The traditional Soviet view of the October revolution claimed that it was a popular uprising lead and carried out by the working class, and in which the peasants followed. This view states that it was the workers that created the soviets, and it was this view that stated that the soviets “acted as the power-bases through which the revolution was accomplished”. This view credits Lenin by saying that he was the leader who wanted to liberate the Russian people from the Provisional Government and take Russia out of the First World War. It also gives credit to the entire Bolshevik party by saying that they led the working class to success. This view, although similar to the Revisionist view, is a lot more biased to the Bolshevik party, and depicts them almost as heroes. This could be because they had to conform to the idolising views of the Bolshevik party, as many historians of their time had to. This means that this view may not be entirely trustworthy, as it is so biased.
The predominant western view after 1945 differs greatly to the traditional Soviet view, as they viewed the October revolution as a coup d’état. They thought that it triggered the ‘straight line’ from Leninism and Bolshevism to Stalinism, which was total rule by a dictator with no civil rights or freedom to express political views or opinions. This makes the October revolution sound like it was not supported by the majority of the Russian revolution as they would have had no freedom of speech or civil rights. Unlike the traditional Soviet view, this view sees Lenin as being in complete control of the Bolshevik party, with the other members of the party being like ‘puppets’ to him and obeying his every command. This view was probably quite biased as at the time there were hostile views to Russia from a majority of westerners due to the cold war.
More recent historians such as Robert Service accept the views of the Revisionists and Cold War historians, and they believe that there was a lot of independent action within the local levels of the Bolshevik party and the Soviets. They believe that the October revolution was a popular uprising as the take over was aided by the growth of radicalism among the soldiers, workers, sailors and peasants. This shows the support of the uprising from the majority of the population, meaning that in one sense the October revolution was a popular uprising.
They also say that there is a certain level of evidence that points to the October revolution as being a coup d’état. Although they don’t share the view of Lenin being the ‘puppet master’ for the Bolshevik Party, they do recognise him as being an important figure in the October revolution and they especially regard his perseverance. They believe that without Lenin, the October revolution would probably not have happened. The view of recent historians is much more open to the idea that the October revolution was both a popular revolution and a coup d’état.
In conclusion, I think that the October Revolution was both a coup d’état and a popular uprising. By looking at all the different historians of different times, you can see that there were mixed views as to whether the October revolution was a coup d’état or a popular uprising. There were definitely key figures in leading the October revolution, such as Lenin. Lenin’s perseverance and ability to motivate people through his public speaking meant that the popularity of the Bolsheviks grew throughout Russia. Lenin became a recognised face with the working class and the support gained from the majority of the population due to this (from peasants, workers, soldiers and sailors). This can contribute to the argument that the October revolution was a popular uprising, as they had so much support from the Russian people. There was also an increase in radicalism throughout the population of Russia. People were beginning to want more radical things from the government, and the Bolsheviks were able to feed this new need for radicalism. This also shows that the October revolution could have been a popular uprising, as they were winning peoples support through their actions and policies. “Peace bread and land” was one of the slogans that brought popularity to the Bolsheviks, and promising land to the peasants was a radical idea (as it meant taking land off the landowners).