• Join over 1.2 million students every month
  • Accelerate your learning by 29%
  • Unlimited access from just £6.99 per month

How far was military defeat responsible for the fall (abdication) of the Tsar in Feb 1917?

Extracts from this document...


How Far Was Military Defeat Responsible For The Fall (Abdication) of the Tsar In Feb 1917? By 1917 Russia had been at War for three years and the strains on the both the army and the country itself were becoming more and more established as time went on and people were beginning to question the Tsar's rule. Previous to 1917 the Tsar had suffered many setbacks as ruler of Russia. The most significant of these were the economic and political problems prevalent in Russia, the prominence of revolutionary groups and their activities and the gradual loss of support for the Tsar. Further factors were the industrialisation of Russia, the 1905 revolution and the October Manifesto and creation of the State Duma. Some of these causes were long term, whilst others were fairly short term. However, it was the huge Military defeats suffered by Russia that set the 1917 Russian Revolution off. At the end of 1914 the Russian army had lost half a million men and they were running low on ammunition and arms. They also had problems with uniform and food. Desertion became more and more frequent and some soldiers even deliberately inflicted injury upon themselves so they could avoid military service. Nobody could understand why the Russian leaders had engaged the country in such a pointless war. ...read more.


This caused the speaker of the Duma (and the leader of the Conservative Octobrist party), Alexander Guchov publicly attacked the Tsar for allowing Rasputin to stay with them. This was a surprise because the Russians had never seen the Tsar openly criticised and he began to seem less god-like and more weak and frail. When the war started in 1914 it affected the Russian people in many ways. First of all it created immediate patriotism: the German named St Petersburg was changed to Petrograd and the German embassy was burnt down. However, by 1915 things had changed again. The army suffered heavy defeats and shortages of labour on the land began to arise due to men and horses being called up for the front. Therefore, the food and goods that people needed for every day life could not be acquired. Prices increased and in the city workers were forced to work long hours under hard conditions in order to maintain the war effort. Some of these things may have mattered less to the people if the war had gone well. The Tsar suspended the Duma and confidence was low. The shortage of supplies affected the Russian army as well, meaning that they were short of food, ammunition and arms and without sufficient clothing to protect them against the harsh winter weather. ...read more.


However, when added to the huge list of problems in Russia that the people blamed the Tsar for, it was yet another thing wrong with the Tsarist reign. If the military had been successful, then it may well have raised morale in Russia, meaning people would be less annoyed with the struggle at home but they weren't. However, a lot of the reason for the army being unsuccessful was due to the problems at home, such as the poor working conditions of the workers, so they may not have been working to their best efforts, therefore not producing as many arms as possible. Also, the incompetence of the Tsar meant that the army had a Commander who did not know what he was doing. Most of the problems could be traced back to the Tsar and the people of Russia finally realised this after they suffered military defeats, despite having believed that the Tsar was chosen by God and giving him an extremely high status for years. Therefore, I think that the Military defeats were immediately responsible for the defeat of the Tsar because they could be seen as the 'straw that broke the camel's back'. However, on their own they would not have caused nearly as much trouble as they did, but when put with the other factors they helped to increase the pressure on the Tsar, eventually causing him to abdicate. ...read more.

The above preview is unformatted text

This student written piece of work is one of many that can be found in our GCSE Russia, USSR 1905-1941 section.

Found what you're looking for?

  • Start learning 29% faster today
  • 150,000+ documents available
  • Just £6.99 a month

Not the one? Search for your essay title...
  • Join over 1.2 million students every month
  • Accelerate your learning by 29%
  • Unlimited access from just £6.99 per month

See related essaysSee related essays

Related GCSE Russia, USSR 1905-1941 essays

  1. Marked by a teacher

    Was Nicholas II Responsible for His Own Downfall? What can you learn from ...

    4 star(s)

    This evidence agrees with the second interpretation of the February revolution, that the revolution was inevitable. However, Source G does also prove Nicholas' ignorance, by him not heeding Durnovo's warning. 'Russia must not be drawn into such a conflict, and least of all on the side of liberal England against conservative Germany.'

  2. The fall of Tsarism in Russia.

    This may indicate that the Tsar believes he is more important than the Bishops are and that he puts himself before his country. This suggests evidence for Idea One; "Autocracy is an outdated form of government not suited to twentieth century Russia."

  1. Why was there a German revolution in 1918 and how far had it gone ...

    the Army, the Judiciary, the Civil Service and Big-Business. These conservative groups which were allowed to continue were hostile to democracy and would undermine it any chance they got. Also the deal between Ebert and Groener gave increased confidence to the forces of the right and they realised that the democracy to some extent depended upon them for its survival.

  2. Why did the Tsarist regime fall in 1917?

    The Tsarist regime could not possibly have been well liked if sections of the Russian army resorted to mutiny in 1917. Similarly, however, the Tsar must have been liked well enough by some sections of the Russian army to drive them to fight to reinstate the Tsar in 1918, so

  1. Why did the tsar fall from power in 1917?

    Even though this chaotic situation would have challenged the best of leaders, the Tsarina and Rasputin made it worse.

  2. Stalin man or monster

    new power again - as shown in source B - this happened with a great deal of human evil suffering. Workers where paid low wages in deplorable accommodation where they suffered from basic amenities such as hot water and electricity, working hours where also unpredictable and lateness was punishable by

  1. Why did the Tsar abdicate after the 1917 revolution

    Whereas in WW1 there was a colossal death count. In the Russo-Japanese there were roughly 55,000 Russian deaths whereas in WW1 there were roughly 3,311,000 deaths, just under half of which were civilian. This shows the severity of WW1 and why it had a large effect on the Tsar abdicating.

  2. The Factors which Lead to the Abdication of Tsar Nicholas in March 1917

    During the war years workers were very poorly paid, in fact they were getting paid less than in 1903. They were also forced to work longer hours to cope with the demand of the war and to cope with the lack of men due to conscription.

  • Over 160,000 pieces
    of student written work
  • Annotated by
    experienced teachers
  • Ideas and feedback to
    improve your own work