The fact that someone had the audacity and felt desperate enough to even make an attempt on the life of the Tsar, a position thought of as God-given, let alone succeed, is a sign of dangerous growing discontent in Russia, though this is more of an indicator of gradual change than the event that sparked peoples ill feelings towards the government. But it must be taken into consideration that Alexander II had been the one to actually begin repression. After a failed assassination attempt on him he had recognized the rising threats of groups like populists and had begun to replace his liberal ministers with conservative ones. He passed far fewer reforms in the final years on his life. There can be no doubt that this period was a turning point in Russian history but perhaps instead of Alexander’s death the turning point occurred at the first attempt on his life, as Russia was growing increasingly repressive even before his death.
Another turning point that did not carve out as much change as would be expected was the revolution of 1905. It was the result of years of disappointment in reforms that did not go far enough, of a disastrous and humiliating war defeat, of appalling conditions in both the countryside and the towns and of an inept Tsar. Considering all of the dissatisfaction with the government it’s surprising that more change to the ruling system was not pushed through, but the Tsar had crucially retained the support of the army. It did however lead to the creation of the Duma, elected bodies that were intended to share power with the Tsar and provide Russia with a democratic element. However this was to be completely disregarded by the Tsar who saw them as little more than advisory body whom he could listen to or ignore as he saw fit. He was not prepared to accept any compromise to his power and had actually never intended to stick to the October Manifesto which he had signed to bring the Duma into existence. In this sense he continued his incompetence and the Russian people achieved very little improvement out of 1905 so large amounts of opposition and problems remained. In theory 1905 had been a big change for Russian government but in reality little changed. The only lasting legacy of the 1905 revolution was that the people had gained concession from the government for the first time and had proved that collective opposition to the ruling power could produce results. Russia had gained a taste for revolution.
This taste was to be satisfied by the two revolutions of 1917 that also undoubtedly marked the biggest change in Russian government. The revolution in February marked the end of Tsardom while the one in October signaled the beginning of Communism in Russia. It is hard to place a wedge between the significance of the two as they both brought about such comprehensive change to Russian in so many ways. February was the first successful revolution in Russia and brought in a truly democratic system for the first time (even though the Provisional Government never did actually get to hold elections). It was also important in the development of Soviets, workers councils who were to be an integral part of Russian society in years to come. The Petrograd Soviet gained immense power and with huge influence over workers in the city it provided a template for future Soviets. The biggest cross against the significance of the February revolution is that the democratic government it created was to last only a short time but this is as of nothing compared to the fact that it did away with centuries of rule by autocratic Tsars.
It is very important to note that without revolution in February the conditions would not have been right for the Bolsheviks to seize power in October. October actually saw a dramatic reverse in many of the changed February had caused. It marked a return to repressive, aggressive government and did away with democracy, replacing it with communism. So compared to what preceded it the Bolshevik coming to power was a big change but in the grand context of Russian history it was actually less significant as it was a return to a totalitarian government and it also took Bolshevism a long time to spread beyond the towns and truly become the government of all of Russia. It took the civil war to make this happen.
For a final event that was to cause long lasting change we must look back to the start of the period and to the emancipation of the serfs, Alexander II’s greatest legacy but also perhaps also the root of all the trouble that eventually results in the revolutions mentioned earlier. The reform, that severed serfs from their masters, simply did not go far enough and not enough changed. Feudal dues, land rotation and poor quality land being given to the ex-serfs all amounted to them not gained much freedom and merely becoming tied to their villages rather than the nobles whose land they had pervious worked on. But while the rich poor divide was as strong as ever and conditions didn’t change, attitudes did and in a big way. Most significantly it marked the start of the so called crisis of rising expectations, whereby the Russian people’s hopes for improvement to life were repeatedly built up and then shattered by inadequate and/or poorly executed reform. The Russian people hence began to see that their lives could be improved if they could simply get the government to pass the necessary reforms. The discontent that was to punctuate Russian society for the just under a century began here. Overall though the Tsar had looked to use emancipation as a way of increasing his power and he clearly did not learn from this as many of the subsequent reforms he passed did much the same. So serf emancipation did little to develop the government but much to develop the attitudes of the Russian people towards change.
In conclusion, while several points in the period 1855-1924 brought about change in Russia, be they in terms of attitudes of people or the make-up of various aspects of life, only two really changed the government – the revolutions of 1917. These were the ones that brought in completely new forms of government who had new ideas for the running of the country. The end of Alexander II’s claim to the title ‘Tsar Liberator’ (that had begun with serfdom’s abolition) as he deviated from reformist policies towards the end of his rule, marked an increase in repression. Alexander III merely continued this policy but did also encourage industrial growth in Russia and was undoubtedly more of a reactionary than his father. Nicholas II made sure that the changes introduced in 1905 were not long lasting. So it is 1917, particularly the first revolution of that year (as that gave the more start contrast to the period before), that clearly saw the biggest change in Russian government. Other events saw them change the emphasis of their policies but there was no great overhaul and as such these events are less significant in developing Russian government.
