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

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

Extracts from this document...


Why did the Tsar survive the revolution of 1905, but not that of 1917? Clear similarities contrasted with crucial differences between the 1905 and 1917 revolutions evidently illustrate the reason as to how and why the Russian monarchy failed after 1917. There were several key factors which helped demonstrate the relationship and difference between the two revolutions. These were the Russo-Japanese war (1904-1905) compared with the disastrous First World War (1914); The Bloody Sunday strike (1905) and the Putilov (1917)- along with several riots and demonstrations; forms of government such as the Soviets and Committees and finally; lacked leadership or to that fact, the up rise of leaders such as Lenin and Trotsky. So regarding the fact that the 1905 and 1917 revolutions were so similar- both years being involved in a war and both having great civil hostility, how come one fizzled while the other erupted disastrously? In 1900 Russia was going through many structural problems which anticipated the letdown of the Tsar's Empire i.e. - revolution. Peasants living in poverty made up the majority of the populations, and had very poor living conditions. Industrial workers suffered low pay, long working hours and poor factory conditions. Nicholas was an incompetent autocrat which was disapproved by the vast majority of Russia's population; most of all, Russia was a very backward country, lacking good roads, railways and economical boost due to uneducated people. ...read more.


He also controlled the movement f revolutionaries by issuing internal passports to citizens who travelled around within Russia. Stolypin completely banned articles issued in newspapers which criticized the Tsar and his government. These acts of repression had some advantages and disadvantages. They reduced the amount of assassinations of government official, and decreased the population of revolutionaries (they began to leave Russia). However, this also made the Tsar more unpopular and large groups such as the Bolsheviks were revived and became more organised in the sense that they began to use more effective anti-Tsarist propaganda. Despite his harshness, Stolypin did give the peasants what they wanted, and that was land. He created Kulaks, which were a large number of mediocre land-owning peasants who supported the Tsar. He allowed them to buy land from village communes, leant money to increase the size of their farms and encouraged Nicholas to offer some of his land in Siberia, where peasants could move and set up their own farms. The only success was that these reforms made many kulaks, which occupied a larger percentage of the peasant population. Other than this, the reforms were very poorly handled with for the workers in the cities, and none of the peasants got what they were promised. This led to his assassination in 1911. Nicholas was now in trouble. The conditions for another revolution began to accumulate once again, even before the First World War, which merely accelerated the revolution. ...read more.


Thus, on March 14th, Tsar Nicholas was forced to resign and formally abdicated the thrown. Hence, it is established that the reasons why Tsarist rule ended in Russia in 1917 were: � The influence of Rasputin � The collapse of the Army � Strikes and Food Shortages It is therefore concluded that the 1917 revolutions were inevitable considering Nicholas' deliberate violation of the 1905 promises and the failure of land reforms, industrial unrest, government repression and the revival of revolutionary parties. It was inevitable that the government was just unfit to deal with the crisis- whether it was through force or concessions.1905 bringing itself to the end of a humiliating war, while the 1917 revolution finding itself in the middle of a catastrophic war; 1905 had a military prepared to fight and support the Tsar, whereas the 1917 had no will power to defend the Tsar or itself. World War one, was by far, the worse economical impact Russia had to go through and thus abolishing the Tsar's useless and inept control over Russia. 1 Quoted from the petition presented by the people led by Priest Father Gapon. 2 Quoted in The Revolution of 1905, A. Ascher 3 p.g 301- notes from "Mastering Modern World History" 4 quote from an essay found on www.courseworkbank.com 5 quoted in Nicholas II, Dominic Lieven 6 p.g 64 "Russia in Revolution Reina Hashash IB1-2 ...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. How and why did the tsar nicholas II survive the 1905 revolution?

    Sergie Witte created a period known as the great spurt. He modernised communications with the introduction of the Trans-Siberian Railway, constructed in 1891 to 1902. In doing so, it improved export and import (which were taxed) of goods and circulation of ideas within the country.

  2. How did living conditions change in towns as a result of the Industrial Revolution ...

    The progress made in English public health had greatly influenced the Americans . They had taken note of British ways and urgently put them to use since there were several outbreaks of yellow fever , cholera , typhoid , smallpox and typhus .

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

    Although Russia did not officially start the war with Japan, Nicholas saw it as an opportunity to regain his control over the country by rallying the nation together through a successful war. Leading into 1905, this was Nicholas's plan for preventing the unrest within Russia mounting to anything beyond normal.

  2. Can the events in Russia in 1905 be considered a revolution? Russian peasants were ...

    After the Duma criticised Tsars actions he ordered new elections, and by 1912 was back to ruling without a Duma. When the Duma was restored the Tsar released the fundamental laws under April 23rd 1906, it stated the Tsar had more political power than, the law, the church and the Duma.

  1. Why did Nicholas II survive the revolution of 1905 but not that of 1917?

    The Tsar agreed to establish the Duma and granted basic civil rights, allowing people to set up their own political parties, and have freedom of expression.

  2. "Why did the Tsar survive the revolution of 1905 but not that of March ...

    The Russian population was fed up with the Tsar and the way he ruled his country, added to the unrest in the main urban centers, there was also unrest in the countryside. The peasantry went on strike which aggravated the already existing food shortage; peasants overthrew their landlords, as they

  1. Why was Nicholas II able to survive the 1905 revolution but was forced to ...

    Yet with the creation of the "Soviets (town councils)" facilitated the co-ordination of the workers. Both the revolutions of 1905 and February 1917 are often said to have been leaderless. It is true that in 1905 there were few, if any individuals willing to assume control of the masses and wrestle power from the autocracy.

  2. Why did the Tsarist regime fall in 1917?

    Sources C and D agree about Tsar Nicholas II because they both say that he is not well suited to power. In source C, the writer of the source says "He had not sought power and his personality meant that he was not very good at exercising it".

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