As the Russian Empire
plunged into anarchy, officials discussed measures to abate the situation,
including the need for reforms. But the Tsar hesitated for any reforms. Explore
how the government acted upon the proposed reforms that ultimately resulted to
the October Manifesto continuing crisis that shook the government.
Fight for a Duma
As
reports of violence across all corners of the Empire, more and more officials
believed that reforms was the only way out of the reformist revolution of the
people. Many officials feared that if the strikes, riots, and uprising might
turn into an anti-Tsarist revolution, especially when socialist revolutionaries
cried slogans like “Down with the Tsar.” When the Committee of Minister met
under the presidency of Count Dmitry Solsky, officials like Witte, Bulygin, and
the finance minister Vladimir Kokovstov voiced the need for reforms. In what
became known as the Solsky Conference, deliberation for reforms followed to
avert the increasing threat of a total collapse of the Tsarist government.
The
Union of Zemstvos and Town Assemblies met once again in June 1905. Tsar
Nicholas graced them with his promise of reforms, including the extension of
autonomy to localities and the creation of a Duma. Although Nicholas promised
change, he himself remained abrasive towards any curbing of his autocratic
powers. After all, he had centuries of Romanov autocratic legacy to protect.
Reforms,
however, became ever more urgent as news of new problems reached St.
Petersburg. In June 14 (Old Style), 1905, the crew of the battleship Potemkin
mutinied and executed their abusive officers. The warship then went to Odessa
where workers launched a massive strike and barricaded themselves in the
streets. Workers and soldiers clashed and the sight of the Potemkin in Odessa
complicated the situation of the government as it showed the unity of the
working class and the military, at least an element of it, against the
establishment. In July, the peasants of Western Russia founded the Peasants
Union and organized mass demonstrations demanding agrarian reform. The fear of
the fall of the Tsarist regime came ever more increasing as the military and
peasants started to demand and protest against the government.
In
August, the government attempted to pacify opposition by providing some
concessions. In an attempt to ease down student qualms, the government gave
back the autonomy of universities and gave professors and students stakes in
school administration. In addition, they also banned police from entering
university grounds. The policy, however, failed to stop student protests; but rather,
it made universities a safe haven for revolutionaries to meet. The Tsar also
attempted to calm down the whole populace with his manifesto issued on August
6/19 (Old Style/New Style), 1905.
The
August 6 Manifesto finally discussed the definition and place of a Duma in the
Tsarist government. In the Manifesto, Nicholas promised to create a Duma
composed of elected representatives. It defined the Duma a “consultative body”
to discuss and elaborate laws and state budgets. The Manifesto entrusted the
handling of the election of the representatives to the state council. Alongside
the manifesto, Nicholas also issued a decree about the proposed Duma. Sergei Witte
recounted what the decree said. The decree as stated by Witte defined the
Duma’s function as a parliament. It also stated that the Duma worked as a
consultative body. Finally, the members of the Duma were to be elected based
mostly from the peasantry.
The
Decree following the Manifesto showed irony. Although it finally recognize the
majority of people from the peasantry and giving them power to elect Duma representatives,
it, however, defined the Duma within contradictions. Witte himself saw the
manifesto as ironic. Based on the decree, the Duma paralleled to European
parliaments. Parliaments shared power with the monarch if not held all powers
with the monarchy only as a symbol. But Nicholas’ decree and even the
manifesto, defined it as a consultative body, henceforth it only work as an advisory
status and had no power whatsoever. Due to the Manifesto’s continuing adherence
to the Tsar’s autocracy and depriving powers to the Duma, little to no one
listened or stopped.
The
August Manifesto ceased nothing. In facts, strikes even went worst. In
September a new wave of general strikes hit Russia. Print shop and railroad
workers and professionals went on strike. The strike of railroad workers led to
a paralysis in travel in the country. Workers from other industries, such as
iron, textile, communication, all stopped working too. The economy suffered
tremendously and life in Russia stood still.
The
only good news that came in September for the government was the signing of the
Treaty of Portsmouth that ended the Russo-Japanese War. For the government, it
meant that they would have finally the resources and soldiers needed to restore
order. But the return of troops from the eastern front would take months, thus,
they needed to buy time.
St. Petersburg Soviet
September
also saw another development in the side of the striking workers. On September
25/October 8 (Old Style/New Style), the Union of Liberation formed strike
committees in major industrial cities. In St. Petersburg, the established
strike committee elevated itself to the Soviet or Council of Worker’s Deputies,
a bold step that exercised what the Marxist called the rule of the working
class or the proletariat.
The St.
Petersburg Soviet first convened on October 13/26, 1905 (Old Style/ New Style)
with Khrustalev-Nosar, a young socialist who took part in the 1899 student
strike in the University of St. Petersburg, as chairman. The St. Petersburg
Soviet met in university halls due to government’s recent policy of prohibiting
police from entering it. The Soviet demanded political reforms, especially the
curbing of the Tsars autocratic powers and the extension of civil liberties
such as free press and freedom of assembly.
However, the authorities locked down universities forcing the Soviet to
cancel their session on October 16, 1905 (Old Style). But a day later, the
Soviet began to publish their own newspaper called the Izviestiya or the
Buttletin.
As
danger within the capital growing, ministers continued to tackle possible
solutions. They had two options. First they would conceded political reforms.
Second they would impose a military dictatorship, with most officials looking
up to Alexander Trepov as top candidate as military dictator and to restore
order. The second option, however, required huge number of troops and
resources, which at their present state unavailable. The most practical
decision that the ministers saw would be the first option. And the man tasked
to take care of the reforms was Sergei Witte.
Sergei
Witte, orchestrator of the Great Spurt and negotiator for Russia in the Treaty
of Portsmouth, was tasked to compose a manifesto embodying the reforms that the
Tsar must concede to. The result was the October Manifesto.
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