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

To what extent was the February 1917 Russian revolution inevitable after the 1905 revolution?

Extracts from this document...

Introduction

To what extent was the February 1917 revolution inevitable after the 1905 revolution? The February 1917 Revolution was one of the defining moments in Russian history, it was the culmination of years of class struggle and the forming of new ideals. The February Revolution was genuinely perceived as the start of a new Russia, this hope was in marked contrast to the subdued elevation of the results of the 1905 Revolution, which were seen as considerably watered-down in comparison to original expectations. The 1905 Revolution was, in essence, an economic revolution; those who marched on Bloody Sunday wanted better working conditions, not the end of Romanov Rule. It was just 12 years later that the mood had changed completely, from wanting better conditions to a concerted effort to rid Russia of an autocracy obsessed with self-preservation. Arguably, the 1905 Revolution added to the thirst for change, however it was other factors also which lead to a Revolution, which was always inevitable because those within the revolution had always sought a system without Tsarist rule. ...read more.

Middle

The major cause for frustration was the Duma, which had originally promised so much but was in the end just a rubber stamp for the Tsar. The people had revolted in 1905 for economic reasons but with the emergence of more radical socialists and more freedom of the press the people were able to make the real link between political incompetence and the economic hardships they faced. The 1905 Revolution provided the basis for change; the Tsar could have taken the opportunity to grant the people a representative assembly, it was however in his nature to preserve the autocracy, the change occurred in the people, they no longer wanted to live under a man described as 'not fit to run a village post office', the people forced the agenda and forced the revolution. The February 1917 Revolution did not happen because of a single event like the 1905 Revolution, the cumulative effect of years of neglect of its people, decades of poor economic policy and a willing to enter into conflicts in which it had no real interest brought about the destruction of the Tsardom. ...read more.

Conclusion

The war was a particularly major factor in the emergence of the revolution and its leaders, obviously socialists were dead against the war but at first a wave of nationalism swept the country as the first months went well for Russia. However, as the war dragged on the people of St. Petersburg, in particular, felt the full affects of food shortages, the victories dried up as well as the Russian army had equipment shortages and desertion was rife. The systematic neglect of its peoples and the apparent inability to take the countries needs into account ensured that the Revolution was close at hand. The February 1917 Revolution gave a platform for the Russian people to have a government in which their views were respected. The 1905 revolution obviously was a factor in the inaction of a revolution in February 1917 but the inevitability of the event can really be seen at the continuation of a Total War, which drained the Russian people and their tolerance for a government, which showed no respect for its peoples. Martin Fox 24/02/03 AKM ...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. Marked by a teacher

    Was Nicholas II Responsible for His Own Downfall? What can you learn from ...

    4 star(s)

    Of two reasons, which possibly could have forced Nicholas to abdicate, I believe that the fact that he could no longer control the workers in his capital city is the most important. If Nicholas had heeded Rodzianko's warning he might have been able to regain control, but he decided to ignore the warning and so led to his own downfall.

  2. What Were The Causes Of The 1905 Russian Revolution? How Successful Was This Revolution?

    Examples of these people were the Tsar himself and his advisors of the aristocracy. The aristocracy could only advise what political decisions to make. The people in this class also had material comforts and lived very comfortable lives indeed. This was the only class who could vote, or have a say in the way the country was run.

  1. What were the causes of the Russian Revolution in March 1917?

    However, it was different in 1917. 12 March was a decisive day and changed the character of the riots. Soldiers in Petrograd refused to fire on crowds, and some regiments shot their officers and joined in the demonstrations. They had had enough of the war and the way they were treated.

  2. Why did the Tsarist regime fall in 1917?

    social situation, and to encourage people to not just sit there and put up with it, but to do something about it. Source G also tried to create discontent with the Tsarist regime, as it showed a dirty tramp, seemingly in control of the Tsar and Tsarina.

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

    The steel works strike at Putilov on the 7th of March put 20000 of "the most politically conscious, and revolutionary workers in Russia."6 By March 10th, great demonstrations were carried out in the streets of Petrograd, demanding for the abdication of the Tsar.

  2. The Russian Revolution 1917

    It is actually arguable that if the Tsar had listened to Rasputin, the Russian Empire would have had many glorious victories and the Tsar would have been hailed as a great military commander, possibly delaying or even completely preventing the revolution from taking place.

  1. To what extent were economic problems the main cause of the 1905 revolution?

    This didn't work for the Tsar as the Japanese were a lot stronger than they thought and due to poor tactics and the underestimation of the Japanese the Russians were beginning to take longer in Japan that what was anticipated.

  2. The February Revolution 1917 - Was Nicholas responsible for his own downfall?

    For instance, if Nicholas had known exactly what was going on then he wouldn't have ignored all the warnings he had and would have done something in order to try and stop the soldiers from mutinying and stop more workers from going on strike.

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