Joined Dec 2009
7,829 Posts | 6+
Tennessee
Peter as he modernized Russia as much as could be done for the era that he ruled- shaking up the boyar system, movie the capitol to St. Petersburg, starting the Russian Navy, and helping to modernize the Army. He was a successful army commander as well.
Joined Dec 2009
19,936 Posts | 25+
Joined Mar 2010
181 Posts | 2+
New York
Peter the Great for modernizing Russia. Though he was a bit on the crazy side and a terrible father.
Alexander II probably would have surpassed him had he not been assassinated since he was considering a constitution and establishing a legislature.
Alexander II probably would have surpassed him had he not been assassinated since he was considering a constitution and establishing a legislature.
Joined Jan 2009
8,559 Posts | 90+
In the Past
Joined Jan 2009
8,299 Posts | 3+
Tennessee
Yeah, Peter brought Russia into the modern world. Ivan the Terrible did his great work in taking Kazan. But then letting loose the Opperichniki loose on the people didnt really do much to help Russia.
Joined Oct 2008
4,313 Posts | 7+
The Bright Center of the Universe
Wasn't Catherine thought to have enjoyed the carnal pleasres of a horse? I seem to remeber hearing that somewhere.
Oh and I voted for Peter the Great
Oh and I voted for Peter the Great
Joined Oct 2009
5,021 Posts | 12+
Vancouver
I would consider Peter to have been the Greatest, but I voted for Ivan because such a giant of history needs more than one measly vote. He might have been horrible, but as much as one might hate him one cannot ignore him.
Joined Aug 2009
2,187 Posts | 10+
Russia, Msk
I voted for Alexander II the Liberator. He abolished the serfdom.
Ivan the Terrible was certainly talented ruler. But only in the first half of the reign. He introduced The Oprichnina that ravaged the country and was later one of the main causes of The Time of Troubles. He had a very peculiar view its imperial mission. It is possible that he suffered from a mental illness (as a consequence of marriages of close relatives).
The main achievement of Peter the Great was he defeated Sweden. The need for modernization of Russia was recognized by Boris Godunov. But Poland and Sweden have purposely prevented the penetration of Western achievements in Russia. Accordingly, their defeat was vital to Russia. His reforms have been very inconsistent and lack of thought. He reinforced what was supposed to cancel - serfdom. His modernization of Russia was a very "flat". Under the influence of this "modernization" was formed that later Dostoevsky described in the following words: "And I won't go through all the axioms laid down by Russian boys on that subject, all derived from European hypotheses; for what's a hypothesis there is an axiom with the Russian boy, and not only with the boys but with their teachers too, for our Russian professors are often just the same boys themselves".
In the reign of Catherine the Great came apogee enslavement of peasants and privileges of the nobility. She, of course, has done much for Russia, but after her the treasury was empty, the peasants were on the situation of slaves, and the aristocracy was not unlimited. The attempt of the Emperor Paul to curb the nobility and aristocracy ended his murder.
Ivan the Terrible was certainly talented ruler. But only in the first half of the reign. He introduced The Oprichnina that ravaged the country and was later one of the main causes of The Time of Troubles. He had a very peculiar view its imperial mission. It is possible that he suffered from a mental illness (as a consequence of marriages of close relatives).
The main achievement of Peter the Great was he defeated Sweden. The need for modernization of Russia was recognized by Boris Godunov. But Poland and Sweden have purposely prevented the penetration of Western achievements in Russia. Accordingly, their defeat was vital to Russia. His reforms have been very inconsistent and lack of thought. He reinforced what was supposed to cancel - serfdom. His modernization of Russia was a very "flat". Under the influence of this "modernization" was formed that later Dostoevsky described in the following words: "And I won't go through all the axioms laid down by Russian boys on that subject, all derived from European hypotheses; for what's a hypothesis there is an axiom with the Russian boy, and not only with the boys but with their teachers too, for our Russian professors are often just the same boys themselves".
In the reign of Catherine the Great came apogee enslavement of peasants and privileges of the nobility. She, of course, has done much for Russia, but after her the treasury was empty, the peasants were on the situation of slaves, and the aristocracy was not unlimited. The attempt of the Emperor Paul to curb the nobility and aristocracy ended his murder.
Joined Aug 2009
5,747 Posts | 10+
Belgium
True, I'd put them on a near equal level, I can't imagine a Peter the Great without the "groundwork" done by Ivan the Terrible, a man more responsible then anyone for founding an autocratic Russia (you know, with the oprichniki and all...).
Joined Dec 2009
19,936 Posts | 25+
Thanks for that excellent review; I entirely agree, but all things considered I still go for Ivan Grozny.
Joined Aug 2009
5,747 Posts | 10+
Belgium
*Ahum* you may want to inquire as to why he abolished serfdom... And moreover, what did he introduce as an alternative? Indeed, the (nearly) same thing in a different jacket.
Joined Aug 2009
2,187 Posts | 10+
Russia, Msk
Well, as i said in another topic, it`s absurd to compare the monarchs were living at different times and in different conditions. But if the question was raised, we must try to determine the criteria on which the answer to the question would not be absurd. By such criteria on the topic I would mention the following:
1) understanding of the monarch challenges facing his state,
2) a degree of sophistication of its actions
3) methods of reform,
4) implications for the country.
According to these criteria Alexander IMHO, leads by a wide margin.
Now answering your question...
The abolition of serfdom was ripe a long time ago and already during a hundred years russian monarchs were looking for a way to cancel it. They had to take the risk and cancel it. Catherine, Paul, Alexander I and Nicholas I simply did not have social support for such action. But the very necessity of the abolition was recognized long ago.
If you're a monarch, you must take care that your actions will not bring down the economy. Even if the reforms are necessary. Alexander and his counsellors chose the path of gradual abandonment of serfdom.
Joined May 2008
14,765 Posts | 384+
Scotland
Serfdom was abolished to allow for military reforms in the wake of the defeat during the Crimean War. Whilst it may be seen or sold as a great liberal move, it was in fact a necessary step in reducing the size of the military. At the end of the day, Alexander actually had very little choice in the matter.
That said, I liked your above post #14.
More History Discussions
Trending History Discussions
-
The Great Captains of History - How Many Battles? - Version 7- Started by DiocletianIsBetterThanYou
- Replies: 861
-
-
The Great Captains of History - How Many Battles? - Version 5
- Started by DiocletianIsBetterThanYou
- Replies: 3K
-
The Diversity Of Early African Architecture/Ruins Thread- Started by Kilwa Sultanate
- Replies: 2K
-