Syllabus_Russian_Revolution

Background Reading A: Rise of the Romanov Dynasty and Modern Russia

• Unique Trajectory of Russia

  • Russia entered the 20th century with a singular path that perplexed Western observers.

  • Understanding Russia’s history is essential to grasp its revolutionary path and distrust of the West, a sentiment reflecting in its current government.

• Romanov Dynasty vs. Soviet Leaders

  • Despite contrasting ideologies, both Tsars and Soviet leaders exhibited unique Russian ways of maintaining power and outlooks toward the world.

  • Both transformed Russia into a global power, surpassed only by American influence.

• Origins of Kyivan Rus

  • Russia began in the 9th century with the merging of the Rus peoples and Varangians, establishing Kyivan Rus.

  • This formation was significant for two reasons:

    1. Multi-ethnic state - Leading to challenges in forming a unified Russian identity, causing unrest and repression.

    2. Historical Importance of Kyiv - Russians regard Kyiv as central to their identity, contributing to tensions with Ukraine.

• Mongolian Invasion

  • Kyivan Rus eventually collapsed under the Mongolian invasion in 1237, a formative foreign conquest event for Russia.

  • Under Mongolian rule, Russia experienced a cultural and trade isolation from Western Europe, retaining medieval customs.

• Rise of the Grand Duchy of Moscow

  • The Grand Duchy emerged from Mongolian rule, leading campaigns for independence under Ivan III in 1380.

  • Moscow adopted the title of the “Third Rome” post-Constantinople's fall to justify dominance over all Rus peoples.

Page 7

• Ivan the Terrible's Reign

  • Ivan IV crowned himself the first tsar in 1547, expanding Russia through military conquests and establishing a culture of paranoia in governance.

  • His purges foreshadowed future oppressive tactics used by later Soviet leaders.

• Impact of Ivan's Campaigns

  • Conquests diversified Russia's cultural landscape, incorporating different ethnicities while suppressing aspirations for independence.

  • His reign led to establishment of a police state and foundational traits of tyranny that characterized future rulers.

• Paranoia and Violence

  • Ivan's Oprichnina period (1565-1572) exemplified his cruel and violent methods, including the Massacre of Novgorod where thousands died due to suspected treason against him.

Page 8

• Time of Troubles Post-Ivan

  • After Ivan's death, a succession crisis triggered the Time of Troubles, marked by foreign occupations and internal strife until the Romanov Dynasty emerged in 1613.

  • The Romanovs solidified their rule, effectively integrating with Europe's broader cultural landscape.

• Peter and Catherine the Great

  • Their reigns marked significant economic and cultural modernization, with Peter notably establishing St. Petersburg as a “window to the West.”

  • While they modernized, common people remained oppressed under serfdom, a continuation of autocratic rule.

Page 9

• 18th Century Russian Empire

  • Under the Romanovs, a tapestry of ethnicities characterized Russian rule over Eastern Europe and beyond.

  • Historical memories of foreign invasions remained fresh, dictating a tsarist demand for loyalty coupled with brutality against dissent.

• Russian Resilience During Invasions

  • The 1812 Napoleon invasion demonstrated the depth of national resolve, though it involved horrific hardships for the civilians.

  • Tsar Alexander I's response highlighted his authoritarian concerns for internal dissent.

Page 10

• Nicholas I and Security

  • Ascending in 1825, Nicholas I utilized repression to quell dissent, establishing the Third Section secret police for order control.

  • He faced significant revolutionary threats not only from intellectuals but also from the discontented peasantry and non-Russian compatriots.

• Consequences of War

  • As wars progressed, Nicholas stirred resentment among his subjects, culminating in foreign conflicts that pressed the monarchy's vulnerability.

Page 11

• Eastern Question and the Crimean War

  • Nicholas's ambitions involved controlling vital straits, clashing with Britain and France that led to the Crimean War.

  • The war's aftermath unveiled military deficiencies, reinforcing anti-Western sentiments in Russia and a growing isolationist ideology.

Page 12

• Alexander II's Reforms

  • Tasked with revitalizing Russia, Alexander II initiated significant reforms, including serf emancipation in 1861, restructuring legal systems, and local governance.

  • Despite gradual modernization, Alexander II faced backlash from radical factions, leading to his assassination amid political unrest.

Page 13

• Alexander III's Reaction

  • As a conservative ruler, he reasserted control against liberal progressive reforms and intensified oppression against minority groups, notably Jews.

  • He aimed to unify the Russian populace through a single national identity, driven by anti-Semitism and aggressive assimilation policies.

Page 14

• Nicholas II's Autocracy and Apathy

  • Amid rapid industrialization, a famine exposed Nicholas II’s detachment from the population. The resulting public outcry foreshadowed revolutionary aspirations.

• Intensifying Revolutionary Ideologies

  • Political and social turmoil increased amidst burgeoning labor movements advocating for reform and socialist ideas taking root amid discontent.

Page 15

• Famine and Political Awakening

  • In the early 1890s famine sparked political organization against the tsarist regime, drawing parallels with revolutionary France.

Page 16

• Russo-Japanese War and Its Aftermath

  • The disastrous Russo-Japanese War brought forth widespread discontent and triggered revolutionary actions, highlighting systemic failures within the tsar's governance.

• The 1905 Revolution

  • Although it did not overthrow the monarchy, the 1905 Revolution reflected deep-seated issues exacerbated by the humiliation of the war.

• Bloody Sunday and Its Consequences

  • The marred workers' protests in January 1905 initiated a public perception of Nicholas as a brutal autocrat, leading to demands for reform.

Page 17

• Massive Strikes and Riots

  • Following Bloody Sunday, unrest erupted in cities, resulting in strikes and violent confrontations with authority, revealing widespread revolutionary fervor against tsarism.

Page 18

• October Manifesto

  • Providing limited reforms under duress, Nicholas II's promises fell short, maintaining absolute authority and sparking further tensions with the Duma.

Page 19

• Duma's Role and Challenges

  • Created amid political demands, the Duma struggled under Nicholas's persistent autocratic governance, ending in its dissolutions and reform failures.

Page 20

• Nicholas II's Public Relations Crisis

  • Facing criticism for luxurious opulence against a backdrop of starvation, Nicholas II resorted to further isolation from reform processes.

Page 21

• Rasputin's Rise to Influence

  • Grigori Rasputin gained notoriety as an advisor due to the royal family's reliance on his supposed healing powers for Tsarevich Alexei’s hemophilia.

Page 22

• Rasputin's Mixed Influence

  • Initially perceived as a miraculous healer, mismanagement and controversies led Rasputin to become synonymous with the monarchy's looming demise.

Page 23

• World War I and Rasputin's Impact

  • Nicholas II's entry into World War I echoed his earlier blunders, cementing public disdain as Rasputin's flawed counsel further worsened military failures.

Page 24

• Rasputin's Assassination

  • Following Rasputin's dramatic murder plot, the monarchy's position grew increasingly tenuous, laying the groundwork for the revolution amidst public unrest.

Analysis of Accountability in Russian History

Ivan IV (the Terrible) and the Oprichnina Raids

• Oprichnina (1565-1572): Ivan IV established a secret police and a separate territory within Russia where he governed with terror, targeting nobles suspected of treason. His methods exemplified paranoia and violence, culminating in events like the Massacre of Novgorod.

• Precedent for Repression: The violent tactics and atmosphere of fear set by Ivan IV became a model for future authoritarian rulers.

Tsar Peter I (the Great) and Westernization / Modernization Policies

• Policies: Peter the Great's reign (1682-1725) marked significant military and cultural modernization, aimed at transforming Russia into a European power. However, his reforms often came at the expense of traditional institutions and societal structures.

• Impact on Future Tsars: Although aiming for progress, Peter's autocratic style laid groundwork for future tsars to wield personal power without regard to public welfare.

Tsar Alexander I and the Response to the Napoleonic Invasion (1812)

• Response to Invasion: Alexander I's approach to the Napoleonic threat involved an authoritarian response to dissent, highlighting a trend of state control during crises. His policies emphasized nationalism and a unified Russian identity against the foreign invader.

• Long-term Effects: This approach established a precedent for emphasizing loyalty and unity that later affected how subsequent leaders responded to internal challenges.

Tsar Nicholas I and the Establishment of the Third Section

• Third Section: Established in 1825, this secret police force was designed to suppress dissent and maintain order, reflecting Nicholas I's oppressive response to revolutionary movements and unrest.

• Comparison with Oprichnina: Both the Oprichnina and the Third Section served similar purposes—controlling the populace through fear, though each operated in different contexts. The Third Section’s actions mirrored Ivan IV's by ensuring loyalty through repression and intimidation.

Conclusion

• Accountability: Ivan IV is fundamentally accountable for setting a repressive precedent that influenced later Romanov tsars, particularly through the establishment of tyranny and secret police. The fear, violence, and state control initiated during his reign reverberated through the policies of Alexander III and Nicholas II, who further institutionalized oppressive governance.

Tsar Alexander II and the Opportunity for Reform

Critical Turning Point: Experts often view Tsar Alexander II's reign (1855-1881) as a crucial moment in Russian history when the possibility for reversing centuries of authoritarian and autocratic rule was tangible.

Key Reforms:

1. Emancipation of the Serfs (1861):

   • Alexander II's most significant reform, this policy aimed to free millions of serfs from oppressive servitude, a critical step towards modernizing Russia's social structure and responding to popular dissatisfaction.

   • By granting personal freedoms, the reform intended to cultivate a more productive and loyal peasantry, thereby improving the economic landscape of Russia.

2. Judicial Reforms (1864):

   • The establishment of an independent judiciary represented a progressive attempt to introduce fairness and public trials, emphasizing legal equality. This was a move away from arbitrary rule, showcasing a commitment to the rule of law.

3. Local Government Reforms:

   • The creation of the Zemstvo system allowed for greater local self-governance. It aimed to engage the populace in political processes and improve local administrative efficiency, decreasing the autocratic grip on day-to-day governance.

4. Military Reforms:

   • Alexander II also modernized the military, implementing conscription reforms intended to create a more efficient and professional army able to protect Russia's interests and ensure internal stability.

Critical Assessment of Potential Impact:

• Historical Context: Had Alexander II fully succeeded in implementing his reforms, there existed a realistic possibility of easing the autocracy's grip, thus promoting gradual political liberalization and potentially averting civil unrest.

• Resistance: Despite initial progress, Alexander faced backlash from conservative factions, limiting the full realization of his reform agenda.

Potential Impact of Continued Reign

• Assassination's Consequences: Had Alexander II not been assassinated in 1881, the path toward moderate reform could have continued, potentially delaying or altering the trajectory leading to the 1917 Revolution. His active engagement in reforms may have averted escalating revolutionary sentiments by addressing some grievances of the populace.

• Counterarguments: However, systemic issues, social divisions, and economic challenges remained deeply entrenched, suggesting that while his leadership might have introduced stability, the inherent pressures for radical change within the societal structure still posed a significant risk.