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

Russia and its Locomotive of History

Extracts from this document...

Introduction

Russian History Coursework: Trotsky described war as the 'locomotive of history'. Can it be argued that change in Russia in the period 1855 - 1954 was caused primarily by involvement in wars? Jess Lawson The concept of the 'locomotive of history' is one which indicates to us that change had taken place in a certain period which could not have been undone. It can be argued that this could be applied to Russia between 1855-1954, when their involvement in 7 wars led to dramatic changes that would affect the lives of Russians for ever. On the other hand, other factors - such as the role of influential leaders and attitudes towards the autocratic government - should be considered when analysing where the need for change stemmed from. Firstly, Russia's terrible defeat in the Crimean War left the government significantly aware of their backwardness as well as the inhumane treatment of the peasants. Because of this, the emancipation of the serfs in 1861 was finally passed as the Russian government saw that its state was the only left in Europe with a feudal system. During the Crimean War, fifty million out of the sixty million legal occupants in Russia were serfs: so it was not surprising that the army consisted almost entirely of serfs forced to serve in it, exacerbating the frailty of Russia's military. This acts as a prime example as to why Russia was left extremely weak by 1856 because of their sheer lack of development socially and economically. Although it can be argued that when Alexander II became the Tsar in 1855, the war showed him that change was needed, the new Tsar also seemed to be more sensitive and willing to deal with Russia's problems than his father Alexander I. He realised even before he came to power that Russia was in need of reforms -- in particular freedom for the serfs, as they were essentially Russia's backbone (for instance they paid most of the taxes and produced grain which was Russia's most valuable export). ...read more.

Middle

What is also significant about the Revolution is that pre-1905 strikes and demonstrations had taken place primarily for economic protests -- 1905 saw hundreds of thousands of civilians protesting for political rights. In 1904, Russia's Minister of Interior named Plehve was assassinated by terrorists as people believed that he should be blamed for the war with Japan. The result of this was that Nicholas II decided to lift some restrictions on the Zemstva to satisfy his people: but this simply increased public meetings and discussions through the press. Therefore the pressure on the Tsar for reform grew, and this could be a reason other than the war as to why tensions in Russia intensified. Although it could be said that the extension of press freedom and 'Russification' - whereby Tsar Nicholas II carried on Alexander III's policy to impose Russian ways on everyone within the nation - assisted the cause of the 1905 Revolution, the event that initiated it was later to be known as Bloody Sunday. The march in St. Petersburg resulted in palace guards firing on the protestors, killing 200 and injuring 100s more. Although Nicholas II was not present at the bloody scene, the event caused an even greater change to Russia in the year that had led on from the Russian war. Father Georgy Gapon who led the march cried: 'There is no God any longer. There is no Tsar' [M. Lynch; 'Reaction and Revolution: Russia 1894-1942']. The Russo-Japanese War witnessed a great increase in freedom of speech: what began as 5 men demanding to be reinstated to the factory in which they were fired from concluded with 105,000 workers throughout the city marching on the Winter Palace. Bloody Sunday aided in escalating hatred towards the Tsarist regime as social unrest continued due to Russia's backwardness, particularly in agriculture. Afraid that the revolution may spiral out of control, Nicholas - against his wishes - was advised by his government to concede a constitution. ...read more.

Conclusion

The war both caused a setback to Russia's plans yet at the same time changed it somewhat for the better. The pact was broken in 1941 due to Operation Barbarossa, and F.Y.P.s were destroyed when it lost some of its industrial infrastructure when the German army invaded. Despite this, Russia was still considered to emerge as one of the world's major industrial powers by the end of the Second World War. After Stalin's death in 1953, there was a widespread concern that the state could not survive without him as there was a barrier of ideological differences left between East and West Russia. Nikita Khrushchev, the general secretary of the Communist Party, denounced Stalin in 1956 when he claimed that 'It is...a bad thing that Stalin launched into deviations and mistakes, which harmed our cause' [D. Murphy; 'Russia 1855-1964']. This added to the tension and fear among the German people. At the same time, the Second World War caused tensions between Russia and the USA, as Russia felt that the Americans wanted most of the fighting to take place in Russia so that they would be left weaker at the end of it. I believe that the distrust in the USA and Britain from the Second World War contributed to Russia's involvement in the Cold War by 1948; however the the dislike of Khrushchev who would create the 1955 Warsaw Pact treaty between communist states triggered it. By analysing Russia between the period 1855-1954, it is clear to see that for each war that they became involved in, a particular form of change took place: some dramatic and permanent such as the abdication of the Tsar; some which only seemed to be a change on the surface such as the emancipation of the serfs. One could say that Russia's character and structure of society was tested in many aspects. However, I feel that although a significant factor, war was not the main factor that triggered change because in most cases, it simply entrenched the need for changes that were already present in Russia. ...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. Marked by a teacher

    Assess the view that the lives of the peasants in Russia did not improve ...

    4 star(s)

    This had again demonstrated that the peasantry were often used as a scapegoat and neglected in favour of industry throughout the period. In contrast, the agrarian reforms under Stolypin brought real improvement and some argue that this was the most prosperous time for the peasantry within the period.

  2. Marked by a teacher

    Explain how the effects of the First World War caused the collapse of the ...

    4 star(s)

    The First World War worsened these problems. There were more food shortages because it was being transported to the army. There was a now fuel shortage as well, which left people cold and hungry. Factories closed and left more workers unemployed. Inflation occurred and people fell into poverty.

  1. Stalins Russia, 1924-53 revision guide

    This reveals that he was playing a tactical game. * Stalin was very skilled in spotting the weaknesses of his opponents and in devising tactics to outmanoeuvre them. * Stalin was aware that the successful mobilisation of the state during the Civil War provided many lessons for the future.

  2. Describe the Russia that Tsar Nicholas II inherited

    Jewish people in particular were targeted and blamed for leading the revolution, resulting in attacks called 'pogroms' against them. "Some 90% of revolutionaries are Jews" - Plehve. This shows that the Tsarist regime considered those not responsible for the political opposition towards the Tsar, to be responsible simply because they

  1. How far does a study of the period 1855 to 1956 suggest that, following ...

    A major feature of repression under Stalin was the Gulag - the need to complete projects in the arctic was perhaps a catalyst for its such widespread use, constituting 10-15% of the GNP during his reign. Rigby argues it was fed by Stalin's desire to turn from an oligarchy to

  2. Trotsky described war as the 'locomotive of history'. Can it be argued that change ...

    The Provisional Government's decision to carry on an unpopular war destroyed its credibility in the same way that Nicholas II lost support by personally going to the frontline. War was essential to revolutions throughout the period. Failure in the Russo Japanese war shattered the image of Tsarist power and exposed

  1. AS Level Edexcel History Spain 1931-33 Revision Notes

    Because of the attack on the Church the government was further split. The Prime Minister and Minister for Home Affairs resigned in protest ? this meant that their the government leant even further more to the left and assisted in radicalisation.

  2. What were the mains reasons for the emancipation of Serfs in Russia?

    But decrees on free farmers and serfs have been carried out on a limited scale only.[4]? In addition, the historian Bruce Lincoln offered another important interpretive. He said that the emancipation of Serfs was a long process; he argued that The Edict of Emancipation was drafted by a generation of

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