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

was bloody sunday the prime reason for the 1905 revolution

Extracts from this document...


BLOODY SUNDAY WAS THE PRIME REASON FOR THE 1905 REVOLUTION? The events of Bloody Sunday were without a doubt an important part of Russian history as it exposed the spiralling problems the tsar faced, and the hurt of the people. The events of Blood Sunday only aided in aggravating the people and opposition as well as stimulating revolution. But yet on the other hand I still do not believe this was the prime cause for the 1905 revolutin. There are various reasons as to why bloody Sunday may have not been a prime reason for the 1905 revolution; for the reason that there are a range of long and short term causes for the march such as the ill treatment of workers and oppression through serfdom, the Russiffication of Russia that eventually led up to what was the bloody Sunday march, this brings to light the question whether the 1905 revolution would have occurred without the events of bloody Sunday. However the events of bloody Sunday helped to bring publicity to what was the worsening political and social situation in Russia in addition to tarring the image of Nicholas the II. So to a certain extent bloody Sunday did play a part in the 1905 revolution however I still do not believe bloody Sunday was the prime reason for the revolution. ...read more.


The abolition of serfdom created more problems for the monarchy as redemption dues were introduced which ensured peasants would stay in poverty. Peasants also had to buy their own land since they were not provided with any. The emancipation of the serfs and the introduction of redemption dues lead to peasants travelling to the cities to find work where they ended up living in squalid conditions. These living and working conditions caused the bloody Sunday march. So to say that bloody Sunday was the main reason for the 1905 would be a mistake as many factors which could be seen as individual causes for the 1905 revolution lead up to the bloody Sunday march. This would however show the significance of the events of bloody Sunday in leading to the revolution, as people had not yet revolted because they still felt it was not the tsars fault for their suffering moreover he was still viewed as their 'little father'. The protest was merely to present a petition but the events that occurred may have triggered revolution as the results of bloody Sunday involved widespread disorder and strikes in the cities and eventually spread to the countryside. Consequently bloody Sunday may have not been a prime reason for revolution but one of many triggers of the revolution. ...read more.


have resulted in mass rebellion, the massacre in which civilians were killed again tarred the tsars reputation thus painting a poor portrait of the tsar in the eyes of his people. The events of Bloody Sunday undoubtedly played a major role in the 1905 revolution. I still can not see it as being the prime reason for the revolution as events leading to the revolution were occurring decades before the 1905 revolution. I can understand why it would be perceived as a prime reason for the revolution because it happened so close to the actual revolution. I however believe it was a trigger for the 1905 revolution but not the main cause for the revolution as I believe the revolution occurred because of the lack of reforms. This is because when reforms were made the revolution ended; this would suggest that the revolution purely took place purely because of the people's want of reforms. The events of Bloody was a cause for the 1905 revolution but not the prime cause, however the importance of the events in relation to the revolution are key as I feel the revolution would have not taken place with innocent people being killed on the 'orders' of the tsar thus inciting aggression and resistance thus leading to eventual revolution. Timothy Omacar 12AM ...read more.

The above preview is unformatted text

This student written piece of work is one of many that can be found in our AS and A Level Modern European History, 1789-1945 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 AS and A Level Modern European History, 1789-1945 essays

  1. Russian Revolution Sources Questions

    The impression the source gives is that Stalin was a man of very limited talents. The caption for the source does not state who wrote it, but many countries in the West were opposed to Stalin and communism which could explain why they were prejudiced against him.

  2. Why was there a revolution in Russia in 1905?

    peasants in stead of nurturing the kind of social unrest ready to be exploited through revolution. It can be said that by coupling his commitment to autocracy with a desire for the spoils and status of western economic power and productivity the Tsar in part crippled his own regime by overlooking his people.

  1. Why was the Tsar able to survive Revolution in 1905 with his powers intact?

    From these two concessions, you could say that the reason the rule of the Tsar was unharmed in 1905 was because of the Prime Minister, Witte, who had kept a level head (and could appreciate how important everyone in Russia was).

  2. Europe In revolution

    revolution occurred in Greece (1821-29), western and central Europe (1848-49), Italy (1859-61), Germany (1866-70), and the Balkans (1871-1881). Liberals throughout Europe demanded that absolutism be abolished and elected parliaments only by property owners make laws instead of monarchs. Liberal revolutions occurred throughout Europe 1820-21, 1830-33, 1848-49.

  1. Europe in Revolution

    This developed in what was known as the Concert of Europe. It included Russia, Austria, Prussia and a hesitant France and Britain. These powers agreed to work together to uphold the terms of the settlement and quell any uprisings. For the most part the Concert was successful in the thirty or so years after it was founded.

  2. FRench revolution

    The king could not make laws on his own; he had to consult his council of ministers and advisors in order to pass a law. As the king was only answerable to by God, he then had to portray that he was strong and dominant person Louis XVI was not a strong figure but in fact rather weak.

  1. Russia 1905 - 1941

    So overall Stalin's desire to modernise agriculture led him to collectivise the farms and putting them totally under state control. In the long term this led to more efficient farming and increased production, but in the short term it involved a war with the kulaks and a dramatic fall in output, which led to widespread famine.

  2. Russian Revolution Sources Question

    Lenin stole the land policy from the social revolutionaries, this put the peasants on the Bolshevik's side. This shows Lenin's ability to change his policies to get the Russian people on his side. But Lenin's policies were not all positive for the Russian peasants who made up the majority of the population.

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