The Russian Revolution Essay 3 February Revolution 1917
The Russian Revolution Essay 3 - February Revolution 1917
Potential Questions How important was the impact of the First World War in bringing about the February Revolution, 1917? To what extent did working class discontent cause the outbreak of the February Revolution in 1917?
Introduction 1914 - "When Russia's emperor and empress appeared on the palace balcony, the crowd knelt as one. A few moments later, the well-known words of Russia's national anthem burst from a quarter of a million throats. . . " Task 1 - Summarise the events of the February revolution. The key information is in the last box. Factors Impact of the war at the front Impact of the war at home Weakness of Nicholas II Impact of the Tsarina and Rasputin Political opponents within Russia Debate p 50, 79 Was Tsarism so weak that it was ripe for collapse, or was WW 1 such a serious trauma that it alone largely caused the end of Tsarism?
1913 - Celebration of 300 years of Romanov rule.
Factor 1 - Impact of the war at the front 1) Describe the events. Give clear examples of Russia's military defeats and the causes of these. 2) Analyse why military defeats would weaken the Tsar and bring about revolution. 3) However. . In what ways can it be argued that military defeats were not a crucial cause of revolution? Where did the army mutiny? 4) Evaluation - Find a quote which would summarise the impact of the war on Russia. 68 -71 229 69, 79 -80
“A government which made them fight a war they could not hope to win, which had failed to provide them with adequate supplies. . . was certainly not worthy of further sacrifices” Orlando Figes “By 1915 the conduct of every aspect of the handling of the war by the Tsar's ministers was under constant damning appraisal. ” Martin Mc. Colgan “The soldiers were radicalised by the realisation that. . . lives were being wasted by an incompetent and treacherous regime. ” Orlando Figes
Russia performed disastrously in the Great War. Their army lacked basic supplies. For example, there was a shortage of rifles and shells, so much so that at the start of the war Russia only had enough shells for 12 weeks of fighting. Furthermore, Russian military tactics were questionable. Radio signals were not encoded, and heavy defeats were suffered at Tannenburg and the Masurian Lakes. This was fundamental in undermining the Tsar as it fatally weakened his relationship with all sections of society. Soldiers felt their lives were being wasted, and higher-ranking officers and the middle-classes believed that the Tsarist government was incapable of organising the war effort. However, countries such as France suffered similar losses and mutinies, but did not undergo a revolution. This perhaps indicates that other circumstances in Russia contributed to the Tsar's abdication. In evaluation, it is clear that the war was pivotal in bringing down the Tsar. As Figes argues, 'the soldiers were radicalised by the realisation that. . . lives were being wasted by an incompetent and treacherous regime'. Thus, the Tsar's most crucial pillar was destroyed by the conflict.
World War 1 was a disaster for Russia because. . . the army was poorly led and equipped, losing key battles such as the Masurian Lakes and Tannenburg. so. . . all sections of the Tsar's key pillar, the army, turned against him; the troops because they were being slaughtered and the officers because they felt that the Tsar's leadership was incompetent. but. . . it was also a disaster for France and she did not suffer a revolution, suggesting that Russian domestic problems were an issue.
Factor 2 - Impact of the war at home 1) Describe the problems encountered by ordinary workers in Russia's cities as a result of the war. Try to provide specific statistics. 2) Analyse why the shortages caused by the war were significant in causing protests against the Tsar. 3) However. . not everybody did badly out of the war. Some industries boomed (munitions) and many peasants were able to rent land at a cheaper rate. 4) Evaluation - Find a quote which supports an overall view of the factor. 74 -75 230 66
By the end of 1916, Petrograd and Moscow were receiving only a third of their food and fuel requirements. Before the war, Moscow had received an average of 2200 wagons of grain per month; by January 1917, this figure had dropped to below 700. The figures for Petrograd told a similar story; in February 1917 the capital received only 300 wagonloads of grain instead of the 1000 it needed. Petrograd suffered particularly badly because of its remoteness from the food-producing regions and because of the large number of refugees which swelled its population and increased the demand on its dwindling resources. By early 1917, bread rationing meant that Petrograd’s inhabitants were receiving less than a quarter of the amount that had been available to them in 1914.
“It began with bread” Orlando Figes "The bread queues became a sort of political forum where rumours and ideas were exchanged by hungry citizens. The workers' revolution was born here. " Orlando Figes
Factor 3 - Nicholas II's Poor Leadership 1) Give detailed examples of Nicholas II's poor leadership decisions. e. g. Appointing himself Commander-in-Chief, not listening to the Progressive Bloc 2) Analyse why Nicholas II's failings made revolution more likely. 3) Nicholas had been a constant in Russia for years before 1917 - therefore it suggests a short-term factor added to his incompetence. . 4) Evaluation -Quote or Comparison with another factor. 76 -77 225 -226 71 -72
“Nicholas was the source of all the problems. Russia gained in him the worst of both worlds; a Tsar determined to rule from the throne yet quite incapable of exercising power. ” Orlando Figes “His character is the source of all our misfortunes. His outstanding weakness is a lack of willpower. ” Sergei Witte "The Tsar. . was more adept at ordering repression than at mustering political support. " Robert Service
Factor 4 - The Tsarina and Rasputin 1) Describe the actions of the Tsarina and Rasputin. You can also describe the rumours about them. 2) Analyse why this was important in undermining confidence in the Tsarist government. 3) However. . is there an argument that the roles of the Tsarina and Rasputin have been exaggerated? Were they a symptom of flaws in the autocratic system? 4) Evaluation -Quote or Comparison with another factor e. g. Nicholas' political mistakes. 72 -73 226 72 -74
“The appearance in [the royal] court of Grigory Rasputin, and the influence he exercised there, mark the beginning of the decay of Russian society and the loss of prestige for the throne and for the person of the Tsar himself. ” Rodzianko, chairman of the Duma “I am obliged to report that, at the present moment, the Russian Empire is run by lunatics. ” Maurice Paleologue, French ambassador 'For many people on the fringes of the court, Rasputin's corruption was taken as the cause of all of Russia's problems itself. ' Orlando Figes A regime dominated by aristocratic crooks, speculators and assorted riff-raff openly paraded its rotteness before an increasingly disaffected people. Alan Woods
Factor 5 - Political Opponents of the Tsar 1) Describe the work of the Bolsheviks in the run up to the Feb. Rev. 2) Analyse why this was important in causing the February Revolution. 3) However. . what arguments can be made that the revolution was not planned by political groups? 4) Evaluation -Quote 80 -82 228 78 -80 147 -148
“The most revolutionary party which human history until this time had ever known was nevertheless caught unawares by the events of history. ” Leon Trotsky “One of the most leaderless, spontaneous, anonymous revolutions of all time. ” W. H. Chamberlain
The Bolsheviks were a political party who opposed the Tsar, and aimed to replace him with a workers' revolution. The Bolsheviks dominated workers' organisations in Russia's major cities. For example, 14 of the 18 trade unions in Petrograd were controlled by the Bolsheviks. Therefore, it can be argued that the Bolsheviks played a vital role in bringing down the Tsar, as it was strikes carried out by many of their supporters which helped to spark the revolution. However, it is important to remember that the Bolsheviks were a minority group, whose leaders were mostly exiled from Russia. In evaluation, it would be fair to support Chamberlain's view that the revolution was 'leaderless, spontaneous, anonymous'. The Bolsheviks did not plan it, but simply took advantage of popular discontent caused by the economic hardship of the war, suggesting that this was a more important factor.
In analysing the February Revolution, Soviet historians place less emphasis on WWI, believing that there was an essential continuity between developments before and after the outbreak of war. The Revolution was thus a conscious assault upon tsarism from the workers who had preserved the traditions of 1905. The Bolshevik Party played a central role in shaping the workers’ protests. Many liberal historians argue that Imperial Russia was steadily transforming into a modern, democratic, industrial society. However, WWI politically, socially and economically weakened the tsarist state and thwarted reformist tendencies. It was these enormous pressures that ultimately led to the collapse of the Tsar’s government. ‘Libertarian’ historians see the role of the masses as the central element of causation: it was the ordinary workers and peasants, men and women, who made the Revolution. They were neither brainwashed nor led by the Bolsheviks. As summarised by Edward Acton, libertarian historians argue that the “goals for which they (the masses) strove were their own”. A number of revisionist historians have taken a ‘pessimist view’ of the February Revolution: Russia was suffering a long-term institutional crisis and revolution was an unavoidable outcome; Imperial Russia was headed toward turmoil and the impact of WWI made little difference in the long run.
Model Introduction In 1913, Nicholas II was acclaimed by huge crowds as he celebrated 300 years of Romanov rule in Russia. One year later, patriotic fervour greeted the outbreak of World War 1. However, in February 1917, Nicholas was forced to abdicate after a series of strikes, bread riots and mutinies in his capital, Petrograd. The war played a role in his downfall, as did the actions of the Tsarina and Rasputin, economic conditions in Petrograd and Nicholas' own mistakes. Perhaps the most compelling argument is that put forward by revisionist historians, who suggest that autocracy was fundamentally weak, and unable to withstand the external pressure of war.
Conclusion On one hand, it is possible to point to Nicholas/the war/political opposition as crucial in bringing about revolution, because. . . Alternatively, an argument can be made that Nicholas/the war/political opposition was more significant because. . . However, the strongest case is. . .
- Slides: 22