The events of the 1905 Russian Revolution were a trying time for Imperial Russia with the question of its transformation into a modern state. As well as the Russo-Japanese War and previous restructured revolutionary groups causing Blood Sunday. The scale of the reforms that followed the revolution made it possible to achieve their goals through political, economic and social changes, paving the way for a modern and advanced way of life for the Russian Empire. Discontent among industrial workers, due to industrial decline resulting in workers being laid off, led to protests and demonstrations by men, women and children in the streets in February 1905. Peasants were also suffering, due to Living conditions hit hard by insufficient harvests, with famine and mortality increasing in rural areas. Additionally, middle-class and intelligentsia citizens wanted more political participation in how the country was governed. Parliament was granted and political parties were legalized, which would strengthen or weaken the monarchy in the empire. Say no to plagiarism. Get a tailor-made essay on “Why Violent Video Games Should Not Be Banned”? Get the original essay The revolution began with Bloody Sunday on January 22, 1905, as evidenced by many artists' impressions of the event ( Kossak, May 1905). Orthodox priest Georgi Gapon attempted a peaceful march alongside industrial workers and their families to the Winter Palace with the intention of presenting a faithful petition to Nicholas II. However, the protest scared police toward the march, leading to gunfire. It is estimated that up to 200 protesters were killed during the riots (Lynch, 2008). The death of the population was considered by opponents of the tsarist regime as a deliberate massacre of unarmed demonstrators. 1905 marked the first time that a Tsarist government was challenged by a combination of three main opposition classes in Russia, consisting of industrial workers, peasants, and the reforming middle class. The immediate reaction to Bloody Sunday caused an outbreak of chaos with strikes in every major city. Followed by terrorism against government officials, organized largely by Socialist Revolutionaries, eventually spreading to rural areas. (Farhad, 2015) Besides historians' secondary sources of evidence and their views on primary evidence, other primary sources can be considered. For example, data relating to this massacre can be shown through numerous paintings created shortly after the events. For example, one artist I referenced earlier (Kossak) depicts workers encountering cavalry fire, which confused and trampled unarmed people. The use of paintings as historical evidence can be debated. However, one factor in the Kossak reference is borne out by the era in which it was painted. The image was created shortly after Bloody Sunday itself. Historical accuracy is therefore very important. The image also confirms the writings noted by primary eyewitnesses, meaning it confirms the historical accuracy and depiction of the source. However, some would argue that art used for historical reasoning should not be relied upon to obtain facts or truth. Some historians suggest that paintings can be fabricated and become misleading through the act of propaganda. (Yonghee Suh, 2013) During the Russian Revolution, most artists were inclined to becomewealthy citizens. This is why they were more likely to paint biased pictures of the event. On the other hand, some might argue that this is unlikely for the Bloody Sunday massacre, as many people were involved in the incident. As a result, it is difficult to conceal information that officials might want to hide. Among public and political unrest, the summer of 1905 brought news of rebellions in the Tsarist army and navy. Most of the soldiers were peasants reluctant to attack their own people. With several cases of troops launching strikes and disobeying orders to shoot anonymous strikers. Although the mutiny was limited to a single ship, there is no doubt that the situation was deeply concerning to Russian authorities. A government that lacks the faith and loyalty of its armed forces positions itself as extremely vulnerable. (EVAN ANDREWS, 2018) The Russo-Japanese War did little to improve the situation in August. Sergei Witte feared that the returning troops would join the Revolution in Russia. Despite Witte's concerns about the rebellion of peasants and workers, Nicholas II found his reform program too progressive for the Empire. However, given the dangerous political, social and economic situations, the government had no choice but to rely heavily on Witte to guide it through difficulties. Witte's first act was to negotiate peace terms with the Japanese. Once completed, his political rank reached a new level as he now became Chairman of the Council of Ministers, head of the Tsar's government. He described government policy as a “mixture of cowardice, blindness and stupidity”. (Lynch, 2008) The fall of 1905 brought significant political reforms to Russia. He unlimitedly ended autocracy in Russia and created the constitutional monarchy during the reign of Nicholas II. With the creation of the Legislative Duma in St. Petersburg; city ​​soviets were formed. Due to industrial unrest, which had now turned into joint strikes, the expansion of enraged urban workers transformed into the elected Soviet. Taking advantage of the Duma government, the Soviets created organizations to represent workers' needs for better conditions. (Farhad, 2015) However, faced with the challenge of the 1905 revolution, the Tsarist government quickly regained its confidence. Despite this, problems arose. The main problem considered by the First State Duma was land. The Duma also tried to carry out political reforms and urged an end to the dominations of the Revolution. Most representatives passed only one government-initiated law, and the First Duma was dissolved by Nicholas II. It is known as “the Duma of people’s anger”. (State Duma, 2019) This event was supported by numerous photographic evidence. For example, in a photograph archived in St. Petersburg, Emperor Nicholas II speaks at the opening of the first State Duma in the Georgian Hall of the Winter Palace on April 27, 1906 (Archives of Saint -Petersburg, 1906). crucial primary sources accessible to historians. Regarding the creation of the Duma, they could be used to reconstruct major historical events that could demonstrate impartial evidence. Unlike fine art, photographs can show what people actually witnessed and how they interpreted those events. Photographs help historians gain a much deeper understanding of what was happening. Photos being one of the only sources that can be stored in such a waypermanent (outside the public if necessary), reproductions are very difficult to produce. However, some people tend to think that the photograph itself is sufficient evidence or that the image is enough. The problem is that it must be validated, legitimized, interpreted, read and presented by a historian or an expert of the time. As a result of the revolutionary war between the classes, major weaknesses were exposed and land was still on the reform agenda. Peter Stolypin was dedicated to strengthening tsarism in times of calamity. Along with the question of revolution, he addresses land problems in Russia. Stolypin began to act on the rural crisis, arguing that industrial progress alone could not solve Russia's most pressing problem: how to feed the country's population. The government's land policies after the liberation of the serfs in 1861 did not help. The system under which state mortgages were advanced to freed serfs, to enable them to purchase their properties, did not create the peace the government hoped for. (Jack M. Lauber, 2001) One of the laws of November 9, 1906 grants the eldest of a peasant family the right to renovate their plots of land in private property into fenced farms. Other laws followed to “accelerate” separations and to help separatists purchase additional land through low-interest credit from peasants. Rural communities resisted, using force or pressure to dissuade them. Overall, the land reforms were considered a failure. Between 1906 and 1917, 15% of all Russian peasants consolidated their land into private plots, bringing the total hereditary-owned peasant holdings to around 30%. (Orlando Figues, 2014) When referring to the use of secondary sources, as I have referred to throughout, their legitimacy can be challenged. Secondary sources are invaluable to historians and researchers alike. However, their reliability and validity are subject to debate and often do not provide accurate information due to biased thoughts and perspectives. One obvious point is that secondary sources are documents that were written about past events, meaning the author was not present at the event. This means that researchers often interpret these events through the ideas and context at the time they were written. However, even if attitudes change over time, the facts remain unchanged, but the interpretations of others are likely to change. Regarding Peter Stolypin's land reform, there were many formal and official statistical documents during and after the events that occurred. Once these numbers are recorded, it becomes easier to translate them into overtime. Historians will likely use them as evidence or simply explain the reasoning behind the facts. This means that evidence from a secondary reason can be relied on in this case. Keep in mind: this is just a sample. Get a personalized article from our expert writers now. Get a Custom Essay Following government tensions and instability soon after, this led to the October Manifesto of October 17 in St. Petersburg (Nicholas II). The tsar published the manifesto written by Witte. Opposing the monarchy was the most unified opposition in the history of the Romanovs, composed of liberals, peasants and industrial workers who wanted freedom of speech and worship, the rights and freedoms of political parties and the legalization of unions, all granted by Nicholas II in.