text:
Russian Revolution of 1905

The Russian Revolution of 1905, also known as the First Russian Revolution, began on 22 January 1905. A wave of mass political and social unrest then began to spread across the vast areas of the Russian Empire. The unrest was directed primarily against the Tsar, the nobility, and the ruling class. It included worker strikes, peasant unrest, and military mutinies. In response to the public pressure, Tsar Nicholas II was forced to go back on his earlier authoritarian stance and enact some reform (issued in the October Manifesto). This took the form of establishing the State Duma, the multi-party system, and the Russian Constitution of 1906. Despite popular participation in the Duma, the parliament was unable to issue laws of its own, and frequently came into conflict with Nicholas. The Duma's power was limited and Nicholas continued to hold the ruling authority. Furthermore, he could dissolve the Duma, which he did three times in order to get rid of the opposition.

The 1905 revolution was set off by the international humiliation that resulted from the Russian defeat in the Russo-Japanese War, which ended in the same year. Calls for revolution were intensified by the growing realisation by a variety of sectors of society of the need for reform. Politicians such as Sergei Witte had succeeded in partially industrializing Russia but failed to adequately meet the needs of the population. Tsar Nicholas II and the monarchy narrowly survived the Revolution of 1905, but its events foreshadowed what was to come in the 1917 Russian Revolution.

Many historians contend that the 1905 revolution set the stage for the 1917 Russian Revolutions, which saw the monarchy abolished and the Tsar executed. Calls for radicalism were present in the 1905 revolution, but many of the revolutionaries who were in a position to lead were either in exile or in prison while it took place. The events in 1905 demonstrated the precarious position in which the Tsar found himself. As a result, Tsarist Russia did not undergo sufficient reform, which had a direct impact on the radical politics brewing in the Russian Empire. Although the radicals were still in the minority of the populace, their momentum was growing. Vladimir Lenin, a revolutionary himself, would later say that the Revolution of 1905 was "The Great Dress Rehearsal", without which the "victory of the October Revolution in 1917 would have been impossible".

Causes
Many factors contributed to unrest across the Russian Empire of 1905. Newly emancipated peasants earned too little and were not allowed to sell or mortgage their allotted land. Ethnic and national minorities resented the policy of "Russification" of the Empire: this represented discrimination and repression against national minorities, such as banning them from voting, serving in the Imperial Guard or Navy, and limiting their attendance in schools. A nascent industrial working class resented the government for doing too little to protect them, as it banned strikes and organizing into labor unions. University students developed a new consciousness after discipline was relaxed in the institutions, and as increasingly radical ideas gained attention.

Significantly, this was a period of disaffection in the Russian military. Soldiers returning from a bloody and disgraceful defeat with Japan found inadequate factory pay, shortages, and general disarray, and organized in protest. Because the Russian economy was tied to European finances, the contraction of Western money markets in 1899–1900 plunged Russian industry into a deep and prolonged crisis; it outlasted the dip in European industrial production. This setback aggravated social unrest during the five years preceding the Revolution of 1905.

The Tsarist government did recognise some of these problems, albeit shortsightedly. The Minister of the Interior Vyacheslav von Plehve had said in 1903 that, after the agrarian problem, the most serious issues plaguing the country were those of the Jews, the schools, and the workers, in that order.

Any residual popular loyalty to Tsar Nicholas II was lost on 22 January 1905, when his soldiers fired upon a crowd of protesting workers, led by Georgy Gapon, who were marching to present a petition at the Winter Palace.

Agrarian problem
Every year, thousands of nobles in debt mortgaged their estates to the noble land bank or sold them to municipalities, merchants, or peasants. By the time of the revolution, the nobility had sold off one-third of its land and mortgaged another third. The peasants had been freed by the emancipation reform of 1861, but their lives were generally quite limited. The government hoped to develop the peasants as a politically conservative, land-holding class by enacting laws to enable them to buy land from nobility by paying small installments over many decades.

Such land, known as "allotment land", would not be owned by individual peasants but by the community of peasants; individual peasants would have rights to strips of land to be assigned to them under the open field system. A peasant could not sell or mortgage this land, so in practice he could not renounce his rights to his land, and he would be required to pay his share of redemption dues to the village commune. This plan was intended to prevent peasants from becoming part of the proletariat. However, the peasants were not given enough land to provide for their needs: "Their earnings were often so small that they could neither buy the food they needed nor keep up the payment of taxes and redemption dues they owed the government for their land allotments. By 1903 their total arrears in payments of taxes and dues was 118 million rubles."

The situation worsened as masses of hungry peasants roamed the countryside looking for work and sometimes walked hundreds of kilometers to find it. Desperate peasants proved capable of violence. "In the provinces of Kharkov and Poltava in 1902, thousands of them, ignoring restraints and authority, burst out in a rebellious fury that led to extensive destruction of property and looting of noble homes before troops could be brought to subdue and punish them."

These violent outbreaks caught the attention of the government, so it created many committees to investigate the causes. The committees concluded that no part of the countryside was prosperous; some parts, especially the fertile areas known as the "black-soil region", were in decline. Although cultivated acreage had increased in the last half century, the increase had not been proportionate to the growth of the peasant population, which had doubled. "There was general agreement at the turn of the century that Russia faced a grave and intensifying agrarian crisis due mainly to rural overpopulation with an annual excess of fifteen to eighteen live births over deaths per 1,000 inhabitants." The investigations revealed many difficulties but the committees could not find solutions that were both sensible and "acceptable" to the government.

Nationality problem
Russia was a multi-ethnic empire. Nineteenth-century Russians saw cultures and religions in a clear hierarchy. Non-Russian cultures were tolerated in the empire but were not necessarily respected. Culturally, Europe was favored over Asia, as was Orthodox Christianity over other religions.

For generations, Russian Jews had been considered a special problem. Jews constituted only about 4% of the population, but were concentrated in the western borderlands. Like other minorities in Russia, the Jews lived "miserable and circumscribed lives, forbidden to settle or acquire land outside the cities and towns, legally limited in attendance at secondary school and higher schools, virtually barred from legal professions, denied the right to vote for municipal councilors, and excluded from services in the Navy or the Guards".

The government's treatment of Jews, although considered a separate issue, was similar to its policies in dealing with all national and religious minorities. Historian Theodore Weeks notes: "Russian administrators, who never succeeded in coming up with a legal definition of 'Pole', despite the decades of restrictions on that ethnic group, regularly spoke of individuals 'of Polish descent' or, alternatively, 'of Russian descent', making identity a function of birth." This policy only succeeded in producing or aggravating feelings of disloyalty. There was growing impatience with their inferior status and resentment against "Russification". Russification is cultural assimilation definable as "a process culminating in the disappearance of a given group as a recognizably distinct element within a larger society".

Besides the imposition of a uniform Russian culture throughout the empire, the government's pursuit of Russification, especially during the second half of the nineteenth century, had political motives. After the emancipation of the serfs in 1861, the Russian state was compelled to take into account public opinion, but the government failed to gain the public's support. Another motive for Russification policies was the Polish uprising of 1863. Unlike other minority nationalities, the Poles, in the eyes of the Tsar, were a direct threat to the empire's stability. After the rebellion was crushed, the government implemented policies to reduce Polish cultural influences. In the 1870s the government began to distrust German elements on the western border. The Russian government felt that the unification of Germany would upset the power balance among the great powers of Europe and that Germany would use its strength against Russia. The government thought that the borders would be defended better if the borderland were more "Russian" in character. The culmination of cultural diversity created a cumbersome nationality problem that plagued the Russian government in the years leading up to the revolution.

Labour problem
The economic situation in Russia before the revolution presented a grim picture. The government had experimented with laissez-faire capitalist policies, but this strategy largely failed to gain traction within the Russian economy until the 1890s. Meanwhile, "agricultural productivity stagnated, while international prices for grain dropped, and Russia's foreign debt and need for imports grew. War and military preparations continued to consume government revenues. At the same time, the peasant taxpayers' ability to pay was strained to the utmost, leading to widespread famine in 1891."

In the 1890s, under Finance Minister Sergei Witte, a crash governmental program was proposed to promote industrialization. His policies included heavy government expenditures for railroad building and operations, subsidies and supporting services for private industrialists, high protective tariffs for Russian industries (especially heavy industry), an increase in exports, currency stabilization, and encouragement of foreign investments. His plan was successful and during the 1890s "Russian industrial growth averaged 8 percent per year. Railroad mileage grew from a very substantial base by 40 percent between 1892 and 1902." Ironically, Witte's success in implementing this program helped spur the 1905 revolution and eventually the 1917 revolution because it exacerbated social tensions. "Besides dangerously concentrating a proletariat, a professional and a rebellious student body in centers of political power, industrialization infuriated both these new forces and the traditional rural classes." The government policy of financing industrialization through taxing peasants forced millions of peasants to work in towns. The "peasant worker" saw his labor in the factory as the means to consolidate his family's economic position in the village and played a role in determining the social consciousness of the urban proletariat. The new concentrations and flows of peasants spread urban ideas to the countryside, breaking down isolation of peasants on communes.

Industrial workers began to feel dissatisfaction with the Tsarist government despite the protective labour laws the government decreed. Some of those laws included the prohibition of children under 12 from working, with the exception of night work in glass factories. Employment of children aged 12 to 15 was prohibited on Sundays and holidays. Workers had to be paid in cash at least once a month, and limits were placed on the size and bases of fines for workers who were tardy. Employers were prohibited from charging workers for the cost of lighting of the shops and plants. Despite these labour protections, the workers believed that the laws were not enough to free them from unfair and inhumane practices. At the start of the 20th century, Russian industrial workers worked on average 11-hours per day (10 hours on Saturday), factory conditions were perceived as grueling and often unsafe, and attempts at independent unions were often not accepted. Many workers were forced to work beyond the maximum of $11 1/2$ hours per day. Others were still subject to arbitrary and excessive fines for tardiness, mistakes in their work, or absence. Russian industrial workers were also the lowest-wage workers in Europe. Although the cost of living in Russia was low, "the average worker's 16 rubles per month could not buy the equal of what the French worker's 110 francs would buy for him." Furthermore, the same labour laws prohibited the organisation of trade unions and strikes. Dissatisfaction turned into despair for many impoverished workers, which made them more sympathetic to radical ideas. These discontented, radicalized workers became key to the revolution by participating in illegal strikes and revolutionary protests.

The government responded by arresting labour agitators and enacting more "paternalistic" legislation. Introduced in 1900 by Sergei Zubatov, head of the Moscow security department, "police socialism" planned to have workers form workers' societies with police approval to "provide healthful, fraternal activities and opportunities for cooperative self-help together with 'protection' against influences that might have inimical effect on loyalty to job or country". Some of these groups organised in Moscow, Odessa, Kyiv, Mykolaiv, and Kharkiv, but these groups and the idea of police socialism failed.

From 1900 to 1903, the period of industrial depression caused many firm bankruptcies and a reduction in the employment rate. Employees were restive: they would join legal organisations but turn the organisations toward an end that the organisations' sponsors did not intend. Workers used legitimate means to organise strikes or to draw support for striking workers outside these groups. A strike that began in 1902 by workers in the railroad shops in Vladikavkaz and Rostov-on-Don created such a response that by the next summer, 225,000 in various industries in southern Russia and Transcaucasia were on strike. These were not the first illegal strikes in the country's history but their aims, and the political awareness and support among workers and non-workers, made them more troubling to the government than earlier strikes. The government responded by closing all legal organisations by the end of 1903.

Educated class as a problem
The Minister of the Interior, Plehve, designated schools as a pressing problem for the government, but he did not realize it was only a symptom of antigovernment feelings among the educated class. Students of universities, other schools of higher learning, and occasionally of secondary schools and theological seminaries were part of this group.

Student radicalism began around the time Tsar Alexander II came to power. Alexander abolished serfdom and enacted fundamental reforms in the legal and administrative structure of the Russian empire, which were revolutionary for their time. He lifted many restrictions on universities and abolished obligatory uniforms and military discipline. This ushered in a new freedom in the content and reading lists of academic courses. In turn, that created student subcultures, as youth were willing to live in poverty in order to receive an education. As universities expanded, there was a rapid growth of newspapers, journals, and an organisation of public lectures and professional societies. The 1860s was a time when the emergence of a new public sphere was created in social life and professional groups. This created the idea of their right to have an independent opinion.

The government was alarmed by these communities, and in 1861 tightened restrictions on admission and prohibited student organisations; these restrictions resulted in the first ever student demonstration, held in St. Petersburg, which led to a two-year closure of the university. The consequent conflict with the state was an important factor in the chronic student protests over subsequent decades. The atmosphere of the early 1860s gave rise to political engagement by students outside universities that became a tenet of student radicalism by the 1870s. Student radicals described "the special duty and mission of the student as such to spread the new word of liberty. Students were called upon to extend their freedoms into society, to repay the privilege of learning by serving the people, and to become in Nikolai Ogarev's phrase 'apostles of knowledge'." During the next two decades, universities produced a significant share of Russia's revolutionaries. Prosecution records from the 1860s and 1870s show that more than half of all political offences were committed by students despite being a minute proportion of the population. "The tactics of the left-wing students proved to be remarkably effective, far beyond what any of the students would have dreamed. Sensing that neither the university administrations nor the government possessed the will or authority to enforce regulations, radicals simply went ahead with their plans to turn the schools into centres of political activity for students and non-students alike."

They took up problems that were unrelated to their "proper employment", and displayed defiance and radicalism by boycotting examinations, rioting, arranging marches in sympathy with strikers and political prisoners, circulating petitions, and writing anti-government propaganda.

This disturbed the government, but it believed the cause was lack of training in patriotism and religion. Therefore, the curriculum was "toughened up" to emphasize classical language and mathematics in secondary schools, but defiance continued. Expulsion, exile, and forced military service also did not stop students. "In fact, when the official decision to overhaul the whole educational system was finally made, in 1904, and to that end Vladimir Glazov, head of General Staff Academy, was selected as Minister of Education, the students had grown bolder and more resistant than ever."

Rise of the opposition
The events of 1905 came after progressive and academic agitation for more political democracy and limits to Tsarist rule in Russia, and an increase in strikes by workers against employers for radical economic demands and union recognition, (especially in southern Russia). As an example, Trotsky who would assume a central role in the 1905 revolution, would write several proclamations urging for improved economic conditions, political rights and the use of strike action against the Tsarist regime on behalf of workers.

Many socialists view this as a period when the rising revolutionary movement was met with rising reactionary movements. As Rosa Luxemburg stated in 1906 in The Mass Strike, when collective strike activity was met with what is perceived as repression from an autocratic state, economic and political demands grew into and reinforced each other.

Russian progressives formed the Union of Zemstvo Constitutionalists in 1903 and the Union of Liberation in 1904, which called for a constitutional monarchy. Russian socialists formed two major groups: the Socialist Revolutionary Party (founded in 1902), which followed the Russian populist tradition, and the Marxist Russian Social Democratic Labour Party (founded in 1898).

In late 1904 liberals started a series of banquets (modeled on the campagne des banquets leading up to the French Revolution of 1848), nominally celebrating the 40th anniversary of the liberal court statutes, but actually an attempt to circumvent laws against political gatherings. The banquets resulted in calls for political reforms and a constitution. In November 1904 a Zemsky Congress (Земский съезд)—a gathering of zemstvo delegates representing all levels of Russian society—called for a constitution, civil liberties and a parliament. On 13 December 1904, the Moscow City Duma passed a resolution demanding the establishment of an elected national legislature, full freedom of the press, and freedom of religion. Similar resolutions and appeals from other city dumas and zemstvo councils followed.

Emperor Nicholas II made a move to meet many of these demands, appointing liberal Pyotr Dmitrievich Sviatopolk-Mirsky as Minister of the Interior after the July 1904 assassination of Vyacheslav von Plehve. On 25 December 1904, the Emperor issued a manifesto promising the broadening of the zemstvo system and more authority for local municipal councils, insurance for industrial workers, the emancipation of Inorodtsy and the abolition of censorship. The crucial demand—that for a representative national legislature—was missing in the manifesto.

Worker strikes in the Caucasus broke out in March 1902. Strikes on the railways, originating from pay disputes, took on other issues and drew in other industries, culminating in a general strike at Rostov-on-Don in November 1902. Daily meetings of 15,000 to 20,000 heard openly revolutionary appeals for the first time, before a massacre defeated the strikes. But reaction to the massacres brought political demands to purely economic ones. Luxemburg described the situation in 1903 by saying: "the whole of South Russia in May, June and July was aflame", including Baku (where separate wage struggles culminated in a citywide general strike) and Tiflis, where commercial workers gained a reduction in the working day, and were joined by factory workers. In 1904, massive strike waves broke out in Odessa in the spring, in Kyiv in July, and in Baku in December. This all set the stage for the strikes in St. Petersburg in December 1904 to January 1905 seen as the first step in the 1905 revolution.

Another contributing factor behind the revolution was the Bloody Sunday massacre of protesters that took place in January 1905 in St. Petersburg sparked a spate of civil unrest in the Russian Empire. Lenin urged Bolsheviks to take a greater role in the events, encouraging violent insurrection. In doing so, he adopted SR slogans regarding "armed insurrection", "mass terror", and "the expropriation of gentry land", resulting in Menshevik accusations that he had deviated from orthodox Marxism. In turn, he insisted that the Bolsheviks split completely with the Mensheviks; many Bolsheviks refused, and both groups attended the Third RSDLP Congress, held in London in April 1905 at the Brotherhood Church. Lenin presented many of his ideas in the pamphlet Two Tactics of Social Democracy in the Democratic Revolution, published in August 1905. Here, he predicted that Russia's liberal bourgeoisie would be sated by a transition to constitutional monarchy and thus betray the revolution; instead he argued that the proletariat would have to build an alliance with the peasantry to overthrow the Tsarist regime and establish the "provisional revolutionary democratic dictatorship of the proletariat and the peasantry."

Start of the revolution
In December 1904, a strike occurred at the Putilov plant (a railway and artillery supplier) in St. Petersburg. Sympathy strikes in other parts of the city raised the number of strikers to 150,000 workers in 382 factories. By 21 January 1905, the city had no electricity and newspaper distribution was halted. All public areas were declared closed.

Controversial Orthodox priest Georgy Gapon, who headed a police-sponsored workers' association, led a huge workers' procession to the Winter Palace to deliver a petition to the Tsar on Sunday, 22 January 1905. The troops guarding the Palace were ordered to tell the demonstrators not to pass a certain point, according to Sergei Witte, and at some point, troops opened fire on the demonstrators, causing between 200 (according to Witte) and 1,000 deaths. The event became known as Bloody Sunday, and is considered by many scholars as the start of the active phase of the revolution.

The events in St. Petersburg provoked public indignation and a series of massive strikes that spread quickly throughout the industrial centers of the Russian Empire. Polish socialists—both the PPS and the SDKPiL—called for a general strike. By the end of January 1905, over 400,000 workers in Russian Poland were on strike (see Revolution in the Kingdom of Poland (1905–1907)). Half of European Russia's industrial workers went on strike in 1905, and 93.2% in Poland. There were also strikes in Finland and the Baltic coast. In Riga, 130 protesters were killed on 26 January 1905, and in Warsaw a few days later over 100 strikers were shot on the streets. By February, there were strikes in the Caucasus, and by April, in the Urals and beyond. In March, all higher academic institutions were forcibly closed for the remainder of the year, adding radical students to the striking workers. A strike by railway workers on 21 October 1905 quickly developed into a general strike in Saint Petersburg and Moscow. This prompted the setting up of the short-lived Saint Petersburg Soviet of Workers' Delegates, an admixture of Bolsheviks and Mensheviks headed by Khrustalev-Nossar and despite the Iskra split would see the likes of Julius Martov and Georgi Plekhanov spar with Lenin. Leon Trotsky, who felt a strong connection to the Bolsheviki, had not given up a compromise but spearheaded strike action in over 200 factories. By 26 October 1905, over 2 million workers were on strike and there were almost no active railways in all of Russia. Growing inter-ethnic confrontation throughout the Caucasus resulted in Armenian–Tatar massacres, heavily damaging the cities and the Baku oilfields.

With the unsuccessful and bloody Russo-Japanese War (1904–1905) there was unrest in army reserve units. On 2 January 1905, Port Arthur was lost; in February 1905, the Russian army was defeated at Mukden, losing almost 80,000 men. On 27–28 May 1905, the Russian Baltic Fleet was defeated at Tsushima. Witte was dispatched to make peace, negotiating the Treaty of Portsmouth (signed 5 September 1905). In 1905, there were naval mutinies at Sevastopol (see Sevastopol Uprising), Vladivostok, and Kronstadt, peaking in June with the mutiny aboard the battleship Potemkin. The mutineers eventually surrendered the battleship to Romanian authorities on 8 July in exchange for asylum, then the Romanians returned her to Imperial Russian authorities on the following day. Some sources claim over 2,000 sailors died in the suppression. The mutinies were disorganised and quickly crushed. Despite these mutinies, the armed forces were largely apolitical and remained mostly loyal, if dissatisfied—and were widely used by the government to control the 1905 unrest.

Nationalist groups had been angered by the Russification undertaken since Alexander II. The Poles, Finns, and the Baltic provinces all sought autonomy, and also freedom to use their national languages and promote their own culture. Muslim groups were also active, founding the Union of the Muslims of Russia in August 1905. Certain groups took the opportunity to settle differences with each other rather than the government. Some nationalists undertook anti-Jewish pogroms, possibly with government aid, and in total over 3,000 Jews were killed.

The number of prisoners throughout the Russian Empire, which had peaked at 116,376 in 1893, fell by over a third to a record low of 75,009 in January 1905, chiefly because of several mass amnesties granted by the Tsar; the historian S G Wheatcroft has wondered what role these released criminals played in the 1905–06 social unrest.

Government response
On 12 January 1905, the Tsar appointed Dmitri Feodorovich Trepov as governor in St Petersburg and dismissed the Minister of the Interior, Pyotr Sviatopolk-Mirsky, on 18 February 1905. He appointed a government commission "to enquire without delay into the causes of discontent among the workers in the city of St Petersburg and its suburbs" in view of the strike movement. The commission was headed by Senator NV Shidlovsky, a member of the State Council, and included officials, chiefs of government factories, and private factory owners. It was also meant to have included workers' delegates elected according to a two-stage system. Elections of the workers delegates were, however, blocked by the socialists who wanted to divert the workers from the elections to the armed struggle. On 5 March 1905, the commission was dissolved without having started work. Following the assassination of his uncle, the Grand Duke Sergei Aleksandrovich, on 17 February 1905, the Tsar made new concessions. On 2 March 1905 he published the Bulygin Rescript, which promised the formation of a consultative assembly, religious tolerance, freedom of speech (in the form of language rights for the Polish minority) and a reduction in the peasants' redemption payments. On 24 and 25 May 1905, about 300 Zemstvo and municipal representatives held three meetings in Moscow, which passed a resolution, asking for popular representation at the national level. On 6 June 1905, Nicholas II had received a Zemstvo deputation. Responding to speeches by Prince Sergei Nikolaevich Trubetskoy and Mr Fyodrov, the Tsar confirmed his promise to convene an assembly of people's representatives.

Height of the revolution
Tsar Nicholas II agreed on 2 March to the creation of a State Duma of the Russian Empire but with consultative powers only. When its slight powers and limits on the electorate were revealed, unrest redoubled. The Saint Petersburg Soviet was formed and called for a general strike in October, refusal to pay taxes, and the en masse withdrawal of bank deposits.

In June and July 1905, there were many peasant uprisings in which peasants seized land and tools. Disturbances in the Russian-controlled Congress Poland culminated in June 1905 in the Łódź insurrection. Surprisingly, only one landlord was recorded as killed. Far more violence was inflicted on peasants outside the commune: 50 deaths were recorded. Anti-tsarist protests displaced onto Jewish communities in the October 1905 Kishinev pogrom.

The October Manifesto, written by Sergei Witte and Alexis Obolenskii, was presented to the Tsar on 14 October. It closely followed the demands of the Zemstvo Congress in September, granting basic civil rights, allowing the formation of political parties, extending the franchise towards universal suffrage, and establishing the Duma as the central legislative body.

The Tsar waited and argued for three days, but finally signed the manifesto on 30 October 1905, citing his desire to avoid a massacre and his realisation that there was insufficient military force available to pursue alternative options. He regretted signing the document, saying that he felt "sick with shame at this betrayal of the dynasty ... the betrayal was complete".

When the manifesto was proclaimed, there were spontaneous demonstrations of support in all the major cities. The strikes in Saint Petersburg and elsewhere officially ended or quickly collapsed. A political amnesty was also offered. The concessions came hand-in-hand with renewed, and brutal, action against the unrest. There was also a backlash from the conservative elements of society, with right-wing attacks on strikers, left-wingers, and Jews.

While the Russian liberals were satisfied by the October Manifesto and prepared for upcoming Duma elections, radical socialists and revolutionaries denounced the elections and called for an armed uprising to destroy the Empire.

Some of the November uprising of 1905 in Sevastopol, headed by retired naval Lieutenant Pyotr Schmidt, was directed against the government, while some was undirected. It included terrorism, worker strikes, peasant unrest and military mutinies, and was only suppressed after a fierce battle. The Trans-Baikal railroad fell into the hands of striker committees and demobilised soldiers returning from Manchuria after the Russo–Japanese War. The Tsar had to send a special detachment of loyal troops along the Trans-Siberian Railway to restore order.

Between 5 and 7 December, there was a general strike by Russian workers. The government sent troops on 7 December, and a bitter street-by-street fight began. A week later, the Semyonovsky Regiment was deployed, and used artillery to break up demonstrations and to shell workers' districts. On 18 December, with around a thousand people dead and parts of the city in ruins, the workers surrendered. After a final spasm in Moscow, the uprisings ended in December 1905. According to figures presented in the Duma by Professor Maksim Kovalevsky, by April 1906, more than 14,000 people had been executed and 75,000 imprisoned. Historian Brian Taylor states the number of deaths in the 1905 revolution was in the "thousands" and notes one source that puts the figure at over 13,000 deaths.

Results
Following the Revolution of 1905, the Tsar made last attempts to save his regime, and offered reforms similar to most rulers when pressured by a revolutionary movement. The military remained loyal throughout the Revolution of 1905, as shown by their shooting of revolutionaries when ordered by the Tsar, making overthrow difficult. These reforms were outlined in a precursor to the Constitution of 1906 known as the October Manifesto which created the Imperial Duma. The Russian Constitution of 1906, also known as the Fundamental Laws, set up a multiparty system and a limited constitutional monarchy. The revolutionaries were quelled and satisfied with the reforms, but it was not enough to prevent the 1917 revolution that would later topple the Tsar's regime.

Creation of Duma and appointment of Stolypin
There had been earlier attempts in establishing a Russian Duma before the October Manifesto, but these attempts faced dogged resistance. One attempt in July 1905, called the Bulygin Duma, tried to reduce the assembly into a consultative body. It also proposed limiting voting rights to those with a higher property qualification, excluding industrial workers. Both sides—the opposition and the conservatives—were not pleased with the results. Another attempt in August 1905 was almost successful, but that too died when Nicholas insisted on the Duma's functions be relegated to an advisory position. The October Manifesto, aside from granting the population the freedom of speech and assembly, proclaimed that no law would be passed without examination and approval by the Imperial Duma. The Manifesto also extended the suffrage to universal proportions, allowing for greater participation in the Duma, though the electoral law in 11 December still excluded women. Nevertheless, the tsar retained the power of veto.

Propositions for restrictions to the Duma's legislative powers remained persistent. A decree on 20 February 1906 transformed the State Council, the advisory body, into a second chamber with legislative powers "equal to those of the Duma". Not only did this transformation violate the Manifesto, but the Council became a buffer zone between the tsar and Duma, slowing whatever progress the latter could achieve. Even three days before the Duma's first session, on 24 April 1906, the Fundamental Laws further limited the assembly's movement by giving the tsar the sole power to appoint/dismiss ministers. Adding insult was the indication that the Tsar alone had control over many facets of political reins—all without the Duma's expressed permission. The trap seemed perfectly set for the unsuspecting Duma: by the time the assembly convened in 27 April, it quickly found itself unable to do much without violating the Fundamental Laws. Defeated and frustrated, the majority of the assembly voted no confidence and handed in their resignations after a few weeks on 13 May.

The attacks on the Duma were not confined to its legislative powers. By the time the Duma opened, it was missing crucial support from its populace, thanks in no small part to the government's return to Pre-Manifesto levels of suppression. The Soviets were forced to lay low for a long time, while the zemstvos turned against the Duma when the issue of land appropriation came up. The issue of land appropriation was the most contentious of the Duma's appeals. The Duma proposed that the government distribute its treasury, "monastic and imperial lands", and seize private estates as well. The Duma, in fact, was preparing to alienate some of its more affluent supporters, a decision that left the assembly without the necessary political power to be efficient.

Nicholas II remained wary of having to share power with reform-minded bureaucrats. When the pendulum in 1906 elections swung to the left, Nicholas immediately ordered the Duma's dissolution just after 73 days. Hoping to further squeeze the life out of the assembly, he appointed a tougher prime minister in Petr Stolypin as the liberal Witte's replacement. Much to Nicholas's chagrin, Stolypin attempted to bring about acts of reform (land reform), while retaining measures favorable to the regime (stepping up the number of executions of revolutionaries). After the revolution subsided, he was able to bring economic growth back to Russia's industries, a period which lasted until 1914. But Stolypin's efforts did nothing to prevent the collapse of the monarchy, nor seemed to satisfy the conservatives. Stolypin died from a bullet wound, fired by a revolutionary, Dmitry Bogrov, on 5 September 1911.

October Manifesto
Even after Bloody Sunday and defeat in the Russo-Japanese War, Nicholas II had been slow to offer a meaningful solution to the social and political crisis. At this point, he became more concerned with his personal affairs such as the illness of his son, whose struggle with haemophilia was overseen by Rasputin. Nicholas also refused to believe that the population was demanding changes in the autocratic regime, seeing "public opinion" as mainly the "intelligentsia" and believing himself to be the patronly 'father figure' to the Russian people. Sergei Witte, the minister of Russia, frustratedly argued with the Tsar that an immediate implementation of reforms was needed to retain order in the country. It was only after the Revolution started picking up steam that Nicholas was forced to make concessions by writing the October Manifesto.

Issued on 17 October 1905, the Manifesto stated that the government would grant the population reforms such as the right to vote and to convene in assemblies. Its main provisions were:
 * 1) The granting of the population "inviolable personal rights" including freedom of conscience, speech, and assemblage
 * 2) Giving the population who were previously cut off from doing so participation in the newly formed Duma
 * 3) Ensuring that no law would be passed without the consent of the Imperial Duma.

Despite what seemed to be a moment for celebration for Russia's population and the reformists, the Manifesto was rife with problems. Aside from the absence of the word "constitution", one issue with the manifesto was its timing. By October 1905, Nicholas was already dealing with a revolution. Another problem surfaced in the conscience of Nicholas himself: Witte said in 1911 that the manifesto was written only to get the pressure off the monarch's back, that it was not a "voluntary act". In fact, the writers hoped that the Manifesto would sow discord into "the camp of the autocracy's enemies" and bring order back to Russia.

One immediate effect it did have, for a while, was the start of the Days of Freedom, a six-week period from 17 October to early December. This period witnessed an unprecedented level of freedom on all publications—revolutionary papers, brochures, etc.—even though the tsar officially retained the power to censor provocative material. This opportunity allowed the press to address the tsar, and government officials, in a harsh, critical tone previously unheard of. The freedom of speech also opened the floodgates for meetings and organised political parties. In Moscow alone, over 400 meetings took place in the first four weeks. Some of the political parties that came out of these meetings were the Constitutional Democrats (Kadets), Social Democrats, Socialist Revolutionaries, Octobrists, and the far-rightist Union of the Russian People.

Among all the groups that benefited most from the Days of Freedoms were the labour unions. In fact, the Days of Freedom witnessed unionisation in the history of the Russian Empire at its apex. At least 67 unions were established in Moscow, as well as 58 in St. Petersburg; the majority of both combined were formed in November 1905 alone. For the Soviets, it was a watershed period of time: nearly 50 of the unions in St. Petersburg came under Soviet control, while in Moscow, the Soviets had around 80,000 members. This large sector of power allowed the Soviets enough clout to form their own militias. In St. Petersburg alone, the Soviets claimed around 6,000 armed members with the purpose of protecting the meetings.

Perhaps empowered in their newfound window of opportunity, the St. Petersburg Soviets, along with other socialist parties, called for armed struggles against the Tsarist government, a war call that no doubt alarmed the government. Not only were the workers motivated, but the Days of Freedom also had an earthquake-like effect on the peasant collective as well. Seeing an opening in the autocracy's waning authority thanks to the Manifesto, the peasants, with a political organisation, took to the streets in revolt. In response, the government exerted its forces in campaigns to subdue and repress both the peasants and the workers. Consequences were now in full force: with a pretext in their hands, the government spent the month of December 1905 regaining the level of authority once lost to Bloody Sunday.

Ironically, the writers of the October Manifesto were caught off guard by the surge in revolts. One of the main reasons for writing the October Manifesto bordered on the government's "fear of the revolutionary movement". In fact, many officials believed this fear was practically the sole reason for the Manifesto's creation in the first place. Among those more scared was Dmitri Feodorovich Trepov, governor general of St. Petersburg and deputy minister of the interior. Trepov urged Nicholas II to stick to the principles in the Manifesto, for "every retreat ... would be hazardous to the dynasty".

Russian Constitution of 1906
The Russian Constitution of 1906 was published on the eve of the convocation of the First Duma. The new Fundamental Law was enacted to institute promises of the October Manifesto as well as add new reforms. The Tsar was confirmed as absolute leader, with complete control of the executive, foreign policy, church, and the armed forces. The structure of the Duma was changed, becoming a lower chamber below the Council of Ministers, and was half-elected, half-appointed by the Tsar. Legislations had to be approved by the Duma, the council, and the Tsar to become law. The Fundamental State Laws were the "culmination of the whole sequence of events set in motion in October 1905 and which consolidated the new status quo". The introduction of The Russian Constitution of 1906 was not simply an institution of the October Manifesto. The introduction of the constitution states (and thus emphasizes) the following:
 * The Russian State is one and indivisible.
 * The Grand Duchy of Finland, while comprising an inseparable part of the Russian State, is governed in its internal affairs by special decrees based on special legislation.
 * The Russian language is the common language of the state, and its use is compulsory in the army, the navy and all state and public institutions. The use of local (regional) languages and dialects in state and public institutions are determined by special legislation.

The Constitution did not mention any of the provisions of the October Manifesto. While it did enact the provisions laid out previously, its sole purpose seems again to be the propaganda for the monarchy and to simply not fall back on prior promises. The provisions and the new constitutional monarchy did not satisfy Russians and Lenin. The Constitution lasted until the fall of the empire in 1917.

Rise of political violence
The years 1906 and 1907 saw a decline of mass movements, strikes and protests, and a rise of overt political violence. Combat groups such as the SR Combat Organization carried out many assassinations targeting civil servants and police, and robberies. Between 1906 and 1909, revolutionaries killed 7,293 people, of whom 2,640 were officials, and wounded 8,061. Notable victims included:
 * Nikolai Bobrikov – Governor-General of Finland. Killed 30 June 1904 in Helsinki.
 * Vyacheslav von Plehve – Minister of Interior. Killed 10 August 1904 in Saint Petersburg.
 * Grand Duke Sergei Alexandrovich of Russia – Killed 17 February 1905 in Moscow.
 * Eliel Soisalon-Soininen – Procurator of Justice of Finland. Killed 19 February 1905 in Helsinki.
 * Viktor Sakharov – former war minister. Killed 5 December 1905 in Saratov
 * Admiral Chukhnin – the commander of the Black Sea Fleet. Killed 24 July 1906 in Sevastopol
 * Aleksey Ignatyev – Killed 22 December 1906 in Tver

Repression
The years of revolution were marked by a dramatic rise in the numbers of death sentences and executions. Different figures on the number of executions were compared by Senator Nikolai Tagantsev, and are listed in the table.

These numbers reflect only executions of civilians, and do not include a large number of summary executions by punitive army detachments and executions of military mutineers. Peter Kropotkin, an anarchist, noted that official statistics excluded executions conducted during punitive expeditions, especially in Siberia, Caucasus and the Baltic provinces. By 1906 some 4,509 political prisoners were incarcerated in Russian Poland, 20 percent of the empire's total.

Ivanovo Soviet
Ivanovo Voznesensk was known as the 'Russian Manchester' for its textile mills. In 1905, its local revolutionaries were overwhelmingly Bolshevik. It was the first Bolshevik branch in which workers outnumbered intellectuals.
 * 11 May 1905: The 'Group', the revolutionary leadership, called for the workers at all the textile mills to strike.
 * 12 May: The strike begins. Strike leaders meet in the local woods.
 * 13 May: 40,000 workers assemble before the Administration Building to give Svirskii, the regional factory inspector, a list of demands.
 * 14 May: Workers' delegates are elected. Svirskii had suggested they do so, as he wanted people to negotiate with. A mass meeting is held in Administration Square. Svirskii tells them the mill owners will not meet their demands but will negotiate with elected mill delegates, who will be immune to prosecution, according to the governor.
 * 15 May: Svirskii tells the strikers they can negotiate only about each factory in turn, but they can hold elections wherever. The strikers elect delegates to represent each mill while they are still out in the streets. Later the delegates elect a chairman.
 * 17 May: The meetings are moved to the bank of the Talka River, on suggestion by the police chief.
 * 27 May: The delegates' meeting house is closed.
 * 3 June: Cossacks break up a workers' meeting, arresting over 20 men. Workers start sabotaging telephone wires and burn down a mill.
 * 9 June: The police chief resigns.
 * 12 June: All prisoners are released. Most mill owners flee to Moscow. Neither side gives in.
 * 27 June: Workers agree to stop striking 1 July.

Poland

The 1905–1907 revolution was at the time the largest wave of strikes and widest emancipatory movement Poland had ever seen, and it would remain so until the 1970s and 1980s. In 1905, 93.2% of Congress Poland's industrial workers went on strike. The first phase of the revolution consisted primarily of mass strikes, rallies, demonstrations—later this evolved into street skirmishes with the police and army as well as bomb assassinations and robberies of transports carrying money to tsarist financial institutions.

One of the major events of that period was the insurrection in Łódź in June 1905, but unrest happened in many other areas too. Warsaw was also an active centre of resistance, particularly in terms of strikes, whereas further south the Republika Ostrowiecka and Republika Zagłębiowska were proclaimed (tsarist control was later restored in these areas when martial law was introduced). Until November 1905, Poland was at the vanguard of the revolutionary movement in the Russian Empire despite the vast military numbers thrown against it; even when the upheaval began its downfall, larger strikes happened more often in Poland than they did in other parts of the Empire in the years 1906–1907.

Due to its reach, violence, radicalism, and effects, some Polish historians even consider the events of the 1905 revolution in Poland a fourth Polish uprising against the Russian Empire. Rosa Luxemburg described Poland as "one of the most explosive centres of the revolutionary movement" which "in 1905 marched at the head of the Russian Revolution".

Finland
In the Grand Duchy of Finland, the Social Democrats organised the general strike of 1905 (30 October – 6 November). The Red Guards were formed, led by captain Johan Kock. During the general strike, the Red Declaration, written by Finnish politician and journalist Yrjö Mäkelin, was published in Tampere, demanding dissolution of the Senate of Finland, universal suffrage, political freedoms, and abolition of censorship. Leo Mechelin, leader of the constitutionalists, crafted the November Manifesto: the revolution resulted in the abolition of the Diet of Finland and of the four Estates, and to the creation of the modern Parliament of Finland. It also resulted in a temporary halt to the Russification policy that Russia had started in 1899.

On 30 July 1906, Russian artillerymen and military engineers rose in revolt in the fortress of Sveaborg (later called Suomenlinna), Helsinki. The Finnish Red Guards supported the Sveaborg Rebellion with a general strike, but the mutiny was quelled within 60 hours by loyal troops and ships of the Baltic Fleet.

Estonia
In the Governorate of Estonia, Estonians called for freedom of the press and assembly, for universal suffrage, and for national autonomy. On 29 October, the Russian army opened fire in a meeting on a street market in Tallinn in which about 8 000–10 000 people participated, killing 94 and injuring over 200. The October Manifesto was supported in Estonia and the Estonian flag was displayed publicly for the first time. Jaan Tõnisson used the new political freedoms to widen the rights of Estonians by establishing the first Estonian political party – National Progress Party.

Another, more radical political organisation, the Estonian Social Democratic Workers' Union was founded as well. The moderate supporters of Tõnisson and the more radical supporters of Jaan Teemant could not agree about how to continue with the revolution, and only agreed that both wanted to limit the rights of Baltic Germans and to end Russification. The radical views were publicly welcomed and in December 1905, martial law was declared in Tallinn. A total of 160 manors were looted, resulting in ca. 400 workers and peasants being killed by the army. Estonian gains from the revolution were minimal, but the tense stability that prevailed between 1905 and 1917 allowed Estonians to advance the aspiration of national statehood.

Latvia
Following the shooting of demonstrators in St. Petersburg, a wide-scale general strike began in Riga. On 26 January, Russian army troops opened fire on demonstrators killing 73 and injuring 200 people. During the middle of 1905, the focus of revolutionary events moved to the countryside with mass meetings and demonstrations. 470 new parish administrative bodies were elected in 94% of the parishes in Latvia. The Congress of Parish Representatives was held in Riga in November. In autumn 1905, armed conflict between the Baltic German nobility and the Latvian peasants began in the rural areas of Livonia and Courland. In Courland, the peasants seized or surrounded several towns. In Livonia, the fighters controlled the Rūjiena-Pärnu railway line. Martial law was declared in Courland in August 1905, and in Livonia in late November. Special punitive expeditions were dispatched in mid-December to suppress the movement. They executed 1170 people without trial or investigation and burned 300 peasant homes. Thousands were exiled to Siberia. Many Latvian intellectuals only escaped by fleeing to Western Europe or US. In 1906, the revolutionary movement gradually subsided.

Cultural portrayal

 * Artists Valentin Serov, Boris Kustodiev, Ivan Bilibin and Mstislav Dobuzhinsky published their works dedicated to the 1905 Revolution in the satirical magazine Zhupel.
 * Novels Mother (1907) by Maxim Gorky and The Silver Dove (1909) by Andrei Bely were written under the impression of the 1905 Revolution. The same authors depicted it in their later works: Andrei Bely in his Petersburg (1913/1922) and Maxim Gorky in The Life of Klim Samgin (1927–1931).
 * Battleship Potemkin (1925), Sergei Eisenstein originally intended this film to be a pro-Bolshevik narrative of the 1905 Russian Revolution.
 * Doctor Zhivago, a 1957 novel by Boris Pasternak which takes place from the years between 1902 and World War II.
 * Symphony No. 11 (Shostakovich), subtitled The Year 1905, written in 1957.
 * Rouletabille chez le Tsar, also known as The Secret of the Night was the third novel of Gaston Leroux's popular Rouletabille detective series set in 1905 during the revolution and drew upon Leroux's own experience reporting on the event as a journalist for France's Le Matin magazine.

title: Russian Revolution of 1905


text:
Henri Poincaré

Jules Henri Poincaré (, ; ; 29 April 1854 – 17 July 1912) was a French mathematician, theoretical physicist, engineer, and philosopher of science. He is often described as a polymath, and in mathematics as "The Last Universalist", since he excelled in all fields of the discipline as it existed during his lifetime. Due to his scientific success, influence and his discoveries, he has been deemed "the philosopher par excellence of modern science."

As a mathematician and physicist, he made many original fundamental contributions to pure and applied mathematics, mathematical physics, and celestial mechanics. In his research on the three-body problem, Poincaré became the first person to discover a chaotic deterministic system which laid the foundations of modern chaos theory. He is also considered to be one of the founders of the field of topology.

Poincaré made clear the importance of paying attention to the invariance of laws of physics under different transformations, and was the first to present the Lorentz transformations in their modern symmetrical form. Poincaré discovered the remaining relativistic velocity transformations and recorded them in a letter to Hendrik Lorentz in 1905. Thus he obtained perfect invariance of all of Maxwell's equations, an important step in the formulation of the theory of special relativity. In 1905, Poincaré first proposed gravitational waves (ondes gravifiques) emanating from a body and propagating at the speed of light as being required by the Lorentz transformations. In 1912, he wrote an influential paper which provided a mathematical argument for quantum mechanics.

The Poincaré group used in physics and mathematics was named after him.

Early in the 20th century he formulated the Poincaré conjecture, which became, over time, one of the famous unsolved problems in mathematics. It was solved in 2002–2003 by Grigori Perelman.

Life
Poincaré was born on 29 April 1854 in Cité Ducale neighborhood, Nancy, Meurthe-et-Moselle, into an influential French family. His father Léon Poincaré (1828–1892) was a professor of medicine at the University of Nancy. His younger sister Aline married the spiritual philosopher Émile Boutroux. Another notable member of Henri's family was his cousin, Raymond Poincaré, a fellow member of the Académie française, who was President of France from 1913 to 1920, and three-time Prime Minister of France between 1913 and 1929.

Education

During his childhood he was seriously ill for a time with diphtheria and received special instruction from his mother, Eugénie Launois (1830–1897).

In 1862, Henri entered the Lycée in Nancy (now renamed the Lycée Henri-Poincaré in his honour, along with Henri Poincaré University, also in Nancy). He spent eleven years at the Lycée and during this time he proved to be one of the top students in every topic he studied. He excelled in written composition. His mathematics teacher described him as a "monster of mathematics" and he won first prizes in the concours général, a competition between the top pupils from all the Lycées across France. His poorest subjects were music and physical education, where he was described as "average at best". However, poor eyesight and a tendency towards absentmindedness may explain these difficulties. He graduated from the Lycée in 1871 with a baccalauréat in both letters and sciences.

During the Franco-Prussian War of 1870, he served alongside his father in the Ambulance Corps.

Poincaré entered the École Polytechnique as the top qualifier in 1873 and graduated in 1875. There he studied mathematics as a student of Charles Hermite, continuing to excel and publishing his first paper (Démonstration nouvelle des propriétés de l'indicatrice d'une surface) in 1874. From November 1875 to June 1878 he studied at the École des Mines, while continuing the study of mathematics in addition to the mining engineering syllabus, and received the degree of ordinary mining engineer in March 1879.

As a graduate of the École des Mines, he joined the Corps des Mines as an inspector for the Vesoul region in northeast France. He was on the scene of a mining disaster at Magny in August 1879 in which 18 miners died. He carried out the official investigation into the accident in a characteristically thorough and humane way.

At the same time, Poincaré was preparing for his Doctorate in Science in mathematics under the supervision of Charles Hermite. His doctoral thesis was in the field of differential equations. It was named Sur les propriétés des fonctions définies par les équations aux différences partielles. Poincaré devised a new way of studying the properties of these equations. He not only faced the question of determining the integral of such equations, but also was the first person to study their general geometric properties. He realised that they could be used to model the behaviour of multiple bodies in free motion within the Solar System. Poincaré graduated from the University of Paris in 1879.

First scientific achievements
After receiving his degree, Poincaré began teaching as junior lecturer in mathematics at the University of Caen in Normandy (in December 1879). At the same time he published his first major article concerning the treatment of a class of automorphic functions.

There, in Caen, he met his future wife, Louise Poulain d'Andecy (1857–1934), granddaughter of Isidore Geoffroy Saint-Hilaire and great-granddaughter of Étienne Geoffroy Saint-Hilaire and on 20 April 1881, they married. Together they had four children: Jeanne (born 1887), Yvonne (born 1889), Henriette (born 1891), and Léon (born 1893).

Poincaré immediately established himself among the greatest mathematicians of Europe, attracting the attention of many prominent mathematicians. In 1881 Poincaré was invited to take a teaching position at the Faculty of Sciences of the University of Paris; he accepted the invitation. During the years 1883 to 1897, he taught mathematical analysis in the École Polytechnique.

In 1881–1882, Poincaré created a new branch of mathematics: qualitative theory of differential equations. He showed how it is possible to derive the most important information about the behavior of a family of solutions without having to solve the equation (since this may not always be possible). He successfully used this approach to problems in celestial mechanics and mathematical physics.

Career
He never fully abandoned his career in the mining administration to mathematics. He worked at the Ministry of Public Services as an engineer in charge of northern railway development from 1881 to 1885. He eventually became chief engineer of the Corps des Mines in 1893 and inspector general in 1910.

Beginning in 1881 and for the rest of his career, he taught at the University of Paris (the Sorbonne). He was initially appointed as the maître de conférences d'analyse (associate professor of analysis). Eventually, he held the chairs of Physical and Experimental Mechanics, Mathematical Physics and Theory of Probability, and Celestial Mechanics and Astronomy.

In 1887, at the young age of 32, Poincaré was elected to the French Academy of Sciences. He became its president in 1906, and was elected to the Académie française on 5 March 1908.

In 1887, he won Oscar II, King of Sweden's mathematical competition for a resolution of the three-body problem concerning the free motion of multiple orbiting bodies. (See three-body problem section below.)

In 1893, Poincaré joined the French Bureau des Longitudes, which engaged him in the synchronisation of time around the world. In 1897 Poincaré backed an unsuccessful proposal for the decimalisation of circular measure, and hence time and longitude. It was this post which led him to consider the question of establishing international time zones and the synchronisation of time between bodies in relative motion. (See work on relativity section below.)

In 1904, he intervened in the trials of Alfred Dreyfus, attacking the spurious scientific claims regarding evidence brought against Dreyfus.

Poincaré was the President of the Société Astronomique de France (SAF), the French astronomical society, from 1901 to 1903.

Students
Poincaré had two notable doctoral students at the University of Paris, Louis Bachelier (1900) and Dimitrie Pompeiu (1905).

Death
In 1912, Poincaré underwent surgery for a prostate problem and subsequently died from an embolism on 17 July 1912, in Paris. He was 58 years of age. He is buried in the Poincaré family vault in the Cemetery of Montparnasse, Paris, in section 16 close to the gate Rue Émile-Richard.

A former French Minister of Education, Claude Allègre, proposed in 2004 that Poincaré be reburied in the Panthéon in Paris, which is reserved for French citizens of the highest honour.

Summary
Poincaré made many contributions to different fields of pure and applied mathematics such as: celestial mechanics, fluid mechanics, optics, electricity, telegraphy, capillarity, elasticity, thermodynamics, potential theory, quantum theory, theory of relativity and physical cosmology.

He was also a populariser of mathematics and physics and wrote several books for the lay public.

Among the specific topics he contributed to are the following:
 * algebraic topology (a field that Poincaré virtually invented)
 * the theory of analytic functions of several complex variables
 * the theory of abelian functions
 * algebraic geometry
 * the Poincaré conjecture, proven in 2003 by Grigori Perelman.
 * Poincaré recurrence theorem
 * hyperbolic geometry
 * number theory
 * the three-body problem
 * the theory of diophantine equations
 * electromagnetism
 * the special theory of relativity
 * the fundamental group
 * In the field of differential equations Poincaré has given many results that are critical for the qualitative theory of differential equations, for example the Poincaré sphere and the Poincaré map.
 * Poincaré on "everybody's belief" in the Normal Law of Errors (see normal distribution for an account of that "law")
 * Published an influential paper providing a novel mathematical argument in support of quantum mechanics.

Three-body problem
The problem of finding the general solution to the motion of more than two orbiting bodies in the Solar System had eluded mathematicians since Newton's time. This was known originally as the three-body problem and later the n-body problem, where n is any number of more than two orbiting bodies. The n-body solution was considered very important and challenging at the close of the 19th century. Indeed, in 1887, in honour of his 60th birthday, Oscar II, King of Sweden, advised by Gösta Mittag-Leffler, established a prize for anyone who could find the solution to the problem. The announcement was quite specific:

"Given a system of arbitrarily many mass points that attract each according to Newton's law, under the assumption that no two points ever collide, try to find a representation of the coordinates of each point as a series in a variable that is some known function of time and for all of whose values the series converges uniformly."

In case the problem could not be solved, any other important contribution to classical mechanics would then be considered to be prizeworthy. The prize was finally awarded to Poincaré, even though he did not solve the original problem. One of the judges, the distinguished Karl Weierstrass, said, "This work cannot indeed be considered as furnishing the complete solution of the question proposed, but that it is nevertheless of such importance that its publication will inaugurate a new era in the history of celestial mechanics." (The first version of his contribution even contained a serious error; for details see the article by Diacu and the book by Barrow-Green ). The version finally printed contained many important ideas which led to the theory of chaos. The problem as stated originally was finally solved by Karl F. Sundman for n = 3 in 1912 and was generalised to the case of n > 3 bodies by Qiudong Wang in the 1990s. The series solutions have very slow convergence. It would take millions of terms to determine the motion of the particles for even very short intervals of time, so they are unusable in numerical work.

Local time
Poincaré's work at the Bureau des Longitudes on establishing international time zones led him to consider how clocks at rest on the Earth, which would be moving at different speeds relative to absolute space (or the "luminiferous aether"), could be synchronised. At the same time Dutch theorist Hendrik Lorentz was developing Maxwell's theory into a theory of the motion of charged particles ("electrons" or "ions"), and their interaction with radiation. In 1895 Lorentz had introduced an auxiliary quantity (without physical interpretation) called "local time" $$t^\prime = t-v x/c^2 \,$$ and introduced the hypothesis of length contraction to explain the failure of optical and electrical experiments to detect motion relative to the aether (see Michelson–Morley experiment). Poincaré was a constant interpreter (and sometimes friendly critic) of Lorentz's theory. Poincaré as a philosopher was interested in the "deeper meaning". Thus he interpreted Lorentz's theory and in so doing he came up with many insights that are now associated with special relativity. In The Measure of Time (1898), Poincaré said, "A little reflection is sufficient to understand that all these affirmations have by themselves no meaning. They can have one only as the result of a convention." He also argued that scientists have to set the constancy of the speed of light as a postulate to give physical theories the simplest form. Based on these assumptions he discussed in 1900 Lorentz's "wonderful invention" of local time and remarked that it arose when moving clocks are synchronised by exchanging light signals assumed to travel with the same speed in both directions in a moving frame.

Principle of relativity and Lorentz transformations
In 1881 Poincaré described hyperbolic geometry in terms of the hyperboloid model, formulating transformations leaving invariant the Lorentz interval $$x^2+y^2-z^2=-1$$, which makes them mathematically equivalent to the Lorentz transformations in 2+1 dimensions. In addition, Poincaré's other models of hyperbolic geometry (Poincaré disk model, Poincaré half-plane model) as well as the Beltrami–Klein model can be related to the relativistic velocity space (see Gyrovector space).

In 1892 Poincaré developed a mathematical theory of light including polarization. His vision of the action of polarizers and retarders, acting on a sphere representing polarized states, is called the Poincaré sphere. It was shown that the Poincaré sphere possesses an underlying Lorentzian symmetry, by which it can be used as a geometrical representation of Lorentz transformations and velocity additions.

He discussed the "principle of relative motion" in two papers in 1900 and named it the principle of relativity in 1904, according to which no physical experiment can discriminate between a state of uniform motion and a state of rest. In 1905 Poincaré wrote to Lorentz about Lorentz's paper of 1904, which Poincaré described as a "paper of supreme importance". In this letter he pointed out an error Lorentz had made when he had applied his transformation to one of Maxwell's equations, that for charge-occupied space, and also questioned the time dilation factor given by Lorentz. In a second letter to Lorentz, Poincaré gave his own reason why Lorentz's time dilation factor was indeed correct after all—it was necessary to make the Lorentz transformation form a group—and he gave what is now known as the relativistic velocity-addition law. Poincaré later delivered a paper at the meeting of the Academy of Sciences in Paris on 5 June 1905 in which these issues were addressed. In the published version of that he wrote:

The essential point, established by Lorentz, is that the equations of the electromagnetic field are not altered by a certain transformation (which I will call by the name of Lorentz) of the form:
 * $$x^\prime = k\ell\left(x + \varepsilon t\right)\!,\;t^\prime = k\ell\left(t + \varepsilon x\right)\!,\;y^\prime = \ell y,\;z^\prime = \ell z,\;k = 1/\sqrt{1-\varepsilon^2}.$$

and showed that the arbitrary function $$\ell\left(\varepsilon\right)$$ must be unity for all $$\varepsilon$$ (Lorentz had set $$\ell = 1$$ by a different argument) to make the transformations form a group. In an enlarged version of the paper that appeared in 1906 Poincaré pointed out that the combination $$x^2+ y^2+ z^2- c^2t^2$$ is invariant. He noted that a Lorentz transformation is merely a rotation in four-dimensional space about the origin by introducing $$ct\sqrt{-1}$$ as a fourth imaginary coordinate, and he used an early form of four-vectors. Poincaré expressed a lack of interest in a four-dimensional reformulation of his new mechanics in 1907, because in his opinion the translation of physics into the language of four-dimensional geometry would entail too much effort for limited profit. So it was Hermann Minkowski who worked out the consequences of this notion in 1907.

Mass–energy relation
Like others before, Poincaré (1900) discovered a relation between mass and electromagnetic energy. While studying the conflict between the action/reaction principle and Lorentz ether theory, he tried to determine whether the center of gravity still moves with a uniform velocity when electromagnetic fields are included. He noticed that the action/reaction principle does not hold for matter alone, but that the electromagnetic field has its own momentum. Poincaré concluded that the electromagnetic field energy of an electromagnetic wave behaves like a fictitious fluid (fluide fictif) with a mass density of E/c2. If the center of mass frame is defined by both the mass of matter and the mass of the fictitious fluid, and if the fictitious fluid is indestructible—it's neither created or destroyed—then the motion of the center of mass frame remains uniform. But electromagnetic energy can be converted into other forms of energy. So Poincaré assumed that there exists a non-electric energy fluid at each point of space, into which electromagnetic energy can be transformed and which also carries a mass proportional to the energy. In this way, the motion of the center of mass remains uniform. Poincaré said that one should not be too surprised by these assumptions, since they are only mathematical fictions.

However, Poincaré's resolution led to a paradox when changing frames: if a Hertzian oscillator radiates in a certain direction, it will suffer a recoil from the inertia of the fictitious fluid. Poincaré performed a Lorentz boost (to order v/c) to the frame of the moving source. He noted that energy conservation holds in both frames, but that the law of conservation of momentum is violated. This would allow perpetual motion, a notion which he abhorred. The laws of nature would have to be different in the frames of reference, and the relativity principle would not hold. Therefore, he argued that also in this case there has to be another compensating mechanism in the ether.

Poincaré himself came back to this topic in his St. Louis lecture (1904). He rejected the possibility that energy carries mass and criticized his own solution to compensate the above-mentioned problems:

"The apparatus will recoil as if it were a cannon and the projected energy a ball, and that contradicts the principle of Newton, since our present projectile has no mass; it is not matter, it is energy. [..] Shall we say that the space which separates the oscillator from the receiver and which the disturbance must traverse in passing from one to the other, is not empty, but is filled not only with ether, but with air, or even in inter-planetary space with some subtile, yet ponderable fluid; that this matter receives the shock, as does the receiver, at the moment the energy reaches it, and recoils, when the disturbance leaves it? That would save Newton's principle, but it is not true. If the energy during its propagation remained always attached to some material substratum, this matter would carry the light along with it and Fizeau has shown, at least for the air, that there is nothing of the kind. Michelson and Morley have since confirmed this. We might also suppose that the motions of matter proper were exactly compensated by those of the ether; but that would lead us to the same considerations as those made a moment ago. The principle, if thus interpreted, could explain anything, since whatever the visible motions we could imagine hypothetical motions to compensate them. But if it can explain anything, it will allow us to foretell nothing; it will not allow us to choose between the various possible hypotheses, since it explains everything in advance. It therefore becomes useless."

In the above quote he refers to the Hertz assumption of total aether entrainment that was falsified by the Fizeau experiment but that experiment does indeed show that that light is partially "carried along" with a substance. Finally in 1908 he revisits the problem and ends with abandoning the principle of reaction altogether in favor of supporting a solution based in the inertia of aether itself.

"But we have seen above that Fizeau's experiment does not permit of our retaining the theory of Hertz; it is necessary therefore to adopt the theory of Lorentz, and consequently to renounce the principle of reaction."

He also discussed two other unexplained effects: (1) non-conservation of mass implied by Lorentz's variable mass $$\gamma m$$, Abraham's theory of variable mass and Kaufmann's experiments on the mass of fast moving electrons and (2) the non-conservation of energy in the radium experiments of Marie Curie.

It was Albert Einstein's concept of mass–energy equivalence (1905) that a body losing energy as radiation or heat was losing mass of amount m = E/c2 that resolved Poincaré's paradox, without using any compensating mechanism within the ether. The Hertzian oscillator loses mass in the emission process, and momentum is conserved in any frame. However, concerning Poincaré's solution of the Center of Gravity problem, Einstein noted that Poincaré's formulation and his own from 1906 were mathematically equivalent.

Gravitational waves
In 1905 Poincaré first proposed gravitational waves (ondes gravifiques) emanating from a body and propagating at the speed of light. He wrote: "It has become important to examine this hypothesis more closely and in particular to ask in what ways it would require us to modify the laws of gravitation. That is what I have tried to determine; at first I was led to assume that the propagation of gravitation is not instantaneous, but happens with the speed of light."

Poincaré and Einstein
Einstein's first paper on relativity was published three months after Poincaré's short paper, but before Poincaré's longer version. Einstein relied on the principle of relativity to derive the Lorentz transformations and used a similar clock synchronisation procedure (Einstein synchronisation) to the one that Poincaré (1900) had described, but Einstein's paper was remarkable in that it contained no references at all. Poincaré never acknowledged Einstein's work on special relativity. However, Einstein expressed sympathy with Poincaré's outlook obliquely in a letter to Hans Vaihinger on 3 May 1919, when Einstein considered Vaihinger's general outlook to be close to his own and Poincaré's to be close to Vaihinger's. In public, Einstein acknowledged Poincaré posthumously in the text of a lecture in 1921 titled "Geometrie und Erfahrung (Geometry and Experience)" in connection with non-Euclidean geometry, but not in connection with special relativity. A few years before his death, Einstein commented on Poincaré as being one of the pioneers of relativity, saying "Lorentz had already recognized that the transformation named after him is essential for the analysis of Maxwell's equations, and Poincaré deepened this insight still further ....".

Assessments on Poincaré and relativity
Poincaré's work in the development of special relativity is well recognised, though most historians stress that despite many similarities with Einstein's work, the two had very different research agendas and interpretations of the work. Poincaré developed a similar physical interpretation of local time and noticed the connection to signal velocity, but contrary to Einstein he continued to use the ether-concept in his papers and argued that clocks at rest in the ether show the "true" time, and moving clocks show the local time. So Poincaré tried to keep the relativity principle in accordance with classical concepts, while Einstein developed a mathematically equivalent kinematics based on the new physical concepts of the relativity of space and time.

While this is the view of most historians, a minority go much further, such as E. T. Whittaker, who held that Poincaré and Lorentz were the true discoverers of relativity.

Algebra and number theory
Poincaré introduced group theory to physics, and was the first to study the group of Lorentz transformations. He also made major contributions to the theory of discrete groups and their representations.

Topology
The subject is clearly defined by Felix Klein in his "Erlangen Program" (1872): the geometry invariants of arbitrary continuous transformation, a kind of geometry. The term "topology" was introduced, as suggested by Johann Benedict Listing, instead of previously used "Analysis situs". Some important concepts were introduced by Enrico Betti and Bernhard Riemann. But the foundation of this science, for a space of any dimension, was created by Poincaré. His first article on this topic appeared in 1894.

His research in geometry led to the abstract topological definition of homotopy and homology. He also first introduced the basic concepts and invariants of combinatorial topology, such as Betti numbers and the fundamental group. Poincaré proved a formula relating the number of edges, vertices and faces of n-dimensional polyhedron (the Euler–Poincaré theorem) and gave the first precise formulation of the intuitive notion of dimension.

Astronomy and celestial mechanics
Poincaré published two now classical monographs, "New Methods of Celestial Mechanics" (1892–1899) and "Lectures on Celestial Mechanics" (1905–1910). In them, he successfully applied the results of their research to the problem of the motion of three bodies and studied in detail the behavior of solutions (frequency, stability, asymptotic, and so on). They introduced the small parameter method, fixed points, integral invariants, variational equations, the convergence of the asymptotic expansions. Generalizing a theory of Bruns (1887), Poincaré showed that the three-body problem is not integrable. In other words, the general solution of the three-body problem can not be expressed in terms of algebraic and transcendental functions through unambiguous coordinates and velocities of the bodies. His work in this area was the first major achievement in celestial mechanics since Isaac Newton.

These monographs include an idea of Poincaré, which later became the basis for mathematical "chaos theory" (see, in particular, the Poincaré recurrence theorem) and the general theory of dynamical systems. Poincaré authored important works on astronomy for the equilibrium figures of a gravitating rotating fluid. He introduced the important concept of bifurcation points and proved the existence of equilibrium figures such as the non-ellipsoids, including ring-shaped and pear-shaped figures, and their stability. For this discovery, Poincaré received the Gold Medal of the Royal Astronomical Society (1900).

Differential equations and mathematical physics
After defending his doctoral thesis on the study of singular points of the system of differential equations, Poincaré wrote a series of memoirs under the title "On curves defined by differential equations" (1881–1882). In these articles, he built a new branch of mathematics, called "qualitative theory of differential equations". Poincaré showed that even if the differential equation can not be solved in terms of known functions, yet from the very form of the equation, a wealth of information about the properties and behavior of the solutions can be found. In particular, Poincaré investigated the nature of the trajectories of the integral curves in the plane, gave a classification of singular points (saddle, focus, center, node), introduced the concept of a limit cycle and the loop index, and showed that the number of limit cycles is always finite, except for some special cases. Poincaré also developed a general theory of integral invariants and solutions of the variational equations. For the finite-difference equations, he created a new direction – the asymptotic analysis of the solutions. He applied all these achievements to study practical problems of mathematical physics and celestial mechanics, and the methods used were the basis of its topological works.

Character
Poincaré's work habits have been compared to a bee flying from flower to flower. Poincaré was interested in the way his mind worked; he studied his habits and gave a talk about his observations in 1908 at the Institute of General Psychology in Paris. He linked his way of thinking to how he made several discoveries.

The mathematician Darboux claimed he was un intuitif (an intuitive), arguing that this is demonstrated by the fact that he worked so often by visual representation. Jacques Hadamard wrote that Poincaré's research demonstrated marvelous clarity and Poincaré himself wrote that he believed that logic was not a way to invent but a way to structure ideas and that logic limits ideas.

Toulouse's characterisation
Poincaré's mental organisation was interesting not only to Poincaré himself but also to Édouard Toulouse, a psychologist of the Psychology Laboratory of the School of Higher Studies in Paris. Toulouse wrote a book entitled Henri Poincaré (1910). In it, he discussed Poincaré's regular schedule:
 * He worked during the same times each day in short periods of time. He undertook mathematical research for four hours a day, between 10 a.m. and noon then again from 5 p.m. to 7 p.m.. He would read articles in journals later in the evening.
 * His normal work habit was to solve a problem completely in his head, then commit the completed problem to paper.
 * He was ambidextrous and nearsighted.
 * His ability to visualise what he heard proved particularly useful when he attended lectures, since his eyesight was so poor that he could not see properly what the lecturer wrote on the blackboard.

These abilities were offset to some extent by his shortcomings:
 * He was physically clumsy and artistically inept.
 * He was always in a rush and disliked going back for changes or corrections.
 * He never spent a long time on a problem since he believed that the subconscious would continue working on the problem while he consciously worked on another problem.

In addition, Toulouse stated that most mathematicians worked from principles already established while Poincaré started from basic principles each time (O'Connor et al., 2002).

His method of thinking is well summarised as:

"Habitué à négliger les détails et à ne regarder que les cimes, il passait de l'une à l'autre avec une promptitude surprenante et les faits qu'il découvrait se groupant d'eux-mêmes autour de leur centre étaient instantanément et automatiquement classés dans sa mémoire (accustomed to neglecting details and to looking only at mountain tops, he went from one peak to another with surprising rapidity, and the facts he discovered, clustering around their center, were instantly and automatically pigeonholed in his memory)."

Honours
Awards
 * Oscar II, King of Sweden's mathematical competition (1887)
 * Foreign member of the Royal Netherlands Academy of Arts and Sciences (1897)
 * American Philosophical Society (1899)
 * Gold Medal of the Royal Astronomical Society of London (1900)
 * Bolyai Prize (1905)
 * Matteucci Medal (1905)
 * French Academy of Sciences (1906)
 * Académie française (1909)
 * Bruce Medal (1911)

Named after him
 * Institut Henri Poincaré (mathematics and theoretical physics centre)
 * Poincaré Prize (Mathematical Physics International Prize)
 * Annales Henri Poincaré (Scientific Journal)
 * Poincaré Seminar (nicknamed "Bourbaphy")
 * The crater Poincaré on the Moon
 * Asteroid 2021 Poincaré
 * List of things named after Henri Poincaré

Henri Poincaré did not receive the Nobel Prize in Physics, but he had influential advocates like Henri Becquerel or committee member Gösta Mittag-Leffler. The nomination archive reveals that Poincaré received a total of 51 nominations between 1904 and 1912, the year of his death. Of the 58 nominations for the 1910 Nobel Prize, 34 named Poincaré. Nominators included Nobel laureates Hendrik Lorentz and Pieter Zeeman (both of 1902), Marie Curie (of 1903), Albert Michelson (of 1907), Gabriel Lippmann (of 1908) and Guglielmo Marconi (of 1909).

The fact that renowned theoretical physicists like Poincaré, Boltzmann or Gibbs were not awarded the Nobel Prize is seen as evidence that the Nobel committee had more regard for experimentation than theory. In Poincaré's case, several of those who nominated him pointed out that the greatest problem was to name a specific discovery, invention, or technique.

Philosophy
Poincaré had philosophical views opposite to those of Bertrand Russell and Gottlob Frege, who believed that mathematics was a branch of logic. Poincaré strongly disagreed, claiming that intuition was the life of mathematics. Poincaré gives an interesting point of view in his 1902 book Science and Hypothesis:

"For a superficial observer, scientific truth is beyond the possibility of doubt; the logic of science is infallible, and if the scientists are sometimes mistaken, this is only from their mistaking its rule."

Poincaré believed that arithmetic is synthetic. He argued that Peano's axioms cannot be proven non-circularly with the principle of induction (Murzi, 1998), therefore concluding that arithmetic is a priori synthetic and not analytic. Poincaré then went on to say that mathematics cannot be deduced from logic since it is not analytic. His views were similar to those of Immanuel Kant (Kolak, 2001, Folina 1992). He strongly opposed Cantorian set theory, objecting to its use of impredicative definitions.

However, Poincaré did not share Kantian views in all branches of philosophy and mathematics. For example, in geometry, Poincaré believed that the structure of non-Euclidean space can be known analytically. Poincaré held that convention plays an important role in physics. His view (and some later, more extreme versions of it) came to be known as "conventionalism". Poincaré believed that Newton's first law was not empirical but is a conventional framework assumption for mechanics (Gargani, 2012). He also believed that the geometry of physical space is conventional. He considered examples in which either the geometry of the physical fields or gradients of temperature can be changed, either describing a space as non-Euclidean measured by rigid rulers, or as a Euclidean space where the rulers are expanded or shrunk by a variable heat distribution. However, Poincaré thought that we were so accustomed to Euclidean geometry that we would prefer to change the physical laws to save Euclidean geometry rather than shift to non-Euclidean physical geometry.

Free will
Poincaré's famous lectures before the Société de Psychologie in Paris (published as Science and Hypothesis, The Value of Science, and Science and Method) were cited by Jacques Hadamard as the source for the idea that creativity and invention consist of two mental stages, first random combinations of possible solutions to a problem, followed by a critical evaluation.

Although he most often spoke of a deterministic universe, Poincaré said that the subconscious generation of new possibilities involves chance. It is certain that the combinations which present themselves to the mind in a kind of sudden illumination after a somewhat prolonged period of unconscious work are generally useful and fruitful combinations... all the combinations are formed as a result of the automatic action of the subliminal ego, but those only which are interesting find their way into the field of consciousness... A few only are harmonious, and consequently at once useful and beautiful, and they will be capable of affecting the geometrician's special sensibility I have been speaking of; which, once aroused, will direct our attention upon them, and will thus give them the opportunity of becoming conscious... In the subliminal ego, on the contrary, there reigns what I would call liberty, if one could give this name to the mere absence of discipline and to disorder born of chance.

Poincaré's two stages—random combinations followed by selection—became the basis for Daniel Dennett's two-stage model of free will.

Poincaré's writings in English translation
Popular writings on the philosophy of science:
 * reprinted in 1921; this book includes the English translations of Science and Hypothesis (1902), The Value of Science (1905), Science and Method (1908).
 * 1905. "", The Walter Scott Publishing Co.
 * 1906. "", Athenæum
 * 1913. "The New Mechanics", The Monist, Vol. XXIII.
 * 1913. "The Relativity of Space", The Monist, Vol. XXIII.
 * 1913.
 * 1956. Chance. In James R. Newman, ed., The World of Mathematics (4 Vols).
 * 1958. The Value of Science, New York: Dover.

On algebraic topology:
 * 1895. . The first systematic study of topology.

On celestial mechanics:
 * 1890.
 * 1892–99. New Methods of Celestial Mechanics, 3 vols. English trans., 1967. ISBN 1-56396-117-2.
 * 1905. "The Capture Hypothesis of J. J. See", The Monist, Vol. XV.
 * 1905–10. Lessons of Celestial Mechanics.

On the philosophy of mathematics:
 * Ewald, William B., ed., 1996. From Kant to Hilbert: A Source Book in the Foundations of Mathematics, 2 vols. Oxford Univ. Press. Contains the following works by Poincaré:
 * 1894, "On the Nature of Mathematical Reasoning", 972–81.
 * 1898, "On the Foundations of Geometry", 982–1011.
 * 1900, "Intuition and Logic in Mathematics", 1012–20.
 * 1905–06, "Mathematics and Logic, I–III", 1021–70.
 * 1910, "On Transfinite Numbers", 1071–74.
 * 1905. "The Principles of Mathematical Physics", The Monist, Vol. XV.
 * 1910. "The Future of Mathematics", The Monist, Vol. XX.
 * 1910. "Mathematical Creation", The Monist, Vol. XX.

Other:
 * 1904. Maxwell's Theory and Wireless Telegraphy, New York, McGraw Publishing Company.
 * 1905. "The New Logics", The Monist, Vol. XV.
 * 1905. "The Latest Efforts of the Logisticians", The Monist, Vol. XV.

Exhaustive bibliography of English translations:
 * 1892–2017..

Concepts

 * Poincaré–Andronov–Hopf bifurcation
 * Poincaré complex – an abstraction of the singular chain complex of a closed, orientable manifold
 * Poincaré duality
 * Poincaré disk model
 * Poincaré expansion
 * Poincaré gauge
 * Poincaré group
 * Poincaré half-plane model
 * Poincaré homology sphere
 * Poincaré inequality
 * Poincaré lemma
 * Poincaré map
 * Poincaré residue
 * Poincaré series (modular form)
 * Poincaré space
 * Poincaré metric
 * Poincaré plot
 * Poincaré polynomial
 * Poincaré series
 * Poincaré sphere
 * Poincaré–Einstein synchronisation
 * Poincaré–Lelong equation
 * Poincaré–Lindstedt method
 * Poincaré–Lindstedt perturbation theory
 * Poincaré–Steklov operator
 * Euler–Poincaré characteristic
 * Neumann–Poincaré operator
 * Reflecting Function

Theorems
Here is a list of theorems proved by Poincaré:

 * Poincaré's recurrence theorem: certain systems will, after a sufficiently long but finite time, return to a state very close to the initial state.
 * Poincaré–Bendixson theorem: a statement about the long-term behaviour of orbits of continuous dynamical systems on the plane, cylinder, or two-sphere.
 * Poincaré–Hopf theorem: a generalization of the hairy-ball theorem, which states that there is no smooth vector field on a sphere having no sources or sinks.
 * Poincaré–Lefschetz duality theorem: a version of Poincaré duality in geometric topology, applying to a manifold with boundary
 * Poincaré separation theorem: gives the upper and lower bounds of eigenvalues of a real symmetric matrix B'AB that can be considered as the orthogonal projection of a larger real symmetric matrix A onto a linear subspace spanned by the columns of B.
 * Poincaré–Birkhoff theorem: every area-preserving, orientation-preserving homeomorphism of an annulus that rotates the two boundaries in opposite directions has at least two fixed points.
 * Poincaré–Birkhoff–Witt theorem: an explicit description of the universal enveloping algebra of a Lie algebra.
 * Poincaré–Bjerknes circulation theorem: theorem about a conservation of quantity for the rotating frame.
 * Poincaré conjecture (now a theorem): Every simply connected, closed 3-manifold is homeomorphic to the 3-sphere.
 * Poincaré–Miranda theorem: a generalization of the intermediate value theorem to n dimensions.

Other

 * French epistemology
 * History of special relativity
 * List of things named after Henri Poincaré
 * Institut Henri Poincaré, Paris
 * Brouwer fixed-point theorem
 * Relativity priority dispute
 * Epistemic structural realism

license: Creative Commons - Attribution Share-Alike - https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/4.0/

title: Henri Poincaré