TakealookatthissamplechapterfromThe

RussianRevolution18941924
 4 Russia in 1914: On the verge
of revolution? Or becoming
a Western-style democracy?

Huge cheering
The celebrations in 1913 to celebrate 300 years of the Romanov dynasty gave
crowds greet the the Tsarist government opportunities for spectacular pageantry. It started
Tsar as he rides into with Nicholas and his family proceeding by open horse-drawn carriages to
Moscow for the a solemn service in the Kazan Cathedral in St Petersburg. A national
tercentenary holiday had been declared and free meals were served in the poorer parts
celebrations of the of the city. There was a public fireworks display in the evening, followed by
Romanov dynasty, a week of receptions and balls at the Winter Palace. In the summer the
1913. Is this picture royal party went on a tour of the old heartlands of Russia by royal train
evidence that and a convoy of 20 motor cars. The last event was the entry into Moscow,
Nicholas was now with Nicholas riding a white horse, alone, 20 metres in front of his guards.
popular? These events were the first occasions Nicholas had ridden in public
since the 1905 revolution. Do the sheer numbers of people on the Moscow
streets in this picture suggest that the bitterness towards him had been
forgotten? If so, Russia was no longer on the verge of revolution. A year
later, on 30 July 1914, Tsar Nicholas ordered the mobilisation of his vast
army, and so took Russia into the First World War. This enquiry investigates
what Russia was like as it entered the war. Was it still a backward autocracy
that was threatened by revolution or had Russia turned into a modern
industrialised democracy, free from fear of revolution?

50
 Russia in 1914: On the verge of revolution? Or becoming a Western-style democracy?

Enquiry Focus: Russia in 1914: on the verge of

revolution, or becoming a modern democracy?
This enquiry is an interpretation question, investigating historians
interpretations of conditions in Russia in 1914. Some historians of the Russian
Revolution are known as Optimists because they argue that things were
getting better by 1914, that Russia was well on the way to becoming a western-
style democracy and that, as a result, Russia seemed to have staved off the
threat of violent revolution. Other historians, however, argue that Russia had not
changed in its essentials and that revolution was still highly likely.
Why is this debate on the condition of Russia in 1914 important? Its
important because it helps us understand the differing explanations of why
the Revolution broke out in 1917. The Optimists hypothesis, that Russia
was well on the way to becoming a modern democracy, suggest that the
1917 Revolution was not inevitable but the result of the unpredictable
circumstances of the First World War.
The Optimists develop their case by pointing out that in Russia in 1914:
1 The forces of violent revolution had been stifled. The 1905 October
Manifesto gave the liberals what they had called for: a constitution, free
speech, religious toleration, freedom to organise. It separated them
off from the radicals and revolutionaries. The government then set
about crushing revolutionary opposition groups with a tough and well-
organised programme of repression.
2 Russia was becoming a functioning democracy. There was a
parliament (the duma) with elections, parties and real debates, so there
was no need for a revolution.
3 Russia had a boom economy with a middle class increasing in size
and importance. The Russian economy was booming, led by the
armaments industry. This boom particularly benefitted the middle
classes, which grew in both numbers and wealth. They were much
more likely to be supporters of moderation than revolution.
4 Many of the peasants grievances had been dealt with. Nicholas able
minister, Pietr Stolypin, had carried out major reforms giving peasants a
real opportunity to break out of poverty. Russia was well on the way to
having a class of successful peasant farmers with a vested interest in
supporting the Tsarist system.
5 Many workers were better off. Booming industry brought better wages,
especially for skilled workers, who would, it was hoped, become less
revolutionary. In time, all workers would share in this prosperity and
abandon their revolutionary attitudes.
The pages which follow deal with each point on the list, one by one. As you read them, judge whether
the Optimists are right about each of the five points on the list. The Optimists hypothesis is unlikely to
be 100 per cent right or 100 percent wrong; you will have to make a judgement about how far each of
the Optimists cases has been proved and mark its position on the Revolution/Democracy line below.

Revolution Democracy

4 3 2 1 0
Russia is still a Tsarist autocracy and violent Russia has become a Western-style
revolution is the only way something will change democracy. Revolution is not necessary

51
 The Optimists case: 1. The forces of
revolution had been stifled
First we need to return to 1905. Nicholas October Manifesto was
welcomed on the streets. There were cheering crowds, speakers on the corners
testing the new freedom of speech, the general strike was called off, in
Poland, Lithuania, Finland and other non-Russian-speaking parts of the
Empire newspapers appeared in the local languages. However, despite this
optimism, the tsarist government was about to regain control of the country.
To the revolutionaries the promise of an elected duma did not go nearly
far enough, but the public were pleased by the promise of an elected duma
and so the revolutionaries lost support and were isolated.
This was exactly what Witte had calculated when he persuaded
Nicholas to grant the October Manifesto (see page XX).

Mass arrests
of opponents

In St Petersburg: the In the countryside: the

Army was used to put Army was used to crush
down and crush the peasant resistance
Bolshevik rising thousands were hanged
Stifling
the Revolution

Black Hundreds gangs Okhrana cripples

attack anti-Tsarists revolutionary organisations

By December 1905 the government decided to move against the

revolutionaries. Troops loyal to the Tsar arrested most of the members of
Soviet the St Petersburg Soviet. An armed rising in Moscow instigated by the
A council elected by Bolsheviks was brutally put down: working class districts were shelled,
factory workers see hundreds were arrested and executed. At least 1000 people died.
page XX Meanwhile there was also tough repression in the countryside. Peasants
could not see anything for them in the October Manifesto and continued
their attacks on property into November. The government sent troops out
into the countryside, with instructions to show no mercy. This letter from
Durnovo, the Minister of the Interior, to the Governor of the Kiev region
was typical: I urgently request that you order the use of armed force without
the slightest leniency and that insurgents be annihilated and their homes burnt.
Military courts held rapid trials and executions. 15,000 peasants were
hanged, 45,000 deported. As Stolypin, Nicholas Chief Minister from 1906,
said: The punishment of a few prevents a sea of blood. Nicholas approved:
he said the military governors were acting splendidly.

52
 Russia in 1914: On the verge of revolution? Or becoming a Western-style democracy?

In addition, the government sponsored an

organisation called The Union of Russian People.
Like the Nazi brownshirts a few years later, it
attracted working class right wing men who
enjoyed a fight. Nicknamed the Black
Hundreds, their victims were liberals, socialists
and, especially, Jews. Gangs carried icons and
pictures of the Tsar as well as knives and
knuckle-dusters. Anyone who seemed reluctant
to kiss the icon or sing the national anthem was
beaten up. Over 3000 people were killed by the
Black Hundreds in 190506. Nicholas wore their
badge (he blamed the Jews for the revolution
anyway) and the government provided money
for their newspapers, transport and weapons.
One of the few government organisations
which was really effective in the years up to
1917 was the secret police, the Okhrana. They
operated virtually outside the law, with
techniques other secret security forces have used
since: spying on revolutionary organisations,
opening mail, tapping telephones, bugging
rooms, card indexing suspects. They were highly The caption to this Russian cartoon from 1906 is:
successful at turning members of revolutionary Now at last my people are free says the Tsar.
organisations. A mixture of torture, beatings,
cups of tea and offers of money led many Here again is point 1 of the Optimist historians case
former revolutionaries to spy on their colleagues.
1 The forces of violent revolution had been stifled.
From the information received, the Okhrana
made sudden mass arrests of key members, 1 Whereabouts on the Revolution/Democracy
usually in the middle of the night. Both the SR line would you put the governments actions
and the Bolsheviks were crippled by these towards the revolutionaries?
Okhrana activities even at the highest levels. By 2 Explain in your own words why you have put it
1917 most Bolshevik leaders had been living in in that position.
exile abroad for many years and the SR
organisation had collapsed.
How did Nicholas get away with it? Through 1906 parts of Russia were
close to a state of civil war. Militant revolutionaries fought back: it is
estimated that about 2000 government officials were killed. But the
government was bound to win in the end because.
n Its opponents were disunited. Workers, peasants, middle class liberals,
nationalists, moderates and revolutionaries had little in common with
each other apart from anger with the Tsar. There was no leader to
bring them together. It was relatively easy for skilled ministers like
Witte and Stolypin to prise the groups apart.
n The army stayed loyal to Nicholas. There were mutinies, but they were
restricted to local affairs and petered out when the war with Japan ended.
In April 1906 Witte arranged a huge loan from the French government.
This restored economic support for Tsarism. It also enabled Nicholas
to pay his troops to carry out their savage repression of his people.

53
 The Optimists case: 2. Russia was
becoming a functioning democracy
In the October Manifesto, Tsar Nicholas II had reluctantly broken 300 years
of tradition and agreed to hold an elected duma. But was he ready to
become a constitutional monarch? As you read this account of the opening
ceremony of the First Duma in April 1906, in the Coronation Hall of the
Tsars Winter Palace, what clues does the historian Orlando Figes give us
about Nicholas attitude?

The throne was draped in ermine with the crown, the sceptre, the
seal and the orb placed at its feet on four little stools. The miraculous
icon of Christ was placed, like a holy protector, before it, and
solemnly guarded by a retinue of high priests. The deep basses of
the choir, dressed in cassocks of crimson and gold, sang verse after
verse of God Save the Tsar, as if on purpose to keep the
congregation standing, until, at the height of the fanfares crescendo,
the royal procession arrived.
On one side of the hall stood the great and good of autocratic
Russia: state councillors, senators, ministers, admirals, generals and
members of the court, all of them turned out in their brilliant dress
uniforms dripping with medals and gold braid. Facing them were the
parliamentary leaders of the new democratic Russia, a motley
collection of peasants in cotton shirts and tunics, professional men in
lounge suits, monks and priests in black, Ukrainians, Poles, Tatars and
others in colourful national costumes, and a small number of nobles
in evening dress.
The two hostile sides stood confronting one another [recalled one
who was there]. The old and grey court dignitaries, keepers of
etiquette and tradition, looked across in a haughty manner, though
not without fear and confusion, at the people off the street, whom
the revolution had swept into the palace. One of the socialist deputies,
a tall man in a workers blouse, scrutinised the throne and the courtiers
around it with obvious disgust. As the Tsar and his entourage entered
the hall, he lurched forward and stared at them with an expression of
hatred. For a moment it was feared that he might throw a bomb.
The court side of the hall resounded with orchestrated cheers as
the Tsar approached the throne. But the Duma deputies remained
completely silent The Tsar delivered a short and perfunctory
speechand got up to leave. The parliamentary era had begun As
the royal procession filed out of the hall, tears could be seen on the
face of the Tsars mother, the Dowager Empress. It had been a
Does this terrible ceremony, she later confided to the Minister of Finance. For
description support several days she was unable to calm herself from the shock of seeing
the Optimists case so many commoners in the palace. They looked at us as upon their
that Russia was enemies and I could not stop myself from looking at certain faces, so
becoming a much did they seem to reflect a strange hatred for us all.
functioning (Orlando Figes, A Peoples Tragedy, London, 1996)
democracy?

54
 Russia in 1914: On the verge of revolution? Or becoming a Western-style democracy?

So began Russias eleven year democratic experiment: it doesnt sound as The opening of the

if its going to go well, does it? First Duma in April
A week before the First Duma met, Nicholas published what he called 1906
ominously the Fundamental Laws. It was a long way from the
democratic constitutional monarchy which most Russians thought had
been conceded in October.
n The State Council would become an upper house of the duma. Half its
members would be appointed by the Tsar, half elected by Tsarist
bodies such as the Church, the nobles, the zemstvos and the
universities.
n Any laws had to be agreed by the duma, the State Council and the Tsar.
This effectively gave him a veto over anything the duma wanted to do.
n The Tsar could dissolve the duma at any time and issue laws by decree
when it was not sitting.
n The Tsar appointed his own ministers, who were not in the duma and
not answerable to it.
n The Tsar kept control of foreign policy, the armed forces and the
administration.

It was clear that he thought of the duma as, at best, there to give him advice.
Voting rights were complicated. All men over 45 could vote, but only
nobles elected their representatives directly to the duma. The rest of voters
elected representatives to a college, which in turn elected duma
members. The effect of this was that the vote from 1 noble was equivalent
to 2 townsmans votes, 15 peasant votes and 45 urban worker votes.

55
 Four dumas were elected between 1906 and 1917. Even though Nicholas
resented what he regarded as their interference in government, Russia
needed to impress potential friends and allies amongst foreign countries.
Voting systems were reformed twice to ensure more right-wing, less
revolutionary members were elected, suggesting that Russia was still a
long way from being a proper democracy. Even so, the dumas continued to
try to influence the Tsars government.

First Duma, April July 1906

Despite all these restrictions, millions turned out to vote, although the Social
Revolutionaries and Social Democrats regarded the duma as just a sop to
the bourgeoisie and boycotted the elections. After the votes had been
counted, the biggest party in the duma was the Constitutional Democrats,
the KD or KaDets (See diagram on page xxx for where this party stood).
The Tsar, believing that all the peasants were his loyal supporters, was
Trudoviks shocked to find that the next biggest group was the Trudoviks, a peasant
A small, radical group of grouping which was more radical in its demands than the KaDets. Riding
agrarian socialists who the wave of democratic fervour, the duma called for a truly democratic
broke away from the SRs parliament: the removal of the State Council, universal suffrage, ministers
(Social Revolutionaries] responsible to the duma and, from the Trudoviks, compulsory takeover of
all private land and its re-distribution to the peasants.
But the KaDets had miscalculated. It was no longer October 1905 and
the Tsar was back in control. During the night of 8/9 July 1906 the duma
was dissolved. Furious, the KaDets went to Finland (a Russian province at
this time), and issued the Vyborg Manifesto, calling on the people to refuse
to pay taxes or join the army. The people took little notice and most of
the deputies who went to Vyborg were arrested and imprisoned.

Second Duma, February June 1907

The Second Duma proved just as radical as the first. Many KaDet leaders
were in prison, but this time Social Revolutionaries won 37 seats and
Menshevik Social Democrats 47. Speakers denounced the land reforms which
Stolypin was introducing and again called for the nationalisation of land. At
6 a.m. on Sunday 3 June, the Second Duma was dissolved by the Tsar.

Third Duma, 190712

Why did the Tsar bother with a duma at all, given his views? The main
The numbers of
s reason was that it gave the impression to his new allies, France and
voters of different Britain, that Russia was becoming more democratic. At Stolypins
classes required to suggestion, the government changed the electoral system to ensure a more
elect each deputy compliant duma. Massive weighting was given to landowner voters, while
after the 1907 peasants, workers and national minorities lost out. It has been calculated
changes to the that one per cent of the electorate now elected 300 of the 442 deputies.
franchise. The table below puts it another way:

1 Deputy was Landowners Wealthy Lower middle Peasants Workers

elected by: businessmen class

230 1,000 15,000 60,000 125,000

56
 Russia in 1914: On the verge of revolution? Or becoming a Western-style democracy?

Stolypin and the Tsar got what they wanted: the duma was now much
more in the hands of the centre right and right wing. The biggest party
was the Octobrists, who were moderate conservatives, so called because
they accepted that the October Manifesto was as far along the road to
reform as they wanted to go. There were also many right wing deputies
who resisted all change. However, duma members still questioned
ministers and criticised many of Stolypins proposals. The duma also
passed legislation to set up schools for poor children and an insurance
scheme for workers, providing unemployment pay and medical fees.

Fourth Duma, 191217

Stolypin was assassinated in 1911 and the ministers Nicholas appointed as
his successors did not conceal their contempt for the duma. This annoyed
even this right wing duma, who openly criticised the government. In 1913
they passed a resolution warning the Tsar:

The Minister of the Interior systematically scorns public opinion and

ignores the wishes of the new duma The Ministrys activities arouse
dissatisfaction among the broad masses who have hitherto been
peaceful. Such a situation threatens Russia with untold dangers.

Summary
The duma was a constitutional experiment which
had already lost the support of most Russians. To
be fair, everyone involved had little experience of
democratic procedures. Speakers would not stay
in their places, but walked about, adding
comments to their friends as they passed.
Arguments broke out. Ministers were not
members of the duma. When they did appear in
the chamber, they lectured the members. The
duma (even the Third and Fourth Dumas) made
little effort to build a co-operative relationship
with ministers. And the Tsar hated it.

Here again is point 2 of the Optimist historians case

2 Russia was becoming a functioning democracy.

1 Whereabouts on the Revolution/Democracy

line would you put the duma?
2 Explain in your own words why you have put it
in that position.

A cartoon from 1906 called Voting in the Duma. w

What can you infer from this cartoon about the
cartoonists views on: (i) Free speech (ii) pressure
from upper class deputies on others?

57
 The Optimists case: 3. Russia had a boom
economy with a middle class increasing in
size and importance
One of the triggers for the discontent which provoked the 1905 Revolution
was a world recession (see page XX). This played itself out by about 1908
and the last few years of the Tsarist economy were startlingly successful.

Factory at Kyn, east w

central Russia, 1912
photographed by
Prokhudin-Gorskii.

1910 1913

Pig iron production 3.00 5.00

Coal production 16.00 36.00

Consumption of cotton goods 0.36 0.43

Table A: production and consumption, in millions of tonnes.

1910 1913

Value of Imports 1.084 (not known)

Value of exports 1.448 1.520

Table B: Financial trade balance, in millions of roubles.

1910 1913

Ordinary budget revenue from taxes 2.781 3.417

Ordinary budget expenditure 2.473 3.094

Table C: Government revenue balance, in millions of roubles.

58
 Russia in 1914: On the verge of revolution? Or becoming a Western-style democracy?

Do statistics bring you out in a cold sweat? They can sometimes tell you a
lot more than words. Lets take these three tables.

Table A
Pig iron and coal are the essentials of heavy industry, and you can see that
production of both more or less doubled. This was driven by a major re-armament
programme, starting in 1912. But you cant eat or wear pig iron or coal: what
about the ordinary Russian going shopping? The last row gives us a clue: a substantial
increase in the amount of cotton goods produced, for example shirts, dresses,
bed linen and so on. This suggests that ordinary Russians had money to spend.
It also suggests that a demand for consumer goods, would create more jobs.

The last two tables show the success of the Russian government economy.

Tables B and C
These two tables show the success of the Russian governments economy. A
healthy economy sells more than it buys (that is, its exports are worth more
than its imports table B).
A healthy government budget spends less than it collects (table C).

This growing modern economy created lots of middle class jobs, not only
industrialists and bankers, but middle managers and clerks, as well as
professionals such as lawyers, teachers and engineers. But were these new
middle class Russians happy supporters of Tsarism?
The 1905 Revolution left the Russian middle classes in a dilemma.
Although they were increasing in numbers, importance and wealth, they
were not increasing their influence. They were the main supporters of the
KaDets and the Octobrists who, as we have seen, were getting sidelined in the
duma. The Tsars government, and the Third and Fourth Dumas, were in the
hands of the old landowning classes. Middle class Russians looked enviously
at western European countries, where the middle classes were dominant.
They grumbled at the continuing incompetence and corruption of Tsarism.
But what could they do about it? The last thing they wanted was a
revolution. They had too much to lose and were not going to throw in their lot
with the angry, revolutionary working class. In a remark which has become
famous, the KaDet (and ex-Marxist) Peter Struve exclaimed as the 1905
revolution ended: Thank God for the Tsar who has saved us from the people.

Here again is point 3 of the Optimist historians case

3 Russia had a boom economy with a middle class increasing
in size and importance.
Also bear in mind what youve just found out about the workings of the duma.
Was the increase in the numbers and wealth of the middle classes moving
Russia away from autocracy, towards democracy, as the Optimists claim, or not?
1 Whereabouts on the Revolution/Democracy line would you put economic
developments?
2 Explain in your own words why you have put it in that position.

59
 The Optimists case: 4. Many of the
peasants grievances had been dealt with
A newspaper reported the peasant violence in 1905:

Hundreds of buildings worth several million roubles have been

destroyed. All the buildings have been razed to the ground on some
large estates. Many houses have been burnt down, regardless of the
relations between the peasants and the landowner. The farms of some
well-known zemstvo liberals have been burnt along with the rest.

At the root of peasants grievances was land hunger. In western Russia, for
example, 100,000 landowners farmed one-third of the land, usually the
best land, while twelve million peasants tried to make a living from the
SRs were the Social
rest. The population of Russia rose by 21 per cent from 1900 to 1910,
Revolutionaries, a
producing even more pressure on land as the mir ensured that every
popular peasant-based
household was given enough to live on. Furthermore, most peasants were
revolutionary party.
carrying huge debts from emancipation. These, and the strength of the
The Trudoviks had
tradition for the farming methods the mir favoured, held back innovation
broken away from the
and productivity was low. For most peasants the solution seemed clear:
SRs. Look back to page
they should take over the land in the hands of private landowners because
XX to see more about
they were the ones who had worked it for generations. This was the
SR beliefs and demands.
demand of the SRs and the peasant Trudoviks in the duma.

Stolypins policies
Nicholas was lucky to have in his service from 1906 an extremely able
minister, Pietr Stolypin. He had not made his way to the top among the
officials at St Petersburg but as governor of the province of Saratov. There he
had seen both the problems of the peasants and their revolutionary violence.
He had used force to deal with peasant uprisings in Saratov and then
organised the ferocious nation-wide repression of 1906 (described on page
XX) leading to the hangmans noose being nicknamed Stolypins necktie.
He set about a programme of land reform:
n Peasants were allowed to leave the mir.
n Those who left were encouraged to consolidate their scattered strips of
land into a single farm.
n The Peasant Land Bank lent money to peasants to invest in new
farming methods.
n In 1907, debts from redemption payments dating back to 1861 were
cancelled.
n Six million hectares of state land in Siberia was made available to new
Octobrists settlers.
Moderate liberals who
supported the Tsars 1905 Stolypin was a firm supporter of Tsarism. He intended his programme to
October Manifesto and take the wind out of the sails of the peasant radicals in the SRs and
believed that it was as far Trudoviks and was supported in the duma by the Octobrists. He believed
down the road towards that peasants were naturally conservative and changes were needed to
democracy as Russia create a new class of successful, independent smallholding farmers, with a
should go stake in the Tsarist system. They would have the enterprise to improve
60
 Russia in 1914: On the verge of revolution? Or becoming a Western-style democracy?

their farming methods and increase yields, providing food for the cities
and for export. Those with too little land would sell it and become wage
labourers. The communal power of the mir would be broken and a
capitalist economy take over the countryside. He called it A wager, not on
the drunken and feeble, but on the sober and strong.
Stolypin said it would take twenty years to make the changes he
wanted. He only had five: he was assassinated by Dmitiri Bogov, a
member of the Social Revolutionary Party, at the Kiev Opera House in
1911. By then his reforms were making him unpopular among the big
landowners who dominated the Tsars court and his successors made less
effort to continue with them, as the chart below suggests.
600,000

550,000

500,000

450,000
Households leaving the Mir

400,000
350,000

300,000
250,000

200,000
150,000

100,000
50,000 v The number of
households leaving
0
1907 1908 1909 1910 1911 1912 1913 1914 the mir.
Year

How successful was Stolypins wager on the

strong?
n Peasants owned more land. Both the nobles and the state had been getting
out of farming for many years and sold their land to the peasants. In 1877
peasants owned less than one-third of the land; by 1917 it was nearly half.
n By 1914 two million peasants had left the mir (although this was only
10 per cent of all peasants, and by no means all of those who left the
mir consolidated their strips into single smallholdings).
n By 1913 three million settlers had taken up land in Siberia (although
about half a million returned).
n Agricultural productivity increased (although this was on both mir and
independent peasant farms).
n The countryside was relatively quiet between 1909 and 1913 (although
this was probably due to good harvests as much as Stolypins reforms).

Here again is point 4 of the Optimist historians case 1 Whereabouts on the Revolution/Democracy line
would you put the situation of the peasants?
4 Many of the peasants grievances had been
dealt with. 2 Explain in your own words why you have put it
in that position.

61
 The Optimists case: 5. Many workers
were better off
Stolypin largely ignored the industrial workers. Subdued after the 1905
revolution, their grievances nevertheless remained: low wages (they
earned less than one-third of western European workers) long hours,
dangerous working conditions, dreadful housing. From 1912, some
workers were covered by an insurance scheme against accidents and
illness, but for most there was no welfare system to deal with desperate
poverty brought about by old age, unemployment or injury at work.
There was another important change taking place. As you saw on page
XX in the nineteenth century most of the industrial workers in Russian
cities had been peasants from the countryside who moved to the city
(sometimes only temporarily) to find work. In the first part of the twentieth
century more workers settled in the city and had children. By 1914 the
majority of industrial workers had been born in the city. They were more
literate than most peasants, ready to read and listen to revolutionary ideas.
The government gave them plenty to be angry about. In 1912 workers
in the Lena goldfields, on strike against their 14-hour day, low pay and
terrible working conditions, were fired on by troops. 200 were killed and
many injured. This was followed by a rapid increase in the number of
workers involved in strikes (see the table below).
Historians have argued about the aims of the strikers. Were they
non-political (about wages, hours, conditions of work and so on) or
political (about democratic rights, an end to Tsarism and so on)? The
classification in the table above was made by the police, so historians have
to be cautious about the evidence. However, Soviet historians get excited
about the apparent rise in the number of political strikes from 1912 which
you can see in the table. They say this proves that the workers were beginning
to take the lead in the move towards the great proletarian revolution. They
claim that this growing politicisation of the workers was due to the
increasing influence of the Bolsheviks, especially in the large factories, such
as the Putilov Works in St Petersburg. However, R B McKeans research in the
Here again is point
1980s showed that more workers were employed in small-scale, domestic and
5 of the Optimist
historians case
service employment than in heavy industry. He also found that, until 1917, far
more days were lost in non-political strikes than political strikes.
5 Many workers
were better off.
Number of Number of strikes Number of
1 Whereabouts on workers involved strikes classified
the Revolution/ in strikes as political
Democracy line
would you put 1911 105,110 466 24
the governments
actions towards 1912 725,491 2,032 1,300
the revolutionaries?
2 Explain in your 1913 861,289 2,404 1,034
own words why
you have put it in 1914 (JanJuly) 1,448,684 3,534 2,401
that position.
Details of strikes between 1911 and 1914.

62
 Russia in 1914: On the verge of revolution? Or becoming a Western-style democracy?

v Strikers outside the

Putilov works in 1905.

Concluding your enquiry
1 Look back over where you have placed the five
Cases made by the Optimist historians on the I was inclined to feel that, had the war not
Revolution/Democracy continuity line. intervened, the chances for survival of the
Discuss your decisions with others. It is often
autocracy and for its gradual evolution into
helpful to do this as others may have thought of a constitutional monarchy would not have
something you missed. Even if they havent, youll been bad. On reviewing once more the
find yourself having to defend your point of view, events of these last decades, I find myself
which helps clarify your thoughts. obliged to question that opinion. Neither
2 What is your Headline answer? For example: the tardiness in the granting of political
Russia was well on the way to becoming a reform, nor the excesses of an extravagant
democracy and foolish nationalism, nor the personal
limitations of the imperial couple began
While progress had been made, Russia was
with the war or were primarily responses
Democracy stood no chance of developing
to the existence of the war. None of the
while Nicholas was Tsar
consequences of these deficiencies were
Use these headlines, or one of your own, to write in the process of any significant correction
an extended paragraph summarising your answer.
as the war approached.
3 The historian (and former US Cold War (George Kennan, quoted by Christopher
presidential adviser) George Kennan writes Read in In Search of Liberal Tsarism, 1969)
about how his views have changed:
a) What did Kennan used to believe?
b) What does he now question in the Optimists c) Use your work on the activities in this enquiry
view he used to hold? to comment on the strengths and weaknesses
of Kennans change of mind.

63
 How Russia entered the First World War
Insight

The story of how the governments of the Great Russia this meant giving support to Serbia (a nation
Powers of Europe got themselves into a of Christian Orthodox Slavs) against Austro-
horrendous war which killed ten million of their Hungarian aggression in the Balkans (south-east
citizens doesnt show any of them up in a good Europe see the map below). AustriaHungarys
light; Nicholas decisions were no more misguided ambitions in that area were also worrying for Russia
and misinformed than those of several other rulers. because 40 per cent of its foreign trade passed
through the Bosphorus and Dardanelles. Free
What drove Nicholas to take the passage through this narrow waterway was
decisions he did in 1914? therefore vital and Austro-Hungarian control of
One of the driving forces of his reign was the them could exert a stranglehold on Russia. Further,
promotion of everything Russian. The Russians Nicholas and his advisers were determined to
defined themselves ethnically as a Slav people (as re-establish Russias honour and reputation after
opposed to Aryan Germans and Austrians) and their humiliating defeat at the hands of the
religiously as Christian Orthodox (as opposed to Japanese in 1905. This meant taking an aggressive
Roman Catholic or Protestant Christians). Outside line in diplomacy which was to prove fatal.

1. Russian interests in the Balkans:

a. support for Serbia like Russia, a Slav Orthodox nation
b. need to have free passage through Dardanelles.

Both bring Russia up against Austria-Hungary

2. ASSASSINATION of Austrian Archduke at

Sarajevo by a Serb. Austria threatens Serbia.

3. WILLY-NICKY messages. Nicholas tries to

avoid war by talking to his cousin, the Kaiser.

4. But Germany had promised full support to

Austria, who declares war on Serbia

5. Nicholas orders Russian mobilisation, to

warn off Germany and Austria.

6. Germany, tied to the Schlieffen Plan, cannot v Nicholas and Russian

delay and declares war on Russia. diplomacy fails to
avoid war.

64
 The Austrian Archduke Franz Ferdinand was shot in Sarajevo on 28

Insight
June 1914, by Gavrilo Princip, a Serb. Austria-Hungary made threats
against Serbia. At this point Nicholas had a series of telegram exchanges
with his cousin, Wilhelm II, Kaiser of Germany about how to avoid the
crisis drifting into war. These Willy-Nicky messages (in English) were
friendly and Nicholas was sure war was unlikely. However, Austria-Hungary
had obtained full German support for their aggressive moves and declared
war on Serbia on 28 July 28. Nicholas ordered the mobilisation of the huge
Russian army, expecting that this would scare Austria-Hungary off.
Germany, however, had a war plan the Schlieffen Plan. German generals
greatest fear was having to split their forces in a two-front war against both
Russia and her ally, France. The Plan relied on Russia being slow to
mobilise, giving just time for German forces to smash France in a powerful,
lightning strike. Their armies would then be transported by rail to deal with
Russia. They could not afford to let Russia get ahead with their
mobilisation, so declared war on 1 August.

RUSSIAN
EMPIRE

AUSTRIAHUNGARY Odessa

BOSNIA ROMANIA
Belgrade
Sarajevo
Black Sea
SERBIA
BULGARIA
Dardanelles
N

Bosphorus

GREECE
0 500
OTTOMAN EMPIRE
Km

Mediterranean
Sea

Sea route to
Russian port
of Odessa

Eastern Europe and the Balkans in 1914.

65

Visitwww.hoddereducation.co.uk/enquiringhistoryto
getyourFREEeInspectioncopyortoorderyour
copies.