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

How and why was Nicholas able to survive the 1905 revolution?

Extracts from this document...


How and why was Nicholas able to survive the 1905 revolution? According to Marxist theory there needs to be a total change of power in order for a revolution to take place, this puts the phrase '1905 revolution' into serious doubt. It is evident that there are many factors that appear to be leading towards revolution however it is debatable weather these factors were strong enough to be called a revolution itself. Survival of this period was attained certainly in the short term, however we must ask how influential the '1905 revolution' was in the eventual downfall of the tsar in 1917. Before we can fully understand how and why Nicholas survived 1095 it is important to recognise the conditions of Russia leading up to this period and how they were caused. Unrest had been evident in Russia for a long period of time; it can be dated as far back as to the assassination of Alexander 2nd in 1979 or even further. At a time where Russia needed to move forward in order to 'keep up' with the world powers, Russia focused on a scheme of reaction and russificatioin beginning in 1881, which was maintained by Nicholas when he came into power in 1894. Opposition groups such as the Liberals had been forming due to the unrest within the country. ...read more.


The Tsar issued the 'October Manifesto', which proved probably the best decision of his reign. In doing this he granted the Liberals their Duma (representative government with proposed influence upon laws), he also issued a range of civil rights including freedom of speech, assembly and worship. He also legalised trade unions. This was going against Nicholas's own beliefs about autocracy, however he realised that this was needed in order to attempt to regain his authority over the country. Due to the Liberals only wanting reforms, this manifesto satisfied their wants sufficiently. This meant that they, being the main threat to Nicholas now moved towards stopping the riots and crass movements that were taking place at the time because their needs had been satisfied. This meant that the Union of Unions was split and therefore the peasants and Soviets were now left to fight their own battle with the government. It became apparent that the 'Union of Unions' formation had actually helped the Tsar in some way. 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. ...read more.


The Tsar lived an insecure and dangerous life, which is why any person who posed the slightest hint of political opposition was put into exile and why he lived a sheltered and ignorant lifestyle away from the Russian people. Nicholas was only able to survive 1905 because not enough pressure was applied to his authority, as no group was able to provide sufficient pressure. 1905 lacked the key individuals and organisation that were so evident in the successful revolution in 1917. I argue that 1905 was not a revolution, but more a culmination of long and short-term unrest that triggered the proceedings which took place. Nicholas was able to survive 1905 due to a long awaited purposeful and well directed plan of action, however there was a certain amount of luck involved, had certain occurrences been different Nicholas may not have remained with such control as he did. Nicholas could have prevented the actions that took place in 1905 long before they took place had he not been such an incompetent and ignorant ruler. "The events of 1905 were a prologue to the two revolutions of 1917" (Trotsky). This tells me that although Nicholas survived the revolution in the short term, the events which took place played a vital part in the 1917 revolutions, therefore it is arguable that Nicholas did not survive the 1905 revolution because of the influences it had upon his eventual downfall in 1917. ...read more.

The above preview is unformatted text

This student written piece of work is one of many that can be found in our GCSE Russia, USSR 1905-1941 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 GCSE Russia, USSR 1905-1941 essays

  1. Why did the Tsar survive the revolution of 1905, but not that of 1917?

    Even the army showed some signs of revolt when naval mutinies took place on Potemkin and three soldiers were thrown over-board. By October, Nicholas II found himself facing "the most united opposition in Romanov history" (Lynch). Although it took a long time for the Tsar to respond to these events, many of the Soviets' revolutionary acts failed to succeed.

  2. How did the tsar survive the 1905 revolution?

    At home people would have been happier, thinking the defeat had not been so humiliating, since the peace treaty had not been that humiliating. This would have improved the Tsars image. Many of the peasantry were easily bought off by promises of civil rights and the legalisation of trade unions

  1. Why was Lenin able to seize power in October 1917?

    There were a number of reasons why Lenin was able to rise to power. Russia was ruled by a series of out of touch men, whom had fallen behind in technology. Tsar Nicholas II ruled a disorganized nation. His government of appointed officials and men in inherited positions which did not represent the people.

  2. Why did the Tsar survive the 1905 revolution but not the 1917 revolution?

    He was also unpopular because he supported Rasputin who everyone thought was unloyal and a risk.

  1. China 1945-90 - source based questions.

    depression, China, with her booming economy, national unity ever closer and a stable political environment is looking towards a brighter future. Her history shows that political life and economic fortunes weave as intricate a web as any other major nation, but not withstanding the inevitable twists and turns, the third millennium certainly looks exciting for China and her inhabitants.

  2. Explain why there was an Industrial Revolution

    However as I mentioned before the Industrial Revolution was a group of interrelated changes, not just one so even though the money, which was to be spent on Britain's industry, was not always it does not matter. Another reason for the Industrial Revolution was Britain's transport improved.

  1. Why did 'Bloody Sunday' take place?

    The fact that Gorky joined the Bolsheviks in 1905 definitely questions the sources reliability because the account will be very biased towards the marchers and totally against the soldiers. If this was the case Gorky could have added details that weren't entirely true making the soldiers seem like total monsters without giving them any credit, if any was due.

  2. Stalin was able to obtain total power in the USSR by the end of ...

    This would make Stalin harder to kick his supporters out. But Stalin was cunning enough to think of this strategy instead of confronting Trotsky directly, as he was able to realize that Trotsky was an overconfident and proud person and would find the fact that he was unable to influence

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