The system of land distribution was unfair and most peasants received 4% less land than they had rented before, many received much less. In reality they had less land than when they were serfs. This was seen as unfair as they believed that, because they had worked the land for generations, it should now belong to them. The Mir still restricted peasants’ movements and as consolidation and enlargement of property was difficult, there was little incentive to improve the land and adopt modern methods, resulting in a decline in productivity The huge redemption taxes also meant that the peasants had to sell many of the crops they needed to eat and the Mir kept the peasants tied to their commune and still controlled by rules. Peasants felt disappointed and disillusioned and many rioted.
Emancipation proved a bitter disappointment amongst the peasantry (Acton E, 1990 p 8), it did very little to improve their life’s and failed to provide any real social mobility. The nobility were also disturbed by emancipation, although they were compensated for loss of land to peasant ownership this was not sufficient in halting the decline of landownership amongst the nobility (cited, Acton E, 1990,
This made it increasingly difficult as the harvest would suffer which would then cause a serious lack of food within the Kingdom itself, which in turn meant that the Fyrd would have very little supplies when called out and also affected all aspects of trade, and finances within the Kingdom. The Vikings could also simply retreat once the Fyrd had been called out. This had a devastating effect on the Saxon economy and harvest, as able bodied men were taken away from their jobs, while the Vikings had a constant supply of men and food from abroad. In comparison the Viking army were very well equipped and mobile. By the
Travel in Russia was very hard; it had very few roads meaning many people up north were almost isolated from the rest. This meant communication was distorted and it would have been hard for the tsar to govern those areas, resulting in him he not being very influential on their lives. Because of this people up north might have not lived under the guidelines the tsar had set out. This could have decreased the chances of the tsar being respected, as the people who lived up north were very independent. Food was very hard to grow
However, economically speaking Russia was one of the most underdeveloped countries in Europe. The country’s economy was based on a backward agricultural system; peasants would have to produce grain on mostly infertile land to pay for the land given by them by the government in the belief that they would use it to grow crops in return for their “freedom”. The complications of this system made it underproductive, and meant that it was difficult to rely on grain export alone for money for industrial development. The lack of industrial revolution also meant that a change in this system seemed unlikely. During the reign of Alexander III, Russia underwent
The lack of education is one of the most significant factors that contributes to poverty. There is no access to jobs for non-educated people. The second cause of poverty has to do with geography. For example, statistics show that people who live in rural areas far away from the cities are poorer. This is caused by the lack of communication and transportation in remote rural areas.
Also, the Serfs had been “freed” so to speak, the majority of peasants did not have complete freedom of movement so this limited the migration of workers into towns and cities to support the workforce needed for new manufacturing industries. Additionally, the economy simply didn’t have sufficient funds to invest in the development and couldn’t
Food was scarce and prices soared. Middle classes, the proletariat, peasants and ethnic minorities were all dissatisfied with the Tsarist system of Government. All of which led to the fall of the Tsarist Regime. The first sixth months of the war saw both successes and failures. In the early stages of the war the Army saw success at Galacia, but they saw heavy losses at Tannenburg and the Masurian Lakes.
With 90% of the country being illiterate, there was no way for the country to industrialize (which would also go on to effect their economy), without people being able to read or write, it became even more difficult for the country to move forward. The economy became weak very quickly because of the growth in population (keeping in mind that the amount of people who were uneducated was still 90%), they relied too much on their primary source of income which was agriculture, this resulted in the land developing crops less as they were constantly taken at every chance possible therefore making the land weaker (and a weaker land meant a weaker income). Another factor that also had an effect on the
Peasants were at the bottom of the Russian Society and in many people's eyes the most likely to want to revolt, but due to the illiteracy and lack of understanding of what was going on, they never, as Robert Service states in “A history of modern Russia” by saying “Peasants, while making money from the expanded market of their products, kept to tradition notions and customs,” this highlights how controlled the Russian Society was and that though many, if not all, peasants were in a bad situation, they upheld traditional values. This would have added to the Tsars strength before 1905, because the peasants made up 80% of the population, and having that huge a percentage under control really would have made the Tsar become under less threat of a revolution. Another reason as to why the Tsar was so strong before 1905 was his tight control over the Russian workers. The Russian industry wasn't very advanced and it can be argued that this was done on purpose, as Robert Service mentions “ for he and his ministers were fearful about the rapid creation of an unruly urban proletariat such as existed in other countries” this shows how the Tsar thought, that if the workers started to earn more money and have a better working life, it may lead to an unbalanced society, so to keep the workers in check, he deliberately