The term 'economically backward' refers to countries that are both economically and socially below the common standard of development, the average standard is exercised by comparing how developed different countries in the world are. Therefore, it is evident the Russia could have been referred to as 'economically backward' credited to it only just beginning to industrialise while the rest of the world was already well on it's way, specifically those in the East, in terms of it's degree of development as a country. The first indication of revolt within Russia was the Decembrist revolt 1525, these situations could be factors as to why Revolution broke out in 1905 and as to how Tsardom was eventually overthrown. The Emancipation of the Serfs 1861 is a main emphasis and there are many reasons as to the reasons it took so long for revolution to occur after this, one being the assassination of Alexander II and therefore the consequent taking over from a fresh ruler, the assassination can be an signal of the public's view within Russia.
According to Orlando Figes one immediate cause for the outbreak of trend in 1905 is the Russo-Japanese warfare 1904. It is stated the Plehve planned this battle as 'a little victorious battle to stem the revolution'
However additionally it is argued by Harrison E. Salisbury that it was Nicholas II who thought that heading to war will be a positive thing for Russia, he assumed that the prospect of possible success usually takes away the public's general discontent towards him, therefore being beneficial to him in person and creating a far more peaceful atmosphere within Russia and for that reason making the prospect of any outbreak of revolution less likely.
Russia and Japan both needed control of Korea and Manchuria due mainly to trade reasons, they were abundant with resources and their locations were useful. Russia already had some place in the East, the factor which allowed this 'economically backward' country to get this done was their first rung on the ladder towards growing their country, the Trans-Siberian Railway 1891.
The scope to which the development helped Russia is debatable, of course, it upgraded travelling of goods and for that reason trade also, being truly a huge help life internally in Russia. However, in conditions of the Russo-Japanese war, the railway was used to send requirements and ammunition to help the soldiers, although this made the process faster than it would have been a decade previously, it was still much slower than the way in which Japan functioned internally, therefore demonstrating that although Russia experienced obviously used steps to further itself, it was still behind financially compared to other countries such as Japan.
In contemporary times, Japan was the first Asian capacity to defeat a European power, this is most certainly credited to Russia's degree of economic backwardness compared to it's competition, Japan. When the war started out with japan attack on Interface Arthur, Nicholas made the assumption the Russia would of course be victorious. Nicholas finally was showing signals of positive management creating patriotism to be felt in high levels. 'Never before got the Russian people in every it's uncooked mass shown so obviously it's love for the Tsar and it's really Fatherland. Despite the fact that innovative thoughts and communities had recently been formed in 1904, this support shows the impact of the Tsar and then the autocracy has above the folks of Russia, even at a time so close to the 1905 outbreak of revolution. What is shocking is how the upper degrees of the populace behaved, these were the educated ones who have been most inspired by revolutionary actions compared to any other social class, but still they whole heartedly recognized the Tsar and his decision to go to warfare with great enthusiasm. Evidence we've of this will be the many demonstrations beyond your Winter Palace and the rallies of support throughout the complete country, in various provinces. This support suggests that events among the short period of time between this and the outbreak of trend will need to have been significant enough to cause it. Another possibility is of course that these high levels of support are just an illusion and is simply the public's wishful thinking. This may then mean that issues which were not as dominant at the time but that have built up over a number of years to an frustrating sense of discontent into the autocracy, such as Russia's monetary backwardness and the Emancipation of the serfs.
The support for the warfare may also be a demonstration of how effective propaganda can in fact be within the country to brainwash people. Making people believe that the Japanese were inferior to the Russians, and boasts that the complete of Europe had been defended from 'the yellow danger, the new hordes of mongols equipped by modern technology' This price can also connect to Russia's level economic backwardness. It confirms the claim that Japan is before Russia in conditions of development, Russia not being familiar with this technology triggers them to see it as something mysterious. They view it as something dangerous and evil and associate it using their enemies. It isn't considered that the same technology may probably be beneficial to them.
The Japanese required control of Korea eventually, and spent the whole leftovers of of 1904 with taking control of Slot Arthur as their main target. Port Arthur was finally surrendered to them in the first half of 1905, Russia needed to surrender, as that they had no chance of defeating the Japanese, this is due to them being more complex in terms with their fighting with each other methods and technology, and Russia was struggling to match this, perhaps because of their lack of development, or of new technology in this area. Another beat for the same reasons was a few months later at Muckden.
However, despite these defeats, Russia was still continual, and Nicholas was still planning a win to help his position in Russia. His designed to accomplish that by cruising the Russian baltic fleet half way throughout the world to meet the Japanese, but the entire fleet was destroyed. Even with the element of surprise on their side, Russia was not advanced and therefore no match for Japan. These happenings turned out to be humiliating for the Tsar, especially since there have been so much focus on the conflict from the people in Russia. After being defeated lots of times, peacefulness was decided upon and Japan had taken control of Korea and Southern Manchuria. Nicholas' tries at expansion into the asia were poor. The battle did the contrary of what Nicholas possessed hoped, it discredited him and the government in the eye of the Russian people. The warfare failed in it's main objective, which was to win support for Nicholas II and the autocracy. The discontent for the federal government grew in such depth that Plehve, the minister for interior, was assassinated by a bombing. One reason behind this may be the public's growing knowing of the problem and inefficiency of the government during the Russo-Japanese war. Much of the transportation used to assist in war initiatives broke down, despite quite recent advancements, once again demonstrating how Russia is with an degree 'backward' in conditions of the way it was run. Loaf of bread prices were soaring consequently of inflation, that your government did little or nothing to help try to reverse until it was too late. Generally, the state of hawaii in Russia was declining, there seemed to be problems with every part of it, as nothing was yet being done about it, the Tsar and the government were just attaining further discredit for themselves in the sight of the Russian people.
It can be argued that another cause of the 1905 trend were the land problems in the countryside and the attitude peasants had towards Tsardom. Specifically, the peasants weren't always in favour of reforms which had occurred. On of the primary reforms which did not benefit them was Alexander II's Emancipation of the Serfs 1861, this got rid of Serfdom, that was they manner in which all land in the countryside was supervised, which means peasants' way of life was consequently completely changed. This reform recommended that all serfs were freed from their responsibilities and obligations with their landowners and were awarded area's of the Noble's estates for themselves. Because of this possession, the peasants needed to pay heavy total annual sums to earn it, and for the time being the land belonged collectively to the village communities and therefore was distributed out evenly between those who lived there. However, the peasants experienced problems with these terms; villages receiving land collectively somewhat than families obtaining it individually meant that how big is the land given out was entirely reliant on how big is the populace of funds. As the rural populations were becoming larger, this would mean there may be less land and for that reason less food to bypass. The insufficient shares of land received were often infertile, therefore signifying less vegetation would expand. The annual amounts were often heavy and it was unrealistic for the peasants to have the ability to pay them as that they had no other income source. The fact that this reform hadn't benefited the people meant that even out of this early stage there was discontent felt towards Tsar system, people didn't feel they were able to put their trust in it as it hadn't helped them whatsoever. Revolution did not happen until 1905 as this discontent was building up, also at this period it was mainly the peasants who were feeling this, plus they were preoccupied with seeking to grow their plants and get enough out of these insufficient shares of land to aid their families. The peasants were designed to think that these were being given more electricity over their lives in the beginning, however, as time passes they would come to see that life-style is not entirely good for them. By giving them this one piece of vitality, may have been the motivating factor to eventually lead them to want further changes within Russia. Other countries in the World had a lot more efficient methods of showing their land, and acquired already possessed them in place for a number of years, the actual fact that Russia is merely just changing it's ways in 1861 to a way which is not totally beneficial once more shows how backward and behind they are simply in comparison to other countries of the world.
'To an outsider's eyes, the villages that the new professional worker got come might appear to be sunk in backwardness, but they were not immune system from change. ' This claim that the Tsar was doing all he could to help those in the countryside, and this his aim honestly was to make life better on their behalf. Russia was significantly behind in terms of monetary development set alongside the remaining world in conditions of how land was farmed and run. The Emancipation of the Serfs was designed to try to modernise and enhance the system, in which the peasants lived, and make an effort to improve life for the coffee lover. The landowners were also not completely pleased with the terms, naturally they lost a great deal of land credited to it being provided to the peasants nonetheless they also lost the labour the peasants got always completed for them free of charge. Many could not take care of the land they did have by themselves, signifying it became infertile and not looked after, leading to more land which food may potentially be grown on to be lost, and because of this many were facing large obligations by 1905. This created discontent towards Tsar due to the landowners' position being made worse.
'The Autocrat feared the sociable consequences associated with an uncontrolled influz into the cities, and therefore made it very hard for peasants to leave the villages' This advises the contrary, that the Tsar's first reason behind the Emancipation had not been to help the peasants, but instead to help his own pursuits, this suggests he intentionally made life problematic for the peasants, and when this is true, then they have justification to feel the discontent towards them that they are doing, which is unlucky that by the Tsar carrying out this he is also ensuring that they can not revolt either. Alexander did not want the already occupied cities to escape control.
There are also views to suggest that he performed want to help though, due to the growing rural populations it is possible that he previously a real wish to make things better in Russia, both through the Emancipation, wanting to make life better in the countryside, and by halting the peasants flooding in to the cities, so that they would not escape control. Was it certainly easy for him to do both these things peacefully and whilst keeping everyone happy. 'For five years he previously fought inertia and obstruction to bring flexibility to the peasants. That his initiatives should have been misinterpreted and produced such assault and misery in it's wake embittered him. ' However, the fact that this is not Alexander's only reform perhaps shows it's possible he had a real desire to change Russia for the better. He made lots of changes to the federal government and modernised the legal system, allowing there to be open trials. He released the countrywide conscription service, abolished armed forces colonies, calm censorship within Russia, and attemptedto widen the foundation of entry into secondary universities. He created town councils who were to be elected by the residents of each area and who had been responsible for the overall welfare of this area. This designed that Russians acquired a style for governing themselves and then for having more freedom to live as they wished, this was not necessarily a very important thing for Tsardom as it may become a triggering factor for the eventual problem to the rule of the Tsar and the Revolution in Russia.
The peasants having insufficient land meant that these were unhappy with just how they were living; it sparked some revolts. The peasants were of the thoughts and opinions that the land was a present from God and so they resented having to pay for something they regarded as rightfully theirs to begin with. Also landowners having no labour and being significantly in debt intended that all teams were up against the Tsar and his actions. Economic Backwardness was the reason all changes were placed into place, to develop Russia further in a number of ways, so it led to these factors which helped lead Russia to the trend.
Famine within the countryside was a large factor in changing the attitudes of the peasants. These extreme circumstances only intensified the discontent noticed to the Tsar. The famine in 1891 supposed that many were facing starvation in the summer. The plants which have been planted had not had time to begin growing before the frost arrived in the wintertime. The shortage was so severe that a sizable number of peasants believed that 'God possessed singled them out for particular consequence' Because of the autumn, the risk of famine had disperse, with around 20 provinces being in peril, this can be an area double the size of France and with a inhabitants of thirty-six million people. Peasants tried out to flee where they could, but this only resulted in roads and trails becoming obstructed with carts. Besides, there was nowhere for them to go, and most wouldn't normally leave their homes. Due to the extreme conditions cholera and typhus pass on, this is another demonstration of Russia's backwardness, there were not the right medical resources to cope with the diseases. For this reason, half a million people passed away by the end of 1892. Clearly, it was hard for the government to try and deal with these problems, they were not equipped to cope with a disaster of this size. As a result of having less help coming from the government, rumours commenced to be conjured up concerning reasons why this would be. It had been said that these were purposefully withholding food packages until they had statistical proof that individuals had no other way to supply themselves, however, by this time around it was often too overdue to save people. The Government's help came up too slowly to save peasants so the general impression was that the federal government was too sluggish and didn't really care about helping people. Anti-government sense was intensified during this time, and consequently the peasants had taken part in some riots. The famine had turned out the incapability of the old regime in place of Russia, and because of this people began to anticipate more and became increasingly more critical, up until the idea in 1905 when they demanded change.
Russia suffered some defeats in the Russo Japanese battle. The Russian army was much larger than the Japanese, so theoretically it could have a higher chance of success. However, this is false. Russia was defeated credited to it's armies being ill equipped, poorly trained as well as the condition and inadequacy of move, This demonstrates that although Russia has considered some type of step to 'better' itself, it was still much less advanced as would be likely, meaning that it was most definitely 'economically backward.
The Emancipation of the Serfs performed a role in the going on of the revolution, however, it built up discontent for the Tsar, and allowed for this to develop over the years until it was believed overwhelmingly by the majority of the inhabitants. Economic Backwardness led to the attempted changes of Alexander II including the Emancipation of the Serfs, these changes resulted in discontent for the tsar being believed from the peasants and the prior landowners, this is a lot of the society in the countryside. The Emancipation added much more to the trend than the Russo Japanese war, the conflict only highlighted the factors which were incorrect within Russia to the people. The Emancipation was the beginning of all the discontent within Russia, people did not act at the time because these were not able to be able to.
Economic Backwardness is the reason which sparked all the factors which added to the 1905 trend, therefore, it is of great importance.
Evaluation of Sources
This was a useful source for me, it starts early and points out all the factors which subsequently induced both revolutions. Orlando Figes is of the view that the revolution could take place anticipated to Russia's position at the start of the century, therefore, sunk in financial backwardness. He thinks that due to discontent towards the autocracy, revolution will need to have been inevitable to happen sooner or later over it's record, or it could never have ended up progressing. Figes writes as if his book is absolutely definitive, when of course there are numerous views on the Revolution and not most of them agree. He is a college or university lecturer in History at Cambridge, and for that reason can explain this issue in great detail, however this does not imply that his view is the right one to deal with the happenings within Russia.
This publication is directly focussed towards specific information about the 1905 trend only, it centers mainly on the incidents somewhat than their causes. To some extent, this book is quite descriptive sometimes. Salisbury worked well for the brand new York Times as well as writing several catalogs on Russia, due to this he may become more ready to accept other people's views and to be more wide open that his views aren't always true. He takes many views into account, and therefore is more likely to be reliable as he is considering other views as well as his own.
Although this publication does not go into the details of the sources of the revolutions in Russia, I used it to get further information on the Tsars to get a better knowledge of their positions and their known reasons for doing the things they did. Admittedly, I did so not utilize this for each Tsar, but I came across it especially useful when dealing with Alexander II, and was able to add information into my study about him and his attitudes towards his reforms. John Truck Der Kiste explains to not only of the Tsar's activities but of their emotions towards them, and their opinions on the activities of each other, it shows also how these were influenced by a number of factors, such as the activities of the ruler before them and the wishes of the families.
This book contained much useful information about the trend, and also focussed on the activities of Tsar Nicholas. It will keep a neutral standing up between the people of Russia and it's really rulers. It instructs of Russia's expansion into Asia, the impact of the Russo-Japanese conflict and the monetary problems triggered by serfdom inspired the united states.
Also We Can Offer!
- Argumentative essay
- Best college essays
- Buy custom essays online
- Buy essay online
- Cheap essay
- Cheap essay writing service
- Cheap writing service
- College essay
- College essay introduction
- College essay writing service
- Compare and contrast essay
- Custom essay
- Custom essay writing service
- Custom essays writing services
- Death penalty essay
- Do my essay
- Essay about love
- Essay about yourself
- Essay help
- Essay writing help
- Essay writing service reviews
- Essays online
- Fast food essay
- George orwell essays
- Human rights essay
- Narrative essay
- Pay to write essay
- Personal essay for college
- Personal narrative essay
- Persuasive writing
- Write my essay
- Write my essay for me cheap
- Writing a scholarship essay