and even more so to the universities, was made more difficult for Jews.
Conclusion
Until now, in our minds there is no consensus regarding the results of the activities of Alexander III. However, in history there are practically no first persons of the state (and this especially applies to monarchs) who have left a 100% negative or positive impression of themselves.
For others, this is primarily a monarch who did not want progress in social relations, encouraged reaction, anti-Semitism, who did not approve of the excessive education of the lower strata of society, who stopped the "social elevators".
The results of the counter-reforms are contradictory: Russia managed to achieve an unprecedented industrial boom, maintain peace, but at the same time, social tension and various "fermentations" in society increased. The reign of the peacemaker king was the calm before the inevitable storm. It was a time of a combination of technological progress, economic recovery and reaction, unwillingness to recognize the need for progress in social relations and social compromise. At the same time, the police regime and class privileges of the nobility were strengthened.
VKontakte Facebook Odnoklassniki
130 years ago, on March 13 (N.S.) 1881, the new Emperor Alexander III, who went down in history as the Peacemaker Tsar, ascended the throne of the Russian Empire. He had just turned 26 then: he was born on March 10 (February 26, O.S.), 1845, in the family of the then heir to the Russian throne, Alexander Nikolayevich, the future Tsar Alexander II the Liberator.
Historians and publicists often give sharply opposite assessments of the reign of Alexander III, depending on their own political views. But with regard to the personality of Alexander Alexandrovich himself, most of them (with the exception of the very extreme radicals) adhere to generally positive assessments.
It should be noted that initially Alexander was not prepared for the reign: his elder brother Nikolai was to become the heir to the throne. Therefore, according to the tradition established in the Romanov family, Alexander, like his younger brothers, was destined for the military path, and received an appropriate education. “Alexander III was not at all prepared to be emperor,” Sergei Witte, one of the most gifted statesmen of Russia in the late 20th and early 20th centuries, later wrote in his memoirs. “We can say that he was somewhat in the pen: no special attention was paid to his education or his upbringing.”
In appearance, character, habits, and the very mindset, Alexander III bore little resemblance to his father, and indeed to any of his sovereign ancestors. The emperor was distinguished by his enormous growth, his gigantic figure exuded strength and power. In his youth, he possessed exceptional strength - he bent coins with his fingers and broke horseshoes, by old age he became obese and bulky, but even then, according to contemporaries, there was something graceful in his figure. He was completely devoid of the aristocracy inherent in his grandfather and partly his father. Even in his manner of dressing there was something deliberately unassuming. He, for example, could often be seen in soldier's boots with trousers tucked into them in a simple way. At home, he wore a Russian shirt with a colored pattern embroidered on the sleeves. Distinguished by frugality, he often appeared in worn trousers, a jacket, a coat or short fur coat, and boots. According to Witte, during the emperor's trip along the Southwestern Railway, one constantly had to see how Alexander III's valet Kotov darned the tsar's tattered trousers.
All the same Witte also noted: “Emperor Alexander III was of a completely ordinary mind, perhaps, one can say, below average intelligence, below average abilities and below average education ... Emperor Alexander III had a small mind of reason, but he had a huge, outstanding mind hearts." And at the same time, “with his appearance, which reflected his enormous character, beautiful heart, complacency, justice and at the same time firmness, he undoubtedly impressed, and, as I said above, if they didn’t know that he was an emperor, and he If he entered the room in any suit, no doubt everyone would pay attention to him.
Some memoirists reproached Alexander Alexandrovich for being rude. Others specified that although he really regularly called even the highest dignitaries in the face "cattle" and "scoundrels", he did it good-naturedly and without malice, and he always conscientiously tried to satisfy the personal requests of the "cattle" and "cattle".
Grand Duke Alexander Alexandrovich became the heir after the death of his elder brother Nikolai, who died in Nice on April 24 (April 12, O.S.), 1865. Alexander had to return to the sciences and pay special attention to history, economics, and law. Historians usually clarify that Konstantin Pobedonostsev (far from an unambiguous personality) taught him a law course, who since then gained unlimited influence on Alexander Alexandrovich, and later, during the years of his reign, became his closest adviser. The course of history was taught to Alexander by the outstanding historian Sergei Solovyov, and the course of military history, tactics and strategy was taught by Mikhail Dragomirov, in the future - an outstanding military leader.
After Solovyov’s death, Alexander wrote to his widow that he “shares with all Russian people the grief of this irretrievable loss and honors in him not only a learned and talented writer, but also a man of goodness and honor, a faithful son of Russia, who warmly took to heart both in the past and her future destinies, everything that relates to her glory, who faithfully kept in her soul the holy faith and devotion to the Church as the most precious guarantee of the good of the people. These feelings of love for the historical past of Russia and devotion to the Church, according to the unanimous opinion of contemporaries, were filled with Alexander himself from a young age.
After the death of his brother Nicholas, he inherited not only the title of Tsarevich (heir to the throne), but also his bride, the Danish princess Dagmar. Despite the tragic circumstances that preceded this marriage, the marriage of Alexander Alexandrovich and Dagmara (in Orthodoxy - Maria Feodorovna) turned out to be strong and happy. Even the ill-wishers of Alexander III admit that, unlike his father, grandfather, brothers and nephews, he was an exemplary family man, exceptionally devoted to his wife. He subsequently tried to introduce a similar firmness of family morals into the Romanov family, and into Russian society as a whole, but, unfortunately, he did not succeed very much in this. It is also worth noting that Alexander Alexandrovich was also one of the most pious Russian sovereigns, thus reminiscent of his distant ancestor Alexei Mikhailovich. The simple and direct soul of Alexander knew neither religious doubts, nor religious pretense, nor the temptations of mysticism. He firmly adhered to the Orthodox canons, always stood up to the end of the service, prayed earnestly and enjoyed church singing. The sovereign willingly donated to monasteries, to the construction of new churches and the restoration of ancient ones. Under him, church life noticeably revived.
Being an ardent Russian patriot and pan-Slavist, Alexander was also an active supporter of Russia's entry into the war for the liberation of Bulgaria from the Turkish yoke. He himself took part in this war, commanding the Ruschuk detachment of two army corps, holding the eastern flank of the Russian troops. Relations with the commander-in-chief - his uncle Nikolai Nikolayevich - were not the warmest at that time. The Commander-in-Chief considered his nephew's sector of the front to be relatively calm and therefore was in no hurry to send reinforcements to him, although the Turks counterattacked the Ruschuk detachment several times and twice put him in a critical situation. The Tsarevich and his troops barely managed to repulse the onslaught of the enemy and defeat his superior forces on the Mechka River. However, the commander-in-chief still believed that nothing extraordinary was happening on the eastern sector of the front compared to the constant crises near Plevna and Shipka. And, what particularly resented Alexander Alexandrovich, his uncle regularly shelved the submissions sent to him for awards to officers and soldiers of the Ruschuk detachment. At the end of the war, Alexander Alexandrovich gave Nikolai Nikolaevich a major scandal, which had to be settled by Emperor Alexander II himself. The imperial intervention, however, led to another extreme: such a reward rain fell on the Ruschuk detachment that the military of all other Russian units came to a standstill; suffice it to say that more than a third of the units awarded as a result of the war turned out to belong to the relatively small Ruschuk detachment.
Many historians, by the way, argue that it was the personal participation of Alexander Alexandrovich in this campaign that gave him a persistent dislike for the war as such. And that is why during his reign he tried to resolve conflict situations peacefully, without bringing the matter to military action.
However, the internal state of the Russian Empire at the time of Alexander's accession to the throne did not contribute to the excessive manifestation of military activity in the foreign policy arena. It is worth recalling that Alexander became emperor after the assassination of his father, Alexander II, by the revolutionaries of the People's Will party. It was this tragedy, which ended the reign of the reforming emperor, that largely led to that “triumph of reaction” in the reign of Alexander III, which liberal and socialist authors love to talk about so much.
The military historian and supporter of the autocratic monarchy Anton Kersnovsky wrote about this: “The reign of Emperor Alexander III is called the “epoch of reaction”. If the word "reaction" is understood in its philistine and simplified sense as a counterbalance to "liberal reforms", increased police strictness, oppression of the press, etc., then this term is, of course, appropriate here. But if by "reaction" we understand its original (and only correct) meaning, then it is not necessary to characterize the internal policy of the Russian Empire in the 80-90s with this clinical term. A reaction is an active opposition to the destructive pathogens of the human body (and transferring this term to the plane of politics - the body of the state). This resistance revolves in the development of antidotes by the body to these destructive principles (in state life, these antidotes are called national doctrine - a firm people's policy).
Although Alexander III himself at first, at least, did not at all adhere to “reactionary views” - well, except for his promise (by the way, fulfilled soon enough) to hang all the regicides caught in response to the appeals of the “progressive public” with requests for their pardon.
The first statements and orders of the emperor were completely in the spirit of the liberal course of his father. It is known that in January 1881, the Minister of the Interior, Count M.T. Loris-Melikov offered Alexander II his program. Its first part provided for the expansion of the rights of zemstvos, the press, the partial decentralization of administrative management, some financial and economic measures, including the completion of the peasant reform. The development of these measures was proposed to be carried out in temporary preparatory commissions with broad participation in them of representatives from zemstvos and city dumas. This project was called the Loris-Melikov constitution. On the morning of March 1, Alexander II signed these papers and ordered them to be published in the Government Bulletin, but after his death they could not be made public without the consent and signature of the new sovereign.
Loris-Melikov turned to Alexander III with a question whether the publication of this document should be suspended. The emperor, without hesitation, replied that the last will of the late king must be carried out. By the way, less than a year before these events, on April 12, 1880, the then Tsarevich Alexander, having learned that Alexander II approved the liberal program of Loris-Melikov, wrote to the latter: “Thank God! I cannot express how glad I am that the sovereign accepted your note so graciously and with such confidence, dear Mikhail Tarielovich... Now we can boldly move forward and calmly and persistently carry out your program for the happiness of our dear homeland and for the misfortune of the ministers... Congratulations from the bottom of my heart…”
But the supporters of the reactionary course were not inactive either. Regicide inspired them. March 1, 1881, late in the evening, K.P. Pobedonostsev appeared at the Anichkov Palace and begged Alexander III to dismiss Loris-Melikov. And although the tsar did not consider this possible, nevertheless at two o'clock in the morning Loris-Melikov received an order from the Anichkov Palace to suspend the printing of the program and subject it to a new discussion.
On March 8, a meeting of the Council of Ministers was held, at which the fate of the “Loris-Melikov constitution” was to be decided. Anticipating the discussion, Alexander said: “Count Loris-Melikov reported to the late sovereign about the need to convene representatives from zemstvos and cities. This idea was generally approved by my late father. However, the issue should not be considered a foregone conclusion, because the late father wanted to convene the Council of Ministers for consideration before the final approval of the project.
How the discussion of this issue went, we learn from the notes of the participant in the meeting of the Minister of War D.A. Milyutin. “From ... Count Sergei Grigoryevich Stroganov, they heard that in the proposed program of peaceful legislative work, signs of revolution, constitution and all sorts of troubles see clearly ... The sovereign listened with noticeable sympathy to the ultra-conservative speech of the old reactionary.” But everything said by Stroganov and other ministers was pale and insignificant in comparison “with the long Jesuit speech delivered by Pobedonostsev; it was no longer just a refutation of the measures proposed now, but a direct, sweeping censure of everything that had been committed in the past reign; he dared to call the great reforms of Emperor Alexander II a criminal mistake ... It was a denial of everything that formed the basis of European civilization. Let's forgive the most venerable Dmitry Alekseevich his excessive admiration for the "foundations of European civilization": after all, he was an honest patriot of Russia, who did a lot to strengthen its military power. And if he happened to get acquainted with today's "European civilization", and especially with its Russian adherents, it remains to be seen what he would say about them.
And then the emperor decided to reconsider Loris-Melikov's proposal again. The project was handed over to the commission, which never met again. The document was "buried". On the other hand, on April 29, 1881, the manifesto “On the Inviolability of Autocracy” was published, actually compiled by Pobedonostsev.
“A special and unexpected thing happened,” wrote Secretary of State E.A. Peretz. “A manifesto has been published declaring the sovereign’s firm intention to protect the autocracy ... The manifesto breathes partly with a challenge, a threat, but at the same time does not contain anything comforting either for the educated classes or for the common people.” Insulted, Loris-Melikov and Milyutin resigned, which was accepted. And the autocrat for many years became "a beast of burden, on which he put his heavy burden of the Victorious."
The problem, however, was that Konstantin Pobedonostsev, who triumphed over the victory, represented the other extreme. Without a doubt, also a sincere patriot, he had a very negative attitude towards both the European order and the ideas of representative democracy. The basis of his ideology was based on the famous formula of Count Uvarov "Orthodoxy, Autocracy and Nationality."
Anton Kersnovsky, a no less devout monarchist, assessed the attempts of both Pobedonostsev and Alexander III, who was sent by him, to arrange Russia on the basis of these principles: “This root of evil consisted in the deterioration and fatigue of the state body. The building of the Russian Empire was built on the European model of the late 17th - early 18th centuries. Built on stilts in the northern swamps, the brilliant "St. Petersburg" was a living embodiment of a great, but alien to the people of the empire. The state machine was worn out... A major overhaul was needed, and they limited themselves to replacing (in the 60s) several parts of it that were especially worn out.
Under such conditions, the three foundations of Russian state life, correctly formulated by Pobedonostsev, lost their force and generally turned out to be inapplicable. Orthodoxy was expressed in the Babylonian captivity of the Church under secular power, which inevitably atrophied the church's influence on the country and led to the spiritual impoverishment of society, and then (not to the same extent, true, but still significant) to the spiritual impoverishment of the people.
Autocracy was reduced to passively following the once-forever beaten bureaucratic - "stallmaster-stolonochnoe" - path, in the use of the already worn out and dilapidated state machine and in the rejection of any constructive, creative initiative. The nationality gradually narrowed down, moving from an imperial setting to a narrow ethnic one, abandoning the broad outlook of the imperial tradition and trying to create one Great Russian kingdom from Oleaborg to Erivan and from Kalisz to Vladivostok. Alexander III said: “Russia is for the Russians”, not quite successfully expressing an essentially beautiful thought ...
The whole tragedy of the situation lay in the fact that the government saw only one dilemma: either to preserve the existing system in its complete integrity, or to embark on various democratic-liberal reforms, which would inevitably lead to the collapse of statehood and the death of the country. But it did not notice a third way out of the situation: the renewal of the state body not in the "democratic-catastrophic" spirit "to the left" (as finally happened in 1905), but in its renewal "to the right" - in the spirit of preserving all the inviolability of the autocratic system by its application to the created conditions, the rejection of its Petrine-bureaucratic-foreign way of life, which led to the rupture of the once united Russian nation and the loss of the country's pulse by the government. This third way was spontaneously sensed by the Slavophils, but they were unable to formulate it without mastering state dialectics.
The government of the Tsar-Peacemaker did not notice this path. The vast and cold state mind of Pobedonostsev lacked dynamism and effectiveness. He correctly diagnosed the disease, even formulated a "trinitarian" medicine against it, but he failed to formulate these medicines correctly and correctly apply them. Perhaps because the patient already seemed incurable to him. This icy skeptic lacked fiery faith in his country, its genius, its great destiny. “Russia is an icy desert,” he said, “and a dashing man roams through it.” If he loved his Motherland with a passionate and active love, he, of course, would never have said these words.
Many of the activities carried out by the king, however, were supposed to make life easier for the common people. The reduction of redemption payments, the legalization of the obligation to buy out peasant plots, the establishment of the Peasants' Bank for issuing loans to peasants for the purchase of land (1881-1884) were aimed at smoothing out the unfavorable aspects of the 1861 reform for the peasants. The abolition of the poll tax (May 18, 1886), the tax on inheritances and interest-bearing papers, the increase in trade taxation (1882-1884) showed a desire to start a radical reorganization of the tax system, in the sense of alleviating the poorest classes; restriction of factory work of minors (1882) and night work of adolescents and women (1885) was aimed at protecting labor; the establishment of commissions for the preparation of criminal and civil codes (1881-1882) answered an undoubted urgent need; Established in 1881, the commission of State Secretary Kakhanov began a detailed study of the needs of local government in order to improve the regional administration in relation to the beginnings of the peasant and zemstvo reforms.
Undoubtedly, for the benefit of both the common people and the Russian state, the laws on resettlement (1889) were also sent, as a result of which over 400,000 peasants moved to Siberia, and about 50,000 more to Central Asia; on the inalienability of peasant allotments (1894), on the regulation of factory labor (1886, 1897).
But at the same time, a number of measures followed, expanding the advantages of the local nobility: the law on noble escheat property (1883), the organization of a long-term loan for noble landowners in the form of the establishment of a noble land bank (1885) in place of the all-estate land bank designed by the Minister of Finance. A sincere admirer of Alexander S.Yu. Witte was very angry about this event. He emphasized in his memoirs that if the Peasant Bank really helped the farmers, then the Noble Bank contributed to the “drinking away” of state funds by the ruined nobility, issued to them on the security of their lands and lands.
In the new regulation on the zemstvos of 1890, the representation of estates and nobility was strengthened. To this end, the qualification for the nobility was reduced and the number of noble vowels increased. The peasantry was deprived of elective representation. Vowels from the peasants were appointed by the governor himself. Not a single decision of the Zemstvo was taken without the approval of the governor or the Minister of the Interior.
One of the most reactionary reforms was the introduction in 1889 of the institution of zemstvo chiefs. Zemstvo chiefs were appointed by the Minister of the Interior from local hereditary nobles on the proposal of the governors. Having combined in their hands the functions of administrators and judges, they received unlimited power. The world court in the village was destroyed. All activities of peasant self-government were under their control. The peasants had no right to complain about the zemstvo chiefs. By this act, the autocracy essentially restored the power of the landowners over the peasants, which had been lost under the reform of 1861.
Witte believed that “Alexander III insisted on this idea ... precisely because he was tempted by the idea that all of Russia would be divided into zemstvo plots, that in each plot there would be a respectable nobleman who enjoys general respect in the given area, that this a respectable nobleman-landowner will take care of the peasants, judge them and dress them up. Justifying the tsar, Witte writes that if this was a mistake, it was in the highest degree sincere, because the emperor was "deeply cordial to all the needs of the Russian peasantry."
City self-government was also curtailed: clerks and small merchants, and other poor sections of the city, lost their electoral rights. The city regulation of 1892 replaced the previous system of three-class elections with elections by territorial electoral districts, but at the same time limited the number of vowels and increased the dependence of city government on governors.
Judicial reform has undergone a change. In the field of the court, the law of 1885 shook the principle of the irremovability of judges, the law of 1887 limited judicial publicity, the law of 1889 narrowed the range of actions of the jury.
In 1882-1884. many publications were closed, the autonomy of universities was abolished; elementary schools were transferred to the church department - the Holy Synod. In 1882-1884. new, extremely restrictive rules were issued on the press, libraries and reading rooms, called temporary, but valid until 1905.
In the field of public education, a new university reform took place (the charter of 1884), which destroyed university self-government; the transfer of literacy schools into the hands of the clergy was carried out, educational benefits for serving military service were reduced.
Well, and, of course, the famous report “On the reduction of gymnasium education” (known as the “circular about cook's children”), published on July 1, 1887 by the Minister of Education of the Russian Empire, Count I.D. Delyanov. The report introduced a monetary qualification for higher education; in this way, “gymnasiums and pro-gymnasiums will be freed from the entry into them of the children of coachmen, lackeys, cooks, laundresses, small shopkeepers and the like, whose children, with the exception of those gifted with brilliant abilities, should not at all strive for a secondary and higher education.”
However, by the end of the 1880s Alexander III was already less inclined to heed the advice of his teacher. The main reason for the loss of influence on the sovereign was the lack of a positive political program. This was also pointed out by the emperor himself in a conversation with S.Yu. Witte: “Pobedonostsev is an excellent critic, but he himself can never create anything... One cannot live by criticism, but one must go forward, one must create, but in this respect K.P. Pobedonostsev and other persons of his own direction can no longer be of any use.”
Therefore, the government policy in the field of industry and finance, in contrast to the political course, objectively contributed to the further movement of Russia along the capitalist path. The difference in approaches to the development of an economic and political course cannot be explained only by the feeling of “respect for the state ruble, the state penny, which Alexander III possessed”, or by his understanding that “Russia can become great only when it becomes a country ... industrial” . Neither Alexander III nor his finance ministers could ignore, firstly, the interests of the state treasury, and secondly, the strengthening of the state's defense power.
Under Alexander III, “customs policy turned sharply from free trade to protectionism,” protective measures were expanded in relation to industry, and a transition was made to new principles of taxation. There is a rapid change for the better in the state budget: after the grandiose deficits of 1881-1887. begins a chronic increase in the excess of government revenues over spending. Thanks to these surpluses, important measures were taken in the field of state credit and money circulation (conversion and early redemption of state loans, reform of money circulation) and in the field of railway construction. Financial stabilization was achieved largely due to the fact that the post of Minister of Finance was held under Alexander III, replacing each other, by the most talented officials: N.Kh. Bunge (1881-1886), I.A. Vyshnegradsky (1887-1892) and S.Yu. Witte (since 1892). The industrial and financial policy of Alexander III created the prerequisites for a powerful economic upsurge in the second half of the 1890s.
In 1891, at the initiative of Witte, Russia began the construction of the Great Siberian Railway - the railway line "Chelyabinsk - Omsk - Irkutsk - Khabarovsk - Vladivostok" (about 7000 km). Its completion was supposed to dramatically increase Russia's forces in the Far East.
In foreign policy, Alexander III and his Minister of Foreign Affairs N.K. Gears pursued a purely prudent policy, trying to protect the country from all sorts of adventures. He received his nickname "Peacemaker" according to the true popular opinion. It was Alexander III who said: “Every person with a heart cannot desire war, and every ruler to whom the people are entrusted by God must take all measures to avoid the horrors of war.”
At the same time, this did not mean at all that the emperor was ready to allow anyone to wipe their feet on Russia. Thus, Alexander III managed, without war, repelling the attempts of the aggressive intervention of Great Britain, bloodlessly annex to Russia vast expanses in Central Asia (over 400,000 sq. Km). However, it was in Central Asia that the only battle for the entire reign of the Tsar-Peacemaker took place.
Urged on by the British, the Emir of Afghanistan decided to seize the Merv oasis, and in 1884 he voluntarily accepted Russian citizenship. However, on March 18, 1885, a detachment of General Komarov completely defeated the Afghan troops, led by British officers, near Kushka. Kushka became the extreme southern point of the advancement of the Russian Empire, as well as an object for scoffing of many generations of army slobs (from tsarist lieutenants to Soviet lieutenants): “They won’t send Kushka further, they won’t give less than a platoon.”
The German Chancellor Bismarck in this situation provoked the Russian-English conflict in every possible way. But Alexander III showed restraint, and his thoughtful and balanced policy paid off: the British tried to send their squadron to the Black Sea, but the Turks, embittered by the fact that the British actually occupied Egypt, which was under the Ottoman Empire, refused to let their fleet through the straits. And Britain did not dare to advance from India to the Kushka region through troubled Afghanistan. In 1887, an Anglo-Russian commission, after two years of painstaking work, established the exact border between Russia and Afghanistan. This was done so carefully that this border line exists without the slightest change to this day - only now between "sovereign" Turkmenistan and Afghanistan.
Alexander III did not share the pro-German sentiments of his father, Alexander II (Wilhelm I, after the unification of German lands into the German Empire in 1871, wrote to Alexander II: “After the Lord God, Germany owes everything to you”). True, on June 6 (18), 1881, at the initiative of the German Chancellor Bismarck, a secret Austro-Russian-German treaty was signed, which was being prepared under Alexander II, known as the "Union of the Three Emperors", which provided for the benevolent neutrality of each of the parties in the event that one of them was at war with the fourth side.
At the same time, Bismarck, secretly from Russia, in 1882 concluded the Tripartite Alliance (Germany, Austria-Hungary, Italy) against Russia and France, which provided for the provision of military assistance by the participating countries to each other in case of hostilities with Russia or France. But the conclusion of the Triple Alliance did not remain a secret for Alexander III. The unfavorable position of Germany towards Russia in the Balkans and during the conflict with Britain around Kushka further cooled Russian-German relations.
As a result, Russia pursued a policy of rapprochement with France, which was the only way for France itself to avoid war with Germany; in 1887, the French government provided large loans to Russia. Alexander III had to reconcile the conservatism of domestic politics with the republican trend in foreign policy, which was welcomed by a significant part of society, but ran counter to the traditional line of the Russian Foreign Ministry (and the personal views of Giers and his closest influential assistant Lamsdorf).
On July 11 (23), 1891, the French squadron arrived in Kronstadt on a friendship visit; On July 13, the tsar visited the squadron. On July 4-28, 1891, negotiations were held on rapprochement between Russia and France. On July 28, Alexander III approved the final version of the treaty, and on August 15, 1891, through an exchange of letters between the foreign ministers, the Russian-French political agreement entered into force. In the event of an attack on France by Germany or Italy, supported by Germany, and in the event of an attack on Russia by Germany or Austria-Hungary, supported by Germany, Russia was supposed to send 700-800 thousand people to the German front out of a total of 1.6 million people mobilized , France - 1.3 million people. In the event of the start of mobilization in one of the countries of the Triple Alliance, France and Russia immediately began to mobilize. The Allies promised not to conclude a separate peace in case of war and to establish permanent cooperation between the General Staff of the Russian and the General Staff of the French armies.
The Russian-French alliance was concluded for as long as the Tripartite Alliance existed. The secrecy of the treaty was very high, Alexander III warned the French government that if the secret was disclosed, the union would be terminated. But although this treaty was kept secret, the very fact of the tsar's rapprochement with republican France came as an unpleasant surprise both for Bismarck, who retired in 1890, and for his successors.
However, the price of the allies, both past and present, Emperor Alexander III knew very well. No wonder he owns the statement: “In the whole world we have only two faithful allies - our army and navy. All the rest will take up arms against us at the first opportunity.”
Meanwhile, the potential for enemy ships to appear in the Black Sea had long worried the Russian government. Back in 1870, Russia announced its right to have a navy on the Black Sea, but for 10 years it has not created it. But on September 6, 1881, Alexander III convened a Special Meeting, at which it was decided to create a fleet superior to the Turkish and capable of delivering Russian troops to the Sultan's palace in Istanbul. The plan was correct, it was embodied after the death of Alexander III - during the First World War, a landing in Istanbul was already planned, but the February Revolution prevented it.
Meanwhile, Alexander III showed constant concern for the development and maintenance of the combat readiness of the domestic navy. On his behalf, the maritime department developed a shipbuilding program for 1882-1900: it was supposed to launch 16 squadron battleships, 13 cruisers, 19 seaworthy gunboats and more than 100 destroyers.
By 1896, 8 squadron battleships, 7 cruisers, 9 gunboats, 51 destroyers were commissioned. The construction of squadron battleships with a displacement of up to 10,000 tons, armed with 4 guns of 305 mm caliber and 12 guns of 152 mm caliber, began. The displacement of the Russian navy by the end of the reign reached 300,000 tons. At that time, this was the third indicator in the world after England and France.
During the 13 years of the reign of Alexander III, measures were constantly taken to modernize the army and strengthen the borders of the state. The troops were re-equipped with new rifles (the same Mosin three-ruler) and new guns. The officer training system has undergone significant changes. Military gymnasiums were transformed into cadet corps, which graduated 19,686 people in 13 years (1881-1895). The commanding staff of the army was trained by combined arms military and cadet schools, as well as special military schools that trained officers of artillery and engineering troops. The capacity of schools was increased: in 1881, 1,750 officers graduated, in 1895 - 2,370. In 1882, officer schools were opened - rifle, artillery (for the practical improvement of candidates for company and battery commanders) and electrical engineering.
However, in military construction, not all was well. General A.F. Rediger (Minister of War in 1905-1909; during the reign of Alexander III he served in the central apparatus of the ministry) wrote in his memoirs about the personnel policy in the military department of that time: time in the military department there was a terrible stagnation. Whose fault it was, whether the sovereign himself or Vannovsky, I do not know, but the consequences of this stagnation were terrible. Incapable and decrepit people were not fired, appointments were made according to seniority, capable people were not promoted, but moved along the line, they lost interest in service, initiative and energy, and when they got to the highest positions, they already differed little from the surrounding mass of mediocrities. This absurd system also explains the terrible composition of commanding officials, both towards the end of the reign of Alexander III, and later, during the Japanese war!
Kersnovsky, for his part, also confirmed: “Vannovsky was the exact opposite of the enlightened and “liberal” Milyutin. In comparison with Milyutin, he was an obscurantist - a kind of "military Pobedonostsev", and in character - a second Paskevich. A man of the utmost rudeness and captiousness, he treated his subordinates arbitrarily. It was very hard to serve with him, and it was rare for anyone to endure it for any length of time.”
Nevertheless, the Ministry of War as a whole successfully solved the task assigned to it by the emperor - to increase the trained reserve of the army by passing a large number of people through its ranks. The annual contingent of recruits under Alexander II was 150,000 people, in 1881, at the very beginning of the reign of Alexander III, 235,000 people were already called up.
The service life was at first left the same: 6 years in service, 9 in reserve. In 1888, the number of extra-enlisted men doubled (still about a third of the target number), and this year the terms of service were reduced to 4 years in foot and to 5 in cavalry and engineering troops. At the same time, the length of stay in the reserve was doubled - from 9 to 18 years, and the reserve began to be considered liable for military service until the age of 43, inclusive.
In 1891, the contingent of the trained reserve of the lower ranks was completed: 2.5 million trained people were considered in the reserve, and up to 4 million fighters were to be counted in the mobilized army (with Cossack troops). Since 1887, universal military service has been extended to the native population of the Caucasus, with the exception of the highlanders. At the end of the reign of Alexander III, 270,000 people were called up annually - about twice as many as under his father. This was enough to maintain the peace-loving course of the Russian emperor.
Despite a relatively healthy lifestyle, Alexander III died quite young, before reaching the age of 50, quite unexpectedly for both relatives and subjects. In October 1888, the royal train coming from the south crashed 50 km from Kharkov. 7 wagons were smashed to smithereens, there were many victims, but the royal family remained intact. At the time of the crash, she was in the dining car. During the crash, the roof of the car collapsed, but Alexander, with an incredible effort, held it on his shoulders and held it until his wife and children got out.
However, shortly after this feat, the emperor began to complain of back pain. Professor Trube, who examined Alexander, came to the conclusion that a terrible concussion during the fall marked the onset of kidney disease. The disease progressed steadily. The sovereign increasingly felt unwell, his complexion became earthy, his appetite disappeared, his heart was not working well. In the winter of 1894, he caught a cold, and in September, while hunting in Belovezhye, he felt very bad. The Berlin professor Leiden, who urgently arrived on a call to Russia, found nephritis in the emperor - an acute inflammation of the kidneys. At his insistence, Alexander was sent to the Crimea, to Livadia, but it was too late. The disease progressed. Soon the situation became hopeless, and on October 20, 1894, Alexander III died. He was buried in St. Petersburg in the Peter and Paul Cathedral.