1. Imperial Russia
Russian in 1815

3. Introduction 19th century Russia- what made her different?
Often seen as one of a number of European states; as misleading as saying Russia is part of western Europe today
Geography, social and political structures, trade, industry and economy

4. Different from Europe
Did not share the same intellectual traditions (entrenched enlightenment ideals)
Russian Orthodox Church
No tradition of the Tsar ever sharing power with any social group
Russian alphabet
Eastern/Asian cultural mix
Size, held together only by the autocratic power of the Tsar rather than by any natural bond between people

5. Russian Geography

6. Russian Geography

7. Russian Geography
1815- Russia covered 1/6th of the total surface of the world
Diversity of the regions and the diversity of the climate placed severe limitations on Russia’s development and growth
Tundra in the north, great forest zone, the steppe and the semi-desert of Central Asia

8. Russian Geography
Eastern Siberia has the same latitude as England but is impossible to cultivate
Only in the steppes and southern forest zone is there a ‘growing season’- very short
The North of European Russia (the old Russian state) has frozen ground for 8 months
One harvest in three would not support the population

9. Russian Geography
Result of these conditions- the peasantry were poor – 1:3 (three grains gathered for every one planted), Europe averaged 1:5
Russian peasants had very little surplus to meet the needs of a bad year, to eat, to sell or to feed animals in the winter

14. Russian Geography
Western Europe- growth of trade and cities went hand in hand with improvements in agriculture- incentive for increased production
In Russia that incentive was lacking due to the social structure…

15. Social Structure 96%- rural population
Social unit was based on the extended family group- 50 people or more
Mir- village commune- a concept more than a term
Mir- made up of a number of smaller families- fewer than 500 inhabitants

16. Peasants - village communes - insufficient land to support families
- low technology; inefficient farming
- bad diet - high mortality rate; vodka
- incessant labor
- superstitious, fatalistic, ignorant, and illiterate
- therefore, Tsar viewed as “little Father”

17. Mir
Heads of families made decisions- nobility/landlords agreed with this
Landlords did not administrating- Mir did all that
Communal nature suited the situation- short growing season demanded intense coordinated activity

20. Peasants
Serfs- privately owned- bought and sold (not the same as slaves in America)
State peasants- lived on land that was not owned privately but owned by the state
Both peasants were allowed to keep the profits of their labour, above the demands of the landlord or state
But due to the harsh conditions and the inefficiency of the system, prevented impossible demands

21. Peasants
Serfdom existed in Russia until most of Europe abolished serfs starting in the 13th century
Even Austria had abolished it by the late 1700s
In Russia it remained as a block to individual innovation and enterprise
83% of Russian population were peasants
What of the rest? Productive and Unproductive members of society (see handout)

22. Class Structure
- Meshchanin- middle class- a variety of poorer town dwellers such as labourers, artisans and shopkeepers
- Movement between classes was possible theoretically but the lower down you went the harder it was to move
- Raznochintsy- well educated, non noble, Russian Intelligentsia (no real place)
- Everything was linked to the nature and form of the Russian autocracy- everyone had a place and station in life, and it was very difficult to alter that place and situation
- natually this stifles ambition, enterprise and initiative

23. The Autocracy Totally and willing submission of Russian subjects
- “Father figure”, “Little Father”, loved all his ‘children’- punish when necessary and keep order
Protect the fatherland from external threats (therefore success is attributed to the individual performance)
- Never shared power with any groups- and Russians believed this was normal- sharing of power would lead to corruption and growth of privileged groups (evil)
- Not even the biggest critics of the regimes never questioned the idea of autocracy but rather focused on inefficient landlords and officials

24. The Autocracy
Hard to defend borders, with multiple nationalities requires strong centralized leadership
Communication very (VERY) slow- therefore Tsar’s representatives often received the blame- the Tsar was remote
Orthodox Church saw the Tsar as a divine emperor and supported him
Orthodox church were part of the autocracy- supported financially by the state and chosen from the upper class- Main emphasis on ritual and the next world
Did not take an active part in politics (this world doesn’t matter)
The ‘opiate of the masses’- in Russia for sure
Bureaucratic nature of the autocracy (created by Peter the Great 1700s)

29. Trade, Industry and Economy
Russian economy was not backward or underdeveloped- it was slow developing and minimally diversified
1800 Russian production was roughly the equivalent of England- by 1850 England produced 12 times as much
Investment and modernization did not take place in Russia as it did elsewhere- protectionism, use of serf labour- no perceived need to change
Cotton industry was expansive (thanks to Napoleon) but it was never as intense as England
The relative stagnation was due to the Russian state’s organization: traditional markets, royal appointment monopolies, no competitive business
Money was scarce (lack of investment)
The freedom and infrastructure in Europe, which encouraged economic growth in the West and America did not exist in Russia and there was no thrusting middle class to push modernization forward