Why did revolution in Russia succeed in February 1917 and not in 1905? (30 marks)

Authors Avatar by offtotheraces (student)

Why did revolution succeed in February 1917 and not in 1905? (30 marks)

     In the Russian Revolution of 1905 there was a clear distinction between revolutionary and reformist ideologies. Such ideological divisions were exploited by the Tsarist government and resulted in the pacification of the liberals and the peasants, and the crushing of the proletariat by the loyal armed forces. In marked contrast, the February Revolution of 1917 exhibited a larger, stronger and more united opposition to Tsarism which, combined with the defection of the armed forces, was able to succeed in toppling the Tsar and his autocratic regime. The switching loyalty of the armed forces and the greater unity in February 1917 were consequences of three interrelated factors: the First World War; actions of the Tsar; and grave political discontent.

     Whilst the Russo-Japanese War, a precursor to the 1905 Revolution, did not break the faith of the armed forces, the sheer scale and severity of the First World War proved fundamental in altering their allegiances. It is important to recognise that the loyalty of the army to the Tsar in 1905 was crucial in defeating the proletariat revolutionaries – as evidenced by the suppression of the Moscow Uprising. By 1917 the army was so irreparably disillusioned that their loyalty no longer resided with the Tsar. The reasons for such disillusionment lie in the disastrous nature of the Russian war effort. First and foremost, military defeats at the Battle of Tannenberg, and the loss of Russian Poland to the Germans, had devastating effects on soldier morale. Such morale was also affected by how dangerously under-equipped the army was – there were, for example, a million more men than rifles. The enormous casualties from 1914-17 of almost two million, much greater than those of the Russo-Japanese War, also worked to rapidly diminish support for the Tsar. The defection of the army in February 1917, a culmination of such discontent and disillusionment, meant that the Tsar had no coercive weapon by which to stifle revolution. This consequently worked to make his abdication an inevitability. This is not the sole reason for the success of the February Revolution however. The actions of the Tsar, in relation to the war, also proved significant in alienating those traditionally loyal to him.      

Join now!

     In 1905 the Tsar was very much ‘behind the scenes’ – criticism towards him was not as sharply focussed as it was by 1917. In 1915, by appointing himself as Commander in Chief of the military, the Tsar managed to directly implicate himself in all war failures. This inextricable link between the Tsar and the war, strengthened by his incompetence as a military strategist, is a key factor as to why his previously loyal army defected, which, as discussed, led to the success of the February Revolution. The Tsar’s decision to take such a role helped alienate his ...

This is a preview of the whole essay