Why Nicholas II Survived the Revolution of 1905 but Not that of 1917

719 Words2 Pages
bulb-icon

Recommended: Political causes of the Russian Revolution

Why Nicholas II Survived the Revolution of 1905 but Not that of 1917

When Father Gapon and his followers marched peacefully on the Winter

Palace on 22nd January in what came to be known as Bloody Sunday due

to the extreme reaction leading to the massacre of the protestors, it

sparked the revolution of 1905, consisting of workers' strikes and

protests in addition to terrorising the wealthy and important upper

classes. As well as being a response to Bloody Sunday, the 1905

revolution was a result of pent up dissatisfaction with the autocracy

in Russia and with the vast social inequality. However, in spite of

the unrest within the country, the tsar managed to retain power after

this revolution. In 1917, when the people revolted again, he was not

so lucky, and the autocracy fell.

There are many reasons why the Tsar was able to survive the 1905

revolution, not least of which was the benefit of good ministers to

advise him well. Stolypin tried to have a moderating influence on the

Tsar and to help him make concessions to the people which would

promise to improve their lives enough that the revolution would die

down. However, by 1917 both Stolypin and Witte were dead, and the

Tsarina Alexandra was in charge of the running of the country due to

the Tsar's absence to the front to fight with the army. During the

time in which he was away, Alexandra replaced many of Nicholas'

ministers with her own personal favourites, most of whom were poorly

equipped to hold such influential positions at such an unstable time.

Due to this, the Tsar had few capable ministers to advise him through

the crisis when revolution broke out and help him emerge unsca...

... middle of paper ...

...es stipulated therein played a large part

in his downfall in 1917. The emergence of the free press after 1905

granted the right to express opinions by publication meant that the

Tsar was widely criticised to the public for the first time, whereas

previously none of his wrong-doings had ever been made known, and he

was viewed as ordained by god. Now however the Russians began to see

him as fallible and to question his actions, leading to further

unrest.

Similarly, and perhaps most importantly, the Duma in 1917 provided a

viable alternative to the autocracy which had not been present in

1905. Ironically, just as freeing the serfs had led to them wanting

more and assassinating Tsar Alexander II, Nicholas' grandfather, so

granting the people their Duma in 1905 in part led to the eventual

downfall of the Tsar in 1917.

Show More
Related

  • Does Nicholas And Alexandra Show Inadequate Leadership That Led To The Collapse Of The Old Regime

    1380 Words  | 3 Pages

    Nicholas was an inadequate leader, the film shows this by portraying him as a man who put his family first, who was too stubborn to appoint a Duma and who didn’t want to be in power. The film implies that this insufficient leadership is what led to the collapse of the old regime however what it doesn’t put enough focus on is the fact that Russia was behind when it came to industrialisation. This too was a major contributing factor that led to the collapse of the old regime. Tsar Nicholas II was a family man who put his family before the wellbeing of the country.

    Read More

  • Essay On Tsar's Power Crumbled In 1917

    572 Words  | 2 Pages

    For centuries, autocratic and repressive tsarist regimes ruled the country and population under sever economic and social conditions; consequently, during the late 19th century and early 20th century, various movements were staging demonstrations to overthrow the oppressive government. Poor involvement in WWI also added to the rising discontent against Nicholas as Russian armies suffered terrible casualties and defeats because of a lack of food and equipment; in addition, the country was industrially backward compared to countries such as Britain, France, Germany, and the USA. It had failed to modernize, this was to do with the tsars lack of effort for reforms. The country was undergoing tremendous hardships as industrial and agricultural output dropped. Famine and poor morale could be found in all aspects of Russian life. Furthermore, the tsar committed a fatal mistake when he appointed himself supreme commander of the armed forces because he was responsible for the armies constant string of defeats.

    Read More

  • The Failure of the Provisional Government and the Rise of the Bolsheviks

    1871 Words  | 4 Pages

    The Failure of the Provisional Government and the Rise of the Bolsheviks i. Subject of investigation. How did the failure of the Provisional Government allow for the rise of the Bolsheviks? ii. Methods to be used.

    Read More

  • How Far Was the First World War the Main Cause of the Fall of the Romanovs in 1917?

    642 Words  | 2 Pages

    ... food making it into the cities and towns and the little food that was already there was now overly expensive due to inflation. There was trouble in the countryside, peasants had started demanding land in order to grow their own food to survive. The people in Russia were fed up with how things were going and were ready for a revolution.

    Read More

  • Russian Revolution Dbq Essay

    465 Words  | 1 Pages

    It was said that the educated people, the contact with other countries should contribute to the government policy. As said in document 1 , "By 1900 there were political parties raging from far right defenders of autocracy and russian power over all other ethnicities, to far left revolutionaries calling for the overthrow of the government." The government there was autocratic, which was when the tsar had all the power/control of the government. Another cause for the Russian Revolution was the outbreak of WW1. "Even before the war urban workers all over the Russian empire had been increasingly radical, but the war brought the government's incompentence and the people's grievances into sharper relief. The first months of the war were a disaster for Russia." It is much easier to overthrow a government than to try andcreate a new government. As said in document 2,"Chaos, conflict, uncertaunty; more violence are much more common and often led to centralized, authoritarian governments." There was celebration all over the streets after the indication that the tsar was overthrown after 300 years of a tsarist government ruling. "The problem was that, after the party, governing problems arose immediately.

    Read More

  • Czar Nicholas II

    683 Words  | 2 Pages

    Czar Nicholas’ poor leadership forced him to abdicate and caused the Bolshevik takeover. One of the reasons I say that is because of the way he handled “Bloody Sunday”. “Bloody Sunday” was when troops killed over a thousand people in a peaceful worker assembly. After “Bloody Sunday”, workers all over Russia went on strike, and peasants caused uprisings that were suppressed by Nicholas II’s troops causing tensions to increase. Another reason was his disastrous involvement in World War I. In the beginning of the war, Russia’s armies did not do well. To fix this, Nicholas became the commander. Now under his command, their continued failure reflected the Czar himself, further decreasing his popularity. Lastly, civil unrest grew as food riots, chronic food shortages, and labor strikes continued to proceed. This eventually erupted into open revolt, and Czar Nicholas had no choice but to abdicate. Soon after, the new government was overthrown by the Bolsheviks, led by Vladimir Lenin.

    Read More

  • Challenges Faced by the Tsar Nicholas the Second of Russia

    871 Words  | 2 Pages

    The government and reform; the actual character of Nicholas II hindered his time in office, for example his outlooks on situations meant he did not trust a lot of his advisors, he was also seen to have been very lazy with respects to making decisions, other observations included him being, weak, timid and lacked guts. This all adds up to a very weak leader that is vulnerable to opposition, due to his tunnel vision and un-ability to see the main needs of the country. The duma was another challenge to the tsar; after the 1905 revolution the tsar had set up an elected body called the duma, this was a way of showing the public that he could be open minded in that delegating decisions to other people, looking back in hindsight this would also be seen as a challenge to the tsar as he never gave the duma any real power, and were easily dissolved, this meant that people were further angered and he was receiving opposition from all sides, it did however hold off opposition for a small period of time in order for the tsar to retain his power. Other individuals had an influence to the challenges facing the tsar, Nicholas had brought some new people in to try and conquer some problems, these included Rasputin who he had originally appointed to become saviour of family, he managed to influence the tsar in many of his decisions, this inevitably caused there to be conflict as the he was relying on Rasputin to relay details of the state of the country, these were not accurate which meant that tsar could not act upon opposition. Other people did help the tsar for example stolypin and his reforms.

    Read More

  • French and Russian Revolutions

    569 Words  | 2 Pages

    In 1905 , Russia had a prerevolution that was put down of the Czar. Instead of learning from this prerevolution, Czar Nicholas II, made a very big mistake by in not introducing some reforms to correct the problems. So because of his actions, the situation grew worse. In 1917, the Russians were fighting in World War I. A good majority of the Russian people were weary and uncontent with the way the war was going and with the Czar's rule. This uncontent along with economic hardships caused riots and demonstrations to break out. The Czar called for the army to put down the revolution as they did in 1905. But the army joined the revolt and the Czar was kicked out of power soon afterwards. A temporary government was set up to decide on what kind of government Russia was gonna set up. Two political parties were set up. The Bolsheviks were one of the two. The leader of the Bolshevik party was a man named Lenin. Lenin was a firm believer of the theories and ideas of Karl Marx. So with his slogan of "Bread, Peace and Land", Lenin gained the support of the peasants and gained control of Russia and setup a communist state.

    Read More

  • Historical-Cultural Context of Animal Farm

    1882 Words  | 4 Pages

    In 1917, two revolutions were involved in Russia, which terminated centuries of imperial ruling. The Russian revolution was made up of two revolutions, which the first one was in February, and the second one was in October.These revolutions started political, and social changes that lead to the creation of the Soviet Union. By March of 1917, Russia who became civil turned into turmoil, which caused constant food shortages.This turned into a revolt against Czar.By the year of 1917 lots of Russian citizens lost faith in their leader Czar Nicholas II. The citizens lost faith in Czar’s leadership due to the governments corruption, Russia’s economy, and Czar constantly affecting the success of the Duma ( the Russian legislative assembly established by Czar Nicholas II in 1905) .This impacted Russia in a disastrous way, which caused Czar Nicholas II to be overthrown.A few months later after Czar was overthrown, the new provisional government was overthrown by Bolsheviks. The first appearance of the Russian Revolution was in February 1917, due to the destructive involvement in World War I. The military and imperial side of Russia, could not compare to the industrialized Germany at the time. The costly war also made Russia’s economy decline in a major way. Word count: 207

    Read More

  • Rule of Lenin vs the Tsar

    721 Words  | 2 Pages

    Consequently they were not susceptible to some of the Tsars. discrimination. Also the Nobility who made up just one 1% of the 128. million population owned 25% of the land therefore meaning they had a large amount of power within the country. To try and console his power. The Tsar banned all political parties, thus allowing him to do what ever he wanted to.

    Read More

  • Russian Revolution

    631 Words  | 2 Pages

    The resignation of Nicholas II March 1917, in union with the organization of a temporary government in Russia built on western values of constitutional moderation, and the capture of control by the Bolsheviks in October is the political crucial opinions of the Russian Revolution of 1917. The actions of that historic year must also be viewed more broadly, however: as aburst of social strains associated with quick development; as a disaster of political modernization, in relations of the tensions sited on old-fashioned traditions by the burdens of Westernization; and as a social disruption in the widest sense, concerning a massive, unprompted expropriation of upper class land by fuming peasants, the devastation of outmoded social patterns and morals, and the scuffle for a new, democratic society.

    Read More

  • The Similarities of Tsarist and Communist Rule in Russia

    1871 Words  | 4 Pages

    But the Tsar had least central control. After the 1905 Revolution the Russian people were granted civil rights, an... ... middle of paper ... ... ressed the Tsars lost support from the nobles and power, after 1905 revolution Nicholas II had very little central control.

    Read More

  • Was the 1905 Revolution a ‘dress rehearsal’ for the events of either February or October 1917?

    2018 Words  | 5 Pages

    In examining the comparison of the 1905 events with the similar situation in 1917, it is vital to look at the backdrop circumstances in order to directly compare the revolutions. The combination of the social disruptions generated by the Russo-Japanese War effort caused unrest and several uprisings to take place in the period 1904-1905. In 1905 Russian armies suffered repeated defeats in the Russo-Japanese war leading to low morale, food shortages and bread prices soaring throughout Russia. Discontentment lay the foundation to political ferment amongst the Proletariat. The mobilisation of the working class accompanied the war effort, revitalizing the threat of a strike movement such like the one in 1905. The circumstances that Russian society found themselves in, in 1905 can be directly compared to the situation of 1914-1917.

    Read More

  • The Causes of the Russian Revolution in March 1917

    871 Words  | 2 Pages

    The Causes of the Russian Revolution in March 1917 There were many causes to explain the outbreak of the Russian Revolution in March 1917. Some of these can be defined as long term. causes as their origin goes way back to pre-revolutionary times. Others are short-term reasons or even immediate effects, which act as. the last spark, to bring the tense situation out of control.

    Read More

  • The Rise Of Communism

    846 Words  | 2 Pages

    Over the next few years, Russia went through a traumatic time of civil war and turmoil. The Bolsheviks’ Red Army fought the white army of farmers, etc. against Lenin and his ways. Lenin and the Bolsheviks won and began to wean Russia of non-conforming parties eventually banning all non-communist as well as removing an assembly elected shortly after the Bolshevik’s gain of power. Lenin’s strict government, however, was about to get a lot stricter with his death in 1924.

    Read More

More about Why Nicholas II Survived the Revolution of 1905 but Not that of 1917

Open Document