Preview

Why Did The Tsars Survive The Revolution Of 1905

Good Essays
Open Document
Open Document
800 Words
Grammar
Grammar
Plagiarism
Plagiarism
Writing
Writing
Score
Score
Why Did The Tsars Survive The Revolution Of 1905
The Russian revolution of 1905 (hereafter referred to as “the revolution”) was a protest against the Tsar's refusal to make political concessions, and that once the concessions were given; the revolution was doomed to failure. The opposition was disorganized and not united in its objectives, and that generally the people of Russia still revered the Tsar, despite his faults.
A notable feature of the revolution is how little a part the revolutionaries actually played. Hardly any of them were either in St Petersburg or Moscow. It could be said that the revolution happened in spite of rather than because, of them. With the exception of Trotsky, none of the revolutionaries actually played a significant part, which has led historians to doubt the
…show more content…
There are a number of reasons for this. A significant reason is that since Nicholas II had enough manpower by way of his military to deal with the revolution, he could crush pockets of resistance wherever there was opposition to the Tsarist regime. The end of a collective resistance was down to the two progressive ministers of the Tsar, Sergie Witte and Peter Stolypin, the former being responsible for the Dumas and the latter for the concessions for the peasants. In this way, the demands and needs of both the liberals and the peasants were satisfied.
The nature and extent of the concessions made in the October Manifesto had a huge impact on the survival of Nicholas II in the revolution. Although until 1905, most of the population opposed the Tsarist regime, there were varying levels of opposition, which became exposed as a result of the October Manifesto. In fact, the readiness with which the liberals and the peasants accepted the government’s political and economic bribes showed that neither of these groups were really serious about
…show more content…
After the Liberals accepted the manifesto it became clear that the Liberals disliked the 'common people' and therefore the majority of people in Russia. Peter Struve said "Thank God for the Tsar, who has saved us from the people". The Intelligentsia's experience with the 'people' had made them see what type of people they were and they disliked it, so therefore the Tsar gained sympathy from the Liberals after the manifesto which helped the Tsar to regain his authority.
With the Liberals satisfied it was easy for the Tsar to deal with the rioting peasantry. He promised to progressively reduce mortgage repayments and the abandon them altogether which did not greatly effect the Tsar as they were not being paid anyway. The immediate response to this was a drop in the number of land seizures across Russia.
And following the year 1905 the number of peasant households becoming independent increased to a peak of 579,409 in 1909, although this number is still small when put into scale with the 12 million peasant households. Now, the only major group of concern for Nicholas was the industrial working class.
The Industrial working class was peasant based initially and was looking for a better standard of life. All that they saw however was poor living and working conditions, bad pay and much unemployment as they were totally at the disposal of the factory

You May Also Find These Documents Helpful

  • Good Essays

    Another factor that was responsible for the survival of the Tsarist rule was the reluctance of the Peasantry to support opposition. The Peasants were extremely uneducated and they didn’t understand how these policies could change their lives. The Tsar had been the political power since the 13th century so it was all that they knew. They believed that the Tsar was appointed by god so whatever he did, they believed it was for the best. They were fearful that if they joined an opposition group the Tsar would be able to ‘see’ them and…

    • 824 Words
    • 4 Pages
    Good Essays
  • Good Essays

    From the years 1906 – 1914, Peter Stolypin was pushing to de – revolutionise the peasantry and put into place economic reform, and there is evidence of this working. During these years large amounts of agricultural reform were set in motion. In 1906 45.9 million tonnes of agricultural production was produced, by 1913 this had grown significantly to 61.7 million tonnes. The massive change in the amount of product shows that agricultural and therefore economic reform had taken place. Farmers, at this time, had also started paying higher taxes, which is sign of higher income, again strengthening this idea of economic reform occurring. Stolypin, however successful he was in his endeavours, was pushing fiercely for a more independent and de-revolutionised peasantry. During November 1906, huge action was taken to change the way the peasants lived. They were freed from the constraints of commune control and land banks were set up to give money to those peasants who chose to leave. Many were also encouraged to move to Siberia, all of these reforms were starting to lay a foundation for a more independent peasantry. Economic reform was being pursued desperately by members of the government such as Stolypin, this can been seen by the copious amount of law, for example peasants leaving commune control, being put into place. The fact these laws were coming about shows that Russia was undergoing economic reform to some extent during this period, whether it was successful or not.…

    • 1040 Words
    • 3 Pages
    Good Essays
  • Satisfactory Essays

    Many of the opposition fled to other European countries where they continued to plot against the Tsar. This shows how Alexander lll had caused Russia to go back in progress politically by exiling all of their possible contenders. This allowed the Tsar to have much more control over Russia much like before Alexander ll reign. The persecution of Jews caused many to join radical parties and organisations. This shows us how there was not even the slightest bit of democracy within Russia, and how Alexander lll had caused Russia to go back in progress. Another major problem in Russia was the growing population of peasants. This caused famines within Russia in 1892 and 1893. This famine was a cause of many peasants death which shows how Russia did not have the money or resources to keep up with their growing population. This showed a lack in progress as they could not even support their country’s people with…

    • 794 Words
    • 4 Pages
    Satisfactory Essays
  • Satisfactory Essays

    The question is focused on the challenges mounted to Tsarist rule in the given period, and the extent to which divisions among opposition groups contributed to their failure. Answers may consider the four main strands of opposition, their internal divisions and their intolerance of each other. A tradition of revolutionary activity was established by the Populists and their appeal to the peasants, though they were weakened by the assassination of Alexander II and the repression established by Alexander III. The Social Revolutionaries tried to gain support among both peasants and townspeople, but were divided between anarchists and revolutionaries. The Social Democrats split into Bolsheviks and Mensheviks at the 1903 Congress, while the Liberals did not establish distinctive parties until after the 1905 Revolution. A simple description of some of the revolutionary parties will be marked within Levels 1 and 2, and progression will depend on the range and depth of relevant material.…

    • 555 Words
    • 2 Pages
    Satisfactory Essays
  • Good Essays

    It is apparent that there existed divisions of the parties opposing the Tsarist government, i.e. the Social Democrats became the Bolsheviks and the Mensheviks in 1903; the Social Revolutionaries had many factions including the revolutionaries and the anarchists; and the Liberals didn’t develop individual parties until after 1905. However, the factors of the nobility, the Russian Army, the Okhrana (secret police) and the Russian Orthodox Church all supported the Tsar, working towards keeping him in power were more important.…

    • 1091 Words
    • 5 Pages
    Good Essays
  • Good Essays

    The February revolution was a big turning point in Russian history; demolishing the Tsarist autocracy and breaking the Romanov dynasty that had ruled Russia for hundreds of years. Due to many factors, involved in the war or long standing issues before the war, Tsar Nicholas II was forced to abdicate to Grand Duke Michael, desperate to keep the rule of Russia in the Romanov family. Grand Duke Michael stated he did not want to rule, therefore ending the absolute monarchy. This essay will explore the main reason for the February revolution of 1917, questioning whether the war started the revolt among the Russian people or simply acted as a catalyst for a result of long standing issues and opinions dating back to the previous revolution of 1905.…

    • 1389 Words
    • 6 Pages
    Good Essays
  • Powerful Essays

    Throughout this time period the ruling elite, who made up 1.1% of the population despite owning 25% of the land, maintained constant support of the Tsar. This support was based on reliance in the Tsars rule in order to ensure their own aristocracy. The nobles controlled the land Therefore through the nobility’s control of land and as a result the means of production, the Tsar had autocratic power over the majority who worked this land; the peasants, both of state (32.7%) and through the nobility 50.7% as despite the emancipation of serfs in 1861 the lives of these peasants were heavily restricted and reliant on the land owners through the Mir, censorship, tax and redemption payments, of which many could not pay for and so were forced into debt. the peasants themselves, being both restricted in the Mir and due to their traditional attitudes and acceptance of social situation, what Marx would call a lack of revolutionary consciousness, can be attributed to the Tsarist survival.…

    • 2563 Words
    • 11 Pages
    Powerful Essays
  • Good Essays

    Essay On Tsarist Autocracy

    • 1209 Words
    • 5 Pages

    The Tsarist autocracy has succeeded for more than three hundred years, but the Russian Revolution that occurred on November 1917 ended the long term autocracy. During this time period, Tsar Nicholas II was the leader of Russia and indeed the last one. He caused Russia’s downfall and made many Russians frustrated about the government. The Tsar did not acknowledge the nation's problems and failed to improve the lives of the citizens. As the Russians struggled with limited rights and lack of help from Nicholas II, they had to make a move. Although peasant unrest led to the Russians protesting and rebelling against the country, the Russian Revolution occurred because of Tsar Nicholas II’s weak leadership, in which he failed to accomplished the Russian’s goals, horribly managed the military, and thought that the system should not change.…

    • 1209 Words
    • 5 Pages
    Good Essays
  • Satisfactory Essays

    The result, Trotsky told the tsar was ‘the general dissatisfaction of all classes with the government and tgeur open hostility towards it’. Trotsky’s depressing conclusion was that ‘it is impossible to maintain this form of government except by violence’.…

    • 1028 Words
    • 5 Pages
    Satisfactory Essays
  • Good Essays

    The Russian people wanted the government to change. There had been a dramatic increase in the number of radical newspapers. Therefore, people did not want a conservative reformation, but a radical revolution. They also did not trust the current government, because of many reasons, one of them being Rasputin.…

    • 715 Words
    • 3 Pages
    Good Essays
  • Good Essays

    A Nationwide Revolution

    • 1615 Words
    • 7 Pages

    The first reason for the revolution in 1905 was the developments in the Russian countryside and how they produced a general unhappiness among the landowners and even the peasants. A long-term social and economic cause was the continuing dissatisfaction of both these groups to the Emancipation reform of Alexander II in 1861. The Landowners did not approve of the act because it denied them the free labour they had access to before the emancipation of the serfs. They had lost their free labour and large amounts of their land. By 1905 many of the Landowners were facing large debts. Although the act did end serfdom in Russia, the peasants were still angry due to the redemption payments they were expected to pay and the poor quality of land they received. They also disliked the fact that they were still tied to the…

    • 1615 Words
    • 7 Pages
    Good Essays
  • Good Essays

    Russian Revolution Causes

    • 687 Words
    • 3 Pages

    By 1917, Russia was chaotic, the government had been thoroughly corrupted, strikes were rampant and all happening at once. The World War I had begun and Russia was having many casualties due to being ill - equipped against industrialized Germany, and amidst the countries it was the one to receive most damage. Due to the german attacks the Russian economy had been falling apart, and such a situation was only useful to the radicals, as they used it as an opportunity to join with the moderates among other forces, in order to overthrow the Czar and achieve their revolutionary goals. As time passed Russia’s situation only deteriorated, demonstrators and protestants took over the streets, the king’s armies killed many of them, but they still continued to attack full force. Then when an army took the protestants side, the tables flipped, Nicholas II, the Czar at the time was forced to abdicate his throne and so freed Russia of over four centuries of Czarist…

    • 687 Words
    • 3 Pages
    Good Essays
  • Good Essays

    The Romanov Dynasty

    • 1502 Words
    • 7 Pages

    When discussing why public opinion of the tsar was so easily pliable in the lead up to revolution in 1917, we must acknowledge that Russia was evolving rapidly. As modern historians and public spectators, it is simple to map out how Russian society became a pressure cooker of discontent and anger. Mass industrialisation made living for a working, urban class almost unbearable, the class divide was still rigid, revolutionary ideas from the West offered a foundation to base claims for the removal of the autocratic system, and the pressures of World War 1 served to unite the people in one cause to end hardship. These factors stoked a population already vying for change and such an environment made revolution in Petrograd (St Petersburg) in the February of 1917 almost inevitable, foreshadowing the end of the…

    • 1502 Words
    • 7 Pages
    Good Essays
  • Good Essays

    The serfs were "freed", the provisional government failed and the czar made serious mistakes. The serfs were "freed" then again got tooken over by the Communist party and were told what to do, where to live, and where to work. The provisional government failed fatefully by continuing war against Germany and got defeated. The czar, well he made a couple of serious mistakes. He fought in the Russo-Japanese War and got defeated. Then he went to war with Austria and Germany and got defeated. The last mistake he made was moving the headquarters to the front and leaving the Russian government under the Alexandra's hands. Conditions were desperate under her rule. The Russian Revolution should have never happened because so many Russian lives were lost under the Russian…

    • 942 Words
    • 4 Pages
    Good Essays
  • Good Essays

    Economic factors were pivotal causes of the February Russian Revolution, however, they were not the main cause of this historic revolution. In 1917, tensions among millions of taciturn Russians initiated concerns against the incompetent Tsarist regime. Tsar Nicholas II, divine right ruler, had repeatedly disappointed the Russian people, due to his lack of political ability and belief in his decisions. Tsar Nicholas created an unsystematic, corrupt Government, lacking control of Russia. Russia’s involvement in World War One was disastrous, due to the lack of modern industrialisation and preparation of the military. The economy was a cause of the revolution, as it treacherously impacted by war materials and supplies, yet it was not the main cause…

    • 1041 Words
    • 5 Pages
    Good Essays