The Bolshevik Revolution Essay Research Paper The

The Bolshevik Revolution Essay, Research Paper The painting was done in the 1920?s some time after the actual event making it secondary evidence. To a certain extent it is historically accurate because the storming of the Winter Palace did take place but it is inaccurate as there was not a great struggle between the Bolsheviks and Provisional Government. The only Provisional Government soldiers present that night were a women?s battalion because the Russian soldiers were fighting in the war. ?This is obviously propaganda by the artist who shows a lot of resistance in his painting. This is because the Bolsheviks believed it was their job to create a revolution, and although they respected Karl Marx did not want it to happen as he said. We can see that the source is quite

unreliable because of what it tells us about the Storming of the Winter Palace and how it portrays the Bolsheviks. It was obviously painted by a Bolshevik supporter because of these reasons.Source B was done in 1917 . It is Primary evidence. It is a cartoon that shows a woman representing mother Russian dressed in Greek Orthodox robes about to be sacrificed by Lenin and Trotsky, the ?tools? to make a 1917 revolution. Alexander Kerensky the leader of the provisional government is stood well back doing nothing. He is neutral, not portrayed as being on either side. Also looking on are two of Lenin?s soldiers, some Red Guards and some Jews shown by their biblical 50 pieces of silver.The cartoon gives the impression that Russia will be destroyed by Lenin and Trotsky Lenin. Kerensky

did nothing to ease the situation and he does not really do much – he became more European with his views. It is him the Red Guards are laughing at? – they are made to look nasty by the artist, because they are the enemy. The cartoonist is a supporter of the Whites because he makes the enemy look evil and bad for Russia and are shown to be very powerful. The peasants who are being ignored in the background are there to have shown the peasants at the time that the Bolsheviks would not have given them what they wanted. However the impression given is purely the artist?s opinions as the cartoon was drawn in 1917 before any of the events took place.Question 2Alexander Kerensky was the leader of the Provisional government in 1917 at the time of the Bolshevik revolution. Source C

is an extract of an account written by him in 1932 describing what was happening at that time. Although this evidence is quite reliable as it was written by someone right in the middle of it all? and can be classed as historically accurate; I would say it may be slightly distorted because it was written years afterwards and Kerensky did not want to go down in history as the person who failed to stop the Bolsheviks. This means he did not want to look bad so the source is biased. He would want to defend the policies of his provisional government and although he was the leader and knew very well what went wrong? I think he is making excuses for his government.For example he says; ? Only armed forces by the Bolsheviks overcame the Provisional Government.? This shows that he was

biased because there was hardly any resistance and there was no conflicts with any armed forces. The Bolsheviks came to power because they had more to offer Russia.Kerensky tell us of ?slow, but steady success.? However the statistics are against him because the number of peasant uprisings since 1915 had quadrupled. In my opinion Kerensky was making the situation seem much less revolutionary or serious that it realistically was. There may have been some ?success? but that really is irrelevant and overpowered by the fact that he still failed to defeat the Bolsheviks and win the war.I don?t think source C is reliable due to the time it was written and Kerensky concerned about his historical status. Also by the time he wrote it, the revolution happened so long ago he thought it