• Join over 1.2 million students every month
  • Accelerate your learning by 29%
  • Unlimited access from just £6.99 per month

How far do you agree that the Russo Japanese war was the biggest cause of the 1905 Revolution in Russia?

Extracts from this document...

Introduction

´╗┐How far do you agree that the Russo Japanese war was the biggest cause of the 1905 Revolution in Russia? Tsar Nicholas II had always desired imperial expansion to the Far East; so naturally Russia clashed with Japan over shared interests in China and Korea. This resulted in the Russo Japanese war to break out. The 1905 Revolution was a different matter; however, they are both connected to each other. The 1905 Revolution was initiated from a peaceful protest by the Surfs but soon transformed into something much bigger. Although the Russo Japanese war played a significant part there was also a variety of other contributing factors; including the great famine, Nicholas II and Bloody Sunday. Firstly, how significant was the Russo Japanese war? In August 1904 Tsar Nicholas II declared war over the Japanese as they refused to let him have Korea under the soviet sphere of influence. Russia was naturally seen as the superior military power of the two but they failed to utilise this. Russia needed Port Arthur as a war water port for military and maritime trade all year round. Vladivostok was only operational in the summer months so the Russians relied heavily on Port Arthur. Yet, in January 1905 the Russians were forced to surrender Port Arthur to the Japanese. However, the greatest humiliation came at the battle of Tsushima in May 1905. ...read more.

Middle

Many Russians began to doubt the current political system and wonder if they would benefit without a Tsar. However, some key left wing figures including Trotsky believed that in some ways it was not Nicholas? fault and that ?Nicholas inherited from his ancestors not only a giant empire, but also a revolution. And they did not bequeath him one quality which would have made him capable of governing and empire?.. Or even a country.? It is clear that Nicholas II rule of even lack of rule compelled many Russians to take matters into their own hands; although some people believed that the revolution was imminent regardless of the ruler it does not redirect attention from the poor decisions made by Nicholas and the disregard for this people. Another important factor which caused the 1905 Revolution is The Great famine of 1891and subsequent famines in 1898 and 1901. In the Volga region in 1891 the winter frosts arrived very early, then the crops where further damaged by the dusty winds in early spring and a very dry long summer which began in April. In 1891 each peasant only managed to salvage 0.1 pud (1.6kg) compared to a normal of 15 pud (240kg) of rye. By autumn, 17 provinces were threatened by the famine which equated to around 36 million people. Almost inevitably a cholera and typhus epidemic struck killing half a million people by the end of 1892. ...read more.

Conclusion

An armed uprising occurred in Moscow on December the 7th and several thousand workers were involved. Yet, they surrendered on 18th of December as the city was destroyed and civilian casualties in the thousands. As we can see, Bloody Sunday was extremely key to the 1905 revolution and can be referred to as the spark that lit the fire. The people finally realised that they could make an impact as shown during the Great Famine. Although the government did manage to extinguish the opposition the people had made enough of an impact for the Tsar to rethink many previously disregarded ideas; and so overall it was a success and more significant than the Russo Japanese war. In conclusion both the Great Famine and Nicholas? suitability for the role of Tsar were very significant in the grand scheme. Along with these the Russo Japanese war was also essential in sparking Bloody Sunday which ultimately was the main cause for the 1905 Russian Revolution. The war was not the most significant factor as although it showed Russia?s weakness it did not directly cause the Revolution, however, Bloody Sunday did do this as it proved to the people that they could stand up against the government. Although both Nicholas II and the Famine were influential they both contributed to the mentality of the people and not directly the revolution. Overall it was a combination of factors which led to the uprising and Bloody Sunday was the last of these consequently lit the fire. ...read more.

The above preview is unformatted text

This student written piece of work is one of many that can be found in our AS and A Level Modern European History, 1789-1945 section.

Found what you're looking for?

  • Start learning 29% faster today
  • 150,000+ documents available
  • Just £6.99 a month

Not the one? Search for your essay title...
  • Join over 1.2 million students every month
  • Accelerate your learning by 29%
  • Unlimited access from just £6.99 per month

See related essaysSee related essays

Related AS and A Level Modern European History, 1789-1945 essays

  1. Stalins Russia, 1924-53 revision guide

    1927 1932 1939 coal (millions of tons) 35 64 145 oil (millions of tons) 12 21.4 40 iron ore(millions of tons) 6 12.1 32 Changing social policies How did the standard of living change? * There is no doubt that the standard of living fell for most ordinary Russians during the 1930s.

  2. How far was the Russian Japanese war of 1905 the cause of the 1905 ...

    and Plehve (who was in favour of it) and the incompetence of Tsar, the whole country blamed the government for this war. The Russians felt humiliation and resentment at their loss. The inefficiency of the army and naval forces was exposed which made the idea of revolution seem more favourable.

  1. How secure was the Tsars power up to 1904

    I am not prepared to be the Csar. I never wanted to become one. I know nothing of the business of ruling. I have no idea of even how to talk to minister". Amongst problems he faced were opposition from the middle class, who wanted a parliament and king (constitutional monarchy)

  2. Vietnam war

    * 2 million suffered from veneral disease * Drug addiction reached a higher rate than anywhere else in the world. In 1976, 100,000 addicts in Saigon alone. * There was a shortage of males and 13 percent of the population was disabled.

  1. To what extent was Tsar Nicholas II saved by making concessions in the 1905 ...

    given them - he could dissolve the Duma's he had granted and only he could demote those he assigned in the Executive. This meant that essentially, the Russians had no control, power, or concessions any more, and so could not pose a danger to the Tsar, and since the revolution had already failed, there was nothing they could do.

  2. 'In the context of the period 1715-1815 to what extent were economic factors the ...

    It included articles indicating that 'all the powers emanate entirely from the nation'15 and 'elections will be held for every seat'16. This is close to the work of Rousseau and his idea of democracy, as well as the freedom experienced by the newly-formed United States.

  1. "The 1905 Revolution transformed the autocracy". Assess the validity of this view of Russia ...

    This was also the time when Soviets emerged, seizing control of essential services, power, hospitals and food distribution in the cities. Strikes continued after 1905 also, illustrating the importance of this increased organisation. Government repression may explain why strike action, peaking in 1905-06, declined steadily over the next 6 years.

  2. Describe the Russia that Tsar Nicholas II inherited

    In order to modernise, Nicholas II would have needed to give people unity and freedom to replace the middle class and industrialise, and to do this, he had to give the people power. However, his role as an autocrat, and his indifference to the world around him, meant he was

  • Over 160,000 pieces
    of student written work
  • Annotated by
    experienced teachers
  • Ideas and feedback to
    improve your own work