The Russian Revolution, 1894 – 1921
4.1 What were the causes and outcomes of the 1905 Revolution up
to 1914
§ At the end of the 19th century, Russia was the largest state in
Europe
§ Compared to other powers - economically underdeveloped,
§ Big gap between the rich and the poor.
§ From 1894 to 1917, the country was ruled by Tsar Nicholas II –
an autocrat with unlimited power.
§ He belonged to the Romanov dynasty, which had governed
Russia since the early 17th century.
§ Nicholas opposed to reforms which might have reduced the
inequalities that plagued Russian society.
v The nature of the tsarist regime: pressures for change and the
reaction of Nicholas II to them
A multiracial, multifaith empire
§ Russia contained a large number of racial groups.
§ 45% of the population were ethnic Russians.
§ Each proud of its nationality, language, history and religion, and
for many years the only force unifying these disparate peoples
was loyalty to the tsar.
§ attitude towards their ruler changed during the 1890s.
§ In this decade, the tsarist regime alienated the different ethnic
groups through a policy of ‘Russification’ – enforcing the
Russian language as well as the Orthodox Christianity and laws
throughout the land.
§ Non-Orthodox blamed for Russia’s troubles and subjected to
periodic pogroms.
,The social hierarchy in Russia
§ The tsar governed with the support of the landowning
aristocracy.
§ nobility did not act as a check on the power of the monarchy.
§ They owed their social position largely to military and civil
service to the state.
§ There were no truly independent institutions in Russian society.
§ The leaders of the Orthodox Church, which exercised great
influence over society
§ The vast majority of Russians were peasants.
§ In theory, peasants had been free since the emancipation of
the serfs in 1861, but this had brought few changes.
§ They belonged to communes or mirs – agricultural cooperatives
which organised the distribution of land between households.
§ Peasants had to make ‘redemption payments’ for the land they
received.
§ Most peasants were loyal to the tsar but disliked the officials
§ Famines were frequent, and, due to poor transport
infrastructure, the government could not move food from
places where it was plentiful to those where it was lacking.
§ There was widespread poverty, and production levels were
low.
§ Peasants were encouraged to move from the west of Russia to
Siberia,
§ In 1882, a Land Bank was founded to provide money for local
communities and individual peasants to buy land.
§ In 1905, redemption payments were cancelled, but in reality
this made little difference to the peasants.
Economic structure
§ Russia should have had enough agricultural resources to feed
its population adequately, but several factors stunted the
economy:
§ Agricultural methods were underdeveloped.
, § the peasantry and the landowners not interested in any form of
modernisation to improve output.
§ Russia did export wheat, and by the end of the 19th century
grain exports were second only to those from America.
§ Profits from these sales, however, did not benefit the
peasantry.
§ The central government, dominated as it was by landowners,
did not impose a fair level of taxation on the Russian ruling
class. Instead the government relied heavily on indirect taxes,
levied on goods.
§ By 1900, Russia had caught up with Britain and Germany, in
terms of the total length of its rail network.
§ This expanded railway system, along with increased industry,
did help Russia to export more wheat, which benefited foreign
trade, but the money was not equally shared.
§ The government’s revenues were limited by the taxation
system:
§ income and land were taxed less than indirect taxes on
commodities and food, and this system disadvantaged the
peasants and the poor who lived in towns.
§ The system by which taxes were collected was inefficient and
corruptible
§ The regime also spent its money unwisely.
§ Funds were allocated generously to the army and to the police,
but little was spent on improving the economy.
§ Nicholas II was simply not interested in modernisation or
reform, and remained firmly committed to autocracy.
§ The result was that the general Russian populace became
increasingly alienated from the government and their
landlords,
4.1 What were the causes and outcomes of the 1905 Revolution up
to 1914
§ At the end of the 19th century, Russia was the largest state in
Europe
§ Compared to other powers - economically underdeveloped,
§ Big gap between the rich and the poor.
§ From 1894 to 1917, the country was ruled by Tsar Nicholas II –
an autocrat with unlimited power.
§ He belonged to the Romanov dynasty, which had governed
Russia since the early 17th century.
§ Nicholas opposed to reforms which might have reduced the
inequalities that plagued Russian society.
v The nature of the tsarist regime: pressures for change and the
reaction of Nicholas II to them
A multiracial, multifaith empire
§ Russia contained a large number of racial groups.
§ 45% of the population were ethnic Russians.
§ Each proud of its nationality, language, history and religion, and
for many years the only force unifying these disparate peoples
was loyalty to the tsar.
§ attitude towards their ruler changed during the 1890s.
§ In this decade, the tsarist regime alienated the different ethnic
groups through a policy of ‘Russification’ – enforcing the
Russian language as well as the Orthodox Christianity and laws
throughout the land.
§ Non-Orthodox blamed for Russia’s troubles and subjected to
periodic pogroms.
,The social hierarchy in Russia
§ The tsar governed with the support of the landowning
aristocracy.
§ nobility did not act as a check on the power of the monarchy.
§ They owed their social position largely to military and civil
service to the state.
§ There were no truly independent institutions in Russian society.
§ The leaders of the Orthodox Church, which exercised great
influence over society
§ The vast majority of Russians were peasants.
§ In theory, peasants had been free since the emancipation of
the serfs in 1861, but this had brought few changes.
§ They belonged to communes or mirs – agricultural cooperatives
which organised the distribution of land between households.
§ Peasants had to make ‘redemption payments’ for the land they
received.
§ Most peasants were loyal to the tsar but disliked the officials
§ Famines were frequent, and, due to poor transport
infrastructure, the government could not move food from
places where it was plentiful to those where it was lacking.
§ There was widespread poverty, and production levels were
low.
§ Peasants were encouraged to move from the west of Russia to
Siberia,
§ In 1882, a Land Bank was founded to provide money for local
communities and individual peasants to buy land.
§ In 1905, redemption payments were cancelled, but in reality
this made little difference to the peasants.
Economic structure
§ Russia should have had enough agricultural resources to feed
its population adequately, but several factors stunted the
economy:
§ Agricultural methods were underdeveloped.
, § the peasantry and the landowners not interested in any form of
modernisation to improve output.
§ Russia did export wheat, and by the end of the 19th century
grain exports were second only to those from America.
§ Profits from these sales, however, did not benefit the
peasantry.
§ The central government, dominated as it was by landowners,
did not impose a fair level of taxation on the Russian ruling
class. Instead the government relied heavily on indirect taxes,
levied on goods.
§ By 1900, Russia had caught up with Britain and Germany, in
terms of the total length of its rail network.
§ This expanded railway system, along with increased industry,
did help Russia to export more wheat, which benefited foreign
trade, but the money was not equally shared.
§ The government’s revenues were limited by the taxation
system:
§ income and land were taxed less than indirect taxes on
commodities and food, and this system disadvantaged the
peasants and the poor who lived in towns.
§ The system by which taxes were collected was inefficient and
corruptible
§ The regime also spent its money unwisely.
§ Funds were allocated generously to the army and to the police,
but little was spent on improving the economy.
§ Nicholas II was simply not interested in modernisation or
reform, and remained firmly committed to autocracy.
§ The result was that the general Russian populace became
increasingly alienated from the government and their
landlords,
