access to history

Reaction and Revolution:

Russia 1s94-1924
MICHAEL LYNCH

{_' ~o<a~A~I~~
LEARN MORE
Contents

CHAPTER 1 Introduction: Russia in 1894 1

1 The land, the people and tsardom 1
2 The problem of reform 9

CHAPTER 2 Nicholas ll's early rule 1894-1905 13

1 Nicholas II : character and policies 14
2 Economic reform 1893-1903 16
3 The opponents oftsardom 22
4 The Russo-Japanese War 1904-5 32
5 The 1905 Revolution 35

CHAPTER 3 Romanov rule 1906-14 45

1 Economic policy under Stolypin 46
2 The dumas 1906-14 51
3 Growing tensions in Russia 1911-14 56
4 Russia's foreign policy before 1914 58
5 The tsar's position at the outbreak of war in 1914 63
6 Key debate 65

CHAPTER4 War and revolution 1914-17 70

1 Why Russia went to war in 1914 71
2 The impact of war on Russia 74
3 The growth of opposition to tsardom 81
4 The February Revolution 86
5 Key debate 93

CHAPTER 5 1917: From Provisional Government to October Revolution 98

1 The Dual Authority 99
2 The return of the Bolsheviks 102
3 The Provisional Government and its problems 106
4 The October Revolution 113
5 Reasons for Bolshevik success 119
6 Key debate 123

CHAPTER6 The Bolshevik consolidation of power 1917-24 130

1 The Bolsheviks in power 131
2 The dissolution of the Constituent Assembly 135
3 The Treaty of Brest-Litovsk 1918 138
4 The Russian Civil War 1918-20 141
5 The foreign interventions 1918-20 150
6 Lenin's methods for imposing control 1917-21 154
7 War Communism 1918-21 160

iii
 Contents

8 The Kronstadt Rising 1921 166

9 The New Economic Policy 170

Study guide 178

Glossary of terms 187
Further reading 192
Index 194

Dedication
Keith Randell (1943-2002)
The Access to History series was conceived and developed by Keith, who created a series to 'cater for
students as they are, not as we might wish them to be'. He leaves a living legacy of a series that for over
20 years has provided a trusted, stimulating and well-loved accompaniment to post-16 study. Our aim
with these new editions is to continue to offer students the best possible support for their studies.

iv
Nicholas ll's early rule
1894-1905
The period 1905-14 was a testing time for Imperial Russia. At issue was the question of
whether it could become a modern state. In 1905, the tsarist system was shaken by the
most open challenge it had yet faced. It survived, but only by making concessions to its
opponents. A parliament was granted and political parties were legalised. Whether such
concessions weakened or strengthened tsardom is the underlying theme of this chapter,
which sees Imperial Russia wrestling with its internal and external enemies. The key areas
examined are:

* Nicholas II: character and policies

* Economic reform 1893-1903

* The opponents oftsardom

* The Russo-Japanese War 1904-5

* The 1905 Revolution

Key dates

1890s The great spurt 1904-5 Russo-Japanese War

1894 Start of Nicholas ll's reign 1904 Union of Liberation formed
1894-1906 Sergei Witte's economic reforms 1905 Revolution
1897 Jewish Bund formed
Bloody Sunday
1898 Social Democrats (SD) party formed
All-Russian Union of Peasants formed
1901 Social Revolutionaries (SR) party
formed October Manifesto
1903 SD party split into Bolsheviks and Formation of the Kadets and the
Mensheviks Octobrists

13
 Reaction and Revolution: Russia I894~ 1924

Nicholas II: character and

policies
I
► How did Nicholas II approach the problem of governing Russia?
I

Nicholas II came to the throne in 1894. It was an irony of history that, at the
very time when Russia most needed a tsar of strength and imagination, it was
a man of weakness and limited outlook who ruled the nation. Whatever his
private virtues (he was, for example, a devoted husband and father), he never
showed the statesmanship the times required. There are two main aspects to
Nicholas II's reign:
• the problems he faced as tsar at a particularly critical stage in Russian history
• the growth of opposition in Russia to the tsarist system.

The issue of modernity

The most pressing question facing Russia at the start of Nicholas's reign was
whether Imperial Russia could modernise itself sufficiently to be able to compete
with the other European nations. Would the new tsar be a reformer or a
reactionary? There was little doubt what the answer would be. The assassination
of a progressive tsar, Alexander II, followed by a fierce period of repression
under his successor Alexander II had made it highly unlikely that the new tsar
1
would reverse his predecessor's policy. Furthermore, Nicholas's upbringing and
education made him suspicious of change. It was no surprise that he continued

l~ KEV FIGURE
the repressive policies he had inherited. This further angered the intelligentsia
and the critics of the tsari~ egime; they began to prepare to challenge tsardom.
Konstantin
Nicholas ll's upbringing: the role of Pobedonostsev
Pobedonostsev
(1827-1907) As a young man, Nicholas had been tutored at court by Konstantin
Chief minister in the Russian Pobedonostsev, a man of great influence in late Imperial Russia. Known as
government from I 88 I to the 'Grand Inquisitor' because of his repressive attitudes, Pobedonostsev was
I 905 and also the Procurator an arch-conservative who had a deep distaste for all forms of democracy. He
(lay head) of the Synod, the condemned the growth of parliamentary democracy in western Europe as
governing body of the Russian
a betrayal of their duty by the political leaders there. He dismissed the idea
Orthodox Church.
of representative government as 'the great lie of our time'. To his mind,
autocracy was the only possible government for Imperial Russia. Pobedonostsev
~ KEVTERM personified the obstructions in the way of Russia's necessary political and social
reform. As personal tutor to Alexander III and Nicholas II, he played a major
Representative
government A system in
part in shaping the reactionary attitudes of the last two tsars. Nicholas took to
which the people of a nation heart the lessons he learned from Pobedonostsev.
elect a government into
One of the quirks of the Russian history of this period was that 'the Reaction',
office, and subsequently vote
it out if they so choose. associated with Alexander III and Pobedonostsev, coincided with a time of
remarkable economic expansion. It is this that gives added weight to the

14
Chapter 2 Nicholas /l's early rule /894- 1905

argument that in the late nineteenth and early twentieth centuries, the tsarist
government through its reactionary policies threw away its last chance of
survival. At a critical phase, when economic developments seemed to offer ~ KEYTERMS
Russia the opportunity to modernise, tsardom showed a fatal resistance to
change. By restricting itself to a narrow form of nationalism and orthodoxy, Nationalism Th e conviction
the tsarist government blindly denied itself the chance to adapt successfully to a that the nation state is
the highest form of social
changing world.
organisation; in Russian
tradition, the belief that
Russification Russia was a 'holy' nation
A policy of particular note that had begun under Alexander III and which that did not need to embrace
modernity.
Nicholas II carried on was Russification. This was a severely enforced policy of
restricting the influence of the non-Russian national minorities by emphasising Orthodoxy Conformity to
an unchanging set of political
the superiority of all things Russian. The aim was to impose Russian ways on all
ideas or religious beliefs.
the peoples within the empire.
Russification Russian was
Officials everywhere in the empire now had a vested interest in maintaining declared to be the official first
the dominance of Russian values at the expense of the other national cultures. language; all legal proceedings
Discrimination against non-Russians, which had previously been a hidden and all administration had
feature of Russian public life, became more open and vindictive in the 1890s. to be conducted in Russian.
Public office was closed
The nationalities that suffered most from this were the Baltic Germans, the
to those not fluent in the
Poles, the Finns, the Armenians and the Ukrainians. State interference in their language.
education, religion and culture became widespread and systematic.
Ghettos Discrete
districts where Jews were
Anti-Semitism concentrated and to which
Among the chief victims of Russification were the Jews. Over 600 new measures they were restricted.
were introduced, imposing heavy social, political and economic restrictions on Pogroms Fierce state-
the Jewish population. Since the majority of Jews lived in ghettos, they were organised persecutions that
easily identifiable scapegoats who could be blamed for'Russia's difficulties. Anti- often involved the wounding
Semitism was deeply ingrained in tsarist Russia. Pogroms had long disfigured or killing of Jews and the
destruction of their property.
Russian history. A group of ultra-conservative Russian nationalists, known
as the 'Black Hundreds', were notorious for their attacks on Jews. During the
reign of Nicholas II the number of pogroms increased sharply. This was proof
of the tsarist regime's active encouragement of the terrorising of the Jews. But
what was equally noticeable was the eagerness with which local communities
followed the lead from above in organising the bloodletting.

The response to Nicholas ll's policies

The tight controls that Nicholas II tried to impose did not lessen opposition to
tsardom. The reverse happened; despite greater police interference, opposition
became more organised. A number of political parties, ranging from moderate
reformers to violent revolutionaries, came into being. The government's policies
of reaction and Russification produced a situation in which many political and
national groups grew increasingly frustrated by the mixture of coercion and
incompetence that characterised the tsarist system.

15
 Reaction and Revolution: Russia 1894- 1924

The failings of Russification

As a policy, Russification proved remarkably ill-judged. At a critical stage in
Russia's development, when cohesion and unity were needed, its leaders chose
to treat its national minorities, who made up half the population, as inferiors
or potential enemies. The persecution of the Jews was especially ill-judged. It
alienated the great mass of the 5 million Jews in the Russian population, large
numbers of whom fled in desperation to western Europe and North America,
carrying with them an abiding hatred of tsardom. Those who could not escape
stayed to form a large and disaffected community within the empire. It was
no coincidence that the 1890s witnessed a large influx of Jews into the various
anti-tsarist movements in Russia. In 1897, Jews formed their own revolutionary
'Bund' or union.

Summary diagram : Nicholas II: character and policies

Nicholas II
lacked necessary political skills

Russification

Resistance through the Bund

Tsardom's lost opportunity at a critical stage in its history

Economic reform 1893-1903

~ What methods did Witte use to develop the Russian economy?
I

For all the difficulties that Russia faced, the period was one of rapid economic
expansion. For a time it seemed that Russia might become a modern industrial
nation. This was largely due to the work of two outstanding ministers: Count
~ KEVTERM
Sergei Witte, who served during the early part of Nicholas II's reign, and Peter
Great spurt Th e spread of Stolypin (see pages 46-50). In the face of resistance from the very regime they
industry and the increase in were trying to serve, Witte and Stolypin sought to modernise Russia.
production that occurred in
Russia in the 1890s. In the 1890s, Russian industry grew so rapidly that the term the 'great spurt'
was used to describe the period. A major reason for the exceptional growth

16
Chapter 2 Nicholas /l's early rule /894- 1905

Sergei Witte by skilfu lly negotiating a peace

that left Russia mi litarily
defeated but not diplomatical ly
1849 Born in T bilisi
humi liated. Witte showed
I870s-80s Administrator in private businesses similar brilliance in drafting
1892-1903 Reforming minister of finance the October Manifesto,
1903-6 Chairman of the Committee of Ministers which enabled the tsar to emerge from the 1905
Revolution with his powers largely intact (see page 39).
1905 Negotiated end of Russo-Japanese War
Witte's efforts went unappreciated. The Empress
1906 Dismissed by Nicholas II Alexandra disliked him, an animosity that was shared
19 15 Died among courtiers and government officials. From 1906,
Nicholas II dispensed with his services altogether, thus
Academically gifted and experienced in management, depriving the government of its most capable minister
Witte was brought into government in 1892 as during the final decade of Witte's life.
minister of finance. He set about modernising Russia's
backward economy. Despite constant criticism from Witte's prickly personality and reluctance to suffer
his less talented coll eagues, who resented his abi lity, fools glad ly meant that he easily made enemies. Yet,
he achieved a series of major financial and economic he remained Russia's last best hope. His en lightened
reforms that led to the great spurt of the 1890s, which economic reforms showed what Russia might have
suggested that Russia had the potential to become a accomplished had he remained in office long enough.
modern industrial power. However, after a decade In hindsight, there is a strong case for saying that the
in office, he was dismissed by the tsar, who believed tsar's dismissal of Witte, at a critical juncture in Russia's
fabricated stories that W itte was imp licated in a Jewish fortunes , inadvertently threw away the best chance of
conspiracy to undermine the Russian state. Despite this , his dynasty's survival. Witte's tragedy, and ultimately
the tsar recalled him in 1905 to extricate Russia from tsardom's, was that he was never trusted by those in
its war with Japan, a task which Witte accomplished charge of the nation he was trying to save.

was the increase in the output of coal in Ukraine and of oil in the Caucasus. ~ KEYTERMS
Economic historians are agreed that, although this sudden acceleration was the
result of private enterprise, it was sustained by deliberate government policy. Private enterprise
Economic activity organised
However, the motives of the tsarist government were military rather than by ind ividuals or companies,
economic. It is true that Russia's capitalists did well out of the great spurt, but it not the government.
was not the government's primary intention to help them. Economic expansion
Capitalists Fi nanciers and
attracted the tsar and his ministers because it was a means of improving the factory owners.
strength of the Russian armed forces. A growing industry would produce more
and better guns, equipment and ships.
The outstanding individual involved in Russia's development at this time was
Sergei Witte. As Minister of Finance from 1892 to 1903, he set himself the huge
task of modernising the Russian economy to a level where it could compete with
the advanced nations of the West. To help bring this about, he invited foreign
experts and workers to Russia to advise on industrial planning. Engineers and
managers from France, Belgium, Britain, Germany and Sweden played a vital
role in the great spurt.

17
 Reaction and Revolution: Russia I 894~ 1924

State capitalism
While not opposed to private enterprise, Witte considered that modernisation
could be achieved only through state capitalism. He was impressed by the
results of the industrial revolutions in western Europe and the USA, and argued
that Russia could successfully modernise by planning along the same lines.
He admitted that, given the backwardness of Russia, this presented particular
difficulties.
SOURCE A

From Witte's memorandum to the tsar in 1899, quoted in T. Riha, editor,

? According to Witte in Readings in Russian Civilization, volume 2, University of Chicago Press, 1964,
• Source A, what is the p.431.
relationship between
Russia and the advanced The economic relations of Russia to Western Europe are fully comparable to the
industrial nations? relations of colonial countries with their metropolises [mother countries]. The
latter consider their colonies as advantageous markets in which they can freely
sell the products of their labor and of their industry, and from which they can
~ KEVTERMS draw with a powerful hand the raw materials necessary for them. Russia was,
and to a certain extent still is, such a hospitable colony for all industrially
State capitalism The developed states, generously providing them with the cheap products of her soil
direction and control of the and buying dearly the products of their labor. But there is a radical difference
economy by the government, between Russia and a colony: Russia is an independent and strong power. She
using its central authority.
has the right and the strength not to want to be the handmaiden of states which
Tariffs Duties imposed on are more developed economically.
foreign goods to keep their
prices high and thereby
discourage importers from
Witte judged that, for Russia to avoid remaining 'the handmaiden' of the
bringing them into the advanced industrial states, its greatest need was to acquire capital for investment
country. in industry. To raise this, he negotiated large loans and investments from abroad,
Gold standard Th e system while imposing heavy taxes and high interest rates at home. At the same time as
in which the rouble had a he encouraged the inflow of foreign capital, Witte limited the import of foreign
fixed gold content, thus giving goods. Protecfo,e tariffs were set up as a means of safeguarding Russia's young
it strength when exchanged domestic industries, such as steel production. In 1897, the Russian currency
with other currencies.
was put on the gold standard. The hope was that this would create financial
Rouble Russia's basic unit of stability and so encourage international investment in Russia. The aim was
currency. largely successful but it penalised the consumers at home since they had to pay
the higher prices that traders introduced to keep pace with the increased value of
the rouble. Furthermore, prices tended to rise as a result of tariffs making goods
scarcer.

The importance of the railways

Much of the foreign capital that Witte was successful in raising was directly
invested in railways. He believed that the modernisation of the Russian economy
ultimately depended on developing an effective railway system. His enthusiasm
was an important factor in the extraordinary increase in lines and rolling stock
that took place between 1881 and 1913. It would not be an exaggeration to
describe this as a transport revolution (see Figure 2.1).

18
Chapter 2 Nicholas /l's early rule /894- 1905

1881 1111111111 21,230 km (13,270 miles)

1891 11111111111111111 31,220km(19,510miles)

1900 11111111111111111111111111111 53,230 km (33,270 miles)

70,160 km
1913 +1+1+1+1+1+1+1+1+1+1+1+I+I+I+I+I+I+I+I+I+I+I+I+I+I+I+I+I+I+-I+-I+-I+-I+-I+-I+-I+-I+-I+-I+-I+-I1-+I
I (43,850 miles)

Figure 2.1 The growth of Russian railways.

Witte's special project was the trans-Siberian railway, which was constructed
between 1891 and 1902. The line stretched for 6000 km (3750 miles) from
Moscow to Vladivostok (see the map on page 3) and was intended to connect
the remoter regions of the central and eastern empire with the industrial
west, and so encourage the migration of workers to the areas where they were
most needed. However, it promised more than it delivered. Sections of it were
still incomplete in 1914 and in the event it did not greatly improve east-west
migration. The trans-Siberian railway proved more impressive as a symbol of
Russian enterprise than as a project of real economic worth.
One of Witte's main hopes was that the major improvements in transport would
boost exports and foreign trade. The trade figures suggest that his hopes were
largely fulfilled (see Table 2.1 and Figure 2.2 on page 20).
These figures of increased production are not so impressive when it is ~ KEYTERM
remembered that Russia was experiencing a massive growth in population.
Production per capita was lower than the overall figures suggested (see Per capita 'Per head',
Table 2.2). Although total production rose during this period, the average calculated by dividing the
amount produced by each person dropped. amount produced by the
number of people in the
Table 2.1 The Russian economy: annual production (in millions of tonnes) population.
Coal Pig iron Oil Grain*

5.9 0.89 3.9 36

16.1 2.66 10.2 56
26 .8 2.99 9.4 74
35.4 4.10 9.1 90
33 .8 3.72 9.7 64

* European Russia only.

Table 2.2 Population of Imperial Russia 1885-191 3

1885 1897 1913

8 1,725,200 93,442,900 121 ,780,000
7,284 ,500 9,289,400 12,717 ,200
4,313,700 5,758 ,800 9,894,500
1,588 ,500 2,465 ,700 3,929,500
3,738,600 5,281 ,000 7,106,000
98,650 ,500 116,237 ,800 155,427,200

19
 Reaction and Revolution: Russia 1894- 1924

180

160
163.6
140 149.7 153.2

120
122.5
:5 111 .7
0.. 100 109.5
:5 100
0 98.2
80

60

40

20

0
1900 1904 1905 1906 1909 1911 1912 1913
Year

Figure 2.2 Industrial output in the Russian Empire (calculated to base unit of I 00
in 1900).

Nevertheless, Russia was enjoying real economic growth. Figure 2.3 shows how
favourably its industrial output compared with other European countries. Again,
one has to be cautious in interpreting the data. Given its backwardness, Russia
was starting from a much lower level of production. For example, although its
96.8 per cent growth looks to be over twice that of Britain's, it was playing catch-
up and had a long way to go.

100
90 96.8%

80 84.2% 82.7%
79%
.r:
70
1:0
°'
(I)
CJ)

.l9
60
50
59.6%
C
(I)
~ 40
(I) 40%
a..
30
20
10

0
Austria Britain France Germany Italy Russia

Figure 2.3 Growth in national production 1898-1913.

20
Chapter 2 Nicholas /l's early rule /894-1905

Witte's problems
There is no doubt that Witte's policies had a major impact on the expansion of
the Russian economy. However, what can be questioned is whether the results
were wholly beneficial for Russia. Critics have pointed to three drawbacks in his
economic reforms:
• Witte made Russia too dependent on foreign loans and investments.
• In giving priority to heavy industry, Witte neglected vital light engineering
areas, such as machine tool production, which would have helped to
modernise manufacturing.
• Witte paid no attention to Russia's agricultural needs.
Yet, any criticism of Witte should be balanced by reference to the problems
he faced. The demands of the military commanders that their transport and
equipment needs should have priority in economic planning too often interfered
with his schemes for railway construction and the building of new industrial
plant. Moreover, Witte's freedom of action was restricted by the resistance to
change that he met from the court and the government. The main purpose of
his economic policies was to make the nation strong and thus protect tsardo
against the disruptive forces in Russian society, but he was disliked by the royal
court and the government, which seldom gave him the support he needed. In
1903, the tsar forced him to resign as finance minister.
Witte was an abrasive individual who made enemies easily, but in ability he
towered above all the other ministers and officials in the government. His
tragedy was that despite his great talents, which, if properly recognised, might
have led Russia towards peaceful modernisation, he was never fully trusted by
the people of the tsarist court and system he was trying to save.

The end of the great spurt by 1900

The improvement of the Russian economy in the 1890s was not simply the result ~ KEVTERM
of the work of Witte. It was part of a worldwide industrial boom. However, by
the turn of the century, the boom had ended and a serious international trade Trade recession A fall in
recession had set in. The consequences for Russia were especially serious. the demand for goods, which
The industrial expansion at the end the century had led to a ballooning of the leads to production being cut
back and workers laid off.
population of the towns and cities (see Table 2.3 on page 22). This increase
had not been organised or supervised; the facilities for accommodating the
influx of workers were wholly inadequate. The result was severe overcrowding.
Furthermore, when boom turned to recession there was widespread
unemployment which increased unrest in the cities and urban areas.

21
 Reaction and Revolution: Russia I 894~ 1924

Table 2.3 Growth of population in Russia's two main cities

St Petersburg Moscow St Petersburg Moscow

928,000 753,500 1,439,600 1,345 ,000

1,033,600 1,038 ,600 1,905 ,600 1,6 17,700
1,264,700 1,174,000 2,217,500 1,762,700

Summary diagram : Economic reform 1893-1903

Key developments
Private enterprise
State capitalism

Helped to create

The great spurt

Factors

Population growth
Urban growth

Witte's reforms

Foreign loans Capital investment Industrialisation Railways

Recession

Worker unrest

~ KEVTERMS

Revolutionaries T hose
who believed that Russia
cou ld not progress unless the
tsarist system was destroyed.
The opponents of tsardom
(
Reformers St rong critics of .,.. What fo rms did opposition to tsardom take?
I
the tsarist system but who
believed it cou ld be changed Two main groups opposed to tsardom can be identified in Nicholas II's reign:
for the better by pressure
revolutionaries and reformers (liberals).
from without and reform
from w ithin .
Revolutionaries
Populists Narodniks , from
the Russian word for 't he The revolutionaries comprised th ree major groups:
people' .
• Populists
Social Democrats T he • Social Revolutionaries (SRs)
All-Russian Social D emocratic
• Social Democrats (SDs).
Workers' Party.

22
Chapter 2 Nicholas /l's early rule /894-1905

The Populists (Narodniks)

The Populists regarded the future of Russia as being in the hands of the
peasants who made up the overwhelming mass of the population. The peasants
must take the lead in transforming Russia, beginning with the overthrow of the
tsarist system itself.
Populism dated from the 1870s. As with all the significant political movements
of this period, the Populist leaders were drawn, not from the peasants, but from
the middle and upper classes. These leaders regarded it as their duty to educate
the uninformed peasantry into an awareness of its revolutionary role. This
involved 'going to the people', a policy under which the educated Populists went
from the universities into the countryside to live for a period with the peasants
in an attempt to turn them into revolutionaries. The policy was seldom a success.
The peasants tended to regard the students as airy-fairy thinkers and prattlers
who had no knowledge of real life.
In desperation, some Populists turned to terrorism as the only way of achieving
their aims. In 1879, a group calling itself 'The People's Will' was founded
with the declared intention of murdering members of the ruling class. This
movement, which was no more than 400 strong, gained notoriety two years later
when it successfully planned the assassination of Alexander II, who was blown
to pieces by a bomb. However, this act weakened rather than strengthened
the Populist movement. The murder of a tsar who had initiated many reforms
seemed to discredit the idea of reform itself and so justified tne repression
imposed in the wake of the assassination.
The importance of Populism lay in its methods rather than in its ideas. Its
concept of a peasant-based revolution was unrealistic; the Russian peasantry
were simply not interested in political revolution. What was lasting about
Populism was the part it played in establishing a violent anti-tsarist tradition. All
the revolutionaries in Russia after 1870 were influenced, if not inspired, by the
example of the Populist challenge to tsardom.

The Social Revolutionaries (SRs)

The Social Revolutionary Party grew directly out of the Populist movement. The
economic spurt of the 1890s had produced a quickening of interest in political
and social issues. Seeing this as an opportunity to gain recruits from the rapidly ~ KEYTERM
growing urban workforce, the SRs began to agitate among the workers. The
intention was to widen the concept of the 'people', so that it encompassed not People That part of the
simply the peasants but all those in society who had reasons for wishing to see population that the Social
the end of tsardom. Revolutionaries believed truly
represented the character
An important figure in the reshaping of Populist strategy was Victor Chernov, and will of the Russian nation.
who played a key part in the formation of the Social Revolutionary Party in 1901
and became its leader. He was a member of the intelligentsia, and sought to
provide a firmer base for Populism than its previous passionate but vague ideas

23
 Reaction and Revolution: Russia 1894- 1924

had produced. However, as with all the revolutionary groups in tsarist Russia,
the SRs were weakened by disagreements among themselves. Leon Trotsky,
who was later to play a major role as a revolutionary, pointed to this division
when he described the SRs as being made up of two competing groups: 'Left
Social Revolutionaries' and 'Right Social Revolutionaries'.

In distinguishing between the left and the right elements, Trotsky was referring
to the division of the SRs into anarchists and revolutionaries. The Left SRs were
the faction who wanted to continue the policy of terrorism inherited from 'The
People's Will'. The Right SRs were the more moderate element, who, while
believing in revolution as their ultimate goal, were prepared to co-operate with
other parties in working for an immediate improvement in the conditions of the
workers and peasants. Between 1901 and 1905, it was the terrorist faction that
dominated. During those years the SRs were responsible for over 2000 political
assassinations, including Plehve, the interior minister, and the tsar's uncle, the
Grand Duke Sergei. These were spectacular successes but they did little to bring
about the desired link with the urban workers.

The 1905 Revolution, which saw the first serious open challenge to tsardom in
Nicholas II's reign (see page 35), brought more gains to the liberals than to the
revolutionaries. One effect of this was that the more moderate Right SRs gained
greater influence over party policy. This began to show dividends. From 1906,
the SRs experienced a growing suppor,t from the professional classes, from
~ KEVTERM the trade unions and from the All-Russian Union of Peasants, which had been
set up in 1905. At its first congress in 1906, the SR Party committed itself to
Revolutionary socialism revolutionary socialism and gave a special pledge to the peasants that it would
The belief that change could end 'the bourgeois principle of private ownership by returning the land to those
be achieved only through
who worked it'.
the violent overthrow of the
tsarist system. It was their land policy that largely explains why the SRs remained the most
popular party with the peasants. However, at the time, the congress decisions
brought disruption rather than unity. The left wing protested that the party's
programme ignored the industrial workers, while the right asserted that
congress policy was unworkable in current Russian conditions. Chernov tried to
hold the factions together, but from 1906 onwards the SRs were a collection of
radical groups rather than a united party. Nevertheless, until they were outlawed
by the Bolsheviks after the 1917 Revolution (see page 171), the SRs remained the
party with the largest popular following in Russia.

The Social Democrats (SDs)

The Social Democrats came into being in 1898; their aim was to achieve
revolution in Russia by following the ideas of Karl Marx (1818-83), the German
revolutionary, who had advanced the idea that human society operated
according to scientific principles. He had asserted that, just as the physical
universe was governed by the laws of chemistry and physics, so too, the
behaviour of human beings was determined by social laws. These could be

24
Chapter 2 Nicholas /l's early rule /894-1905

scientifically studied and applied. Marx claimed that the critical determinant
~ KEYTERMS
of human behaviour was class struggle, a process that operated throughout
history. He referred to this process as the dialectic. Class struggle A continuing
conflict at every stage of
For revolutionaries in the nineteenth century, the most exciting aspect of
history between those who
Marx's analysis was his conviction that the contemporary industrial era marked possessed economic and
the final stage of the dialectical class struggle. Human history was about to political power and those
reach its culmination in the revolutionary victory of the proletariat over the who did not - in simple
bourgeoisie, which would usher in 'the dictatorship of the proletariat'. This terms, 'the haves' vs 'the
have-nots'.
dictatorship would be the last but one stage of history in which the workers,
having overthrown the bourgeoisie in revolution and taken power, would hunt Dialectic The violent
down and destroy all the surviving reactionaries. It would be a violent and struggle between opposites
which takes place in nature
bloody affair but, once these final class enemies had been obliterated, all conflict
and in human society.
would end and the perfect, harmonious society would emerge.
Proletariat The exploited
The attraction of Marx for Russian revolutionaries is easy to understand. His industrial workers who would
ideas had been known in Russia for some time, but what gave them particular supposedly triumph in the last
relevance was the great spurt of the 1890s. This promised to create the industrial great class struggle .

conditions in Russia that would make a successful revolution possible. The Bourgeoisie The owners
previously unfocused hopes for revolution could now be directed on the of capital, the boss class,
industrial working class. who exploited the workers
but who supposedly would
The first Marxist revolutionary of note in Russia was George Plekhanov. He be overthrown by them in
had translated Marx's writings into Russian and had worked to promote the idea revolution.
of proletarian revolution. Despite his pioneering work, and his founding of the
SD Party, a number of the members soon became impatient w:ith Plekhanov's ~ KEY FIGURE J
leadership. They found him too theoretical in his approach; they wanted a much
more active revolutionary programme. The outstanding spokesman for this George Plekhanov
viewpoint was Vladimir Ulyanov, better known as Lenin. (1856-1918)
Often referred to as 'the
father of Russian Marxism' ; it
Lenin and Marxism was under his leadership that
By the age of 20, Lenin's study of Marx's writings had turned him the SD Party was formed in
into a committed Marxist for whom revolution was a way of life. 1898.
By the age of 30, his dedication to the cause of revolution in Russia
had led to arrest, imprisonment and internal exile. Indeed, he was in
exile in Siberia when the SD Party was formed in 1898.
Lenin's greatest single achievement as a revolutionary was to
reshape Marxist theory to make it fit Russian conditions. The
instrument that he chose for this was the Bolshevik Party. Because
the party was the vehicle of historical change, its role was not to
win large-scale backing, but to direct the revolution from above,
regardless of the scale of popular support. 'No revolution', Lenin
wrote, 'ever waits for formal majorities.' (See page 104 for a full
profile of Lenin .)

25
 Reaction and Revolution: Russia I894~ 1924

Lenin's impact on the SDs

When Lenin returned from exile to western Russia in 1900, he set about
turning the SDs into his idea of what a truly revolutionary party must be. With
a colleague, Julius Martov, he founded a party newspaper, Iskra (The Spark),
which he used as the chief means of putting his case to the party members.
Lenin criticised Plekhanov for being more interested in reform than revolution.
~ KEVTERM He said that under Plekhanov the SDs, instead of transforming the workers into
a revolutionary force for the overthrow of capitalism, were following a policy
Economism Putting the of 'economism'. Lenin wanted living and working conditions to get worse, not
improvement of the workers' better. In that way the bitterness of the workers would increase, and so drive the
conditions before the need Russian proletariat to revolution.
for revolution.
In 1902, Lenin wrote his strongest attack yet on Plekhanov in a pamphlet called,
What Is To Be Done? In it he berated him for continuing to seek allies among as
broad a group of anti-tsarist elements as possible. Lenin insisted that this would
lead nowhere. Revolution in Russia was possible only if it was organised and led
by a party of dedicated, professional revolutionaries.
For Lenin, revolution was not a haphazard affair; it was a matter of applied
science. He regarded the teachings of Karl Marx as having already provided the
key to understanding how revolutions operated. It was the task of those select
members of the SD Party who understood scie tific Marxism to lead the way in
Russia. The workers could not be left to themselves; they did not know enough.
They had to be directed. It was the historical role of the informed members
of the SD Party to provide that direction. Only they could rescue the Russian
working class and convert it to true socialism.

The Bolshevik-Menshevik split

The dispute between Lenin and Plekhanov came to a head during the second
congress of the SD Party in 1903. Plekhanov tried to avoid confrontation, but
Lenin deliberately made an issue of who had the right to belong to the party.
His aim wasi:o force members to choose between Plekhanov's idea of a broad-
based party, open to all revolutionaries, and his own concept of a small, tightly
knit and exclusive party. The congress that met in a number of different places,
including Brussels and London, was a heated affair, which frequently descended
into a series of slanging matches over points of procedure. The London police,
who had been asked by the Russian authorities to keep an eye on proceedings,
tended to find the SDs a comical bunch. Their reports spoke of 'funny foreign
gentlemen' all speaking at the same time and trying to out-shout each other.
No matter how much the SDs may have amused the London bobbies, they
took themselves very seriously. A deep divide developed between Lenin and
one of his Iskra co-editors, Julius Martov, who shared Plekhanov's viewpoint
about membership. Their quarrel was as much to do with personality as with
politics. Martov believed that behind Lenin's tactics was a fierce determination
to become dictator of the party. Martov's view was supported by Alexander

26
Chapter 2 Nicholas /l's early rule /894- 1905

Potresov, another co-editor of Iskra, who wrote the description of Lenin in

Source B.
SOURCE B

From the papers of Alexander Potresov, writing in 1903, quoted in David Shub,
Lenin, Penguin, 1976, p. 76. According to Source B,
why was Lenin unwilling
?•
Lenin [showed] great cunning and a readiness to do anything to make his to join a common front
opinion prevail. Frequently my colleagues and I felt out of place in our own against the tsarist
newspaper office. Lenin divided the world sharply between those who were government?
with him and those who were against him. For him there existed no personal or
social relationship outside of the two classes. When the political principle was
enunciated that in the fight against the common enemy - the Tsarist
government - it was desirable to present a common front by combining with
other groups and parties, Lenin accepted it reluctantly and only in theory. In
practice, it remained an idle phrase. He could not have acted on that principle
even if he had wanted to, because he was incapable of co-operating with other
people. It went against his grain.

In a series of votes, the SD congress showed itself to be evenly divided between

Lenin and Martov. However, after a particular set of divisions had gone in ~ KEYTERMS
his favour, Lenin claimed that he and his supporters were the majority. This
led to their being called Bolsheviks while Martov's group became known as Bolsheviks From bolshinstvo ,
Mensheviks. Initially, the main point dividing Bolsheviks and Mensheviks was Russian for majority.
simply one of procedure. However, following the split in 1903 the differences Mensheviks From
between them hardened into a set of opposed attitudes. These are shown in menshinstvo, Russian for
Figure 2.4. minority.

By 1912, Bolsheviks and Mensheviks had become two d'stinct, conflicting

Marxist parties. Lenin deliberately emphasised the difference between himself
and Martov by resigning from the editorial board of Iskra and starting his
own journal, Vyperod (Forward), as an instrument for Bolshevik attacks on the
Mensheviks. A Bolshevik daily paper, Prav'da (The Truth), was first published
in 1912.

Lenin and the Bolsheviks before 1917

An important point to note is that the later success of Bolshevism in the October
Revolution has tempted writers to overstate the importance of Lenin in the
period before 1917. For example, Trotsky, who joined Lenin in 1917 after having
been a Menshevik, argued in his later writings that the Bolsheviks had been
systematically preparing the ground for revolution since 1903. But the fact was
that during the years 1904-17 Lenin was largely absent from Russia. He lived
variously in Finland, France, Switzerland and Austria, and his visits to Russia
were rare and fleeting. Although he continued from exile to issue a constant
stream of instructions to his followers, he and they played only a minor role in
events in Russia before 1917.

27
 Reaction and Revolution: Russia 1894- 1924

Menshevik view Issue Bolshevik view

Russia not yet ready for Revolution Bourgeois and proletarian

proletarian revolution - the stages could be telescoped
bourgeois stage had to into one revolution.
occur first.

A mass organisation with The party A tight-knit, exclusive ,

membership open to all organisation of professional
revolutionaries . revolutionaries.

Open , democratic Decision-making Authority to be exercised by

~ KEVTERM discussion within the party the central committee of the
- decisions arrived at by party - this was described as
'Democratic centralism' votes of members. 'democratic centralism'.
Lenin's notion that democracy
in the Bolshevik Party • Alliance with all other Strategy • No co-operation with other
revolutionary and parties.
lay in obedience to the
bourgeois liberal parties. • 'Economism' dismissed as
authority and instructions • Support of trade unions in playing into hands of
ofthe leaders. In practice , pursuing better wages and bourgeoisie.
Bolsheviks did what Lenin conditions for workers • Aimed to turn workers into
told them to do. ('economism'). revolutionaries.

Figure 2.4 Main differences between the Mensheviks and Bolsheviks.

Bolshevik tactics
Lenin and his fellow exiles set up training schools for revolutionaries who were
then smuggled back into Russia to infiltrate worker organisations such as the
trade unions. The Bolsheviks who remained in Russia spent their time trying
to raise money for their party. This frequently involved direct terrorism and
violence; post offices were favourite targets for Bolshevik attack. In one notorious
episode in Tiflis (present-day Tbilisi) in Georgia, a Bolshevik gang bomb-blasted
their way into a post office and killed some twenty people before making off
with a quarter of a million roubles. The money stolen in such raids was used to
finance the printing of masses of handbills, leaflets and newspapers attacking
the tsarist regime and calling for revolution.
Yet, the truth was that, despite such activities, Lenin's revolutionaries were
regarded by the authorities during this period as merely a fringe group of
extremists. Interestingly, the Bolsheviks were not listed by the police as a major
challenge to the tsarist system. In the pre-1914 period the numerical strength
of the Bolsheviks varied between 5000 and 10,000; even in February 1917 it was
no more than 25,000. Before 1917, the Mensheviks invariably outnumbered
them. Numbers, of course, are not everything. Determination is arguably more
important. Whatever the apparent lack of influence of Lenin's Bolsheviks before
1917, the fact is that when a revolutionary situation developed in 1917 it was they
who proved the best prepared to seize the opportunity to take over government
(see page 118). The Bolsheviks' readiness was one of Lenin's major political
achievements.

28
Chapter 2 Nicholas /l's early rule /894- 1905

Reformers and Liberals

There were a number of reforming groups seeking change. These are usually
referred to as liberals but they never came together to form a common front.
Until the issuing of the October Manifesto in 1905 (see page 40), political parties
had been illegal in Russia. This had not actually prevented their formation,
but it had made it very difficult for them to develop as genuinely democratic
bodies. There was no tradition of open debate. Since they were denied legal
recognition, they often resorted to extreme methods in order to spread their
ideas. As a result, during the brief period of their permitted existence from 1905
to 1921, before they were again outlawed, the Russian political parties proved
to be suspicious and intolerant of each other. This made co-operation and
collective action difficult to organise. Yet, although they were to have a short and
inglorious life, the Russian liberal parties should not be ignored. In historical
study, losers deserve as much attention as winners. ~ KEY FIGURES J
The economic boom of the 1890s saw the rapid development of a small but
Paul Milyukov
ambitious class of industrialists, lawyers and financiers. It was among such
(1859-1943)
social groups that liberal ideas for the modernising of Russia began to take
An outstanding liberal critic of
hold. There was also often a strong national element in Russian liberalism. The
tsardom, he grew increasingly
national minorities viewed the liberal movement as a means of advancing their
disillusioned with the tsar and
claim to be independent of Russian imperial control. Three principal liberal doubted that the system he
parties came to prominence in the pre-1914 period: the Union ofUiberation, the represented could be saved.
Octobrists and the Kadets.
Peter Struve
(1870-1944)
Union of Liberation
A radical thinker and writer
The first significant reforming movement to emerge was the Union (also who had first been attracted
sometimes called League) of Liberation. Its principal leaders were academics to Marxism and for a short
Paul Milyukov and Peter Struve. Formed in 1904, the Union drew up a time was an SD member.
programme which expressed its basic aim.
SOURCE C

Extract from the programme of the Union of Liberation, 1904, quoted in David
______
"'""'""""""'"'""'"'""" """""""'"""'""""""""""'"'"""'""'"'"'""'""'"""'"'"'""'""""""'""'""'"'""'""""""'""""

According to Source C. ?
Christian, Imperial and Soviet Russia, Macmillan, 1997, p. 135.
what is the basic aim of •
The first and foremost aim of the Union of Liberation is the liberation of the Union of Liberation?
Russia. Considering political liberty in even its most minimal form completely
incompatible with the absolute character of the Russian monarchy, the union
will seek before all else the abolition of autocracy and the establishment in
Russia of a constitutional regime. In determining the concrete forms in which a
constitutional regime can be reduced to Russia, the Union of Liberation will
make all efforts to have the political problems resolved in the spirit of extensive
democracy. Above all, it recognises as fundamentally essential that the
principle of universal equal, secret, and direct elections be made the basis of the
political reform.

29
 Reaction and Revolution: Russia I 894~ 1924

The union tried to bring the various liberal groups together by pointing out
where there was common ground between them. Its influence helped to prepare
the way for the 1905 Revolution and it continued to operate as a party until 1917.
However, the union was unable to create a single coherent reforming movement
with a single purpose. The union's deeper significance was in indicating the
~ KEVTERMS
range of anti-tsarist feeling that existed and in advancing the arguments and
Duma The Russian ideas that the more progressive members of the government, such as Witte, took
parliament, which existed to heart. The union's programme was expressed in the type of language with
from 1906to 1917. which all liberal and reforming parties subsequently asserted their claims.
Constitutional monarchy
A system of government in The Octobrists
which the king or emperor This group dated from the issuing of the tsar's manifesto of October 1905, which
rules but only through
created the duma . The Octobrists were moderates who were basically loyal to
elected representatives
whose decisions he cannot
the tsar and his government. They believed in the maintenance of the Russian
countermand. empire and regarded the manifesto and the establishment of the duma as major
constitutional advances.

l~ KEV FIGURES
The Octobrists were mainly drawn from the larger commercial, industrial
and landowning interests. Their leading members were Alexander Guchkov
Alexander Guchkov and Mikhail Rodzianko, both of whom were later to ta1<.e a major part in the
(1862-1936) Provisional Government of 1917 (see page 99). How relatively restricted the
A major industrialist and
Octobrists were in their aims can be gauged from their programme, issued in
factory owner. November 1905, which called for unity among all those who wanted the 'rule
of law'. It appealed for the conti uation of a 'strong and authoritative regime' to
Mikhail Rodzianko
work with 'the representatives of the people' in bringing peace to the country.
(1859-1924)
A large landowner. The limited aims of the Octobrists led to their being dismissed by revolutionaries
as bourgeois reactionaries who were unwilling to challenge the existing
system. This was not wl:!,olly accurate. In the dumas, the Octobrists frequently
voiced serious criticisms of the short-sightedness or incompetence of the tsarist
government. They may not have wanted the overthrow of tsardom, but they
were very willing to point out its failings .

The Constitutional Democrats (Kadets)

The..Constitutional Democrats also came into being as a party at the time of the
1905 Revolution. The Kadets, the largest of the liberal parties, wanted Russia to
develop as a constitutional monarchy in which the powers of the tsar would
be restricted by a democratically elected constituent (national) assembly. They
believed that such a body, representative of the whole of Russia, would be able
to settle the nation's outstanding social, political and economic problems. Lenin
dismissed this as bourgeois political nai:vety, but there is no doubt that the
dream of a constituent assembly remained a source of inspiration to Russian
reformers in the period before the 1917 Revolution.

30
Chapter 2 Nicholas /l's early rule /894- 1905

The Kadet Party contained progressive landlords, the smaller industrial

entrepreneurs and members of the professions. Academics were prominent in
it, as typified by its leader, Paul Milyukov, who was a professor of history and
had been a founder member of the Union of Liberation. In the duma, the Kadets
proved to be the most outspoken critics of the tsarist system. They were to play
a significant role in the events surrounding the February Revolution in 1917 (see
page 86).

The Kadet Programme

• An All-Russian Constituent Assembly.
• Full equality and civil rights for all citizens.
• The ending of censorship.
• The abolition of the mortgage repayments on land.
• The recognition of trade unions and the right to strike.
• The introduction of universal, free education.

Summary diagram: The opponents of tsardom

Revolutionaries Reformists

Marxists Populists Liberals

sos (1898) The People's Will (1879) Nationalists

A
Bolsheviks Mensheviks SRs (1901)

1905 Revolution Kadets (1905)

October Manifesto 1---~ -octobrists (1905)

31
 Reaction and Revolution: Russia 1894- 1924

The Russo-Japanese War

1904-5
I
► Why did Russia go to war with Japan in 1904?
I

The foreign policy that Nicholas II inherited and continued was largely
determined by the size of the Russian empire. The protection of its many
frontiers was a constant preoccupation. In 1904, Nicholas II faced his first
major test in foreign affairs when his country went to war with its far-eastern
neighbour, Japan. It was a war largely of Russia's own making. The Russian
government had three main motives:
• to pursue an expansionist policy in the Far East, to make up for what it saw as
its relative decline in Europe
• to obtain an ice-free port, something for which Russia had yearned for
centuries, all its major ports being unusable in the winter months when they
froze
• to distract attention from Russia's domestic troubles by rallying the nation in a
patriotic struggle.
In regard to the last motive, it used to be thoug t that Vyacheslav Plehve, the
interior minister, was the main force pushing for war. His words 'We need
a small, victorious war to avert a revolution' were often quoted. However,
research has shown that Plehve was deliberately misrepresented by his political
opponent, Witte. We now know that Plehve was reluctant to go to war, whereas
Witte, wishing to see Russia expand economically into the Far East, knew full
well that this made conflict with Japan a very strong possibility.

The path to war

The Russians looked on Japan as an inferior nation and no match for themselves.
They expected an easy victory. Pretexts for war were not hard to find. Territorial
dispu es between Russia and Japan over Korea and Manchuria were long-
standing. In 1904, the Russian government curtly rejected Japanese proposals
for the settlement of the two countries' rival claims to Korea. The Russian hope
was that this would provoke a military response from the Japanese. It did: Japan
opened hostilities by attacking the Russian fleet in Port Arthur.

The course of the conflict

The war itself soon revealed that Russia had greatly underestimated the strength
of Japan. It was not the backward state the Russians had imagined. Under the
Emperor Meiji (1869-1914), Japan had embarked upon a series of major reforms
aimed at rapid modernisation along Western lines. The Japanese army and navy
were far better prepared and equipped than the Russian forces and won a series

32
Chapter 2 Nicholas /l's early rule /894- 1905

RUSSIA

CHINA

JAPAN

Russian 120,000
Japanese 75,000
200 400 mis
~ Japanese land
, and sea attacks
0 300 600km

Figure 2.5 The main areas of the Russo-Japanese war, 1904-5.

of striking victories over them. For Russia, the conflict was a tale of confusion
and disaster. After a long siege, PortA thur fell to Japan in January 1905. The
following month, the Japanese ex loited their advantage by seizing the key
Manchurian town of Mukden.
The final humiliation for Russia came at sea. The Russian Baltic fleet, dispatched
to the Far East in 1904, took eight months to reach its destination, only to
be blown out of the water immediately on its arrival by the Japanese fleet at
Tsushima in May 1905. Such defeats obliged the tsarist government to make
peace. In the Treaty of Portsmouth, Russia agreed to withdraw its remaining
forces from Manchuria and accepted Japanese control of Korea and Port Arthur.

33
 Reaction and Revolution: Russia 1894- 1924

Russia's defeat
Russia lost the war not because its troops fought badly, but because its military
leaders had not prepared effectively:
• The commanders understood neither the enemy they were fighting nor the
territory in which the struggle took place.
• Their unimaginative strategy allowed the Japanese to outmanoeuvre the
Russian forces .
• The distance over which men and materials had to be transported from
western Russia made it impossible to provide adequate reinforcements and
supplies.
• The trans-Siberian railway, still incomplete in a number of sections, proved of
little value. Russia's defeat at the hands of a small, supposedly inferior, Asian
country was a national humiliation.
Within Russia, the incompetence of the government, which the war glaringly
exposed, excited the social unrest that it had been specifically designed to
dampen. Russia's dismal performance was a potent factor in the increasing
tension which eventually led to an open challenge to tsardom - the 1905
Revolution.

Summary diagram: The Russo-Japanese War 1904-5

Causes
Russian expansionism
Need for an ice-free port
To distract from home problems

Course
Port Arthur fell to Japan in January 1905
Russian surrender of Mukden , February 1905
Russian fleet destroyed at Tsushima, May 1905
Russian surrender

Outcome
Loss of Manchuria, Korea and
Port Arthur to Japan

Reasons for Russian defeat

Underestimation of Japanese strength
Inadequate military planning
Poor strategy
Japan's readiness, skill and spirit

34
Chapter 2 Nicholas /l's early rule /894- 1905

The 1905 Revolution

I
~ How far was the tsarist government responsible for the 1905
Revolution?

The reasons for the revolution

The situation created by the government's policy of political repression was
graphically described by Leo Tolstoy (1828-1910), the world-renowned Russian
novelist and philosopher. In 1902, in an 'Open address to Nicholas II', he
detailed the persecution under which Russia groaned. Prisons were overflowing
with convicts innocent of any real crime, the city streets were full of soldiers
ready to shoot the people on a whim, and the censors' power stretched
everywhere, denying freedom of religious and political expression. Things were
no better in the countryside, where famine was a constant source of peasant
misery. Presiding over this grim scene, Tolstoy asserted, was a government that
squeezed money from the people through heavy taxation but was incapable of
providing leadership. The result was 'the general dissatisfaction of all classes
with the government and their open hostility against it'. Tolstoy's dispiriting
conclusion was that it was 'impossible to maintain this form of government
except by violence'.
The bleak picture which Tolstoy painted did not necessarily mean that
confrontation, still less revolution, was unavoidable. After all, 'f oppression is
applied firmly enough it prevents effective challenges to government. What
weakened the tsarist regime in the period before 1917 was not its tyranny but
its incompetence. It is certainly true that the crisis that occurred in Russia in
1905 was in large measure due to the mishandling of the situation by the tsar
and his government. This was shown by the speed with which the government
reasserted its authority once it had recovered its nerve.
The year 1905 marked the first time the tsarist government had been faced by
a combination of the three main opposition classes in Russia: the industrial
workers, the peasantry and therefor ist middle class. This was the broad-based
revolt that most revolutionaries_had been awaiting. Yet, when it came, it was
accidental rather than planned. Despite the efforts of the various revolutionary
parties to politicise events, the strikes and demonstrations in the pre-1905 period
had been the result of economic rather than political factors. They had been a
reaction to industrial recession and bad harvests. It was the tsarist regime's ill-
judged policies that turned the disturbances of 1905 into a direct challenge to its
own authority.

35
 Reaction and Revolution: Russia I 894~ 1924

The course of events

Bloody Sunday
The 1905 Revolution began with what has become known as Bloody Sunday.
On 22 January, Father Georgi Capon, an Orthodox priest, attempted to
lead a peaceful march of workers and their families to the Winter Palace in
St Petersburg. The marchers' intention was to present a loyal petition to the
tsar, begging him to use his royal authority to relieve their desperate conditions.
However, the march induced panic in the police forces in the capital. The
marchers were fired on and charged by cavalry. There are no precise casualty
figures, but estimates suggest that up to 200 marchers may have been killed,
with hundreds more being injured. The deaths were depicted by opponents of
~ KEVTERMS the tsarist regime as a deliberate massacre of unarmed petitioners. Although
Nicholas II was in fact absent from St Petersburg when these events took place,
Little Father A traditional they gravely damaged the traditional image of the tsar as the 'Little Father'.
term denoting the tsar's In the midst of the death and confusion, Capon had repeatedly cried out: 'There
paternal care of his people. is no God any longer. There is no Tsar.'
Autonomy National self-
government Disorder spreads
The immediate reaction to Bloody Sunday in Russia at large was a widespread
outbreak of disorder, which increased as the year went on. Strikes occurred
in all the major cities and towns. Terrorism against government officials and
landlords, much of it organised by the Social Revolutionaries, spread to the
countryside. The situation was made worse by Russia's humiliation in the war
against Japan (see page 32). The government was blamed for Russia's defeat,
which led to further outrages, including the assassination of Plehve by SR
terrorists. Public buildings in towns and large private estates in the country were
attacked. Land and :rroperties were seized by the peasants, who then squatted in
the landlords' hpuses. An important factor motivating the peasants was the fear
that the government was about to repossess the homes of those families who
had failed to pay off the mortgages taken out in the post-emancipation years (see
page 46).
The unrest and the government's difficulties in containing it encouraged
the non-Russian minorities to assert themselves. Georgia declared itself an
independent state, the Poles demanded autonomy and the Jews pressed
for equal rights. In May, Paul Milyukov, leader of the Union of Liberation,
persuaded the majority of the liberal groups to join in forming a 'Union of
Unions', with the aim of organising a broad-based alliance that would include
the peasants and the factory workers. A 'Union of Unions' declaration was
issued, which referred to the government as 'a terrible menace' and called for
a constituent assembly to replace 'the gang of robbers' now in power. It was
from this Union of Unions that the Kadet party, also led by Milyukov, would be
formed in 1905 (see page 31).

36
Chapter 2 Nicholas /l's early rule /894- 1905

Father Georgi Gapon from Russia to join a group of

SDs in Geneva. It was there
that he met Lenin. Krupskaya,
1903 Helped found the Assembly of Russian
Lenin's wife, recorded that
Workers
her husband learned a great
1904 Involved in organising a mass strike deal about Russian peasant
1905 January, led workers' march to present a problems from Gapon . For
petition to the tsar his part, Lenin tried to convert
February, fled to Geneva after Bloody Sunday Gapon to Marxism.
massacre
Yet, by the end of 1905 , Gapon had returned to
December, returned to St Petersburg St Petersburg, declaring that he no longer believed in
1906 March , murdered revolution and that he wished to help the government
to track down its enemies. T his may have been a ruse.
Gapon remains an intriguing character. There were Perhaps he intended to infiltrate government circles as
strong suspicions that he was an Okhrona double- an SD spy. The only hard fact is that in March 1906 he
agent . Sometimes he genuinely sympathised with the was murdered , apparently by Okhrona agents, although
workers, as suggested by his efforts in organising the even th is is unclear.
Assembly of Russian Factory and Plant Workers. He said
he wanted to 'build a nest among the factory and mill Modern historians tend to agree that Gapon was na·ive
workers where a truly Russian spirit would prevail'. Yet, politically and became involved in events he never fully
on other occasions, he was wi lling to inform on those he grasped. A contemporary was once asked whether
led and to betray them to the authorities. Gapon was a supporter of constitutionalism. He rep lied,
'Support it? He can't even say it.' Whatever Gapon's real
At the time of Bloody Sunday he appeared to be sincere intentions may have been , his lack of understanding of
in his wish to lead the workers in protest; indeed , he political realities made him a fascinating but ultimately
ignored a direct order from the authorities to call off the powerless participant in the 1905 Revolution.
march. Having escaped serious injury or arrest during
the suppression of the protest, he immediately fled

~ KEYTERMS
The Potemkin mutiny
The summer of 1905 brought the still mor disturbing news for the tsarist Double-agent
authorities of mutinies in the army and navy. The rank and file soldiers in the A government spy who
pretends to be working for
army were peasants who were naturally reluctant to attack their own kind -
the opposition against the
workers on strike or rebellious peasants in the countryside. There were several authoriti es but who reports
instances of troops disobeying orders to shoot unarmed strikers or to use force plans and secrets back to the
to drive peasants from the properties they had occupied. authorities.

In June there were even worse tidings for the government. The crew of the Borsch A thin soup made
from rotting beetroot.
battleship Prince Potemkin, of the Black Sea naval squadron, mutinied while
at sea. The incident began as a protest by the sailors at having to eat rotting
food and drink foul water; particular horrors were borsch, and scraps of meat
crawling with maggots. The sailors elected a representative, Peter Vakulenchuk,
to approach the captain with their complaints. The captain's immediate response
was to have the man shot. In retaliation, the crew attacked the officers, killed
several of them and then took over the ship. This was a desperate act and could
have worked only if the other ships in the squadron had mutinied also.

37
 Reaction and Revolution: Russia I 894~ 1924

SOURCED

? H ow valuable are the

• photos in Source C when
studying the impact of the
Potemkin mutiny?

There are no photographs of the Potemkin mutiny. These two stills are taken from the feature film Battleship
Potemkin, made in 1925 by Sergei Eisenstein, the pro-Bolshevik director. The images from his silent film are so
powerful that they have conditioned the way the actual event itself is now visualised.
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - · " ' " ''' """''"'""'"'"'' """''""'' """ _____________
But they did not; despite the equally grim conditions in the other ships, the
captains managed to maintain control. The crew of the Potemkin was on its own.
Hoping to arouse su port on land, the crew sailed to the port of Odessa, where
a serious anti-government strike was taking place. The strikers welcomed the
crew as heroes and formally honoured the body of Vakulenchuk by laying it on
an elevated platform and surrounding it with flowers. It was a defiant gesture
of solidarity but it enraged the authorities, who could not tolerate strikers and
mutineers making common cause. Troops were ordered to disperse the crowds
who had gathered in the harbour at the foot of a deep and wide flight of steps.
With bayonets fixed, the soldiers marched resolutely down the steps, trampling
on those who fell in front of them and driving hundreds into the sea. The
civilian death toll ran into thousands.
The massacre forced the Potemkin to leave Odessa. Since no other ships had
sided with them, the sailors decided to cut their losses. They sailed around the
Black Sea looking for a safer area to land. Eventually they abandoned the ship in
a Romanian port, hoping to find sanctuary for themselves in this remoter part of
the Russian empire.

38
Chapter 2 Nicholas /l's early rule /894-1905

Although the mutiny was restricted to one ship, there was no doubt that the
affair was deeply troubling to the Russian authorities. A government that cannot
rely on the loyalty of its armed services, particularly in time of war, is in a very
vulnerable position. The end of the Russo-Japanese War in August did little to
ease the situation. Indeed, Witte feared that the returning troops would join the
revolution. If this happened, he said, 'then everything would collapse'.

Witte's role
Nicholas II had shown his distaste for Sergei Witte years earlier when he had
relieved him of his post as finance minister after ten years' loyal service (see
page 17). However, it was to Witte that the tsar now turned in June 1905. Witte's
first task was to negotiate peace terms with the Japanese. With this successfully
completed, he then became chairman of the council of ministers, the effective
head of the tsar's government. Yet, Witte remained frustrated by the inability
of the tsar and his ministers to understand the crisis Russia was in. He referred
to government policy as a 'mixture of cowardice, blindness and stupidity'.
Nevertheless, he remained at his post, driven by a sense of duty to do his best to
steer the regime through its difficulties.

Failure of the August Manifesto

It was on Witte's advice that the tsar issued the August Manifesto, an ~tterrwt
to lessen the tensions by making concessions, the principal one being a promise
to create a state assembly of elected representatives of the 51 provinces of the
empire, which would begin sitting in January 1906. However, the powers
the assembly would have were not clearly defined. Moreover, since the tsar
added the clause, 'We reserve to ourselves exclusively the care of perfecting
the organisation of the Assembly', the clear implication was that he did not
intend his royal authority to be restricted in any way. The limited concession the
manifesto represented did not work. In September a series of strikes had begun
in both St Petersburg and Moscow. Striking workers were joined by striking
students, whose activities brough the universities to a standstill and added to
the general disorder in the ca ital.

Soviets
By October 1905, the industria1 unrest had grown into a general strike. It was in
this atmosphere that a development of particular moment occurred. In a number ~ KEYTERM
of cities, most notably in St Petersburg and Moscow, workers formed themselves
into an elected soviet. The soviets began as organisations to represent the Soviet Russian word for a
workers' demands for better conditions, but their potential as bases for political council made up of elected
agitation was immediately recognised by revolutionaries. The Menshevik, Leon representatives.

Trotsky, became chairman of the St Petersburg soviet and organiser of several

strikes in the capital.

39
 Reaction and Revolution: Russia 1894- 1924

Government recovery
By October, the tsar was faced by the most united opposition in Romanov
history. But, recognising the danger, the regime now began to show the sense
of purpose that it had so far lacked. Concession was unavoidable, but, by giving
ground, the government intended to divide the opposition forces ranged
against it:

~ KEVTERM • The liberals were the first to be appeased. On Witte's advice, the tsar issued
the October Manifesto in which, going further than he had in the August
Legislative duma Manifesto, he accepted the creation of a legislative duma : 'Our will is that
A parliament with law-making no law can be made without the agreement of the State Duma.' Since the
powers. manifesto, which Witte had written, also contained a promise to introduce a
range of civil rights, including freedom of speech, assembly and worship, and
the legalising of trade unions, the liberals could claim a remarkable success.
Their appetite for reform was satisfied, at least temporarily.
• The peasants were the next to be pacified by an announcement in November
that the mortgage repayments which had so troubled them were to be
progressively reduced and then abolished altogether. The response was an
immediate drop in the number of land-seizures y the peasants and a decline
in the general lawlessness in the countryside.
• Having won over the liberals and peasants, the government was now
seriously opposed by only one major group - the industrial workers. Here
the policy was one not of concession but of suppression. The government felt
strong enough to attempt to crush the soviets. Despite the mutinies earlier
in the year, the troops who returned from the Far East at the end of the war
proved sufficiently loyal to be used against the strikers. After a five-day
siege, the headquarters of the St Petersburg soviet were stormed and the
ringleaders, including Trotsky, were arrested. The destruction of an uprising
in Moscow proved even more violent.

Moscow uprising suppressed

On 7 December, a group of Bolsheviks, Mensheviks and SRs came together in
tne recently formed Moscow soviet to organise a general strike. Encouraged by
their success in this, they then seized a number of key installations, including
post offices and railway stations, in an attempt to take over the whole city.
However, tsarist regiments, some of whom had recently suppressed the
St Petersburg soviet, were rushed to Moscow. There they used heavy artillery
to force the insurgents into an increasingly confined area. To avoid being
slaughtered, the soviet resisters surrendered on 18 December. Lenin, who had
encouraged the uprising but had played no direct part in it, arrived in Moscow
just in time to witness the flames of the gutted soviet buildings, set ablaze by
government troops. The twelve-day uprising had led to the deaths of over 1000
people.

40
Chapter 2 Nicholas /l's early rule /894-1905

The significance of the 1905 Revolution

A notable feature of the 1905 Revolution was how minor a part was played by
the revolutionaries. Hardly any of them were in St Petersburg or Moscow when
it began. Revolution occurred in spite, rather than because, of them. With the
exception of Trotsky, none of the SDs made an impact on the course of events.
This throws doubt on the notion of 1905 as a revolution.
There is the further fact that in a number of important respects tsardom
emerged from the disturbances stronger rather than weaker. Despite its
disastrous failure in the war against Japan, which produced protest throughout
Russia and united the classes in opposition, the tsarist regime survived 1905
remarkably unscathed. The mutinies in the armed services did not spread and
did not continue after the war. Loyal troops returned to destroy the soviets. The
readiness of the liberals and the peasants to accept the government's political
and economic bribes indicated that neither of those groups was genuinely ready
for revolution.
It is true that the tsar appeared to grant significant concessions in the October
Manifesto, but these were expedients rather than real reforms. The duma was
not intended to be, nor did it become, a limitation on the tsar's autocratic powers.
This was evident from the Fundamental Laws, which Nicholas II promulgated
in April 1906: 'The Sovereign Emperor possesses the initiative in all legislah e
matters .. . The Sovereign Emperor ratifies the laws. No law can come into force
without his approval.'

The lesson of the 1905 Revolution

What 1905 showed was that as long as the tsarist government kept its nerve
and the army remained loyal, the forces of protest would find it very difficult
to mount a serious challenge. The events of 1905 also raised questions about
the extent to which the liberals wantecLchangein Russia. Few of them enjoyed
their experience of mixing with the workers during the revolution. They found
proletarian coarseness unattractive and were frightened by the primitive forces
they had helped to unleash. One middle-class proprietor, who had thrown his
house open to the strikers, remarked on the difficulty of sustaining his belief in
the goodness of people who abused his hospitality by molesting his daughters,
urinating on his carpets and stealing everything they could carry. Peter Struve,
who had been a founder member of the Union of Liberation before joining the
Kadets in 1905, spoke for all frightened liberals when he said 'Thank God for the
tsar, who has saved us from the people.'
Leon Trotsky reflected that 1905 had failed as a revolution because the protestors
were disunited and inexperienced. Furthermore, the liberals had backed out
of the revolution and betrayed the workers by leaving them to be crushed by
government troops. He concluded that the tsarist system, 'although with a few
broken ribs, had come out of the experience of 1905 alive and strong'.

41
 Reaction and Revolution: Russia I 894~ 1924

Summary diagram: The 1905 Revolution

Reasons for the 1905 Revolution

Government's own responsibility

Repression Taxation Incompetent

leadership

Social unrest Economic recession Bad harvests

Peasants' anger over mortgage repayments

Workers ' anger over unemployment and falling wages

Russia's dismal performance against Japan

Events of 1905-6

Bloody Sunday: role of Gapen

I
Strikes in the major cities
I
Milyukov led the liberal groups in a 'Union of Unions'

Peasants' seizure of land Soviets formed Mutinies in the services

Return of Witte

Tsar issued October Manifesto

Government recovery

Liberals placated Peasants bought off Workers crushed

Fundamental Laws restated tsar's absolute power

Significance of 1905 Lessons of 1905

I
First broad-based Russian government
challenge to tsardom , unmoveable if it kept
but was it a revolution? its nerve . Opposition lacked
unity and direction

42
 Chapter 2 Nicholas /l's early rule /894- 1905

s,\\\\llllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllll/f//l'.

~==~====_ff ~1111:":::.~r.:,::.o~l:l:~..::o:;,iu~
-r-.
rr:::-=v=~11r.11cn development of opposition from liberals and
revolutionaries. While liberals believed that
l -
tsardom could be reformed into a constitutional -
monarchy, revolutionaries were convinced that
_ Led by a tsar and a government that were rel
only by the destruction of tsardom could Russia -
= to engage in reform, Russia faced the problem
- be modernised. Choosing to go to war with
- of how to achieve modernity. The answer of
- Japan in 1904, the government was shocked by
tsardom's leading statesman, Witte, was to shape
Russia's defeat, which proved a major factor in the
the economy in such a way that the nation could
outbreak of the 1905 Revolution when a loose
compete at parity with its European rivals. He
alliance of peasants , industrial workers and liberals
encouraged industrial expansion and urged the
joined in resistance and protest. The government
state to take the lead in this by encouraging foreign
recovered its nerve and survived for the time being
= investments. His efforts undoubtedly contributed to
by satisfying the peasants with the cancelling of
= Russia's achieving the 'great spurt' of the 1890s.
their mortgage repayments , placating the liberals by
= Notwithstanding its economic growth, Russia's political concessions, and physically suppressing the
-
,, slowness in reforming politically led to the protesting workers. ~
~,,,,1111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111\\\~

Refresher questions
Use these questions to remind yourself of the key 9 Vl(b.at had encouraged the growth of a liberal
material covered in this chapter. movement in tsarist Russia?
I O How sweeping was the Kadet Programme for the
I Why was it so difficult for Russia to reform itself?
reform of tsarist Russia?
2 What was Russification intended to achieve?
I I How critical were the Octobrists of the tsarist
3 What methods did Sergei Witte use to develop the system?
Russian economy?
12 Why did Russia perform so badly in the Russo-
4 How successful were Witte's policies? Japanese war?
5 What were the main ideas of the Social 13 What pattern did the 1905 Revolution follow?
Revolutionaries (SRs)?
14 Why was the Potem/(jn mutiny such a serious threat
6 What was the impact of Marxism on the Social to the tsarist regime?
Democrats (SDs)?
15 What steps did the government take to deal with
7 What led to the divide in the SD Party? the challenge facing it in 1905?
8 How strong were the Bolsheviks before 19 17?

43
 Reaction and Revolution: Russia 1894- 1924

(§) Question practice

ESSAY QUESTIONS
1 'The only policy Nicholas !l 's government genuinely followed between 1894 and 1904 was one of
repression.' How far do you agree with this statement?
2 How far did Witte succeed in his plans to reform Russian industry in the years 1892-1903?
3 How accurate is it to say that by 1905, Russia's revolutionary parties had failed to make any real advance
towards their goal of undermining tsardom?
4 To what extent was the 1905 Revolution the result of the mistakes made by the tsarist regime?

SOURCE QUESTIONS
1 Why is Source 1 valuable to the historian for an enquiry into the causes of Bloody Sunday in January 1905?
Explain your answer, using the source, the information given about it and your own knowledge of the
historical context.
2 How much weight do you give the evidence of Source 1 for an enquiry into the attitude of the Petrograd
workers towards the tsar in January 1905? Explain your answer, using the source, the information given
about it and your own knowledge of the historical context.

SOURCE I
, - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -"""''' ""''' """'' ""''"""'' """'' ""'"'""'"'
From a petition intended to be delivered by striking industrial workers to Tsar Nicholas II on Sunday
__________,,
9 January 1905 ('Bloody Sunday'), quoted in Lionel Kochan, Russia in Revolution 1890-1918, Granada,
1966, p. 99.

We working men and inhabitants of St Petersburg, our wives and children, and our parents, helpless and
aged men and women, have come to You, our ruler, in quest ofjustice and protection. We have no
strength at all, 0 Sovereign. Our patience is at an end. We are approaching that terrible moment when
death is better than continuance of intolerable sufferings.
Our first request was that our employers should discuss with us but this they refused to do. They
regarded as illegal our other demands: reduction of the working day to eight hours, the fixing of wage
rates in consultation with us, and investigation of our grievances against the factory managements. We
have been in bondage [slavery] with the help and co-operation of Your officials. Anyone who dares to
speak up in defence of the interests of the working class and ordinary people is jailed or exiled. Is this,
0 Sovereign, in accordance-with the laws of God, by whose grace you reign?

44