The collapse of the autocracy in February 1917 signified the end product of the interaction of multiple factors relating to both domestic and foreign issues. Discuss.

Authors Avatar

The collapse of the autocracy in February 1917 signified the end product of the interaction of multiple factors relating to both domestic and foreign issues. The traditional historiographical view of a rapid insurrection catching the autocracy by surprise is increasingly called into question – Hasegawa sees the abdication of Nicholas II as the product of disillusionment with the war being translated into popular protest.  The experience of 1905 left workers and soldiers more prepared for rebellion and the long – term factor of war accentuated the domestic problems in Russia. The pressure created by the war rendered the autocracy vulnerable, hence the unrest from the 23rd of February onwards had such an impact. It was ultimately however the loss of military discipline and loyalty in Petrograd, coupled with liberals’ decisions and autocratic choice, which caused the regime to fall, not as a result of previous unrest, but a fear of what rebellion may be still to come. This fear was what dictated the nature of the revolution. It was this combination of long and short – term factors that caused the Russian autocracy to fall. It is pertinent to tackle this issue in a chronological form, beginning in 1915 / ’16.  One must however bear in mind that unrest in Petrograd, almost irrespective of the rest of Russia, was enough to cause the collapse of autocracy. One cannot see the unrest in the capital as symptomatic of a wider national movement. The movement was of a unique scale and extremism in Petrograd.

        By the end of 1915 popular fervour for war was declining, and during 1916 continuing heavy defeats left the population demoralised. It is scarcely surprising that Russia incurred such heavy losses during the war. Without mentioning frequent mismanagement of resources and poor decisions by Generals, Russia was at a disadvantage before a shot was fired, with industry never able to match the demands of her vast army. The factors inherent in the war shall be looked at now in terms of their effect on Russia’s vulnerability to revolution. The fact that all these factors intertwine renders them difficult to deal with individually, however it is necessary in order to provide a clear analysis of how they relate to the collapse of autocracy.

        Russian industry was far less developed than that of its allies. During the war heavy industry suffered from a shortfall in raw materials, including iron amongst others. The demands of the military could not be fully met, a contributing factor to the military failures which shall be dealt with later. Russian industry was also not sufficiently developed or diversified as to support a war effort of such scale. Metallurgic, machine and petro – chemical industries were in their infancy, and the seizure of 20% of Russian industry by the Germans as they advanced in 1915 placed them at a further disadvantage.

Join now!

        Faced with this shortfall Russia had to turn to her allies for assistance in providing essential wartime products. France and Britain however had their own problems and so could only offer limited assistance, and American orders ran behind schedule. The severing of trade routes, moreover, made it tricky to get imports to where they were needed – many had to be brought in from the east.

        The industrial sector was further disadvantaged by the sending of skilled workers to the front (upto on quarter of the industrial working class according to Burdzhalov), and mismanagement of what resources were available.

        A ...

This is a preview of the whole essay