The October Manifesto propelled Russia to constitutionalism and parliamentary government. Yet, Tsar Nicholas planned to revive his powers as an autocratic ruler. Explore how Russia's new age of freedom transpired and how Tsar Nicholas perverted the contents of the Manifesto for his benefit.
New of Age of Freedom
With
the October Manifesto, Russia prepared its way towards a constitutional
autocracy. No longer the Tsar had the final and only say in the matters, he had
to share it with a parliament – a Duma. In March 1906, Russia elected their
representatives to the State Duma. Those who voted composed a majority of the
Russian society. It included the landed gentry, urban population, peasants, and
laborers. Nevertheless, it still marginalized women, soldiers, and men under
the age of 25. Despite the limitations, the election proceeded and a month
later, Nicholas enacted Russia’s constitution – the Fundamental Laws.
The
Fundamental Laws Russia’s constitution. In Chapter 1, no. 7 it stated that “The
sovereign emperor exercises power in conjunction with the State Council and the
State Duma,” which clearly defined that the Emperor no longer rule alone. No
laws could not also be enacted without the approval of the Tsar, State Council
and the State Duma. Nevertheless, the Emperor had the power to dictate foreign
relations and the sole right to “declare war, conclude peace, and negotiate
treaties with foreign states.” The Fundamental Laws itself cannot be revised
unless with the approval of the State Council and the State Duma. The
Fundamental Laws also maintained freedom of worship, right for due process,
right against warrantless searches and seizures, and right to travel freely. It
also guaranteed freedom of peaceful assembly, of writing and publication, of
unions. The Fundamental Laws guided the disposition of Russia under a
constitutional autocracy.
In
April 27, 1905, Tsar Nicholas II personally addressed the opening of the First
Duma. Much to the disappointment of the government and the Tsar, the
Constitutional Democrats, who belonged to the center left, dominated the Duma.
Other than the Kadets, non-Russian minorities also took part in the first Duma.
The Central Asian Muslims who had been lucky to be elected to the Duma
established a Muslim block called the Ittigaq al-Muslimin or the Union of
Muslims. They supported democracy and also a constitution. Meanwhile, Baltic
countries also had their representatives in the Duma and represented the region’s
aspiration for autonomy from St. Petersburg.
The
Kadets dominance over the Duma led to the resignation of Prime Minister Sergei
Witte on April 23/May 5 (Old Style/New Style), 1905. Ivan Goremykin succeeded
him. The Kadets used their majority in the Duma to push for universal suffrage,
a complete parliamentary form of government, abolition of capital punishment,
and weakening of the State Council. But the most controversial of all, the
Kadets wanted a complete socialization of lands, thus taking lands from the
landlords for massive land redistribution program. Goremykin refused to accept
any of the proposals. The rejection led to resignation of Goremykin as Prime
Minister. With fear of hurting the interest of the landed nobility and his
authority and government, Tsar Nicholas then dissolved the Duma, in hope of another
election with more favorable results for them. In place of Goremykin, Nicholas
appointed a strong man with skills that matched Witte’s – Pyotr Stolypin.
In
protest of the dissolution of the First Duma, Kadets went to Finland and issued
a threatening manifesto. Led by Sergei Muromtsov, the Kadets published a
Manifesto calling for massive civil disobedience of the population, such as
refusing conscription and paying taxes. The manifesto received reactions that
amounted little to none. In addition, the act equaled to rebellion resulting to
the arrest of numerous Kadets. 167 Kadets that sat in the First Duma found
themselves arrested. Following the dissolution, other groups protested in more
violent ways. Mutinies and terrorist acts rose again. One bombing even injured
Stolypin’s daughter.
On
the other, with most of the army already deployed throughout western Russia. Punitive
expeditions cracked down on dissidents in many parts of the Empire. Meanwhile,
Stolypin and Nicholas planned the reestablishment of Tsarist autocratic powers.
They used the growing instability as an excused to establish court martial,
which resulted to quick trials, imprisonments, banishments, and executions,
throughout the empire. But their primary goal remained the weakening of the
Duma and turning it into an advisory body.
The
Second Duma met on February 21, 1907 (Old Style). To the much disappointment of
the Tsar and Stolypin, their situation became worse. Indeed the Kadets lose
seats in the Duma. However, the revolutionaries, Social Democrats and Social
Revolutionaries, decided to participate in the elections and gained the
majority. Octoberist and Kadets took only one-fifth of the seats. With more
radical proposals being submitted to the Duma, Stolypin looked for ways to somehow
weaken the Duma and he saw a coup d’etat as the only way to do so.
But
before Stolypin handled the curbing of the Duma, he first addressed one of the
factors in creating the Revolution of 1905 – economic reasons. On March 19,
1907 (New Style), Stolypin submitted to the Duma for approval his plans which
became known as the Stolypin Reform. The Stolypin Reforms aimed in buying lands
from landlords and redistributing them to peasants. It focused in creating new
prosperous peasant landowners, which he hoped to join the cause of the
conservatives, especially when they experience better conditions thanks to the
Tsar and the government.
The
Second Duma rejected the Stolypin Reform. They refused to pass it unless the
government abolish the court martials that it established. In addition, in
April 13, 1907 (New Style) the Social Revolutionaries submitted a bill with the
objective of taking lands from the landlords for a massive land redistribution
program. For the government, it threatened the existence of the economic and
power base of the Tsars – the landed gentry. But with the revolutionaries
holding the majority, the Duma passed the bill. Stolypin and the Tsar hardly
looked for any reason to dissolve the Duma. It came on May, 1907 when Stolypin
discovered a plot by Socialists to instigate a military uprising. Many of the
Socialists involved in the plot sat as representatives in the Duma. With a
perfect pretext of treason and mutiny, on June 14, 1907 (New Style), the police
arrested 16 and investigate 55 members of the Duma implicated in the planned
mutiny. Two days later, the Tsar issued a decree dissolving the Second Duma.
The
decree that dissolved the Second Duma spelled what Stolypin and the government
did next. In the decree, it blamed the election system for placing criminals and
agitators in the Duma. In addition to the electoral system, it also pointed out
the intrusion of non-Russians in a “Russian questions” also caused the
inefficiency and treachery of the Second Duma. Alas, it proposed a changes in
the electoral system to pick the right men for the job as representative. But
beneath all the reasons as being benevolent, the government, in particular
Stolypin and Tsar, wanted to choose as representatives men with privilege which
would protect Orthodoxy, Autocracy, and Nationality.
As
stated in the dissolution decree, Stolypin changed the election laws. He
changed it without the approval of the Duma which violated the Fundamental Laws.
The changes in the law made the election favorable to the landowners and the
wealthy. Many peasants and minorities suddenly found themselves once again
disenfranchised and marginalized. But in order not to make the changes blunt,
in addition to changing suffrage, the style of election became indirect which
passed through different colleges and bodies. The complication and reform of
the election system, effectively disregarded the commitments of the Tsars in
the October Manifesto. When the Third Duma convened, as expected landowners
dominated it. It became widely regarded as a rubber stamp Duma. The Tsar broke
his own words to revive his autocratic power.
Summing Up
The
Russian Revolution of 1905 was a wide and turbulent movement aimed in achieving
political and social reforms, which the Tsars refused to concede for a long
time. Series of economic, political, social, and even diplomatic factors
resulted to the Revolution. Nevertheless, Tsar Nicholas II remained hesitant
and tried to evade reforms. But with threats closer at home, the Tsar in the
end compromised. But even with his approval, he looked for allies and ways to
change the reforms to favor his power and that of the landowning class. Thus,
the Revolution failed to meet its goal of a constitutional and democratic
Russia. A failure that resulted to an even worse end in 1917.
By
the turn of the century, Russia transformed in many aspects. Politically, the
throne went from liberal to reactionary Tsars. New ideas from Europe entered
and spread in Russia, leading to developments of political ideologies and
parties. Economically, Russia emerged from an economy based on serfs to an
industrializing country by the 1900’s. Socially, the abhorred institution of
serfs disappeared but left a huge number of landless peasants. Moreover,
Russian society saw the rise of a working class, capitalist bourgeoisie and
intellectuals known as the Intelligentsia. With the culmination of all these
factors, the establishment of the Tsars came into question, and many sought to
change it.
By
the early years of the 1900’s, disturbances and violence surged. Starting from
students, protest about government practices, arbitration, and abuses spread to
other social classes. Workers began to strike for better conditions. Peasants
protested for land. Intelligentsias petitioned for political and civil rights.
And the Non-Russian population nationalism rose and started to demand autonomy
and even independence. The government continued to be oblivious and took a
tough stand against what they deemed as transgression.
But
in 1904, a failed adventure in the east made the government vulnerable to criticism
and attacks. The Russo-Japanese War weakened the military in Western Russia
with most troops fighting losing battles in Manchuria. Russia lose
international prestige and the people regarded the Tsar and his government as
incompetent. Reformist took the chance to resuscitate demands for political
reforms and civil rights and acted upon it.
In
1905, the events of Bloody Sunday opened the floodgates that burst with
violence, anarchy, and turbulence. Killing of peaceful and loyal-appearing
workers enraged many. Strikes, boycotts, mutinies, riots, assassinations
reported across Western Russia, the Baltics, Poland, and the Caucasus.
Students, workers, peasants, intelligentsias, and soldiers participated.
Government promises failed to appease the people. Revolutionaries took the
opportunity to start a revolution with the dictatorship of the proletariat by
establishing Soviets or Council of Workers to direct strikes. With the economy
in trouble, deaths rising, and threats within the capital, the Tsar had no
choice but to concede to reforms by signing the October Manifesto.
The
October Manifesto helped to calm things down. Moderates decided to give the Manifesto
a chance and prepared for the elections. New parties, which supported the
Manifesto and reforms appeared. Socialist had pessimistic views and decided to
boycott the elections. In the peripheries of the Empire, non-Russian population
set up their respective Congresses and decided the faith of their countries.
Most demanded autonomy and participated in the Duma elections. Nevertheless,
some reports of trouble continued. Moscow Soviet waged an uprising in December
1905 while Poland continued to be dragged in violence. Extreme conservative
groups also launched pogroms against Jews with the view that they caused the
upheavals.
In
1906, Russia experienced its first months as a Constitutional Autocracy. In
March, the Tsar inaugurated the Fundamental Laws that served as the country’s
constitution and a month later the First Duma convened. The moderate liberal
Constitutional Democrats or Kadets held the majority and demanded further
reforms. Two Prime Ministers resigned due to shaky relations between the Tsar
and the Duma. Eventually in July, the Tsar dissolved the First Duma resulting
to an election with worse results. Radical socialist held the majority. Tsar
Nicholas and Prime Minister Pyotr Stolypin looked for an excuse to dissolve the
Second Duma and change the election system to turn in their favor. By May 1907,
they discovered a plot of a mutiny that implicated several Duma members.
Stolypin had the members the suspects arrested and investigated. The Tsar used
it as a pretext to dissolve the Duma and change the election system that indeed
led to the Tsar and Stolypin’s control over the Duma. From that point, Russia
reverted where the Tsar held absolute power with the Duma only serving as a
rubber stamp.
The
effects of the Russian Revolution of 1905 remained until the Revolution of
1917. The 1905 Revolution showed how the people had become disillusioned with
autocracy. It showed the Russian people interest in changing the establishment that
only benefitted the privileged. It also showed the power of protest, strikes,
and boycotts in a massive scale to a government to concede. In the end,
however, the Revolution failed because what it gained in October 1905
disappeared within less than two years. Much to the credit of the Tsar and
Stolypin Russia reverted back to the situation where autocracy ruled. The
people failed to protect it because they had become weary of violence and the
chaos of 1905. Nevertheless, they never forgot that the Tsar broke his own
words and reversed many of the contents of the October Manifesto. For the
Tsarist government, the Revolution of 1905 bought them another decade of
Romanov rule. But only then another effect of the Revolution appeared.
The
Revolution of 1905, radicalized many liberals. Liberals who had been dismayed
by the Tsar with his broken promises. Many believed that reforms no longer
provided the path for change, only a revolution toppling the Romanov Dynasty
would bring true change. 1905 also provided an example or a rehearsal for many
Socialist revolutionaries. Men like Lenin, Trotsky, and Stalin, participated in
1905 Revolution. From that point, they strengthen their parties, and unleashing
them in another revolution in 1917.
For
non-Russians, the Revolution of 1905 gave them the stage to become politically
active. It gave them the opportunity to reassert their respective nationalities
and their right to govern themselves. They succeeded in being represented in
the Duma, but later on, they too had been betrayed by the Tsar, when he decreed
the reduction of numbers of non-Russian representatives in the Duma.
The
Revolution of 1905 marked the last decades of the Romanovs. It showed that
inflexibility of Tsar Nicholas to rule and weakened his position in the eyes of
his people. Although Russia developed until 1913, the people remained
dissatisfied unless social and political reforms truly happened. Eventually,
what the Revolution of 1905 failed to achieve in the long run was taken up in a
more revolutionary and violent Revolution of 1917.
Explore
also:
Bibliography:
Books:
Balkelis, Tomas. The Making of Modern Lithuania.
New York, New York: Routledge, 2009.
Bolukbasi, Suha. Azerbaijan: A Political History.
New York, New York: I.B. Tauris & Co. Ltd., 2011.
Croissant, Michael. The Armenia-Azerbaijan Conflict:
Causes and Implications. Westport, Connecticut: Greenwood Press, 1998.
Euchensehr, Kristen and
Michael Reisman (Eds.). Stopping
Wars and Making Peace: Studies in International Intervention. Leiden, The
Netherlands: Koninklijke Brill, 2009.
Kassow, Samuel. Students, Professors, and the State
in Tsarist Russia. Berkeley, California: University of California Press,
1989.
Kasekamp, Andres. A History of the Baltic States.
New York, New York: Palgrave Macmillan, 2010.
Kokovtsov, Vladimir. H.H.
Fisher (Ed.). Laura Matveev (Trans.). Out
of My Past: The Memoirs of Count Kokovtsov. Standford University,
California: Stanford University Press, 1935.
Leslie, R.F. (ed.). The History of Poland since 1863.
New York, New York: Cambridge University Press, 1980.
O'Connor, Kevin. The History of the Baltic States.
Westport, Connecticut: Greenwood Press, 2003.
Papazian, K.S. Patriotism Perverted: A Discussion
of the Deeds and the Misdeeds of the Armenian Revolutionary Federation, the
So-called Dashnagtzoutune. Boston, Massachusetts: Baikar Press, 1934.
Pipes, Richard. A Concise History of the Russian
Revolution. New York: Alfred A. Knopf, Inc., 1995.
___________. Formation of the Soviet Union:
Communism and Nationalism, 1917 - 1923. Cambridge, Massachusetts: Harvard
University Press, 1997.
Palmer, Robert. A History of the Modern World.
Boston, Massachusettes: McGraw-Hill, 2002.
Plakans, Andrejs. The Latvians: A Short History.
Stanford, California: Hoover Institution Press, 1995.
Prazmowska, Anita. Poland: A Modern History. New
York, New York: IB Tauris, 2010.
Raun, Toivo. Estonia and the Estonians.
Stanford, California: Hoover Institution Press, 1995.
Witte, Sergei. Abraham
Yarmolinsky (Trans.). The
Memoirs of Count Sergei Witte. Garden City, New York: Dobleday, Page &
Company, 1921.
General References:
"Jadidism," Historical Dictionary of Kazakhstan.
Edited by Didar Kassymova et. al. Lanham, Maryland: Scarecrow Press, Inc.,
2012.
"Revolution of
1905-1906." In the Historical
Dictionary of Poland, 966 - 1945. Edited by Jerzy Jan Lerski. Westport,
Connecticut: Greenwood Press, 1996.
"Russian Revolution
(1905)." In the Historical
Dictionary of Marxism. Edited by Elliott Johnson et. al. Lanham, Maryland:
Rowman & Littlefield, 2014.
Corfield, Justin.
"Russian Revolution (1905)." In The
Encyclopedia of the Industrial Revolution in World History. Edited by
Kenneth E. Hendrikson, III. Lanham, Maryland: Rowman & Littlefield, 2015.
Frame, Arthur. Russia,
"Revolution of 1905." In The
Encyclopedia of World War I: A Political, Social, and Military History.
Santa Barbara, California: ABC-CLIO, Inc., 2005.
Gough, Jana trans. History of Civilizations of Central
Asia V. 6. Paris: UNESCO, 2005.
Mikaberidze, Alexander. Historical Dictionary of Georgia.
Lanham, Maryland: Rowman & Littlefield, 2015.
Suny, Ronald Grigor.
"Russian Revolution of 1905." in The
Encyclopedia of Political Revolutions. Edited by Jack A. Goldstone. New
York, New York: Routledge, 1998.
Suziedelis, Saulius. Historical Dictionary of Lithuania.
Lanham, Maryland: Rowman & Littlefield Publishing Group, Inc., 2011.
Online Newspaper Articles:
A Russian Correspondent of The New York Times. "Russian Tells
Story of Sunday's Massacre." New
York Times (January 25 1905).
URL: http://query.nytimes.com/mem/archive-free/pdf?res=9505E0D6173AE733A25756C2A9679C946497D6CF
"Troops Overawe St. Petersburg." New York Times (January 24, 1905). URL: http://query.nytimes.com/mem/archive-free/pdf?res=9C07EFDF1F3BE631A25757C2A9679C946497D6CF
"Iron Ruler for St. Petersburg." New York Times (January 25, 1905). URL: http://query.nytimes.com/mem/archive-free/pdf?res=9907E0D6173AE733A25756C2A9679C946497D6CF
"Revolution?" The Manchester Guardian (January 23,
1905). URL: http://static.guim.co.uk/sys-images/Guardian/Pix/pictures/2013/1/4/1357302276132/Russia-1905-uprising-001.jpg
Websites:
Ascher, Abraham. "Revolution of 1905." Encyclopedia of
Russian History. 2004. Encyclopedia.com.
1 Feb. 2016. http://www.encyclopedia.com.
Trotsky, Leon. “1905.” Marxist
Internet Archives. March 12, 2016. https://www.marxists.org/archive/trotsky/1907/1905/
No comments:
Post a Comment