Part of The Student Room Group

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

Why did Tzar Nicholas II abdicate in 1917 and not in 1905?

Extracts from this document...

Introduction

Why did Tzar Nicholas II abdicate in 1917 and not in 1905? The Tzar abdicated following the revolution of 1917 but he did not abdicate after the 1905 revolution. There were a number of key factors which made this happen, in this essay I will be looking into the similarities and the differences. During both revolutions the people went on strike over poor working conditions and poor pay, but there were differences and these were the factors that determined the survival and the fall of the Tzar. Russia had many difficulties for a ruler. The size of Russia is incredible, 17,075,400 square kilometers of land, however there was only one railway across the country so much of the country was unreachable and passing a message on was very difficult. In addition Tsar Nicholas was a weak and unpopular ruler, having been passed down his status as absolute monarch and not having to work for it. His popularity was worsened by the fact that his family lived in great wealth and yet there was terrible poverty across most of the population. February 1904, a war broke out between Russia and Japan which became known as the Russo-Japanese war. This war was over a town called Manchuria situated in Northern China. ...read more.

Middle

Petersburg and gone to live near the front line, leaving his German wife Keisarinna Aleksandra in charge of Russia. This was a very bad move. Aleksandra was hated as she was seen as a German spy. Under her leadership there was a mass shortage of food as all the supplies were going to the front line to feed the soldiers. Further weakening The Tzar's Reputation compared to 1905. Russian factory workers worked extremely long hours including Saturdays and conditions in the factories were extremely harsh. There was little concern shown for the workers and their health. Workers tried to form trade unions, but they were dismissed by the factory owners who had total power over their employees. Then in 1903, a Priest formed the Assembly of Russian Workers and within a year it had over 9,000 members. In 1904 prices of essential goods rose immensely, and therefore effectively wages fell by 20 per cent. The Priest wasn't happy that nothing was improving and so called for industrial action. Over the next few days over 110,000 workers in St. Petersburg went out on strike, in an attempt to settle the dispute, the priest decided to make a personal appeal to Tzar Nicholas II. The Tzar accepted this appeal and he shortened the working day by a couple of hours and also agreed to an increase in wages and an improvement in working conditions. ...read more.

Conclusion

This was made worse by Russia's involvement in the First World War. These two situations were basically the same because in both Russia were losing a war and there were riots because of poverty. However in 1917 the war was on their land so if they had pulled out like in Manchuria they would have lost their land and their people would have to abandon their homes as most of the Russians lived in west Russia. Also in this war the Tzar's weakness was very obvious as Germany were much stronger than Japan. Germany was ready for a war whereas Russia didn't have anywhere near enough supplies, rifles or ammunition. Also the protests had stepped up a level, the workers and peasants realized that the peaceful protest weren't going to work so they stated violent protests and these were a lot more affective. In conclusion I think it was the three differences Being that he had he a worsened reputation, the situation in the war was far worse and the main point is that The Protests had got more organized and they were now violent not peaceful. This is what made the Tzar abdicate from his position of absolute ruler on 15th March 1917 when in 1905 the situation had not escalated as much enabling the Tzar to continue. ?? ?? ?? ?? Why did Tzar Nicholas II abdicate in 1917 and not in 1905 October 29, 2008 1 ...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

or


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)

    However, Source B agrees with what we know as historical fact and so is very useful to us to find out why Nicholas abdicated. In brief the first two sources tell us of a workers uprising and then later joined by the soldiers over the price of bread and their lack of land.

  2. Why was the Tsar Forced to Abdicate in 1917?

    There were just too many people in Russia, and the rail network couldn't cope. Again, talks of a revolution spread, and there was soon mutiny in the army. Troops felt that the Tsar was purposely misleading and misguiding them and didn't agree with his actions and ideas.

  1. Tsar Nicholas II

    could not reach the aims and this meant that the country would not improve. Bloody Sunday also made the Russian Empire so difficult to govern for Tsar Nicholas II because it made many Russian people believe that the Tsar was a very mean and aggressive person as he slaughtered so

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

    The strikes continued until Nicholas was forced to act. The people realised, after being fired upon, that their faith in the Tsar was ill founded. The same conditions did not exist in 1917. The people were under no illusion as to how the Tsar felt about them.

  1. The blance sheet for russia.

    That is its cardinal sin from the standpoint of the ruling class and its echoes in the labour movement. That is what lies behind their hatred and loathing of Bolshevism, their vitriol and spiteful attitude towards it, which completely conditions their attitude even three generations later.

  2. Why Did Tsar Nicholas Abdicate Following the 1917 Revolution but not the 1905 Revolution?

    They were annoyed at the appalling living conditions inside cities and also their working conditions. There was a sudden boom in industry in Russia and although it was good for the economy it created problems in the cities. The cities were very polluted and cramped and generally in a bad state.

  1. Why did the Tsar abdicate after the 1917 revolution

    When they finally arrived, they were defeated by the Japanese navy in a matter of hours. The Tsar was forced to ask the Japanese for peace. The loss in the war actually turned out to be a good thing, as the troops were then able to return home still loyal to the Tsar and extinguish the protestors in the revolution.

  2. Lenin's Importance in the 1917 Revolutions.

    This highlights that Lenin was very prepared since he was ensuring that no one would abandon the plan; and they would have to put maximum effort into the revolution. Additionally, on October 10th, a meeting was held in which he tried to persuade twelve party leaders that a revolution was necessary.

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