When war broke out in July 1914, Russia’s internal divisions were temporarily forgotten and Tsar Nicholas II rode a wave of support. The Times wrote, “For perhaps the first time since Napoleon’s invasion of Russia, the people and their Tsar were one”. However it would be a mistake to see the short term rise in patriotic support for Russia and The Tsar as having anything other than a transient effect on Russian government and politic.
As the war dragged on, the toll of casualties, hunger, and economic privation were exploited by the Tsar’s enemies. Total war placed enormous strain on Russia. The temporary display of unity at the beginning of the war quickly faded. Loyalty towards the Tsar was eroded and the monarchy fell in February 1917.
…show more content…
Such patriotism had been standard practice under so many years of Tsarist autocracy, the natural reaction to a national event. However this hopeful display of unity was like the Tsar himself, an anachronism from the past. Beneath the surface lay a rift between Nicholas and his people, one, which had emerged after the Emancipation Act 1861 and one which was further stretched apart by numerous social and political grievences. The war exacerbated the faults in the foundation of Tsarism. Russians were tired of food shortages, rationing and inflation. The war encouraged political opposition due to the incompetence of the government; Russia’s abysmal military performance was considered a national humiliation. As such the war was the catalyst for the February 1917 revolution. Just as the Crimean War had been followed by the end of serfdom, and the war with Japan by the revolution of 1905, so Russia’s involvement in the World War 1 led to the February revolution. There is a view that Nicholas worsened the situation and evidence from Figes confirms this as “sent a cable to General Khabolov ordering him to use military force to put down the disorders” . This further emphasises the Tsar learnt nothing from the events of 1905, because his instruction to Khabolov was merely a repetition of what happened on Bloody Sunday. However, the decisive factor in the success of the February revolutionaries, was the attitude of the Petrograd garrison. In 1905, the army had broken the revolution. In 1917 the army, wanted an end to the war, joined the revolution and fought against the Tsar. The immediate effects of the War on Russian government and politics was not catastrophic. The rift between the Tsar and people did not seem beyond repair in 1914, it could not have been bridged by anything other than the weakening of Tsarism, something which Nicholas refused to allow. Russia was
No war is fought without the struggle for resources, and with Russia still rapidly lagging behind in the international industrialisation race by the turn of the 20th century, the stage was set for social unrest and uprising against its already uncoordinated and temporally displaced government. With inconceivable demands for soldiers, cavalry and warfare paraphernalia, Russia stood little chance in the face of the great powers of World War One. Shortages of basic human necessities led to countless subsistence riots and the eventual power struggle between the ruling body and its people. From the beginnings of WWI to 1916, prices of essential goods rose 131 percent in Moscow and more than 150 percent in Petrograd. Additionally, historian Walter G. Moss stated that in September 1915 that “there were 100,000 strikers in Russia; in October 1916, there were 250,000 in Petrograd alone.” Moss continues to exemplify the increasing evidence of social unrest and connects the riots to a lack of resources when he goes on to point out that “subsistence riots protesting high prices and shortages… also increased.” ...
For centuries, autocratic and repressive tsarist regimes ruled the country and population under sever economic and social conditions; consequently, during the late 19th century and early 20th century, various movements were staging demonstrations to overthrow the oppressive government. Poor involvement in WWI also added to the rising discontent against Nicholas as Russian armies suffered terrible casualties and defeats because of a lack of food and equipment; in addition, the country was industrially backward compared to countries such as Britain, France, Germany, and the USA. It had failed to modernize, this was to do with the tsars lack of effort for reforms. The country was undergoing tremendous hardships as industrial and agricultural output dropped. Famine and poor morale could be found in all aspects of Russian life. Furthermore, the tsar committed a fatal mistake when he appointed himself supreme commander of the armed forces because he was responsible for the armies constant string of defeats.
Even though there were other things that caused the February Revolution and the fall of the Romanovs the First World War is by far the most important. Without the war the country would be in this state of disappointment with their performance and the Tsar wouldn’t have had to take control and leave his wife in charge of the government. Without the war Russia wouldn’t have been in so much debt and wouldn’t have such terrible food shortages. Overall its clear to see that the War was the main cause for the fall of the Romanovs in 1917.
Three "Whys" of the Russian Revolution, The Russian Revolution, and Rethinking the Russian Revolution. Writing of an annotated bibliography of the topic. 2. Selection and reading of the sources to determine which ones are the most relevant and comprehensive 3. Finding opposing arguments to give and analytical view with multiple perspectives 4.
It was said that the educated people, the contact with other countries should contribute to the government policy. As said in document 1 , "By 1900 there were political parties raging from far right defenders of autocracy and russian power over all other ethnicities, to far left revolutionaries calling for the overthrow of the government." The government there was autocratic, which was when the tsar had all the power/control of the government. Another cause for the Russian Revolution was the outbreak of WW1. "Even before the war urban workers all over the Russian empire had been increasingly radical, but the war brought the government's incompentence and the people's grievances into sharper relief. The first months of the war were a disaster for Russia." It is much easier to overthrow a government than to try andcreate a new government. As said in document 2,"Chaos, conflict, uncertaunty; more violence are much more common and often led to centralized, authoritarian governments." There was celebration all over the streets after the indication that the tsar was overthrown after 300 years of a tsarist government ruling. "The problem was that, after the party, governing problems arose immediately.
While most of Europe had develop strong central governments and weakened the power of the nobles, Russia had lagged behind the times and still had serfs as late as 1861. The economic development that followed the emancipation of peasants in the rest of Europe created strong industrial and tax bases in those nations. Russian monarchs had attempted some level of reforms to address this inequality for almost a century before, and were indeed on their way to “economic maturity” (32) on par with the rest of Europe. But they overextended themselves and the crushing defeats of the Russo-Japanese War in 1905 and the First World War in 1917 lost them the necessary support from their subjects and created “high prices and scarcity” which were by far “the most obvious factors in the general tension”
I. A good majority of the Russian people were weary and uncontent with the way the war was going and with the Czar's rule. This uncontent, along with economic hardships, caused riots and demonstrations to break out. The Czar called for the army to put down the revolution, as they did in 1905. But the army joined the revolt and the Czar was kicked out of power soon afterwards.
The resignation of Nicholas II March 1917, in union with the organization of a temporary government in Russia built on western values of constitutional moderation, and the capture of control by the Bolsheviks in October is the political crucial opinions of the Russian Revolution of 1917. The actions of that historic year must also be viewed more broadly, however: as aburst of social strains associated with quick development; as a disaster of political modernization, in relations of the tensions sited on old-fashioned traditions by the burdens of Westernization; and as a social disruption in the widest sense, concerning a massive, unprompted expropriation of upper class land by fuming peasants, the devastation of outmoded social patterns and morals, and the scuffle for a new, democratic society.
the damage that the Tsar had done to the country. This was a huge task
In this instance Nicholas did not understand the magnitude of his people's, more specifically the soldiers suffering while at war with Austria and Germany. Often times the war minister, Vladimir Sukhomlinov, misinformed Nicholas regarding the conditions of soldiers leaving the Russian army without food, clothing and weapons. Through this miscommunication, it left not merely the soldiers without defense, but the country defenseless along with them. As a result, “By the following spring, the shortage had grown so severe that many soldiers charged into battle without guns. Instead, commanders told them to pick up their weapons from the men killed in front lines. At the same time, soldiers were limited to firing just ten shots a day. Sometimes they were even forbidden to return enemy fire” (134). This was just one piece of the puzzle that led to the crumble of the Russian autocracy. Especially considering the fact that everyone could see their efforts for winning the war were dissipating all except for one, “. . . everyone in the tsar’s government knew it… everyone, that is, except Nicholas himself” (135). As shown in this instance, basic misconceptions can begin a ripple effect that has the power to put a country in
Wood, A. (1986). The Russian Revolution. Seminar Studies in History. (2) Longman, p 1-98. ISBSN 0582355591, 9780582355590
In the years leading up to World War I, social unrest among the Russian people was spreading rapidly. There was a huge social gulf between the peasants who were former serfs and the landowners. The peasants regarded anyone who did not work as a parasite. They had always regarded as all land belonging to them. They regarded any land retained by the landowners at the time serfs were freed as stolen and only force could prevent them from taking it back. By the time Russia entered the war, one peasant rebellion had already been suppressed and several socialist revolutionary movements were developing.
This made the demonstration of 1917 different. from anything that had happened before because for the first time Tsar had to fight against his own army. As a conclusion, I suggest that the war was the main cause of the The Russian Revolution. It is the origin of all the further problems that were facing Russia at the time. If there had not been a war then perhaps the Tsar could have concentrated on the co-operation with the Duma and could have resulted in changes for the better in Russia.
The discontent of Russian industrial workers was an important cause of the 1905 revolution. Moreover, it was the most important reason behind the 1905 revolution. However, many other factors also played a major role in the lead up to revolution. The discontent of the Russian industrial workers caused father Gapon to make a petition for the tsar asking for more rights and improvements to the system and the march to the winter palace with the petition ended up causing bloody Sunday another major factor in the revolution. Russification was also one of the main causes of the 1905 revolution as several minority groups in Russia were very unfairly treat and many wanted this changed and joined revolutionary forces. The other causes of the 1905 revolution were the failures of the Russo Japanese war, the policy of Russification and Bloody
In the years leading up to the revolution, Russia had been involved in a series of wars. The Crimean war, The Russo-Turkish war, The Russo-Japanese war and the First World War. Russia had been defeated in all except the war with Turkey and its government and economy had the scars to prove it. A severe lack of food and poor living conditions amongst the peasant population led firstly to strikes and quickly escalated to violent riots. Tsar Nicholas II ruled Russia with an iron hand while much of Europe was moving away from the monarchical system of rule. All lands were owned by the Tsar’s family and Nobel land lords while the factories and industrial complexes were owned by the capitalists’. There were no unions or labour laws and the justice system had made almost all other laws in favour of the ruling elite. Rents and taxes were often unaffordable, while the gulf between workers and the ruling elite grew ever wider.