Download Russian Economic Development

Russia (1801-1917)
Russian Revolutions 1
Russia (1801-1917)
Russia at the beginning of the 19th century
1. Russia was a country of immense size which extended from the Arctic Ocean to the
Blank Sea and from the Baltic Sea eastward to the Pacific Ocean. It was inhabited by
peoples of many races, religions and languages. Two-thirds of its people were slaves
and were adherents of the Orthodox Church. At the beginning of the 19th C, the country
was still backward rather than modern and Asiatic rather European.
2. One characteristic feature of the Russian government was the autocracy of the Czar,
who claimed to rule by Divine Right of King and was responsible only to God. Nearly
all the Czars were reactionary and despotic. They were reluctant to introduce reforms
to benefit the people who had to obey the Czar in all things. The Czar had absolute and
unlimited power over the affairs of state and over the life and properties of his subjects.
Even the Orthodox Church was turned into an instrument of Czarist rule and the
Church instilled into the people ideas of loyalty and obedience to the Czar. The people
had no say in the government since there was no parliamentary system. Russia when
compared with other western countries was really backward and her government
unconstitutional. She was untouched by the ideas of the French Revolution and the
effects of the Industrial Revolution.
3. Position of classes
There were no classes or institutions that might check autocracy. In most of the
European countries, the nobility, clergy and middle class already restricted the power of
the ruler, or at least served as a potential check. Yet in Russia, such balancing forces
were entirely lacking.
a) Nobles --- rich and privileged, exempt from much of the taxation. However, even the
highest nobles were merely the servants of the Czar, with no security against arbitrary
confiscation of property or exile to Siberia.
b) The clergy --- enjoyed high social status, but they were also completely subordinate to
the Czar.
c) The middle class --- It was so small and ill-developed as to be practically non-existent.
The capitalists, intellectuals, professionals and free citizens of the towns constituted
only 3.5% of the total population.
d) Serfdom --- the central feature of Russian life. Until 1861, at least half of Russia’s
peasant population was serfs who were compelled to live and work on the estates of
their lords. They were practically without rights and were subject to brutal treatment by
their lords. They might be compelled to undertake all kinds of labour; they might be
sold, flogged, exiled to Siberia, or conscripted for the army. Much of the land in Russia
belonged to the Crown; serfs on the imperial and government estates were in better
1
Russia (1801-1917)
Russian Revolutions 2
condition than those in private ownership. Moreover, the serfs were forbidden to leave
the land they tilled for their masters and leave the countryside for the towns.
4. Economic background
a) An agrarian economy --- About 90% of the population were peasants. Productivity and
efficiency remained low as the serfs had no incentive to produce more than the
minimum. Human exploitation was an obstacle to economic growth.
b) Industry was limited. The free workers were free citizens or peasants who migrated to
industrial towns and were employed in merchant factories. There was the gradual
growth of industrial capitalism with the conversion of bondage factory into a capitalist
one. However, the upstart manufacturers were of little social and political importance at
the beginning of the 19th century.
Alexander I (1801-1825)
1. Alexander I’s liberalism (1801-1819)
From 1801 to 1819, Alexander appeared to favour liberal ideas. He took up the mission
of “liberator of Europe” -- freeing all Europeans from the oppressive rule of Napoleon.
When he was young, he had his tutor’s liberal education. The works of Voltaire, Rousseau
and other great thinkers of the 18thC Enlightenment were well known to Alexander, and he
was sincerely anxious to apply his knowledge to the benefit of Russia.
Alexander’s domestic policy -- In his government, Alexander wished to improve the
state of affairs. He recognized the evils which then existed; he tried to check corruption
among public officials. He suppressed the secret police. Many exiles were recalled from
Siberia and many political prisoners released. The use of torture by the police was
forbidden and foreign books were allowed to be imported. Three new universities were
established and a system of elementary schools begun. Alexander also realized the
necessity of improving the condition of the serfs. He passed a law enabling the great
landowners to liberate their serfs. About 50,000 were released from personal bondage to
their lords. In 1809, he produced a scheme by which elections were to be held for an
imperial duma and in these elections the peasants or serfs were to have a definite voice.
Unfortunately, Alexander did not accomplish much because his reforms were opposed by
the Russian landlords and officials. Soon he ceased even to wish to undertake reforms and
the last few years of his reign were reactionary.
Alexander and Poland -- Alexander was known to be in sympathy with the granting of
constitutions to the nations of Europe; he set the example to other monarchs by granting a
constitution to Poland in 1815. The Allies prevented Alexander from gaining control of the
whole of Poland, but the great part of the Grand Duchy of Warsaw, Napoleon’s creation,
passed to him. The Kingdom of Poland thus formed was to be self-governing, the only
direct connection with Russia being the presence in Warsaw of a Russian viceroy. A
2
Russia (1801-1917)
Russian Revolutions 3
National Assembly was to be elected and to control all affairs relating to Poland. At the
same time, Alexander accorded the right of freedom of religion and of speech to all citizens.
Even after 1819 when Alexander was under the reactionary influence of Metternich, he
retained the Polish Constitution.
2. Alexander turned away from liberalism (1819-1825)
The last years of Alexander’s reign were marked by the growth of a reform movement
among sections of the officer class in the Russian Imperial Army, in cooperation with a few
Russian intellectuals. These army officers had served abroad and had made contact, not
only with western liberalism but with the culture and literature of France and the German
states. Upon their return to Russia, they were horrified at the contrast between what they
had seen in Europe and the inefficient and backward government of the Czar. They looked
first to Alexander to bring about reforms and they were encouraged by the liberal
constitution he introduced to Poland. They hoped that this would be followed by a
parliamentary system for Russia.
They were soon disappointed, for in 1819, Metternich won the Czar over to the side of
repression. He pointed out to Alexander the dangers of a liberal policy; he convinced
Alexander that all reform movements meant revolutions against lawful monarchs. He
exaggerated the importance of such incidents as the murder of Kotzebue (1819) and the
revolutions in Spain (1818) and Naples (1820). The Czar was converted. Henceforth, he
was an autocrat. Restrictions were imposed, even in Poland. Alexander now instituted a
censorship of all school textbooks, gave up schemes which he had in mind for freeing more
serfs, and gave the Russian Orthodox Church control of education. Even in Poland similar
measures of control were introduced.
3. Comments on Alexander’s reign
a) Alexander’s early zeal for liberalism was genuine. Yet, his mind was unstable and
he came too easily under the way of Metternich.
b) Alexander’s playing with liberal ideas kindled the hopes of the liberals in Russia.
Then his turning away from liberalism disappointed the liberals. Consequently,
they formed secret societies and pursued their revolutionary activities. The seeds
of the Decembrist Revolt were thus sown.
Nicholas I (1825-1855)
1. The Decembrist Revolt, Dec. 1825
It broke out upon the death of Alexander I. The leaders were chiefly army officers.
Russian officers and troops had come into contact with currents of liberal thought, with
new social conditions and with new political institutions in West Europe during the struggle
3
Russia (1801-1917)
Russian Revolutions 4
against Napoleon I. Upon their return home, they saw that the ideas of the rights of men
were regarded with contempt by their rulers, that their country was controlled by an
autocracy which made all progress impossible. As they had no legitimate means of making
their desires known, they organized secret societies which agitated for reforms including
the establishment of a constitution. These societies, afterwards, called the Decembrists,
were planning a widespread uprising, but when Alexander suddenly died on Dec 1, 1825,
resolved to take advantage of the uncertainty then existed regarding the succession to
attempt a coup d’ etat.
Alexander had no children. His brother Constantine would normally have become the
Czar. But he had already renounced the throne in favour of his younger brother, Nicholas.
Alexander had not made public this renunciation by Constantine. On Dec 24, 1825, the
officers of the St. Petersburg garrison gave their oath of allegiance to Constantine. Soon
afterwards, Nicholas learned of Constantine’s renunciation and he therefore ordered a new
oath of loyalty to himself to be taken by the army officers. But Nicholas was unpopular
among the soldiers and Constantine was thought to be more favourable to liberal reform.
The subsequent uprising was easily crushed. The Decembrists were a small group, not
united in themselves and with no support in the masses, and were therefore easily isolated
and defeated.
Significance:
a) The Decembrist Revolt was the first manifestation of liberalism in Russia. Alexander’s
campaign against Napoleon had unintentionally given decisive impetus to a new
b)
c)
generation of thinking Russians.
Despite its failure, it survived as a myth to inspire all future rebels against the regime
-- the intelligentsia of the 40’s, the Nihilists of the 60’s, the Populists and Anarchists of
the 70’s, and the Marxists of the 80’s. The outburst engendered a spirit of self-sacrifice
which was to furnish later intellectual movement in Russia with a model and even with
enthusiasm as well as religious fervour too.
The Russian autocracy was on the alert. Nicholas was determined not to give any more
concessions to the liberals. He never forgot the scenes of the conspiracy. There was no
one left to trust. The autocracy became more ruthless. Nicholas I’s reign was the
period of darkest reaction. This period deprived Russia of a complete generation of the
most intelligent and cultural citizens. It drew intellectual movement in Russia into a
state of desperation, thus making it the more revolutionary.
2. Reactionary policy of Nicholas I
Nicholas was determined to suppress all signs of liberalism in Russia. The Decembrist
revolt had strengthened that determination. To forestall any further attempt to change the
status quo, he fought liberal ideas relentlessly. He at once re-established the special secret
police and at the same time imposed the strictest government censorship over all
4
Russia (1801-1917)
Russian Revolutions 5
publications. Forbidden books might be neither printed nor imported. Education was
discouraged and entry to the new secondary schools were restricted to children of the
gentry and of the government officials only. A close watch over university students was
kept by the secret police. The teaching of certain “dangerous” subjects such as History and
Philosophy was completely forbidden in the universities.
After the attempted revolution in 1848 and the dispatch of Russian troops to help
Austria to suppress the rising in Hungary, Nicholas increased the severity of his rule. He
especially directed his attention to the Russian intellectuals, many of whom were exiled to
forced labour in Siberia. Altogether about 150,000 were exiled to Siberia in the reign of
Nicholas I. The secret police was active in seeking out and punishing all persons suspected
of subversive tendencies. Foreign travel was also forbidden.
3. Peasant unrest
Despite the ruthless police terror in the reign of Nicholas, the discontent of the Russian
peasants broke out into open revolt. These revolts were isolated despairing protests at the
unjust exactions of the landlords. They resulted in the murder of landlords but achieved
nothing constructive. More than 400 peasant revolts broke out during the reign of Nicholas
I and more than 300 of these occurred after 1840.
4. The Polish Revolt of 1830
For some years the Poles had been discontented. Under Nicholas I, the censorship of
the press was increased. Russian officials began to replace Polish officials in the
government service, while in 1828 Nicholas ceased calling the Polish Parliament altogether.
He also abandoned the idea of adding Lithuania to the Polish territories.
In 1830, Nicholas decided to send an army to suppress the revolt of the Belgians. In
Nov 1830, however, the Polish troops in Warsaw rose in revolt seized control of the city.
The Russian governor was forced to flee from Poland.
The Polish revolt of 1830 was essentially a movement of the nobility and had
insufficient support from the remainder of the population, especially the peasants. Nicholas
sent an army to suppress the revolt. The Poles were defeated and the capital was occupied
by Russian troops. The divisions among the Poles, the lack of peasants’ support and tactical
errors all caused the failure of the revolt.
Nicholas punished the Polish rebels severely. The 1815 Constitution was abolished and
public meetings and political organizations banned throughout Poland. The University of
Warsaw was closed down, all important posts in the country went to Russians, and about
80,000 Poles were exiled to Siberia. Poland was treated as a province of the Russian
Empire.
5. Reforms
To make sure that subversive views could not reach those in position of responsibility,
the top civil service and military posts were controlled and only those with strong
5
Russia (1801-1917)
Russian Revolutions 6
conservative views were allowed to hold posts. This deprived the state of many able men
who wanted Russia to catch up with Western Europe. Nevertheless, Nicholas did carry out
reforms designed to increase the efficiency of the state machine.
a) Codification of Russian law
A committee was appointed to draw up a code of laws. In 1832, the first codification of
Russian law accomplished. This systematized the law of the whole country and made court
procedure throughout the Empire uniform.
b) Laws were passed to protect the serfs from some of the extreme form of exploitation by
landowners including the practice of selling them without agreement.
c) New banknotes backed by a solid reserve of gold were issued.
These measures did not satisfy the reformist elements who continued to agitate for
reforms. The reforms of Nicholas had not gone far enough and had not increased the
efficiency of the state. The civil service continued to be recruited by nepotism or personal
patronage. The lower ranks were very badly paid and widespread corruption was inevitable.
Even the army which was an instrument for suppressing revolution was too large to be
efficient.
6. Intellectual fermentation
a) The foundations of Russian liberalism, and even socialism, were laid during the reign
of Nicholas I.
b) A split developed between Westerners and Slavophils
The question that most concerned Russia’s educated people was: What should be the
fundamental intellectual and moral foundations of Russian society? Two different answers
were given by the Slavophils and Westerners.
The Slavophils, in a sense nationalists, believed that the Slavs had a great part to play
in the future of Europe and the World. Russia, the greatest of the Slav nations, must work
out her own salvation and not tamely imitate the West. They held that Russia had its innate
strength and virtue rooted in the people and the Orthodox Church, destined to supersede the
West and to become the universal civilization of the future. They were trying to revive the
characteristics of Russian culture. The peasants were the true representatives of the old
Russia. The future was with the peasants, who must be raised in status and intellect. They
gave special emphasis to the cooperative peasant commune -- the mirs. They argued that
this embodied a specifically Russian form of socialism of a type that would enable Russia
to avoid both the individualism and capitalism that were tearing the western world apart.
The Slavophils were against Nicholas’s regime because it was the product of an alien
dynasty, stemming from the European-inspired reforms of Peter the Great. For them
Russian history owed nothing to the West and Peter the Great was an apostate one who
betrayed Russian culture.
The Westerners, notably Herzen, Belinsky and Bakunin, had a fundamental belief in
6
Russia (1801-1917)
Russian Revolutions 7
the urgent necessity for closer contact with the West, where the virtues of free thought,
nationalism, individual liberty, the values of science existed, and could serve as the means
and the model for the regeneration of Russia.
Both the Slavophils and Westerners shared a detestation of the regime, and both
fervently believed in the Russian future, whether as part of the West or as an important
independent force. However, after the failure of the 1848 revolutions and discredit of
republicanism and liberalism, Europeanism lost ground and pro-Russian sentiment grew.
By the mid 19th C, the Russian liberalism became more and more under the influence of
French utopian socialists (e.g. St. Simon). Liberalism in Russian came to be more
revolutionary than its counterparts in West Europe. The interaction of these schools of
thoughts prepared the way for the rise of Marxism in Russia in the late 19th C.
7. Foreign policy
In his foreign policy, Nicholas aimed at the expansion of Russian territory and
influence. He waged a successful war against Persia and in the Far East, he gained
important territory from China along the Amur River. Nicholas intervened actively in
support of the Greeks and by the Treaty of Adrianople 1829, he gained the right of free
navigation for Russian ships in the Dardanelles and the Bosphorus. The Treaty of
Unkiar-Skelessi of 1833 also gave Russia the main voice in the control of the entrance to
the Black Sea. Nicholas made vigorous efforts to break up the Turkish Empire in agreement
with Britain, but the failure to get agreement with Britain on this question led to the
Crimean War. The humiliation of the defeat was too much for Nicholas. He died in the
midst of the Crimean War. So Nicholas’s own foreign policy put an end to his oppressive
rule. He was succeeded by his son Alexander II in 1855.
Alexander II (1855-1881)
The accession of Alexander II opened a new era in Russian history. Russia’s
humiliating defeat in the Crimean War had not only exposed the weakness and rottenness
of the governmental system but had also revealed the extent to which Russia was lagging
behind the other states of Europe. One of Alexander’s first aims was to bring the Crimean
War to an end by recognizing defeat and signing the Treaty of Paris, 1856. After the
conclusion of peace, Alexander turned his attention to the most serious problem facing
Russia, that of serfdom. Though an autocrat by conviction, circumstances of time
convinced him that Russia must have some change.
1. Abolition of serfdom
a) Background
The defeat in the Crimean War destroyed the legend of Russian invincibility created in
1812. It led to widespread clamour for radical reforms. Circumstances were favourable for
7
Russia (1801-1917)
Russian Revolutions 8
tackling the problem of serfdom. The big landowners in the fertile Ukraine were now
entering the world market and exporting grain. They had discovered that free labour was
more efficient than serfs. Moreover, as modern industry began to appear in Russia, a
mobile labour was needed; but this was obstructed by the bondage of the serfs to the land.
Serfdom was found to be a great obstacle to industrial progress. The illiterate serfs were no
match for the free skilled labour of the West. There was the additional fear that serfs might
rise up in revolts. The rising tide of peasant unrest was evident in the reign of Nicholas I
with the outbreak of more than 400 agrarian revolts. As early as March 1856, Alexander II
remarked that “It is better to abolish serfdom from above than to wait for the time when it
will begin to abolish itself from below.” In 1857, a committee was formed to study the
problem. The decree putting the Emancipation Act into force was signed in 1861.
b) The Emancipation Act, 1861
The fundamental principles of the Act were:
i) The serfs were to be freed with land
ii) Land was not given as a gift to the peasants. Ultimately each was to pay for his land
allotment. In order that they might obtain land at once, the government paid the former
landlord and then collected the money from the peasants, distributing the payments
over a period of 49 years (redemption payments).
iii) The full right of landownership was not conferred on the individual peasant but on the
mir or village community. (i.e. the land did not belong to the peasants as private
c)
i)
ii)
iii)
property, but to the mir where the peasants were bound together. The governing body of
mir distributed land to each member.)
Effects of the emancipation -- The Emancipation Act came as a mixed blessing with
both advantages and disadvantages.
Beneficial effects:
For the serfs, the Act gave them at least personal freedom and civil rights.
For the Russian nation as a whole, the Act removed at least a social evil and the most
demoralizing factor in Russian social life.
The Act increased the possibility of an extended area of cultivation and the possibility
of introduction of more scientific method of farming.
Yet these were more than offset by the disadvantages and did not really solve the
peasant problem.
i) The peasants had been firmly convinced for centuries that although they were not
personally free, the land belonged to them. “We are yours, but the land is ours.” They
said to the landlords. They failed to understand why they were now called on to make
redemption payments. They were burdened under redemption payments which were
higher than former dues they paid to the lords. Besides, they paid their installment of
8
Russia (1801-1917)
Russian Revolutions 9
redemption at an interest rate of 6% a year. Consequently, they were burdened with a
new form of heavy taxation and were in a worse plight than before.
ii) The plots of land given to the peasants were limited in size and insufficient to afford
them in a fair living. In fact, they received less land than they had utilized before
emancipation. Moreover, as each child had a right to land, the land of the mirs had to be
periodically rearranged to provide for the new generation. The rise in population meant
the decline in the size or number of strips held by each peasant. While the peasants’
holdings shrank all the time, they lost all incentive to improve the land which they
might lose in the next redistribution. Hence, there was no improvement and
productivity remained low.
Another reason for the shortage of land was that from 1861 to the end of the 19th
C, only 1/2 of the cultivated land was transferred from the nobility to the village
commune. The other half remained in the hands of the state, nobles and monastery. This
also explained why land was insufficient for the growing population.
iii) The emancipation of serfs did not create a class of free peasants as there was no private
ownership of land. It only led to the rise of collective ownership of land.
iv) Although peasants were free from jurisdiction of the nobility, they were subject to the
control of communal authorities and communal regulations. In every village, there was
the Elder who took over the collection of taxes and semi-police duties. Over the village
level, there were the chiefs of the district who assumed even larger police duties. Hence
the Russian peasants were freed from personal servitude, but did not become entirely
free citizens. A peasant’s freedom was still restricted by the mir as he had to get
permission from the mir before he could go anywhere else. A passport would be issued
by the mir; without it no villager could travel beyond the village. Consequently, there
was no free movement of labour to towns and supply to industries after the
emancipation of serfs. Migration of labourer from villages to towns did not come until
after 1905.
(N. B. 4 million serfs received no land at all. Most of them were former domestic
serfs employed in manorial factories and mines and the state industrial installations.
Most had no choice but to drift townwards. So emancipation did give a certain impetus
to capitalist development and to the urbanization of Russia. After the reform, for
example, the urban population increased almost twice as fast as the rural.
v) Peasants lacked both the capital and knowledge necessary to improve their crops. They
were as poor as before. There was no increase in efficiency of agriculture and
production of food.
d) Significance
The emancipation of serfdom posed problems as numerous as those which it
solved. However, all this must not be interpreted to mean that the emancipation of the
9
Russia (1801-1917)
Russian Revolutions 10
serfs was either a mistake or a failure. Though it was a painful process and full of
difficulties, it was a necessary step towards the development of modern Russia. It did
have one lasting effect -- the Act gave hopes for the future. It opened the way to further
reform which became indispensable now that the most solid bulwark or the old regime
had gone down in semi-ruin. Alexander II had destroyed the whole foundation of the
administrative system, and as a matter of practical necessity, the bureaucracy could not
avoid the task of reconstructing the system from below. Obviously, the emancipation
did not amount to the revolution from above. But it is equally clear that the old regime
had gone forever.
2. Other reforms
a) Zemstvos (Zemstva)
The emancipation of the serfs meant the destruction of the jurisdiction power of the
nobility over the peasants in the countryside. This in turn made it necessary to undertake
further reform in the local government. In 1864, a limited home rule system was
established in 33 provinces of European Russia. This was to be exercised by local
assemblies known as zemstvos. The zemstvos were composed of elected representatives of
the nobles, peasants and townsmen. The members were elected on a country and provincial
basis through a system of electoral colleges. Peasants had the right to vote and even a
limited right to be elected.
i) District zemstvos -- in charge of maintenance of roads, bridges, schools, hospitals,
charitable institutions, public health, introduction of new methods of agriculture,
prevention of local famines, etc.
ii) Provincial zemstvos -- Once each year, the district zemstvos sent representatives
to a provincial zemstvos, for the discussion of problems affecting provinces as a
whole.
In both the district and provincial zemstvos, nobles retained their dominant position,
but the establishment of zemstvos marked an advance because it admitted the peasants and
townsfolks to a share in local government.
b) Municipal councils
In 1870, Alexander II created new forms of self-government for the municipalities by
issuing an act which provided for municipal councils composed of representatives elected
by all those who paid the municipal taxes. The municipal councils in the cities exercised
the same functions as the zemstvos did in the countryside.
c) Judicial reforms
These included open trial, the right to counsel and the introduction of trial by jury in
criminal cases. Judges were appointed for life so that they could be independent of outside
control. Besides, the salaries of judges were raised to increase their independence.
d) Educational reforms
10
Russia (1801-1917)
Russian Revolutions 11
A report in 1870 showed that only about 8% or 9% of the population could read and
write. Although Alexander II increased the no. of primary schools, his measures in this
respect were only limited. By the end of his reign, only 13.8% of the boys and 3.3% of the
girls of school age were attending schools. More important were his measures on behalf of
higher education. He increased the no. of the universities and granted all of them
administrative autonomy and comparative freedom of teaching. Furthermore, he repealed
the law which limited the no. of students and also provided scholarships which enabled
poor students to attend universities. The result was that the no. of university students more
than doubled during his reign.
e) Press censorship was relaxed though not abolished.
f) The power of the secret police was curtailed.
g) Military reform -- Conscription was introduced. The period of service was reduced
from 25 years to 15 (6 with the colours and 9 with the service). All this amounted to
equalization and lightening of the burden of military service.
h) Construction of railways was pressed forward and development of industry
encouraged.
3. Significance of the reforms
a) The end of serfdom came as a mixed blessing.
b) The zemstvos constituted a source of authority directly representative of the population.
They gave the Russians, especially the middle class, a chance of getting experience in
representative government. However, these zemstvos were weak in financial and
executive power. Besides, the provincial governor still exercised the right to veto
demands made by the zemstvos.
c) In the judicial field, the administration of justice was separated from the administration
of the state. Yet political offenders were still tried secretly and arbitrarily in special
courts.
d) Though censorship was relaxed, editors offending the government were still tried in
special courts.
e) With the expansion of education, people began to realize the inefficiency of the
government and to cherish stronger desire for more political power. Thus the taste of
freedom served to what the appetite for more.
f) All these reforms did not change the nature of the regime, but they signified the
clipping of autocratic wings and the rise of new centers of power and influence,
opposed to what remained of the old regime. The old world of autocracy still existed,
but at the same time, the reform meant the introduction of some western-European
legal, constitutional and educational practice, resulting in new stirrings and new forces.
The place side by side of these 2 worlds resulted in friction.
4. Period of reaction (1866-1881)
11
Russia (1801-1917)
Russian Revolutions 12
In the latter part of Alexander’s reign, he became increasingly reactionary. The pace of
reform began to slacken in the 1870s.
a) Reasons
i) Polish revolt 1863-64
In Poland, Alexander introduced reforms similar in principle to those in Russia:
universities were restored, official use of Polish language, religious equality and a
system of democratic government. The Poles were greatly encouraged to ask for more.
When rejected by the Czar, the Poles rose in open rebellion. After the suppression of
the revolt, Alexander turned Poland into a part of Russia; Russian became the official
language; Russians replaced Poles in administrative posts; Roman Catholicism ceased
to be the privileged religion of the state.
ii) The Paris Commune of 1871 might also have frightened the Czar.
iii) The growth of intellectual ferment and revolutionary movement alarmed Alexander.
1866 saw the first unsuccessful attempt on his life.
b) Reactionary measures
i) The power of the zemstvos was further restricted. e.g. They were compelled to meet
all obligatory expenses imposed on them by the government which sometimes took
as much as 82% of their budget, leaving 8% for public health and 5% for education.
ii) Press censorship was tightened. Magazines had to be submitted 4 days in advance
to a preliminary censor.
iii) Press cases in 1866 were withdrawn from ordinary courts. In 1874, political cases
were withdrawn from ordinary courts. Administrative arrests and punishments were
still retained in practice.
All these measures only increased the revolutionaries’ hatred of the Czar.
5. The intellectual ferment and growth of revolutionary movement
In view of the disappointment with Alexander’s reforms, many of the younger
generation of the 1860s began to take various creeds of revolutionary violence.
a) Populism
i) The Populists: a general name given to the revolutionaries in Russia in the period
1870-81. Populism has the conviction that a revolution must come, that the revolution
would be socialist and that its institutional kernel would be the peasant commune. The
driving force behind all this would be the people, conceived of as the peasantry. This
was a throwback of Slavophile teaching.
ii) In the 1870s, the populists began to use more terrorist methods. In 1877, they organized
a terrorist society called “Land and Liberty” which resorted to assassinations of
government officials. In 1880, it was replaced by 2 organizations: Black Partition and
the People’s Will. The slogan of the Black Partition was “All land to the peasants”. It
favoured peaceful propaganda in the earlier Populist tradition. The People’s Will was
12
Russia (1801-1917)
Russian Revolutions 13
responsible for the murder of Alexander II in 1881. In the 1890s, the Populists revived
among the Russian exiles with the formation of the Social Revolutionaries in 1902.
b) Anarchism and Nihilism -- One section of Russian liberals moved to anarchism.
i) Anarchism is a political doctrine advocating the abolition of organized authority.
Anarchists hold that every form of government is evil and a tyranny. They want a free
association of individuals, without armed forces, courts, prisons or written law. The
Russian intellectual, Michael Bakunin, was regarded as the founder of European
anarchism. His famous claim is “the passion for destruction is also a constructive
passion”. This doctrine of destruction inflamed the minds of many young Russians and
echoed by many of the Russian nihilists.
ii) Nihilism – “nihil” is a Latin words meaning “nothing”. The idea of the nihilists were
intensely destructive. They contended that existing institution, political, social and
religious, should be swept away and that a new organization of society be set up.
6. Assassination of Alexander II
The first of many attempts on Alexander’s life took place in 1866. The discovery of a
widespread secret society pledged to overthrow the government dampened Alexander’s
ardour for reform and even caused him to reverse some of his policies. In spite of this, in
1881, Alexander II decided to grant a new liberal constitution with a responsible ministry.
Only a few days after his decision was made, he was killed in March 1881 by a bomb
thrown by a member of the People’s Will. The fanatics believed that the Czar had only to
be assassinated for the whole regime to fall. After the Czar’s assassination, the leaders of
the People’s Will were rounded up and the organization ceased to exist.
7. Effects of the assassination
a) Assassination did not bring down Czardom as the People’s Will had hoped. It
seemed to most other revolutionaries, a clear proof that terrorism alone was not
enough. Terrorism was discredited. The failure of People’s Will opened the way to
Marxian Socialism.
b) It postponed the introduction of any parliamentary government in Russia for a 1/2
century, until 1905. And then it was too late. If Russia had got parliamentary
institutions in 1881, the Revolution, if it had occurred at all, would have been very
different. If the Czar had been able to meet liberalism half-way, revolutionary
fervour would have been dampened. But now even the moderates were driven to
revolutionary measures.
c) Liberalism and radicalism in Russia were henceforth to develop on lines even
more different from those of the West. Russian liberalism had already to fight an
uphill battle: there was no tradition of civil liberty as in England or even the
memory of successful revolution as in France. In a country without a constitution
all opposition to the existing government is driven into revolutionary channels.
13
Russia (1801-1917)
Russian Revolutions 14
The compromise and discussion by which true liberalism achieves its ends were
impossible in Russia. Liberalism was driven further and further to the left. As this
development was taking place, emancipation was creating a discontented
peasantry and the development of industry a discontented proletariat; neither
would feel much sympathy with the purely political reforms of liberalism. Even if
they were not wholly sympathetic with Nihilism, they wanted far-reaching
economic and social changes. From the time of the assassination onwards, it was
increasingly clear that there was little hope that the Russian regime would be
reformed and liberalized successfully on western lines.
d) Assassination led to a reassertion of autocracy under the narrow obstinate
Alexander III.
Alexander III (1881-1894)
Alexander III tried to go back to the days of Nicholas I, with the slogan of “autocracy,
orthodoxy and nationality”. But it was now more difficult because
a) a much more self-conscious revolutionary movement had developed.
b) the taste for freedom and local self-government and a relaxed censorship.
However, circumscribed, was not lightly lost. Hence Alexander had to be far more
repressive than Nicholas I.
1. He restored the power of the landed nobility. A new post of land captains was created.
These land captains were picked from the local nobility and exercised judicial and
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
administrative functions.
In 1890, he revised the constitution of the zemstvos so as to guarantee power to the
noble element and correspondingly diminish the peasant element.
In 1892, he raised the property qualification for voters to the municipal councils.
In the judicial field, the independence of the judiciary was attacked with a tighter
control over the judges. The Jews were refused the right to practice at the bar.
Cultural control -- Closer supervision was exercised over intellectual life. University
autonomy was undermined and press censorship was tightened up.
Russification:
a) Teaching of the vernacular was forbidden in schools in non-Russian places e.g. Poland,
Ukraine.
b) Use of Russian was enforced.
c) Discrimination against nationalities and religious oppression.
d) Persecution of Jews -- Anti-semitism had existed in Russia, but had not yet been used
as an instrument of government policy. Hence Alexander III’s persecution of the Jews
was unprecedented.
As a Jewish girl was one of Czar’s assassins, this became a pretext for a wave of
14
Russia (1801-1917)
Russian Revolutions 15
government-inspired pogroms that brought terror, death and rape to many Jewish
districts in south Russia in 1881. One of Alexander III’s advisers stated, “1/3 of the
Jews of Russia must die, 1/3 emigrate, and 1/3 assimilate.” The May Laws and other
discriminatory laws were passed. These included quota system in schools and
universities, exclusion from the Bar, for Jewish doctors, exclusion from employment
with public authorities, the loss of franchise rights in zemstvo and municipality and
forceful resettlement.
7. There was some relaxation of the pressure on the peasants. e.g. the redemption
payments were scaled down and poll tax abolished. The government also made it easier
for village communes to rent or buy additional land.
Russian Economic Development
1. Alexander II
a) Emancipation gave a certain impetus to capitalist development and to the urbanization
of Russia. 4 million serfs were freed without land. For the majority of these, there was
no choice but to drift townwards. In the decade 1860-70, urban population increased by
45%. This created a reserve of cheap labour which could be used for the development
of industry.
b) The development of the railway network was one of the most impressive features of the
post-reform decades. The aim was first to link the grain-producing areas with the
population centers and the internal markets, and second, to link the former with the
ports and thus facilitate the export of grain. Between 1861 and 1880, the track grew
from 1000 miles to more than 14,000 miles.
c) This railway boom encouraged Russian heavy industry. This can be seen in a
sixteenfold rise in coal production, a tenfold rise in steel, and a 50% rise in iron and
pig-iron in the period from 1860-1876. Similar expansion took place in traditional
industries (cotton-spinning and woolen manufactures).
d) A budgeting system was inaugurated (before 1862 there had been no proper budget at
all). Private banks were promoted and various attempts were made to stabilize the
currency. Nevertheless, none of these really succeeded.
e) The State stepped in as the promoter of industrial enterprise. Its instrument was the
State Bank, founded in 1860. The chief function of the State Bank and other banks were
to serve as the creditors of many industrial enterprises. So Russian industry had a close
connection with the State. e.g. By 1901, the Government owned 2/3 of the existing
railway tracks.
2. Alexander III
In the reign of Alexander III, although political development was cut short, economic
development continued.
15
Russia (1801-1917)
Russian Revolutions 16
a) There was a great contrast between agriculture and industry. While agriculture
stagnated, industry flourished. Under the inspiration of Sergei Witte, all branches of
Russian industry and production showed a remarkable upsurge in the 1890s.
b) In 1892, Witte became Minister of Transport and later Minister of Finance. He was so
important and influential that he was for all practical purposes the Czar’s chief minister.
He made the industrial development of Russia his overriding him. Not only that: his
Russo-Persian bank and his Trans-Siberian Railway served as agents of Russian
expansion and penetration into the Middle and Far East.
c) A few figures are enough to show the astonishing upsurge in production. In the last
decade of the 19th C, the smelting of pig-iron increased in Russia by 190%. By 1900,
Russia had moved up to 4th place in world production. The same applies to the
production of iron, coal, oil and cotton. In every case, the rate of growth in Russia far
outstripped that of any other nation.
d) Characteristics of industrial development -- the emphasis on heavy industry particularly
railroad and rolling stock construction, the concentration of industry in large units of
production, the great extent of governmental financial population was engaged in
factories employing a thousand or more workers. The growth in productivity was
concentrated in the larger units.
This enormous investment was not financed by private capital raised within the
country. It derived almost wholly from Russian government funds and from foreign
capitalists and entrepreneurs. The government took a particularly important part in
railroad construction. There developed a special form of State capitalism with special
interests in railroads, and through the railroads, in all the ramifications of heavy
industry also.
The state’s participation in industry went even further. In founded credit
institutions. It owned mines and enjoyed monopolistic rights in the sale of vodka to the
populace. A balanced budget, a highly protectionist tariff, and government contracts
were other State-inspired concomitants of the policy of industrialization.
The encouragement of foreign capital was Witte special preserve. It was his chief
motive for bringing Russia on to the gold standard in 1896 and making the paper rouble
convertible into gold. This was the background to the astonishing influx of foreign
capital in the 1890s, especially after the ratification of the France-Russian alliance in
1894. France and Belgium together accounted for the bulk of foreign investments at
this period, followed by Germany and Britain. Russian industry could also profit from
the most advanced technical innovations of the West, could use its technicians, its
manage its manifold specialists. Russia jumped several stages in industrial development
in a few decades.
e) Effects
16
Russia (1801-1917)
Russian Revolutions 17
i) There was a sudden, gigantic growth in the size of the urban working class. It more
than doubled between 1865 and 1890, increasing at a faster rate than the urban
population. In the next decade, the rate accelerated even more. By now a hereditary
working class existed. It was no longer formed of peasants displaced from the
countryside and often returning to their villages for the harvest; it was a true factory
proletariat.
ii) The bad conditions in both the factories and dwelling quarters in the new industrial
centers bred discontent. The workers in Russia enjoyed no state intervention and no
right to strike and no right to form trade unions. Labour legislation was limited and
gave no protection against exploitation. e.g. long hours in bad working conditions
for low wages, housing conditions were poor and the cities were overcrowded.
iii) This was the immediate background to the growth of Marxism and to the workers’
role in the revolutions of 1905 and 1917.
Nicholas II (1894-1917)
1. Nicholas II was not prepared to be the Czar. He was weak in character and greatly
influenced by his wife, Alexandra.
2. Conditions in Russia
a) Nicholas II had inherited from his ancestors a giant empire. By 1890, Russia had a
population of 95 millions with a standing army of a million men. Territorially, Russia
had been expanding since Peter the Great. Because of land hunger, people began to
migrate to Siberia. Before emancipation, there had been a movement of peasants
eastwards. Some were state peasants who were furnished with official permission.
Others were serfs from private estates in illegal flight. From 1890 onwards, continuous
surge of migration began. The government encouraged colonists by granting some
exemption from taxation. The Trans-Siberian Railway was completed and from 1898
was offering cheap migrant fares. By the end of the 19th C, the population of Siberia
had reached over 13 millions.
b) Expansion had brought with it problems. In Siberia, a free and prosperous peasantry in
the empty lands of the east had an independent spirit. In 1910, Stolypin, the Prime
Minister, expressed his fears: “The democracy of Siberia will crush us.” Besides,
expansion also brought with it diversity which challenged the idea of uniform
bureaucratic centralization which was the tradition of the Czars. In 1897, 55% of the
population was non-Russian. These nationalities developed a sharp consciousness of
independent religions tradition. Autocracy throughout the 19th C adapted an
unimaginative requirement of uniformity -- Russification. Under Alexander III and
Nicholas II (up to 1905), Russification reached its intensity. This policy of Russification
was directed against the Jews and Poles in particular. This explained why the Jews were
17
Russia (1801-1917)
Russian Revolutions 18
prominent in the revolutionary movement while in Poland a growing revolutionary
movement also developed.
c) Since emancipation, a small and lucky minority or rich peasants emerged. But the mass
of the peasantry became even poorer. The poverty of the countryside meant that
industry had a restricted internal market. In the industrial field, railways, tariffs, foreign
investment and state encouragement of western capitalism combined with the results of
the emancipation of the serfs to effect a revolution in Russian economy. It was the most
rapidly growing industrial country in the world. This was the period of industrial
takeoff and Russia desperately needed above all a government capable of planning and
of evoking popular support. But the regime of Nicholas II could do neither. It was
unable to foresee or remedy shortages of food and fuel and exported grain when its own
people were starving. It did little to better the lot of the working class. Trotsky had
remarked, “Nicholas II inherited from his ancestors not only a giant empire, but a
revolution.” These desperate problems provided the groundwork of the “revolution”
which Trotsky regarded as the other half of the Romanov inheritance.
d) Through all these confusion ran the developing patterns of revolutionary ideas:
Nihilism, Populism, Anarchism, liberalism and Marxism.
3. Revolutionary groups
a) Constitutional Liberals
Liberalism in Russia made progress during the 1890s.
i) The moderates -- The centers of the more moderate form of liberalism were the
zemstvos. They still looked for a conciliatory gesture from the throne in the Russian
tradition of reform from above. A generation of experience in local administration had
given zemstvo men confidence in their ability to govern. They felt that powers of
elected bodies should be extended and that there should be some central elected
assembly -- some wished to be legislative while some favored consultative. Nicholas
II’s reply was that these desires were “senseless dreams of the participation of
zemstvo representatives in the affairs of internal administration. “
ii) Radicals / Constitutionalists -- They reached the point of seeking fundamental
political change through a constituent assembly. The more radical branch of Russian
liberalism was associated with the professional classes especially with the experts
employed by the zemstvos. These became known as the “third element”. From the
mid 1890s, professional congresses began to be frequent. In 1903, a meeting of
zemstvo leaders resulted in the formation of the League of Liberation. It won the
support of the professional organizations, the “third element” and the more radical
zemstvo assemblies. It demanded the installation of a parliament with power to issue
laws and to control budget, guarantee of personal and civil liberties, equality before
law, universal suffrage and freedom of press. But it made no mention of the far more
18
Russia (1801-1917)
Russian Revolutions 19
urgent: problems affecting the actual conditions of workers and peasants and
neglected the poverty of the masses. Therefore, it had to support from the top and
from below.
b) The Social Democratic Movement
i) In the 1880s, the only free political discussions among Russians took place abroad,
especially in Switzerland. (Contact with political ideas was still possible by traveling
or studying abroad.) Here in Switzerland, the first important Russian Marxist group,
the Liberation of Labour, was formed with Plekhanov as its leader. Plekhanov, father
or Russian Marxist movement, was the greatest of Russian Marxist theorist.
ii) The first organized Marxist groups inside Russia in the 1880s were formed in several
cities. They were little more than secret study and discussion groups organized by
students. Workers were drawn only for education in socialist ideas rather than for
action.
iii) In 1895, the Union of Struggle for the Liberation of the Working Class was formed in
St. Petersburg. It was a more efficient Marxist organization. Lenin and Martov were
among its leaders. They were later caught and banished for some years in Siberia.
iv) In 1898, a congress of existing Marxist groups was held in Minsk. The Russian Social
Democratic Labours’ Party was formed. The manifesto of the party stressed the
leading role of the industrial workers in the struggle for political freedom in Russia.
Immediately, after the congress, the central committee was caught. Members
continued to function in the Switzerland.
v) The exiles set up a paper in Munich, Iskra (The Spark). It was smuggled back into
Russia. Its editors were Lenin, Martov and Plekhanov. It upheld the idea that the party
was to be the revolutionary vanguard, leading the workers forward. It should not
leave the initiative to the masses and the party must understand the workers’ interest
better than the workers themselves.
vi) In 1903, the second congress of the party met first in Brussels and then in London. Its
most important discussions concerned the nature and organization of the party.
--- Lenin argued for a strongly centralized and disciplined party, to consist of
professional revolutionaries, even if in practice it would have to be small in
numbers. To Lenin, quality was more important than quantity. He wished to admit
those who would take an active part in one of the party organizations.
--- The opposite point of view argued by Martov was that anyone who accepted the
party’s political programmes should be allowed to enter, even if it meant that many
party members would not be active.
The 1903 Congress was a crucial congress. It saw the birth of Bolshevism as a
political organization and a special form of political warfare that had no precedent in
the West, and also the split with Menshevism. As a result of the disputes, the party
19
Russia (1801-1917)
Russian Revolutions 20
was divided into 2 parts: the Bolsheviks (majority) and the Mensheviks (minority). In
1904, Iskra passed under Menshevik control. Lenin founded his own paper, Forward
(Vperyod). Henceforth, there are in fact 2 separate Russian Marxist parties.
vii) The Bolsheviks and Mensheviks -- differences and similarities
The Bolsheviks
-- The future revolution would be a bourgeois revolution. It would be led not by the
bourgeoisie, but by working class in alliance with the peasantry.
-- The bourgeoisie was weak and cowardly. It would betray the revolution and seek a
compromise with the ruling class.
-- Lenin shared the common Marxist view that the peasantry was a politically
backward class with a “petty bourgeois” outlook. But in the struggle against
Tsardom and for the partition of the great landed estates, the vast majority of
peasants would be won for the revolution. So there was the need to give
battle-training to the workers and the peasants.
-- After the end of the Czardom, there would be a revolutionary democratic
dictatorship of the proletariat and peasantry. The new regime would be
bourgeois-democratic, not socialist. Russia would pass on form the bourgeois to the
socialist revolution. This might be achieved faster if the proletariat in west
European states staged a socialist revolution. Lenin did not commit himself as to
the length of period of transition between the 2 stages of the revolution in Russia.
The Mensheviks
-- They also made the same distinction between the bourgeois and socialist
revolutions as did Lenin. They also admitted that the spread of revolution to
western countries would greatly assist and accelerate development in Russia.
-- They were extremely skeptical about the revolutionary potentialities of the
peasantry.
-- They were much less contemptuous than Lenin towards the radical elements of the
urban middle class. Therefore, they regarded a long period of bourgeois democracy
as inevitable.
viii) A third position was taken by Trotsky. He believed that the Russian proletariat might
lead the revolution in its bourgeois stage. Once the proletariat had power, it would
have to move on to the socialist revolution. But this could not be successful in
Russia unless there was a socialist revolution also in industrial Europe. i.e.
permanent revolution. In this last point, Trotsky’s views were not far from those of
Lenin. He differed from Lenin in being skeptical (though less so than the
Mensheviks) about the role of the peasantry. In questions of party organization, he
was much closer to the Mensheviks than to the Bolsheviks.
ix) Consequently the great questions for Russian Marxist socialism after 1903 were
20
Russia (1801-1917)
Russian Revolutions 21
those about party organization, relations with the peasantry and the prospects of the
bourgeois and socialist revolution. The differences between the Bolsheviks and
Mensheviks spread in depth and breadth until they became quite distinct and
mutually hostile movements.
c) Social Revolutionaries
i) They were heirs to the populists and a more radical version of the Populist groups. In
1903, Populist exiles in Switzerland and representatives of the groups inside Russia
agreed to form a single Social Revolutionary Party. It gained support in Russia in the
next 3 years, especially among students and teachers in provincial towns and villages.
The leading figure was Victor Chernov.
ii) Programme
-- civil liberties, labour legislation and taxation according to wealth
-- emphasis on a federal structure of the Russian state with complete
self-determination for non-Russians
-- Agrarian policy: The party did not believe that capitalism could develop well in
Russia. Capitalism could make only slow progress in Russia because Russia had
neither capital nor a bourgeoisie, that the internal consumption level was too low
to absorb its products, that it was too weak to conquer markets abroad in the
normal imperialist fashion. They concluded that Russia could escape the capitalist
phase of economic development. By fortifying the commune and its collective
virtues, Russia could evolve its own form of socialism without undergoing the
preliminary capitalist phase of exploitation and wage slavery.
-- From the Populists, the Social Revolutionaries inherited the belief in a specific
Russian form of agrarian development based on the commune. They advocated the
nationalization of the land with a view to its distribution on the basis of use.
iii) Tactics -- The SRs combined mass propaganda with the policy of terror and
assassination.
iv) The SRs had common ground with the Marxists in their insistence on the socialist
potentialities of the coming bourgeois revolution.
d) Russia in the time of Nicholas II was therefore revolutionary. “Nicholas inherited a
bomb, not an empire”.
4. The 1905 Revolution
a) Background causes -- The appalling conditions in Russia and rising discontent of the
people.
b) Immediate cause -- The Russo-Japanese War
i) The war revealed the follies of Nicholas II and his advisers. The war was not
unwelcome in certain Russian governing circles. e.g. Plehve, the Minister of
Interior, held that it would be “a short, victorious war that would stem the tide of
21
Russia (1801-1917)
Russian Revolutions 22
revolution.” But the war turned out to be far from short and far from victorious. War
revealed the weakness of the Czarist regime especially corruption and
incompetence in the army and navy. The war eventually triggered off the revolution.
ii) Bloody Sunday (22.1.1905)
-- It was the spark that set alight the flame of revolution.
-- Father Gapon, in collaboration with some of the zemstvo leaders, intelligentsia
and Social Revolutionaries, drafted a petition letter for presentation to the Czar:
freedom of press, religion, assembly, a constituent assembly, equality before the
law, labour legislation and the 8-hour day, amnesty to political prisoners.
-- On Jan. 22 1905, (Sunday), 150,000 petitioners under Gapon’s leadership
marched to Winter Palace. This peaceful and unarmed procession ended in a
bloody massacre when guards fired on the petitioners. Perhaps a thousand were
killed, and many more thousands wounded.
-- This massacre fused the latent discontent in a whitehot rage. Revolts flared up
in all parts of the country in all social groups. An All-Russian Peasants’ Union
was formed -- the first time that a political party of the peasants had arisen on
Russian soil.
c) In August 1905, the Czar promised a national assembly (Duma) but with no legislative
power; the workers would have no vote at all. Such concessions failed to pacify the
discontented. In September, the General Strike took place. The whole life of the country
was paralyzed. This was accompanied by further mutinies among the troops and
peasant violence in the countryside.
d) The first soviet was formed in St. Petersburg, then in Moscow. The St. Petersburg
Soviet consisted of some 500 delegates elected by about 200,000 workers. Its birth
represented the peak of working-class achievement. It was a spontaneous creation. But
it was a lesson in revolution, not the revolution itself. Trotsky was at one time the
co-chairman of the St. Petersburg Soviet. It followed on the whole a moderate policy. It
supported the general strike, but sought to educate the workers in the limitations of the
Duma rather than to organize an immediate armed insurrections. The most
revolutionary act of the Soviet was to call for non-payment of taxes and withdrawal of
bank deposit.
e) The October Manifesto
Witte persuaded the Czar since he realized that by now the existence of the
autocracy was at stake. The Manifesto proclaimed certain fundamental civil liberties
such as freedom of speech and assembly. It promised to extend the franchise to the
working class. No law could be promulgated without the approval of the State Duma.
The Duma had legislative power.
To some extent, the October Manifesto split off the liberal middle class from the
22
Russia (1801-1917)
Russian Revolutions 23
workers and the moderates from the radicals. The government could now proceed with
the repression of the revolution. The leaders of the St. Petersburg Soviet were arrested.
An armed uprising in Moscow was put down. The 1905 Revolution had come to an end
by the end of the year.
f) Reasons for failure
i) No unity of purpose and political programme -- In 1905, each party made its own
struggle against Czardom. The chief driving force of the 1905 Revolution was the
masses. They were not mobilized by political groups.
ii) The October Manifesto split the radicals and moderates, thus weakening the
revolutionary movement and enabling the Czar to suppress the revolution.
iii) The Russian army on the whole remained loyal to the government and fought the
revolutionaries.
iv) The government was strengthened by French loans to suppress revolution.
v) Troops returning from Russo-Japanese War were used to suppress the rebellion.
g) Importance
i) Russia had seen the face of revolution, a modern revolution, not a serf rising or a
guards’ conspiracy. For the first time in Russian history, million of people in
towns and villages took part in a revolution.
ii) The lesson that the Czar had refused to learn was there for his enemies to study. It
had shown how easy defeated soldiers could be fanned by propaganda and how
coercive a general strike could be, if headed by soviets like those in St. Petersburg
and Moscow.
iii) The cause of revolution had gained new heroic memories, more inspiring to
practical action than the long annals of suffering in jails and exile or of sporadic
terrorism.
iv) Defeat imposed a lesson in insurrectionary strategy. A bourgeois revolution in
Russia would never succeed. The conspiratorial minority ought to seize the state
machinery in the revolution. Lenin was already on the verge of this conclusion.
v) For the majority of the Russians, who had neither revolutionary purposes nor
theories, 1905 marks the end of an ancient illusion. The myth of the paternal
autocrat, separated from his people by nobles, bureaucrats or industrialists, was
shattered. Gapon summed up the universal disillusionment after the Bloody
Sunday, “Nicholas Romanov, formerly Czar and now destroyer of souls.”
vi) After the revolution, reforms came as the last-minute attempt to strengthen
autocracy. But they came too late.
Hopeful developments (1905-1914)
a) In the years after 1905, it seemed as though progressive peaceful liberalism might have
23
Russia (1801-1917)
Russian Revolutions 24
a fresh chance. The Duma seemed to be playing an important role and taking root. It
focused public opinion and provided a platform for discussion. Its leaders had excellent
scheme for the future, including a blueprint of a system of national education. Besides,
the revolutionary ardour of 1905 appeared to have died down. There did exist a large
and growing section of opinion hostile to revolution, which was working steadily for
the evolution of Russia into a constructional monarchy. This liberal section was
composed of professional classes, businessmen and landowners. Considerable reforms
were introduced after 1905 -- agrarian reform; industrial production increased and
social reform began; a scheme of insurance against sickness was introduced in 1912.
b) The Dumas
i) The First Duma, (May-Jul 1906)
It met in May 1906. A majority of liberals was returned. The Constitutional Democrats
(Cadets) represented liberal and zemstvo opinion. They had 170-180 seats. The Octobrists
(the more moderate wing of the Cadets) took their stand on the basis of the October
Manifesto (30-40 seats). Others included 18 Social Democrats, mainly Mensheviks. The
official policy of the Social Democrats was to boycott the elections, but this was not
everywhere observed.
The power of the State Duma was limited. It had a very limited control over the state
finances. The Council of Ministers was responsible to the Czar. No law could be effective
without approval of both houses and the Czar. (The State Duma was the lower house was
purely elected. State Council, the upper house, consisted of 1/2 of Crown nominees, the
other half of elected members who were wealthier commercial and professional classes.)
The members of the Duma presented demands to the Czar, demanding for the control
of all affairs of the state, including taxation. The Czar’s reply was to call in troops and
dissolve the Duma.
ii) The Second Duma, (Mar-Jun 1907)
Elections for a new duma were held. Efforts had been made to ensure the return of
pro-government candidates. But the opposition again had a majority. The Czar again
dissolved it 3 months later.
iii) The Third Duma, (1907-1912)
The electoral law had been changed to favour the landed gentry and wealthier
town-dwellers. Consequently, it was able to run its full course. In June 1908, there was
public discussion in the Duma on budget estimates. This was a turning point in the life of
the Third Duma. It began to rally the confidence and support of the public. It really
appeared to be a very hopeful development. The Duma had plainly come to stay, it had
become a habit, the country stood more and more behind it, and the bureaucracy and even
the court had reconciled themselves to its existence. It coincided with a period of
remarkable economic prosperity.
24
Russia (1801-1917)
Russian Revolutions 25
iv) The Fourth Duma, (1912-1917)
Altogether it was not a happy history, the Duma suffered from the dilemma of
attaining complex, specifically Western objectives in an illiberal, underdeveloped society.
As parliamentary tradition in Russia was not deeply rooted, it was easy for opposition to
drift towards radical channels.
c) Stolypin’s Agrarian reforms
The possibility that Russia might have escaped anything resembling the Revolution of
1917 is immeasurably increased by the fact of the Stolypin reform. He began a scheme for
social insurance, improved education and sought to extend the system of zemstva. His
agrarian reforms were especially important. Stolypin became the chief adviser of the Czar
after Witte was dismissed.
i) 1905 -- he cancelled all further redemption payments after the peasants should have
paid half the sums due for 1906.
ii) 1906 -- peasants could obtain passports and had no obligation to the mir anymore.
iii) The encouragement of internal colonization was another way to tackle peasant
problem. Between 1906 and 1915, about 3.5 million people migrated to Siberia,
usually with government assistance.
iv) The Peasant Bank was set up to assist in the purchase of land by more able peasants.
By 1916, more than 2 million households had received legal title to their new land.
Stolypin had 2 basic ideas regarding the peasants:
i) The peasants could be used to defeat revolution.
ii) To fortify the peasants as a bulwark of the state.
iii) The principle of free primary education was established.
iv) To pass laws to improve the conditions of the workers.
To achieve this, the government must free the peasants from the commune and permit
them to acquire private property. Peasants would be free to buy and sell their land. The
more able peasants would then emerge as small landed proprietors with a strong stake in
the existing order. Stolypin hoped to make use of the kulaks (rich peasants or the haves)
against the have-nots (peasants).
As a result of Stolypin’s agrarian reforms, a class of kulaks rose up in Russia. Many
sold their land to the more able peasants. Accompanied by the modern methods of farming,
the kulaks increased production by the purchase or rent of extra land and expanding output
in the more profitable branches of agriculture.
Stolypin’s policy did “inaugurate an era of relative peace on the agrarian front”. In the
years before the war, the no. of peasant riots annually decreased. But he had asked for 20
years of peace and this he would not have. Besides, it was all too little and too late.
Agricultural technique was low and the yield in crops also remained low. Neither could
Stolypin solve the problem of growing rural population. What was needed was the raising
25
Russia (1801-1917)
Russian Revolutions 26
of agricultural productivity and accelerated industrial development. The reforms made only
an insignificant contribution to this in relation to the size of the problem.
d) The revolutionaries
i) From 1906 to 1912, the revolutionary movement was in the doldrums. The Bolsheviks
were still a minority and not strong enough to go on the offensive. At the same time,
reforms pacified the moderates who took part in elections to the Dumas.
ii) In the meantime, Lenin and the revolutionaries generally could draw the lesson of the
peasant upheavals of 1905. They concentrated their efforts on mobilizing the
discontent of the peasantry as a positively anti-government force rather than allowing
such discontent to dissipate itself into futile sporadic and short-lived revolts.
e) Repression
i) Ruthless treatment of Jews and Poles continued.
ii)The martial and extraordinary powers to governor-generals were responsible between
Sep 1906 and May 1907 for the execution of more than 1100 people.
The February Revolution, 1917
1. Background causes
a) Political factors
i) Autocracy made liberal reforms unlikely. Government remained inefficient, corrupt
and incompetent.
ii) Role of Czar Nicholas II
-- He was weak-willed and slow-witted and was unable to solve the problems facing the
Czarist regime.
-- His weaknesses made a genuine liberal monarchy unlikely and his half-heartedness in
reforms rendered them ineffective.
-- A bade judge of man, Nicholas II dismissed or appointed his ministers at his own will.
Capable officials were often dismissed. The most outstanding example was the
dismissal of Witte in 1905.
-- His follies in 1905 resulted in the loss of confidence and respect of the people. His
prestige never recovered from the blow of the Bloody Sunday.
-- His reluctance to give up autocracy and the limitation of the Duma meant that Russia
lost the last chance of peaceful transformation.
-- Being weak-willed, he was influenced by his wife, Alexandra. From 1906 to 1916,
both the Czar and Czarina fell under the influence of Rasputin, resulting in chaos and
resentment. To some extent, the Czarina and Rasputin were the prime authors of the
collapse of the Empire and of Russia. Rasputin, “a symbol for all the evils”, was
murdered in 1916. Yet the harm done was beyond repair. His assassination came too
late to save the dynasty.
26
Russia (1801-1917)
Russian Revolutions 27
iii) Lack of capable leaders / advisers
The human factor swung all in favour of the Marxists who had talented and capable
leaders. The only two men of ability in the service of Nicholas II were Witte and
Stolypin. The former was dismissed in 1905 while the latter was assassinated in 1911.
After 1911, the prime ministers were mediocre.
b) Socio-economic factors
i) The growing land-hunger increased discontent.
ii) Industrialization necessitated the export of grain which further decreased the living
standard of the peasants. The mass was suffering from poverty and hunger. All this
made the peasantry a reservoir of revolutionaries.
iii) The growth of industrialization was accompanied by the rise of a discontented
proletariat. Their discontent with their conditions resulted in a mounting wave of
strikes, though these strikes were spontaneous, unpolitical, slow and elemental.
iv) On the whole, there existed in Russia a wide gap between the ruling class and people,
between the privileged and the non-privileged classes, between the rich and the poor,
between the kulaks (by 1914, they formed 15% of the peasants) and the poor peasants,
and between the bourgeoisie and proletariat.
c) Revival of revolutionary activity
All this discontent meant a revival of revolutionary activity, which was detrimental to
the Czarist regime.
2. Immediate cause – Impact of World War I
a) At the beginning of the War, patriotism drowned all oppositions. There was initial
success. Then came defeat. Russian troops lacked guns and ammunitions. Russia’s
technical backwardness meant she could not sustain a long war. By the third year of the
war, her resources were limited. Russian troops were seriously affected by low morale,
poor coordination and breakdown of railway system. By 1916, there were wholesale
desertions and several mutinies. The importance was that due to its demoralization; the
army could not be used to suppress the revolution when it broke out.
b) To replace the huge casualties, the call-up operated irrationally. About 37% of male
population of the working age in 1917 were forced to join the army. This led to acute
labour shortage with a consequent sharp decline in agricultural and industrial output.
Other problems followed: shortage of food, prices inflated and consumer goods
vanished. Shortage of food became more critical as Russia lost her chief wheat
producing area, the Ukraine. In Russia, there took place a rapidly mounting wave of
strikes, with the workers crying, “Down with the Czar!”
c) Nicholas II was away from the center of government to become the Commander in
Chief in 1915. He left the government to the evil monk, Rasputin and Tsarina
Alexander who was German and was suspected of being a traitor. This made the
27
Russia (1801-1917)
Russian Revolutions 28
government even more corrupt and inefficient.
d) In short, the war had utterly destroyed any confidence that still remained between the
government and the people. The war also led to the revival of the revolutionary activity
which had died down in the last 10 years. It could more easily be revived because of
growing discontent and because parliamentary government was not deeply rooted. But
the revolutionary wave would not have submerged Russia had it not been for the War.
3. Outbreak of the February Revolution
a) It began in a small way, spontaneously and unpolitically. It began as bread riots. Long
queues besieged the bakers’ shops. Soldiers were called in to restore order, but they
joined the rioters. Disorder was confined at first to Petrograd. There were strikes,
housewives’ demonstrations, mutinies among the troops and police -- a collapse of all
authority. The movement took the revolutionaries by surprise as much as anyone else.
Public buildings were taken over against very little opposition, prisoners released and,
police stations and barracks captured. The army refused to open fire on the
demonstrations.
b) At the same time, the deputies of the Duma refused to be dissolved by the Czar. A
Provisional Government was proclaimed with Prince Lvov as the head. It was
dominated by the Liberals with one leftist. Alexander Kerensky who was associated
with the Social Revolutionaries, as Minister of Justice. Nicholas abdicated in favour of
his brother. But his brother refused the throne. For the first time in 3 centuries, Russia
was without a Czar.
c) More significant was the absence of a centre of power. The Provisional Government
could not fill the gap. The Petrograd Soviet then flowed into this vacuum of power.
Similar soviets were formed in Moscow and the provincial towns and in the
countryside. These soviets challenged the authority of the Provisional Government.
The October Revolution, 1917
1. Causes and events leading to the October Revolution
a) Birth of the Petrograd Soviet of Workers’ and Soldiers’ Deputies
This was a rebirth of the Soviet of 1905. Its members were elected by their
workmates in barracks, factories, workshops and public enterprises. It was not long
before similar soviets were formed in Moscow and the provincial towns and in the
countryside. In some places, they even controlled food distribution. They undoubtedly
enjoyed incomparably more support than the official government. People brought their
personal problems to the Soviet rather than to the ministers.
The Petrograd Soviet at first supported the Provisional Government. It was in
agreement with the reforms of the P.G. The government proclaimed an amnesty for
political prisoners, abolished discriminatory legislation, inaugurated the 8-hour day,
28
Russia (1801-1917)
Russian Revolutions 29
restored the constitution of Finland, promised the Poles independence, undertook to
arrange the election of a constituent assembly which would consider the peasant
question.
b) Weakness of the Provisional Government
i) It could not fill the vacuum of power created by the abdication of the Czar. “The
Provisional Government,” said one minister, “possesses no real power and its orders
are executed only in so far as this is permitted by the Soviet of Workers’ and Soldiers’
Deputies, which holds in its hands the most important element of actual power, such
as troops railroads, postal and telegraph service.
ii) It dug its own grave by fulfilling the commitments to the Allies. i.e. to continue the
war. In other words, the P.G. pursued the same policy that had already taken the
country into revolution. The Russian army suffered further defeats. Besides, the failure
of Russian offensives led to further discontent.
iii) The P.G. decided to postpone the land question until the meeting of a constituent
assembly.
iv) In spite of concessions in civil liberties, the P.G. failed to get the support of the people.
Their concrete desire was peace and land rather than the rights of man. The failure of
the P.G. to provide them with peace and land proved to be fatal blunder.
c) After Mar 1917, a genuine and immense agrarian revolution was in progress in the
countryside. The peasants were at last fulfilling their age-long desire. They were simply
expropriating the large estates. By Mar 1919, virtually all the usable land was in
peasant hands. It was this elemental movement that was indispensable to the victory of
Bolshevism. It was this movement, as much as any other factor, that led to the
disintegration of the Russian armies. As a result of war weariness, there were mass
desertions. The returned soldiers joined in the scramble for land.
d) Return of Lenin and his April Theses, April 1917
The return of Lenin from Switzerland to Russia aroused great enthusiasm. He
presented his policy to a congress of the Bolsheviks in the famous April Theses. He
demanded the overthrow of capitalism as the only way to end the war; no further
support must be given to the Provisional Government: the power of the soviets must be
built up and the power of the Bolsheviks inside the soviets; there must be no
parliamentary republic; the land and the banks must be nationalized; the soviets must
take production and distribution into their own hands.
By the end of April 1917, the Bolsheviks had committed themselves to opposing
any collaboration with the Provisional Govt. and to transferring power to the soviets.
The slogan was “All Power to the Soviets”.
In order to gain the support of the workers and the peasants, Prince Lvov resigned
and the Kerensky government replaced the Provisional Government.
29
Russia (1801-1917)
Russian Revolutions 30
e) Temporary setback of the Bolsheviks
The Russian offensive against the Germans in the war failed. This failure sparked
off an open insurrection against the Provisional Government. But the movement had no
clear political aims. The Bolsheviks later tried to lead it to success. Yet 4 days later the
movement failed. It gave Kerensky, now head of the Provisional Government, occasion
to suppress the Bolsheviks as defeatists and agents of the Germans. Lenin had to flee to
Finland.
f) Growing influence of the Bolsheviks
The Bolsheviks regained influence again in July 1917 as a result of the attempted
coup by of General Kornilov, the newly appointed Commander-in-chief. Kornilov, a
right-wing supporter, tried to forestall a Bolshevik revolution by marching on Petrograd.
The Bolsheviks cooperated with the Mensheviks and Social Revolutionaries launched a
campaign to undermine his troops. The attempted coup eventually failed. Kornilov was
arrested but released later in the year.
The episode brought the Bolsheviks a tremendous access of strength. Within a
week, they had majorities in the soviets of Petrograd and Moscow. Trotsky was elected
chairman of the Petrograd Soviet. This pattern was followed in many local and
provincial soviets. In the countryside, as peasant disorders spread, Bolshevik influence
grew. Between Jan and Aug 1917, the number of Party members increased some
tenfold.
g) Decision on a revolution
Lenin wrote in mid Sept to the Party’s central committee, urging that the moment had
come. “History will not forgive us if we do not seize power now.” In October, it was
revolved to initiate an armed insurrection. The Petrograd Soviet established a
Military-Revolutionary Committee under the presidency of Trotsky.
2. Outbreak
Trotsky himself directed the overall strategy of the coup. On Nov 6 (24 Oct old style),
revolutionary troops and Red Guards went into action. They occupied one key-point after
another -- the railway stations, the power station, the telephone exchange, the State Bank,
the bridges, etc. They met almost no resistance. Kerensky fled. His ministers were arrested.
The coup was almost bloodless. But before the Bolsheviks held firm power, much blood
would be shed.
3. Reasons for Bolshevik victory
a) Strength of the Bolsheviks
i) As professional revolutionaries, the Bolsheviks were strictly disciplined and
tightly organized.
ii) The Bolshevik doctrine suited the need of the war-wearied and poverty-stricken
people. They called for “Peace, Land and Bread”. This rallied the support of the
30
Russia (1801-1917)
Russian Revolutions 31
masses. Their appeal of “All Power to the Soviets” enabled them to seize power.
iii) Brilliant leadership
-- Lenin displayed masterly leadership and excellent calculation. Lenin’s strategy
was to emphasize the division of the Provisional Government leaders.
“Neutralize their opposition, and capitalize on their apathy.” This contributed to
Bolshevik success.
-- Trotsky’s military talent and strategy also contributed to success.
iv) The Bolshevik control of the Petrograd and Moscow soviets greatly strengthened
them.
b) Weakness of the Provisional Government
i) It was unable to solve the urgent problems facing Russia.
ii) Its emphasis on liberal tendencies and constitutional legality on Western model
did not appeal to the people.
iii) Its decision to continue the war and postpone the land question alienated many
and turned them into opposition. It was indeed out of touch of reality.
iv) It was weakened further by internal strife. The failure of July offensive discredited
it further. Although Kornilov’s attempted coup was suppressed, it enabled the
Bolsheviks to regain popularity and strength.
c) Weakness of other political parties
i) The Social Revolutionaries were weakened by internal strife. They split into right
and left wings.
ii) The Mensheviks split into factions. One faction supported the P.G. to establish
bourgeois democracy in Russia. They believed that the proletarian socialist
revolution must be preceded by bourgeois democratic revolution.
Nature of the 1917 Revolutions
1. The February Revolution
It was at first a leaderless, spontaneous and anonymous revolution. No one even
among the revolutionary leaders, anticipated that the strikes and bread riots would
culminate in the mutiny and the overthrow of the government 4 days later. The revolution
in the later stage became a liberal bourgeois revolution which resulted in a republic with
parliamentary government and liberties for the people.
2. The October Revolution
It was a socialist revolution or proletariat revolution led by the Bolsheviks. It aimed at
proletariat dictatorship, the establishment of a soviet republic, nationalization of land and
means of production, and the abolition of private property. It ended with the establishment
of the rule of the communists.
31