The beginning of the October Uprising in Petrograd

The October Uprising in Petrograd was one of the most significant events of the Russian Revolution. In the Soviet era, it played a crucial symbolic role as a founding myth, capable of asserting the historical legitimacy of the Soviet system and the authority of the ruling political elites. The question of when the October uprising began was ultimately linked to the issue of the leadership of the uprising.Firstly, in the 1920s, in a relatively liberal atmosphere, various memoirs and collections of materials by revolution participants and eyewitnesses were published and various views on the October Revolution were raised. This was also true for the issue of the date of the October uprising. In particular, the view that it began at 2 a.m. on October 25 seems to have been widely accepted. However, Trotsky asserted that the actual uprising occurred in mid-October when the conflict began between the Provisional Government and the Military Revolutionary Committee and Anishev argued that the uprising began on October 24.In the 1930s, as Stalin’s personal power established, political pressure on historiography intensified and the history of the October Revolution was rewritten to focus on the leading role of the Party Central Committee, centered on Stalin. History of the Communist Party of the Soviet Union (Bolsheviks): Short Course presented the official interpretation, stipulating that the armed uprising began on the morning of October 24, and this view was repeated in other historiography of the Stalin era.After Stalin’s death in 1953, Soviet historiography entered a new era. As Stalin’s cult of personality was criticized, Stalin’s role in the October Revolution was reexamined and the roles of Lenin and the party leadership were emphasized. Soviet historiography gradually expanded empirical research using archival materials, allowing for disagreements and debates on major issues. However, the existing ‘Leninist’ interpretation of the Russian Revolution was still maintained and the view that the uprising began on the morning of October 24 remained dominant. Nevertheless, as shown in academic conferences in the 1960s, various views on the date of the October uprising were raised and some scholars linked the beginning of the uprising to Lenin’s evening letter of October 24th or his arrival at Smolny.The Leninist interpretation of the Russian Revolution, which served as the basis for these debates, faced severe criticism from the late 1980s, and with the collapse of the Soviet system, the necessity to newly define the character and historical significance of the Russian Revolution arose. As a result, issues such as the date of the armed uprising seem to have degenerated into ‘minor’ debates within the historical community, devoid of real political significance.

Authors

Publication Details

Journal
The Journal of Western History
Published
2025-05-31
DOI
https://doi.org/10.16894/jowh.72.2
Primary Topic
Eastern European Communism and Reforms
Type
article
Field-Weighted Citation Impact
0.00
Controls
|||
ALL TIME
JAN
FEB
MAR
APR
MAY
JUN
JUL
AUG
SEP
OCT
article

The beginning of the October Uprising in Petrograd

Sung Shin Park
The Journal of Western History
Eastern European Communism and Reforms
article

The beginning of the October Uprising in Petrograd

Sung Shin Park
article en

Abstract

The October Uprising in Petrograd was one of the most significant events of the Russian Revolution. In the Soviet era, it played a crucial symbolic role as a founding myth, capable of asserting the historical legitimacy of the Soviet system and the authority of the ruling political elites. The question of when the October uprising began was ultimately linked to the issue of the leadership of the uprising.Firstly, in the 1920s, in a relatively liberal atmosphere, various memoirs and collections of materials by revolution participants and eyewitnesses were published and various views on the October Revolution were raised. This was also true for the issue of the date of the October uprising. In particular, the view that it began at 2 a.m. on October 25 seems to have been widely accepted. However, Trotsky asserted that the actual uprising occurred in mid-October when the conflict began between the Provisional Government and the Military Revolutionary Committee and Anishev argued that the uprising began on October 24.In the 1930s, as Stalin’s personal power established, political pressure on historiography intensified and the history of the October Revolution was rewritten to focus on the leading role of the Party Central Committee, centered on Stalin. History of the Communist Party of the Soviet Union (Bolsheviks): Short Course presented the official interpretation, stipulating that the armed uprising began on the morning of October 24, and this view was repeated in other historiography of the Stalin era.After Stalin’s death in 1953, Soviet historiography entered a new era. As Stalin’s cult of personality was criticized, Stalin’s role in the October Revolution was reexamined and the roles of Lenin and the party leadership were emphasized. Soviet historiography gradually expanded empirical research using archival materials, allowing for disagreements and debates on major issues. However, the existing ‘Leninist’ interpretation of the Russian Revolution was still maintained and the view that the uprising began on the morning of October 24 remained dominant. Nevertheless, as shown in academic conferences in the 1960s, various views on the date of the October uprising were raised and some scholars linked the beginning of the uprising to Lenin’s evening letter of October 24th or his arrival at Smolny.The Leninist interpretation of the Russian Revolution, which served as the basis for these debates, faced severe criticism from the late 1980s, and with the collapse of the Soviet system, the necessity to newly define the character and historical significance of the Russian Revolution arose. As a result, issues such as the date of the armed uprising seem to have degenerated into ‘minor’ debates within the historical community, devoid of real political significance.

The Journal of Western HistoryVol. 72(0)
Openalex Percentile: Top 77%
Eastern European Communism and Reforms
AI Navigator

Ask Laika to Summarize, Analyze, and Connect papers live on the map.

Summarize Papers & Methodologies

Extract key findings, datasets, and comparative methods across publications.

Benchmark Rankings & Visual Analytics

Rank top research institutions, authors, funders, topics, and journals by Field-Weighted Citation Impact (FWCI) and paper volume with instant charts.

Connect Distant Disciplines

Bridge topological clusters on the map to find hidden collaborative intersections.