On the reforms of Nicholas II, I quote material from the book: Alfred Mirek "Emperor Nicholas II and the fate of Orthodox Russia."

(This is an extract from the book given on the Internet by one of the users)

(The appendix is ​​included in the collection “How Rus' was Destroyed”)

In the second half of the 19th century in Russia, there was a progressive desire of the monarchical government for reforms in all areas of state activity, which led to the rapid flourishing of the economy and the growth of the country's well-being. The last three Emperors - Alexander II, Alexander III and Nicholas II - with their mighty hands and great royal mind, raised the country to unprecedented heights.

I will not touch on the results of the reforms of Alexander II and Alexander III here, but will immediately focus on the achievements of Nicholas II. By 1913, industry and agriculture had reached such high levels that the Soviet economy was only able to reach them decades later. And some indicators were exceeded only in the 70-80s. For example, the power supply of the USSR reached pre-revolutionary levels only in the 1970-1980s. And in some areas, such as grain production, it has not caught up with Nikolaev Russia. The reason for this rise was the powerful transformations carried out by Emperor Nicholas II in various areas of the country.

1. Trans-Siberian Railway

Siberia, although rich, was a remote and inaccessible region of Russia; criminals, both criminal and political, were exiled there, as if in a huge sack. However, the Russian government, ardently supported by merchants and industrialists, understood that this was a huge storehouse of inexhaustible natural resources, but, unfortunately, very difficult to develop without a well-established transport system. The very need for the project has been discussed for more than ten years.
Alexander III instructed his son, Tsarevich Nicholas, to lay the first, Ussuri section of the Trans-Siberian Railway. Alexander III placed serious trust in his Heir by appointing him chairman of the construction of the Trans-Siberian Railway. At that time it was, perhaps, the most voluminous, difficult and responsible state. a business that was under the direct leadership and control of Nicholas II, which he began as Tsarevich and successfully continued throughout his reign. The Trans-Siberian Railway could rightfully be called the “Construction Site of the Century” not only at the Russian, but also at the international level.
The Imperial House jealously ensured that construction was carried out by Russian people and with Russian money. Railway terminology was introduced predominantly by Russian: “crossing”, “path”, “locomotive”. On December 21, 1901, the labor movement along the Trans-Siberian Railway began. The cities of Siberia began to develop quickly: Omsk, Krasnoyarsk, Irkutsk, Chita, Khabarovsk, Vladivostok. Over the course of 10 years, thanks to the far-sighted policy of Nicholas II, and the implementation of the reforms of Peter Stolypin, and due to the opportunities opened up with the advent of the Trans-Siberian Railway, the population here has increased sharply. The enormous riches of Siberia became available for development, which strengthened the economic and military power of the Empire.
The Trans-Siberian Railway is still the most powerful transport artery of modern Russia.

2. Currency reform

In 1897, under the Minister of Finance S.Yu. Witte, an extremely important monetary reform was painlessly carried out - the transition to a gold currency, which strengthened the international financial position of Russia. A distinctive feature of this financial reform from all modern ones was that no segments of the population suffered financial losses. Witte wrote: “Russia owes its metallic gold circulation exclusively to Emperor Nicholas II.” As a result of the reforms, Russia received its own strong convertible currency, which took a leading position in the world foreign exchange market, which opened up enormous prospects for the country's economic development.

3. The Hague Conference

During his reign, Nicholas II paid a lot of attention to the defense capabilities of the army and navy. He constantly took care of improving the entire complex of equipment and weapons for the rank and file - the basis of any army at that time.
When a new set of uniforms was created for the Russian army, Nikolai personally tried it out himself: he put it on and walked 20 versts (25 km) in it. Came back in the evening and approved the kit. A widespread rearmament of the army began, dramatically increasing the country's defense capability. Nicholas II loved and nurtured the army, living the same life with it. He did not raise his rank, remaining a colonel until the end of his life. And it was Nicholas II who, for the first time in the world, as the head of the strongest European power at that time, came up with peaceful initiatives to reduce and limit the armaments of the main world powers.
On August 12, 1898, the Emperor issued a note that, as the newspapers wrote, “will amount to the glory of the Tsar and His reign.” The greatest historical date was the day of August 15, 1898, when the young thirty-year-old Emperor of All Russia, on his own initiative, addressed the whole world with a proposal to convene an international conference to put a limit to the growth of armaments and prevent the outbreak of war in the future. However, at first this proposal was received with caution by world powers and did not receive much support. The Hague, the capital of neutral Holland, was chosen as its convening place.
From the author of the extract: “I would like to recall here, between the lines, an excerpt from the memoirs of Gilliard, to whom, during long intimate conversations, Nicholas II once said: “Oh, if only we could do without diplomats! On this day, humanity would achieve great success."
In December 1898, the Tsar made his second, more specific, constructive proposal. It must be emphasized that 30 years later, at the disarmament conference convened in Geneva by the League of Nations, created after World War I, the same issues were repeated and discussed as in 1898-1899.
The Hague Peace Conference met from May 6 to July 17, 1899. A number of conventions have been adopted, including the Convention on the Peaceful Settlement of International Disputes through Mediation and Arbitration. The fruit of this convention was the establishment of the Hague International Court, which is still in force today. The 2nd conference in The Hague met in 1907, also on the initiative of the Sovereign Emperor of Russia. The 13 conventions adopted there on the laws and customs of war on land and at sea were of great importance, and some of them are still in force.
On the basis of these 2 conferences, the League of Nations was created in 1919, the purpose of which is to develop cooperation between peoples and guarantee peace and security. Those who created the League of Nations and organized the disarmament conference could not help but admit that the first initiative undoubtedly belonged to Emperor Nicholas II, and neither war nor revolution of our time could erase this from the pages of history.

4. Agricultural reform

Emperor Nicholas II, caring with all his soul for the well-being of the Russian people, most of whom were peasants, gave instructions to the outstanding state. Russian leader, Minister P.A. Stolypin, to make proposals for carrying out agrarian reform in Russia. Stolypin came up with a proposal to carry out a number of important government reforms aimed at the benefit of the people. All of them were warmly supported by the Emperor. The most important of them was the famous agrarian reform, which began by royal decree on November 9, 1906. THE ESSENCE OF THE REFORM is the transfer of peasant farming from low-profit communal farming to a more productive private sector. And this was not done forcibly, but voluntarily. Peasants could now allocate their own personal plot in the community and dispose of it at their own discretion. All social rights were returned to them and complete personal independence from the community in managing their affairs was guaranteed. The reform helped to include large areas of undeveloped and abandoned land into agricultural circulation. It should also be noted that peasants received equal civil rights with the entire population of Russia.
His premature death at the hands of a terrorist on September 1, 1911 prevented Stolypin from completing his reforms. The murder of Stolypin took place before the eyes of the Sovereign, and His Majesty showed the same courage and fearlessness as his August grandfather Emperor Alexander II at the time of the villainous attempt on his life. The fatal shot thundered at the Kiev Opera House during a gala performance. To stop the panic, the orchestra played the national anthem, and the Emperor, approaching the barrier of the royal box, stood in full view of everyone, as if showing that he was here at his post. So he stood - although many feared a new assassination attempt - until the sounds of the anthem ceased. It is symbolic that on this fateful evening M. Glinka’s opera “A Life for the Tsar” was performed.
The Emperor's courage and will were also evident in the fact that, despite the death of Stolypin, he continued to implement the main ideas of the illustrious minister. When the reform began to work and began to gain national momentum, the production of agricultural products in Russia sharply increased, prices stabilized, and the growth rate of the people's wealth was significantly higher than in other countries. In terms of the volume of growth of national property per capita by 1913, Russia was in third place in the world.
Despite the fact that the outbreak of the war slowed down the progress of reforms, by the time V.I. Lenin proclaimed his famous slogan “Land to the peasants!”, 75% of the Russian peasantry already owned land. After the October revolution, the reform was canceled, the peasants were completely deprived of their land - it was nationalized, then the livestock was expropriated. About 2 million wealthy farmers (“kulaks”) were exterminated by their entire families, mostly in Siberian exile. The rest were forced into collective farms and deprived of civil rights and freedoms. They were deprived of the right to move to other places of residence, i.e. found themselves in the position of serf peasants under Soviet rule. The Bolsheviks de-peasantized the country, and to this day in Russia the level of agricultural production is not only significantly lower than it was after the Stolypin reform, but even lower than before the reform.

5. Church reforms

Among the enormous merits of Nicholas II in a variety of state areas, a prominent place is occupied by his exceptional services in matters of religion. They are connected with the main commandment for every citizen of his homeland, his people to honor and preserve his historical and spiritual heritage. Orthodoxy spiritually and morally strengthened the national and state principles of Russia; for Russian people it was more than just a religion, it was a deep spiritual and moral basis of life. Russian Orthodoxy developed as a living faith, consisting in the unity of religious feeling and activity. It was not only a religious system, but also a state of mind - a spiritual and moral movement towards God, which included all aspects of the life of a Russian person - state, public and personal. The church activities of Nicholas II were very broad and covered all aspects of church life. As never before, during the reign of Nicholas II, spiritual eldership and pilgrimage became widespread. The number of churches built increased. The number of monasteries and monastics in them increased. If at the beginning of the reign of Nicholas II there were 774 monasteries, then in 1912 there were 1005. During his reign, Russia continued to be decorated with monasteries and churches. A comparison of statistics for 1894 and 1912 shows that in 18 years 211 new monasteries and convents and 7,546 new churches were opened, not counting a large number of new chapels and houses of worship.
In addition, thanks to the generous donations of the Sovereign, during these same years, 17 Russian churches were built in many cities around the world, standing out for their beauty and becoming landmarks of the cities in which they were built.
Nicholas II was a true Christian, treating all shrines with care and reverence, making every effort to preserve them for posterity for all times. Then, under the Bolsheviks, there was a total looting and destruction of temples, churches and monasteries. Moscow, which was called golden-domed due to the abundance of churches, lost most of its shrines. Many monasteries that created the unique flavor of the capital disappeared: Chudov, Spaso-Andronevsky (the gate bell tower was destroyed), Voznesensky, Sretensky, Nikolsky, Novo-Spassky and others. Some of them are being restored today with great effort, but these are only small fragments of noble beauties that once towered majestically above Moscow. Some monasteries were completely razed to the ground, and they were lost forever. Russian Orthodoxy has never known such damage in its almost thousand-year history.
The merit of Nicholas II is that he applied all his spiritual strength, intelligence and talent to revive the spiritual foundations of living faith and true Orthodoxy in a country that was at that time the most powerful Orthodox power in the world. Nicholas II made great efforts to restore the unity of the Russian Church. April 17, 1905 On the eve of Easter, he issues a decree “On strengthening the principles of religious tolerance,” which laid the foundation for overcoming one of the most tragic phenomena in Russian history - the church schism. After almost 50 years of desolation, the altars of Old Believer churches (sealed under Nicholas I) were opened and it was allowed to serve in them.
The Emperor, who knew the church charter very well, well understood, loved and appreciated church singing. Preserving the origins of this special path and its further development allowed Russian church singing to occupy one of the honorable places in world musical culture. After one of the spiritual concerts of the Synodal Choir in the presence of the Sovereign, as archpriest Vasily Metallov, a researcher of the history of synodal schools, recalls, Nicholas II said: “The choir has reached the highest degree of perfection, beyond which it is difficult to imagine that one can go.”
In 1901, the Emperor ordered the organization of a committee of trusteeship of Russian icon painting. Its main tasks were formed as follows: to preserve in icon painting the fruitful influence of examples of Byzantine antiquity and Russian antiquity; to establish “active connections” between official church and folk icon painting. Under the leadership of the committee, manuals for icon painters were created. Icon painting schools were opened in Palekh, Mstera and Kholuy. In 1903 S.T. Bolshakov released the original icon painting; on page 1 of this unique publication, the author wrote words of gratitude to the Emperor for his sovereign patronage of Russian icon painting: “...We all hope to see a turn in modern Russian icon painting towards ancient, time-honored examples...”
From December 1917, when the arrested Nicholas II was still alive, the leader of the world proletariat began reprisals against the clergy and the looting of churches (in Lenin’s terminology - “cleansing”), while icons and all church literature, including unique notes, were burned everywhere. bonfires near churches. This has been done for over 10 years. At the same time, many unique monuments of church singing disappeared without a trace.
Nicholas II's concerns for the Church of God extended far beyond the borders of Russia. Many churches in Greece, Bulgaria, Serbia, Romania, Montenegro, Turkey, Egypt, Palestine, Syria, Libya have one or another gift of martyrdom. Entire sets of expensive vestments, icons and liturgical books were donated, not to mention generous monetary subsidies for their maintenance. Most of the Jerusalem churches were maintained with Russian money, and the famous decorations of the Holy Sepulcher were gifts from the Russian Tsars.

6. Fight against drunkenness

In 1914, despite wartime, the Tsar resolutely began to realize his long-standing dream - the eradication of drunkenness. For a long time, Nikolai Alexandrovich was imbued with the conviction that drunkenness is a vice that is corroding the Russian people, and that it is the duty of the Tsarist government to join the fight against this vice. However, all his attempts in this direction met with stubborn resistance in the Council of Ministers, since income from the sale of alcoholic beverages constituted the main budget item - one fifth of the state budget. income. The main opponent of this event was the Minister of Finance V.N. Kokovtsev, who became P.A. Stolypin’s successor as Prime Minister after his tragic death in 1911. He believed that the introduction of Prohibition would deal a serious blow to the Russian budget. The Emperor deeply valued Kokovtsev, but, seeing his lack of understanding of this important problem, he decided to part with him. The Monarch's efforts were in keeping with the general popular opinion at the time, which accepted the prohibition of alcoholic beverages as a deliverance from sin. Only wartime conditions, which overturned all normal budgetary considerations, made it possible to carry out a measure that meant the state renounced the largest of its incomes.
Before 1914, no country had ever taken such a radical measure to combat alcoholism. It was a huge, unheard of experience. “Accept, Great Sovereign, the prostration of your people! Your people firmly believe that from now on the past grief will end!” - said Duma Chairman Rodzianko. Thus, by the firm will of the Sovereign, an end was put to state speculation on the people's misfortune and the state was laid. basis for further fight against drunkenness. The “lasting end” to drunkenness lasted until the October revolution. The beginning of the general drinking of the people began in October during the capture of the Winter Palace, when most of those who “stormed” the palace went to the wine cellars, and there they drank to such an extent that they had to carry the “heroes of the assault” upstairs by their feet. 6 people died - that was all the losses that day. Subsequently, the revolutionary leaders drank the Red Army soldiers into unconsciousness, and then sent them to rob churches, shoot, smash and commit such inhuman sacrileges that people would not have dared to do in a sober state. Drunkenness remains the worst Russian tragedy to this day.

The material is taken from the book by Mirek Alfred “Emperor Nicholas II and the fate of Orthodox Russia. - M.: Spiritual Education, 2011. - 408 p.

§ 172. Emperor Nicholas II Alexandrovich (1894–1917)

In the very first months of his reign, the young sovereign with particular force expressed his intention to follow his father’s system in the internal government of the state and promised to “protect the beginning of the autocracy as firmly and steadily” as Alexander III guarded it. In foreign policy, Nicholas II also wanted to follow the peace-loving spirit of his predecessor, and in the first years of his reign not only did not deviate practically from the behests of Emperor Alexander III, but also posed to all powers the theoretical question of how diplomacy, through international discussion of the matter, could “put the limit to continuous armaments and to find means to prevent the misfortunes that threaten the whole world.” The result of such an appeal by the Russian emperor to the powers was the convening of two “Hague Peace Conferences” in The Hague (1899 and 1907), the main goal of which was to find means for a peaceful solution to international conflicts and for a general limitation of armaments. This goal, however, was not achieved, because there was no agreement to end disarmament, and a permanent international court to resolve disputes was not established. The conferences were limited to a number of private humane decisions on the laws and customs of war. They did not prevent any armed clashes and did not stop the development of so-called “militarism” with its enormous expenditures on military affairs.

Simultaneously with the work of the first Hague Conference, Russia was forced to take an active part in the internal affairs of China. It began with the fact that it prevented Japan from retaining the Liaodong Peninsula, which it had conquered from China, with the fortress of Port Arthur (1895). Then (1898) Russia itself leased Port Arthur with its region from China and ran one of the branches of its Siberian Railway there, and this made another Chinese region, Manchuria, through which the Russian railway passed, indirectly dependent on Russia. When the uprising began in China (the so-called “Boxers”, patriots, adherents of antiquity), Russian troops, along with the troops of other European powers, took part in pacifying it, took Beijing (1900), and then openly occupied Manchuria (1902). At the same time, the Russian government turned its attention to Korea and found it possible to occupy some points in Korea for its military and trade purposes. But Korea has long been an object of desire for Japan. Affected by the transfer of Port Arthur to Russian possession and concerned about Russia's assertion in the Chinese regions, Japan did not consider it possible to give up its dominance in Korea. She opposed Russia and, after lengthy diplomatic negotiations, started a war with Russia (January 26, 1904).

The war dealt a sensitive blow to Russia's political prestige and showed the weakness of its military organization. The government faced the difficult task of reviving the naval power of the state. It seemed that this would take a long time and that Russia would not be able to take an active part in international political life for a long time. Under this assumption, the central European powers, Germany and Austria-Hungary, became less shy towards Russia. They had many reasons to interfere in the affairs of the Balkan Peninsula, where there were wars between the Balkan states with Turkey and among themselves. Austria-Hungary exerted the main pressure on Serbia, intending to subordinate this state to its full influence. In 1914, the Austrian government delivered an ultimatum to Serbia that encroached on the political independence of the Serbian kingdom. Russia stood up, against the expectations of Austria and Germany, for the friendly Serbian people and mobilized the army. At this, Germany, followed by Austria, declared war on Russia, and with it, at the same time, France, its longtime ally. Thus began (in July 1914) that terrifying war that engulfed, one might say, the whole world. The reign of Emperor Nicholas II, despite the peace-loving statements of the monarch, was overshadowed by extraordinary military thunderstorms and difficult trials in the form of military defeats and the loss of state areas.

In the internal administration of the state, Emperor Nicholas II considered it possible and desirable to adhere to the same principles on which the protective policy of his father rested. But the policy of Alexander III had its explanation in the troubled circumstances of 1881 (§170); its goal was to combat sedition, restore public order and calm society. When Emperor Nicholas came into power, order was strengthened, and there was no talk of revolutionary terror. But life brought to the fore new tasks that required special efforts from the authorities. Crop failure and famine, in 1891–1892. which struck the agricultural regions of the state with extreme force, revealed an undoubted general decline in the people's well-being and the futility of those measures with which the government had until then thought to improve class life (§171). In the most grain-producing regions, the peasantry, due to scarcity of land and lack of livestock, could not maintain land farming, had no reserves, and at the first crop failure suffered hunger and poverty. In factories and factories, workers were dependent on entrepreneurs who were not sufficiently limited by law in the exploitation of labor. The suffering of the masses, revealed with extraordinary clarity during the famine of 1891–1892, caused a great movement in Russian society. Not limiting themselves to sympathy and material assistance to the starving, the zemstvos and the intelligentsia tried to raise before the government the question of the need to change the general order of government and move from the bureaucracy, powerless to prevent the ruin of the people, to unity with the zemstvos. Some zemstvo assemblies, taking advantage of the change in reign, in the first days of the power of Emperor Nicholas II turned to him with the appropriate addresses. However, they received a negative answer, and the government remained on its previous path of protecting the autocratic system with the help of bureaucracy and police repression.

The sharply expressed protective direction of power was in such a clear discrepancy with the glaring needs of the population and the mood of the intelligentsia that the emergence of opposition and revolutionary movements was inevitable. In the last years of the 19th century, protests began against the government by students in higher educational institutions and unrest and strikes by workers in factory areas. The growth of public discontent caused increased repression, aimed not only at those exposed in the movement, but also at the entire society, at the zemstvos and at the press. However, repressions did not prevent the formation of secret societies and the preparation of further actions. The failures in the Japanese War gave the final impetus to public discontent, and it resulted in a number of revolutionary outbreaks. [Cm. Russian Revolution 1905-07.] Demonstrations were organized in cities, strikes in factories; political murders began (Grand Duke Sergei Alexandrovich, Minister Plehve). A demonstration of unprecedented size took place in Petrograd on January 9, 1905: masses of workers converged on the Winter Palace with a petition to the Tsar and were dispersed using firearms. With this manifestation, an open revolutionary crisis began. The government made some concessions and expressed its readiness to create a legislative and advisory people's representation. However, this no longer satisfied the people: in the summer there were agrarian unrest and a number of uprisings in the fleet (Black Sea and Baltic), and in the fall (October) a general political strike began, stopping the normal life of the country (railways, post office, telegraph, water pipes, trams). Under the pressure of unusual events, Emperor Nicholas II issued a manifesto on October 17, 1905, which granted the population the unshakable foundations of civil freedom on the basis of actual inviolability of the individual, freedom of conscience, speech, assembly and unions; At the same time, the broad development of the beginning of general suffrage was promised and an unshakable rule was established so that no law could take effect without the approval of the State Duma and that those elected by the people would be provided with the opportunity to truly participate in monitoring the regularity of government actions.

On October 20, 1894, at age 26, Nicholas accepted the crown in Moscow under the name of Nicholas II. On May 18, 1896, during the coronation celebrations, tragic events occurred on the Khodynskoye field. The organizers were not prepared to receive such a huge number of people, as a result of which a terrible crush formed.

The reign of Nikolai Alexandrovich occurred during a period of sharp aggravation of the political struggle in the country, as well as the foreign policy situation (Russian-Japanese War of 1904 - 1905, Bloody Sunday, Revolution of 1905 - 1907 in Russia, World War I), February Revolution of 1917).

During the reign of Nicholas II, Russia turned into an agrarian-industrial country, cities grew, railways and industrial enterprises were built. Nicholas supported decisions aimed at the economic and social modernization of the country: the introduction of gold circulation of the ruble, Stolypin's agrarian reform, laws on workers' insurance, universal primary education, and religious tolerance.

Not being a reformer by nature, Nicholas II was forced to make important decisions that did not correspond to his inner convictions. He believed that in Russia the time had not yet come for a constitution, freedom of speech, and universal suffrage. However, when a strong social movement in favor of political change arose, he signed the Manifesto on October 17, 1905, proclaiming democratic freedoms.

In 1906, the State Duma, established by the Tsar's manifesto, began to work. For the first time in Russian history, the emperor began to rule with a representative body elected by the population. Russia gradually began to transform into a constitutional monarchy. But despite this, the emperor still possessed enormous power functions: Nicholas II had the right to issue laws (in the form of decrees), appoint a prime minister and ministers accountable only to him, determine the course of foreign policy, was the head of the army, the court and the earthly patron of the Russian Empire. Orthodox Church.

The turning point in the fate of Nicholas II was 1914 - the beginning of the First World War. The tsar did not want war and until the very last moment tried to avoid a bloody clash. However, on July 19 (August 1), 1914, Germany declared war on Russia.

In August (September 5) 1915, during a period of military failures, Nicholas II took over military command, a position previously held by Grand Duke Nikolai Nikolaevich (the Younger). Now the tsar visited the capital only occasionally, and spent most of his time at the headquarters of the Supreme Commander-in-Chief in Mogilev.

The war exacerbated the country's internal problems. The tsar and his entourage began to be held primarily responsible for military failures and the protracted military campaign. Allegations spread that there was “treason in the government.” At the beginning of 1917, the high military command led by Tsar Nicholas II (together with allies - England and France) prepared a plan for a general offensive, according to which it was planned to end the war by the summer of 1917. In March 1917, Admiral Kolchak was preparing to land troops on Constantinople and capture the Bosphorus straits and Dardanelles.

Attitudes towards the personality of the last Russian emperor are so ambiguous that there simply cannot be a consensus on the results of his reign.
When they talk about Nicholas II, two polar points of view are immediately identified: Orthodox-patriotic and liberal-democratic. For the first, Nicholas II and his family are an ideal of morality, an image of martyrdom; his reign is the highest point of Russian economic development in its entire history. For others, Nicholas II is a weak personality, a weak-willed man who failed to protect the country from revolutionary madness, who was entirely under the influence of his wife and Rasputin; Russia during his reign is seen as economically backward.

The purpose of this article is not to convince or change anyone's mind, but let's consider both points of view and draw our own conclusions.

Orthodox-patriotic point of view

In the 1950s, a report by the Russian writer Boris Lvovich Brazol (1885-1963) appeared in the Russian diaspora. During World War I he worked for Russian military intelligence.

Brasol's report is called “The Reign of Emperor Nicholas II in Figures and Facts. A response to slanderers, dismemberers and Russophobes.”

At the beginning of this report there is a quote from the famous economist of the time, Edmond Thery: “If the affairs of European nations go from 1912 to 1950 in the same way as they went from 1900 to 1912, Russia by the middle of this century will dominate Europe both politically and both economically and financially." (Economist Europeen magazine, 1913).

Let us present some data from this report.

On the eve of the First World War, the population of the Russian Empire was 182 million people, and during the reign of Emperor Nicholas II it increased by 60 million.

Imperial Russia based its fiscal policy not only on deficit-free budgets, but also on the principle of significant accumulation of gold reserves.

During the reign of Emperor Nicholas II, by law of 1896, gold currency was introduced in Russia. The stability of monetary circulation was such that even during the Russo-Japanese War, which was accompanied by widespread revolutionary unrest within the country, the exchange of banknotes for gold was not suspended.

Before World War I, taxes in Russia were the lowest in the world. The burden of direct taxes in Russia was almost 4 times less than in France, more than 4 times less than in Germany and 8.5 times less than in England. The burden of indirect taxes in Russia was on average half as much as in Austria, France, Germany and England.

I. Repin "Emperor Nicholas II"

Between 1890 and 1913 Russian industry increased its productivity fourfold. Moreover, it should be noted that the increase in the number of new enterprises was achieved not due to the emergence of fly-by-night companies, as in modern Russia, but due to actually working factories and factories that produced products and created jobs.

In 1914, the State Savings Bank had deposits worth 2,236,000,000 rubles, i.e. 1.9 times more than in 1908.

These indicators are extremely important for understanding that the population of Russia was by no means poor and saved a significant part of their income.

On the eve of the revolution, Russian agriculture was in full bloom. In 1913, the harvest of major cereals in Russia was one-third higher than that of Argentina, Canada and the United States of America combined. In particular, the rye harvest in 1894 yielded 2 billion poods, and in 1913 - 4 billion poods.

During the reign of Emperor Nicholas II, Russia was the main breadwinner of Western Europe. At the same time, special attention is drawn to the phenomenal growth in the export of agricultural products from Russia to England (grain and flour). In 1908, 858.3 million pounds were exported, and in 1910, 2.8 million pounds, i.e. 3.3 times.

Russia supplied 50% of the world's egg imports. In 1908, 2.6 billion pieces worth 54.9 million rubles were exported from Russia, and in 1909 - 2.8 million pieces. worth 62.2 million rubles. The export of rye in 1894 amounted to 2 billion poods, in 1913: 4 billion poods. Sugar consumption during the same period of time increased from 4 to 9 kg per year per person (at that time sugar was a very expensive product).

On the eve of World War I, Russia produced 80% of the world's flax production.

Modern Russia is practically dependent on the West for food.

In 1916, i.e., at the very height of the war, more than 2,000 miles of railways were built, which connected the Arctic Ocean (port of Romanovsk) with the center of Russia. The Great Siberian Road (8,536 km) was the longest in the world.

It should be added that Russian railways, compared to others, were the cheapest and most comfortable in the world for passengers.

During the reign of Emperor Nicholas II, public education achieved extraordinary development. Primary education was free by law, and from 1908 it became compulsory. Since this year, about 10,000 schools have been opened annually. In 1913 their number exceeded 130,000. In terms of the number of women studying in higher educational institutions, Russia ranked first in Europe, if not in the whole world, at the beginning of the 20th century.

During the reign of Sovereign Nicholas II, the government of Pyotr Arkadyevich Stolypin carried out one of the most significant and most brilliant reforms in Russia - the agrarian reform. This reform is associated with the transition of the form of ownership of land and land production from communal to private land. On November 9, 1906, the so-called “Stolypin Law” was issued, which allowed the peasant to leave the Community and become the individual and hereditary owner of the land he cultivated. This law was a huge success. Immediately, 2.5 million requests for release from family farmers were submitted. Thus, on the eve of the revolution, Russia was already ready to turn into a country of property owners.

For the period 1886-1913. Russia's exports amounted to 23.5 billion rubles, imports - 17.7 billion rubles.

Foreign investment in the period from 1887 to 1913 increased from 177 million rubles. up to 1.9 billion rubles, i.e. increased by 10.7 times. Moreover, these investments were directed into capital-intensive production and created new jobs. However, what is very important, Russian industry was not dependent on foreigners. Enterprises with foreign investment accounted for only 14% of the total capital of Russian enterprises.

The abdication of Nicholas II from the throne was the greatest tragedy in the thousand-year history of Russia. With the fall of autocracy, the history of Russia slid down the path of unprecedented atrocity of regicide, the enslavement of many millions of people and the death of the greatest Russian Empire in the world, the very existence of which was the key to global political balance.

By the definition of the Council of Bishops from March 31 to April 4, 1992, the Synodal Commission for the Canonization of Saints was instructed “in studying the exploits of the new Russian martyrs to begin researching materials related to the martyrdom of the Royal Family.”

Excerpts from " GROUNDS FOR CANONIZATION OF THE ROYAL FAMILY
FROM THE REPORT OF METROPOLITAN JUVENALIY OF KRUTITSKY AND KOLOMENSKY,
CHAIRMAN OF THE SYNODAL COMMISSION FOR THE CANONIZATION OF SAINTS.”

“As a politician and statesman, the Emperor acted based on his religious and moral principles. One of the most common arguments against the canonization of Emperor Nicholas II is the events of January 9, 1905 in St. Petersburg. In the historical information of the Commission on this issue, we indicate: having become acquainted on the evening of January 8 with the contents of Gapon’s petition, which had the nature of a revolutionary ultimatum, which did not allow entering into constructive negotiations with representatives of the workers, the Sovereign ignored this document, illegal in form and undermining the prestige of the already wavering in the conditions wars of state power. Throughout January 9, 1905, the Sovereign did not make a single decision that determined the actions of the authorities in St. Petersburg to suppress mass protests by workers. The order for the troops to open fire was given not by the Emperor, but by the Commander of the St. Petersburg Military District. Historical data does not allow us to detect in the actions of the Sovereign in the January days of 1905 a conscious evil will directed against the people and embodied in specific sinful decisions and actions.

Since the beginning of the First World War, the Tsar regularly travels to Headquarters, visiting military units of the active army, dressing stations, military hospitals, rear factories, in a word, everything that played a role in the conduct of this war.

From the very beginning of the war, the Empress devoted herself to the wounded. Having completed nursing courses together with her eldest daughters, Grand Duchesses Olga and Tatiana, she spent several hours a day caring for the wounded in the Tsarskoye Selo infirmary.

The Emperor viewed his tenure as Supreme Commander-in-Chief as the fulfillment of a moral and national duty to God and the people, however, always presenting leading military specialists with a broad initiative in resolving the entire range of military-strategic and operational-tactical issues.

The Commission expresses the opinion that the very fact of the abdication of the Throne of Emperor Nicholas II, which is directly related to his personal qualities, is generally an expression of the then historical situation in Russia.

He made this decision only in the hope that those who wanted to remove him would still be able to continue the war with honor and would not ruin the cause of saving Russia. He was afraid then that his refusal to sign the renunciation would lead to civil war in the sight of the enemy. The Tsar did not want even a drop of Russian blood to be shed because of him.

The spiritual motives for which the last Russian Sovereign, who did not want to shed the blood of his subjects, decided to abdicate the Throne in the name of internal peace in Russia, give his action a truly moral character. It is no coincidence that during the discussion in July 1918 at the Council of the Local Council of the question of the funeral commemoration of the murdered Sovereign, His Holiness Patriarch Tikhon made a decision on the widespread service of memorial services with the commemoration of Nicholas II as Emperor.

Behind the many sufferings endured by the Royal Family over the last 17 months of their lives, which ended with execution in the basement of the Ekaterinburg Ipatiev House on the night of July 17, 1918, we see people who sincerely sought to embody the commandments of the Gospel in their lives. In the suffering endured by the Royal Family in captivity with meekness, patience and humility, in their martyrdom, the evil-conquering light of Christ's faith was revealed, just as it shone in the life and death of millions of Orthodox Christians who suffered persecution for Christ in the twentieth century.

It is in understanding this feat of the Royal Family that the Commission, in complete unanimity and with the approval of the Holy Synod, finds it possible to glorify in the Council the new martyrs and confessors of Russia in the guise of the passion-bearers Emperor Nicholas II, Empress Alexandra, Tsarevich Alexy, Grand Duchesses Olga, Tatiana, Maria and Anastasia.”

Liberal Democratic point of view

When Nicholas II came to power, he had no program other than the firm intention not to cede his autocratic power, which his father had handed over to him. He always made decisions alone: ​​“How can I do this if it’s against my conscience?” - this was the basis on which he made his political decisions or rejected the options offered to him. He continued to pursue the contradictory policies of his father: on the one hand, he tried to achieve social and political stabilization from above by preserving the old class-state structures, on the other, the industrialization policy pursued by the Minister of Finance led to enormous social dynamics. The Russian nobility launched a massive offensive against the state's economic policy of industrialization. Having removed Witte, the tsar did not know where to go. Despite some reform steps (for example, the abolition of corporal punishment of peasants), the tsar, under the influence of the new Minister of Internal Affairs Plehve, decided in favor of a policy of fully preserving the social structure of the peasantry (preserving the community), although the kulak elements, that is, the richer peasants, had an easier exit from peasant community. The Tsar and the ministers did not consider reforms necessary in other areas either: on the labor issue, only a few minor concessions were made; Instead of guaranteeing the right to strike, the government continued repression. The tsar could not satisfy anyone with his policy of stagnation and repression, which at the same time cautiously continued the economic policy he had begun.

At a meeting of zemstvo representatives on November 20, 1904, the majority demanded a constitutional regime. The forces of the progressive landed nobility, rural intelligentsia, city government and broad circles of urban intelligentsia, united in opposition, began to demand the introduction of parliament in the state. They were joined by St. Petersburg workers, who were allowed to form an independent association, headed by priest Gapon, and they wanted to submit a petition to the tsar. The lack of overall leadership under the already effectively dismissed Minister of the Interior and the Tsar, who, like most ministers, did not understand the seriousness of the situation, led to the disaster of Bloody Sunday on January 9, 1905. Army officers, who were supposed to restrain the crowd, in a panic ordered to shoot at civilians to people. 100 people were killed and more than 1,000 are believed to have been wounded. Workers and intellectuals responded with strikes and protest demonstrations. Although the workers for the most part put forward purely economic demands and revolutionary parties could not play an important role either in the movement led by Gapon or in the strikes that followed Bloody Sunday, a revolution began in Russia.
When the revolutionary and opposition movement in October 1905 reached its climax - a general strike that practically paralyzed the country, the tsar was forced to again turn to his former Minister of the Interior, who, thanks to the very beneficial peace treaty for Russia that he concluded with the Japanese in Portsmouth ( USA), gained universal respect. Witte explained to the Tsar that he either had to appoint a dictator who would brutally fight the revolution, or he had to guarantee bourgeois freedoms and elected legislative power. Nicholas did not want to drown the revolution in blood. Thus, the fundamental problem of constitutional monarchies - creating a balance of power - was exacerbated by the actions of the prime minister. The October Manifesto (10/17/1905) promised bourgeois freedoms, an elected assembly with legislative powers, expansion of suffrage and, indirectly, equality of religions and nationalities, but did not bring the country the pacification that the tsar expected. Rather, it caused serious unrest, which broke out as a result of clashes between forces loyal to the tsar and revolutionary forces, and led in many regions of the country to pogroms directed not only against the Jewish population, but also against representatives of the intelligentsia. The development of events since 1905 has become irreversible.

However, there were positive changes in other areas that were not blocked at the political macro level. The rate of economic growth has again almost reached the level of the nineties. In the countryside, Stolypin's agrarian reforms, which aimed at creating private ownership, began to develop independently, despite resistance from the peasants. The state, through a whole package of measures, sought large-scale modernization in agriculture. Science, literature and art reached a new flowering.

But the scandalous figure of Rasputin decisively contributed to the loss of prestige of the monarch. The First World War mercilessly exposed the shortcomings of the late tsarist system. These were primarily political weaknesses. In the military field, by the summer of 1915 it was even possible to take control of the situation at the front and establish supplies. In 1916, thanks to Brusilov's offensive, the Russian army even held most of the territorial gains of the Allies before the collapse of Germany. However, in February 1917, tsarism was approaching its death. The tsar himself was entirely to blame for this development of events. Since he increasingly wanted to be his own prime minister, but did not live up to this role, during the war no one could coordinate the actions of the various institutions of the state, primarily civil and military.

The provisional government that replaced the monarchy immediately placed Nicholas and his family under house arrest, but wanted to allow him to leave for England. However, the British government was in no hurry to respond, and the Provisional Government was no longer strong enough to resist the will of the Petrograd Council of Workers' and Soldiers' Deputies. In August 1917, the family was transported to Tobolsk. In April 1918, local Bolsheviks achieved their transfer to Yekaterinburg. The king endured this time of humiliation with great calm and hope in God, which in the face of death gave him undeniable dignity, but which, even in the best of times, sometimes prevented him from acting rationally and decisively. On the night of July 16-17, 1918, the imperial family was shot. The liberal historian Yuri Gautier spoke with cold precision upon learning of the tsar’s assassination: “This is the denouement of yet another of the countless minor knots of our troubled times, and the monarchical principle can only benefit from it.”

The paradoxes of the personality and reign of Nicholas II can be explained by the objectively existing contradictions of Russian reality at the beginning of the 20th century, when the world was entering a new phase of its development, and the tsar did not have the will and determination to master the situation. Trying to defend the “autocratic principle,” he maneuvered: he either made small concessions or refused them. As a result, the regime rotted, pushing the country towards the abyss. By rejecting and slowing down reforms, the last tsar contributed to the beginning of the social revolution. This should be recognized both with absolute sympathy for the fate of the king, and with his categorical rejection. At the critical moment of the February coup, the generals betrayed their oath and forced the tsar to abdicate.
Nicholas II himself pulled the rug out from under his feet. He stubbornly defended his positions, did not make serious compromises, and thereby created the conditions for a revolutionary explosion. He also did not support the liberals, who sought to prevent the revolution in the hope of concessions from the tsar. And the revolution was accomplished. The year 1917 became a fatal milestone in the history of Russia.

Under Emperor Nicholas II, the foundations of all the “great construction projects of communism” were laid, which the Bolsheviks later took credit for.

In historical science, and in the public consciousness, transformations and reforms carried out in monarchical states are usually associated with the personality of the monarch reigning at that time. It never occurs to anyone to call the reforms of Peter the Great, Catherine II or Alexander II the reforms of Menshikov, Potemkin or Milyutin. There are historical concepts: “Petrine reforms”, “Catherine’s century”, “Great reforms of Alexander II”. No one would think of calling the famous Code Napoleon (Napoleon's Code) the “Code of François Tronchet” or the “Code of Jean Portalis,” although these were the people who were the direct executors of the will of the First Consul to draw up a legislative act. This is as true as the fact that Petersburg was founded by Peter the Great, and Versailles was built by Louis XIV.

But as soon as we talk about the era of the last Sovereign, for some reason they use the terms: “Witte reform” or “Stolypin reform”. Meanwhile, Witte and Stolypin themselves invariably called these transformations the reforms of Emperor Nicholas II. S.Yu. Witte spoke about the monetary reform of 1897: “ Russia owes its metallic gold circulation exclusively to Emperor Nicholas II" P.A. Stolypin on March 6, 1907, speaking in the State Duma, said: “The government set itself one goal - to preserve those covenants, those foundations, those principles that were the basis for the reforms of Emperor Nicholas II”. Witte and Stolypin knew well that all their reform activities would have been impossible without the approval and guidance of the Autocrat.

Serious modern researchers come to a clear conclusion about Emperor Nicholas II as an outstanding reformer. Historian D.B. Strukov notes: “By nature, Nicholas II was very inclined to search for new solutions and improvise. His political thought did not stand still, he was not a dogmatist.”.

A detailed and unbiased study of the progress of reforms in Russia at the beginning of the twentieth century irrefutably proves that Emperor Nicholas II was their main initiator and convinced supporter. He did not refuse reforms even during the revolution of 1905-1907. At the same time, Nicholas II was well versed in the issues of that aspect of the country’s life that he was going to reform. In 1909, Deputy Minister of Internal Affairs S.E. Kryzhanovsky reported to Nicholas II his thoughts regarding the project of decentralization of the Empire. He later recalled: “I was amazed by the ease with which the Emperor, who had no special training, understood the complex issues of the electoral procedure both in our country and in Western countries, and the curiosity that he showed at the same time.”.

Moreover, there is no doubt that reforms were never born spontaneously in the head of the Sovereign, many of them he nurtured even before ascending the throne. Under Nicholas II, a total of more transformations were carried out than under Peter the Great and Alexander II. It is enough just to list the main ones to be convinced of this: 1) the introduction of a wine monopoly;

2) monetary reform;

3) education reform;

4) abolition of peasant “mutual responsibility”;

5) judicial reform;

6) reform of public administration (establishment of the State Duma, Council of Ministers, etc.);

7) the law on religious tolerance;

8) introduction of civil liberties;

9) agrarian reform of 1906;

10) military reform;

11) health care reform.

It should be taken into account that these reforms were practically painless for the majority of the population of the Russian Empire precisely because the Emperor did not prioritize the transformation itself, but the people in whose name it was carried out.

The example of Emperor Nicholas II convincingly proves that it is possible to carry out the most ambitious, most ambitious reforms and transformations without the death and impoverishment of millions of people, as would be the case during the Bolshevik “transformations.” But it was under Emperor Nicholas II that all the “great construction projects of communism” were programmed, started or implemented, which the Bolsheviks took credit for: the electrification of the entire country, the BAM, the development of the Far East, the construction of the largest railways, the construction of the largest hydroelectric power stations at that time, the foundation of an ice-free ports beyond the Arctic Circle.

The reform activity of Emperor Nicholas II was most clearly manifested during the famous Agrarian Reform of 1906.