Preview

Why The 1905 Revolution And How Did It Happened To The Tsarist Regime?

Good Essays
Open Document
Open Document
1160 Words
Grammar
Grammar
Plagiarism
Plagiarism
Writing
Writing
Score
Score
Why The 1905 Revolution And How Did It Happened To The Tsarist Regime?
The 1905 revolution, highlighted the evident threat towards the Tsarist regime, though only started due to poor working conditions, the violent suppressing of the Russian people on ‘Bloody Sunday’ brought forth a wave of protest that argued for better leadership and civil rights for the people, and yet it wasn’t until 1906 that there became a decline in power in the Romanov rule, and so how did the Tsarist regime last until then, and what was the main reason?

Immediately after the revolution there was a lack of official responses from Nicholas II, as he failed to listen to the problems of the Russian people and situations that were happening within his own country, and it was only after some serious persuasion from his ministers that he finally understood the
…show more content…
This led to the drawing up of the first of two Manifestos’: the August Manifesto. Written up by Alexander Bulygin, the Manifesto presented three important points, firstly, the new elected assembly was to be called the Duma, secondly, the Duma’s purpose was only to give advice to the Tsar and could discuss proposed new laws, but essentially they had no power and could not enforce anything in terms of laws and changes for the Russian people. There was also to a difficult electoral process favoring peasants and landowner. However, urban workers, the national minorities, Jews and much of the intelligentsia were excluded from this and not given suffrage. The liberals were unimpressed by the concessions made by the Tsar as it was far from the parliament and constitution they wanted. Though some ultra-moderate liberals thought that the Manifesto gave a foundation for further discussions, yet nearly everybody else on the opposing side disregarded it as it was complete inadequate. The August Manifesto was entirely superficial and left the priorities of Tsarism intact. Although it could be argued that the concessions introduced in the August Manifesto were

You May Also Find These Documents Helpful

  • 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

    Tsarism thrived for hundreds of years but as Russians became more educated they decided that communism and a dictatorship was too harsh and after a few revolutions Tsarism was a thing from the past. In the years 1881 to 1905 many things changed in Russia for the better and for the worse.…

    • 824 Words
    • 4 Pages
    Good Essays
  • Powerful Essays

    To a certain extent the divisions among the opponents of the Tsar, such as the Bolshevik and Menshevik split in the Marx party after the 1903 conference, or even the divisions among different revolutionary parties entirely, e.g. Marx and the Social Revolutionaries, was responsible for the survival of Tsarist rule in this period as this led to disorganisation and lack of effectiveness among opposition. However other factors, such as the loyalty of the army, despite mutinies during the 1905, allowed the Tsar to remain in control. Furthermore actions by the Tsar himself, although not that effective, for example the reforms in the October Manifesto and the continuing support of the ruling elite was accredited to securing the Tsarists power.…

    • 2563 Words
    • 11 Pages
    Powerful Essays
  • Good Essays

    Firstly, the opposition groups of the Tsar were known as the Populists, the Liberals and the Marxists. Each group had its own ideas on what was needed for Russia and each group wanted change, however, there were many problems within the groups and none of them were willing to work with each other. The Populists who were mainly concentrated on establishing a democratic government used violent tactics such as terrorism and assassinations, the most famous being the assassination of Tsar Alexander II. However, the Liberals, who also wanted to establish some sort of democracy did not agree on using violent tactics, they preferred to discuss things in meetings and banqueting campaigns. The Liberals were the most moderate of the opposition groups and wanted to keep the Tsar, but remove autocracy and have his current power shared between a democratic government. The Marxists, like the other two groups, also wanted to establish some sort of democracy; however, once again, they did not agree on using violence, they preferred to use propaganda campaigns, as did the Populists and Liberals, but not violence. These divisions meant that each opposition group’s strength alone was not enough to achieve their own specific goals and even though the groups did have some tactics such as propaganda in common, it was not enough. If each group had considered changing their tactics or been slightly more lenient, they may have succeeded.…

    • 800 Words
    • 4 Pages
    Good Essays
  • Good Essays

    In early 1906 the October Manifesto was published as a result of the 1905 revolution and as a way to appease the peasants and appear as a revolutionary change, when truly very little was changed by this. Political activity was now legal so political parties now no longer needed to remain secrets; freedom of speech was also introduced along with the introduction of a state elected Duma. Most of these changes were made as a bid to make the peasants content and prevent the chances of another revolution; however this also banned trade unions and newspapers. The introduction of the first Duma was short lived due to to the disapproval of the Tsar, who dissolved it under the Fundamental Law, after only 73 days. This was due to the number of members that were revolutionaries, who wanted to push through more moral ideas and reforms than the Tsar was willing to do, only 2 out of 391 made it into the law. This then led to the Vyborg manifesto, which was a group of frustrated Duma members teaming up to go against the Tsar’s action of raising taxes - unfortunately this backfired, leading to all 200 members being banned from standing in the next Duma. The next Duma followed a similar suit, just with the gaining of the Social Revolutionaries and the Social Democrats gaining seats, it was the third and fourth Dumas that raised the most change within Russian society, but this may have been due to the Electoral Reform. In order to make sure…

    • 1012 Words
    • 5 Pages
    Good Essays
  • Powerful Essays

    October 17 (October 30 NS) - The October Manifesto, issued by Tzar Nicholas II, brings an end to the 1905 Russian Revolution by promising civil liberties and an elected parliament (Duma)…

    • 3824 Words
    • 16 Pages
    Powerful 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 second reason for rise in opposition to tsarist regime were Alexander’s liberal reforms. These controversial reforms enabled people to criticize government and Tsar in open public, in which those who wanted further change saw a great opportunity and therefore wrote books encouraging people to join the opposition, namely the book called “What is to be done?” by Chernykevsky who shared his…

    • 532 Words
    • 3 Pages
    Good Essays
  • Good Essays

    LALALA

    • 1173 Words
    • 5 Pages

    Tsarism in Russia survived the revolution of 1905 but not that of March 1917 due to the difference in support it had in both years. It faced many difficulties throughout much of its late history; from the assassination of Alexander II and the similar attempts on Alexander III, to the downfall of the Romanov dynasty and the final abdication of Tsar Nicholas II on the 2nd of March. The way the country was being run and the strongly Slavophile views within Russian society made it difficult for any kind of revolt to occur at any time. There were, however, two main revolts against the Tsarist government; these were the 1905 revolution and the March revolution of 1917. The first of these predominantly failed to make any major changes to the government for lack of organisation and coordination of the Tsarist regime’s opponents and the persistently loyal attitude of the armed forces towards The Tsar. The March 1917 revolution, however, resulted in major political revolution and a brand new government due to the impact of the First World War and social and economic discontent within Russian society. The attitudes of the regime’s Liberal opposition greatly varied from 1905 in 1917, and this also played a significant part in pressuring the Tsar Nicholas II to abdicate.…

    • 1173 Words
    • 5 Pages
    Good Essays
  • Good Essays

    Nonetheless, with the release of the “April Theses” by Lenin, the Bolsheviks support grew. The “April Theses” pushed what Lenin thought Russia needed most at that time: ‘Peace, Bread and Land.’ This vastly appealed to masses of the lower working class of Russia; they had been exhausting this for years; the mass famine across Russia, the land controversy’s that exploited the peasant populace, which approximately made up 80% of the Russian population, and the continuation of the war, which…

    • 883 Words
    • 3 Pages
    Good Essays
  • Good Essays

    Under many aspects it is arguable that the 1905 Revolution and the March 1917 Revolution in Russia were very similar. Both years found the country still struggling from a war (one bringing humiliation and the other incomprehension and outrage); both found hostility from the streets directed against perceived governmental incompetence. Yet something had changed from 1905 to 1917 for Tsarism not to be able to survive the second revolution like it did the first. The reasons are to be researched in the impact that World War 1 had on the country, the October Manifesto issued by Nicholas II on 1905, and the loyalty that the population and the Armed Forces were not willing to give the Tsar anymore.…

    • 945 Words
    • 4 Pages
    Good 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
  • Good Essays

    Examining textbooks printed prior to 1991 helps to define the differences that arose in theories of the causes, process, and outcomes of the reforms. Hugh Seton-Watson’s textbook The Russian Empire 1801-1917 published in 1967 devotes a chapter to the topic of the reforms. He argues that one of the problems that determined the reforms’ outcome was Alexander II’s own conflicting philosophies and the contradictory liberal and conservative influences that surrounded him. Therefore the reforms did not go fare enough because of these conflicting influences on the state’s design of the reforms. He theorizes that this is why “the 1861 settlement was no solution to the peasant question: it created more problems than it solved, and difficulties piled…

    • 364 Words
    • 2 Pages
    Good Essays
  • Good Essays

    Royal Romanov Family

    • 991 Words
    • 4 Pages

    The Liberals were not successful in gaining governmental acceptance of their ideas. However, when the Revolution was reignited in 1917, the Revolutionaries had more support and the determination to accomplish their goals. During this time, because of World War I, there was hardly any food or fuel, and hard winters made for hard times. Nicholas II then attempted to appease the people with the introduction of a Constitution and the Duma, a parliament which would give the people more of a say in government, but it was too little and too late. The mounting pressures of World War I, combined with years of injustice, toppled the rule of Tsar Nicholas II in March 1917. Forced to abdicate, he was replaced by a Provisional Government committed to continuing the…

    • 991 Words
    • 4 Pages
    Good Essays
  • Good Essays

    The Northern and Southern Societies were not able to reach agreement on many issues; however one issue that they were able to reach an agreement on was that the revolution was not be carried out by the masses, rather it was to be led by a small military group. The Decembrists believed that the involvement of the masses would end in the failure of their revolution. The Historian Waclaw Lednicki argues that the Decembrist Revolution was in fact a class revolution which would ultimately be a failure as the masses at this point, did not care about movements to reform the Russian political system. Lednicki believed that "Without the masses the upheaval was impossible, but at the same time the Decembrists expressed no desire to involve the masses." Therefore the collapse of Tsar evidently, could not have solely been brought about by the upsurge of just the political masses as the Decembrist Revolution would've succeeded. Clearly, if the Decembrists had secured the support of the masses and shifted their indifference in their favour, they would've been more…

    • 666 Words
    • 3 Pages
    Good Essays