How convincing is the argument that WW1 was the main factor in the collapse of Tsarism in Russia

Authors Avatar

How convincing is the argument that WW1 was the deciding factor in the collapse of Tsarism in Russia?

Nicholas II’s abdication in February 1917 marked the end of Tsarism in Russia and the end of over 100 years of Romanov rule. By the time the war broke out in 1914 almost every section of Russian society felt betrayed by the autocracy, in particular the peasants and the growing number of urban workers. The peasants increasingly resented being exploited by the nobility and governing elite, and although Tsar Alexander II had started to make reforms beginning with the Emancipation act in 1861, most of these reforms had little or no effect on the everyday lives of the peasantry. Although the war exacerbated these social problems, even before 1914 a revolution was inevitable.

Opposition began to grow within the industrial workers, especially due to the violence of Bloody Sunday and the 1905 revolution, after which workers lost faith in the ‘Little Father’ and realised that under rule of the Tsar they were always going to be oppressed. By the beginning of 1917 even the military, Cossacks and members of the aristocracy wanted rid of the Tsarist regime. This change in attitudes was much stronger than it had been in 1905 as the suffering of the peoples was now much greater and the autocratic system in such a critical state.

However, Russia’s political structure was in a dire state even before the war. Peter Waldron notes: “The Imperial Russian state perished from its own weakness”. This view seems valid as the Tsarist regime proved incapable of reacting to calls for change with anything more than a reluctant acceptance for reformation. During the war the unmodernised Russian economy was too weak to supply the army and maintain an adequate standard of living for the peasantry and urban workers. As a result all the problems accumulated over the past half century came into focus during wartime.

Due to the critical state of Russia’s political system and the vast social inequalities a revolution was inevitable; it was just a question of when. The accumulation of pre-war grievances and the appalling conditions caused by the war led the Russian masses to protest and riot. The regime was too weak and incompetent to deal with the huge problems Russia faced and failed to see the urgency of the situation. Whilst the war inexorably brought Russia’s problems to a head, the reasons for the collapse of structures of the old regime were rooted deeply in the Russian state.

The Emancipation Act of 1861 left the peasants dissatisfied. Even though their juridical status had changed for the better they were still deprived of the land they worked on. In the years leading up to the 1905 ‘revolution’ there were countless uprisings and riots and general unrest in the peasant communes. Primitive agricultural methods left the peasants continually having to work hard but not gaining any benefits from this work. Liberal optimist historians claim that without the obstruction of the war the Tsar may have made more reforms and efficiently improved agriculture as well as the peasant’s quality of life. The Liberal optimists believe the revolution could have been prevented without the imposition of WW1, though it seems likely that even without the war, reformations for the peasants would still have been minimal and similarly ineffective. In addition Christopher Read has claimed: “The root causes of the revolution lay in the everyday working of Russian society, particularly its harsh and growing level of exploitation of peasants and workers and the rigid barriers erected against political change.” 

Join now!

The peasant’s antagonism towards the autocratic system was also heightened due to the fact the peasants were not free men but were bound to a village commune. The government was hesitant to change the village commune system, as it made it easier to gather taxes and it was believed the peasant communes were a bulwark against the spread of subversive left-wing ideas. It was not until the unforeseen 1905 ‘revolution’ that the governing elites finally realised the urgency to create a class of peasant farmers as a reliable support to the social order against propaganda of left-wing groups. This ...

This is a preview of the whole essay