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

Was Nicholas II Responsible for His Own Downfall? What can you learn from Source A about the situation in February 1917?

Extracts from this document...


James Taylor 11MA Was Nicholas II Responsible for His Own Downfall? a) What can you learn from Source A about the situation in February 1917? Source A is an extract from Tsaritsa Alexandra's diary from the 25th February 1917. After reading through the source I believe it to be inaccurate and not very reliable. This for a number of reasons, the first sentence reads: 'Young people run and shout that there is no bread, simply to create excitement'. This is very incorrect, the workers weren't demonstrating just to create excitement; the workers wanted the price of bread lowered. Also the source says: 'But all this will pass and become calm if only the Duma will behave itself' The truth is the Duma was behaving itself, and although they wanted to take over the Empire, the Duma in fact had nothing to do with the demonstrations led by the peasants. The Duma was the Russian parliament, which Tsar Nicholas II created in an effort to make himself popular, but he later ignored the Duma and led the country using the army. Source A is inaccurate, although I believe there is a simple explanation. Tsaritsa Alexandra has written in her diary what she believes to be true. As the Tsar's palace is far outside Petrograd, I think the information from the centre of the city must have been altered slightly by the time it reached Tsaritsa Alexandra. As source A is quite inaccurate you cannot get a lot of truth from it. Although we can learn from it that in February 1917, the weather was very cold and the workers had gone on strike. However, this source is not very useful, as it does not give us a proper insight into what really happened on those days. b) Explain why Source's A and B are different? Source B is an account from Mikhail Rodzianko, president of the Duma writing about the events of February 27th 1917. ...read more.


The first two sources give us one of the first possible reasons for Nicholas' abdication. As there was no soldiers left in the city to fight the workers the Tsar could no longer control them, and he couldn't draft more in because most of the other soldiers were fighting Germany alongside the Tsar. Also a second reason we can get from the two sources is that as the workers were on strike factories ground to a halt and so no goods were being produced, Nicholas had to solve this fast, the pressure for him to do so was immense as some of the factories in Petrograd produced important supplies for the front line. Source C gives us numerical figures telling us how many workers approximately were on strike during the first few days of the revolution. I believe this to be trustworthy as it agrees with historical fact. This source also backs up the claim that Nicholas was slowly losing control over his capital city. Source D an extract from a British nurse's diary who was working in Petrograd at the time of the revolution tells us of how the tsars soldiers fired upon the people and it goes on to say that nothing now can stop the revolution. Also source E a photograph of soldiers taken on the 27th February showing their mutiny after being forced to fire upon their own kind. The photo shows banners which a said to read 'Down with Tsar. Long live the republic' I believe this source to be trustworthy as it is pictorial evidence and it is unlikely that it has been edited in any way. Again these two sources back up the fact that the Tsar was slowly losing control over the people and there was nothing he could do to stop them apart from meet their demands, as they were the greatest force in Russia. ...read more.


All these reasons contributed to the February Revolution in 1917. Many of the reasons are also closely linked. The tsar had left no reinforcements behind protecting his capital in case of any revolutionary plots, even when Rodzianko recommended that he did take action, the Tsars ignorance kept him form doing so. The same ignorance was seen with Durnovo's memorandum and the threat of revolution if Russia did suffer defeat. If the Tsar had taken action and planned for the future when the first warning of revolution was sewn in Durnovo's memorandum in 1914, the Tsar might have avoided the situation he was faced with in February 1917. Also if the Tsar had planned and prepared for war carefully and not created the huge strain on the industry, he might not have had the workers demonstrating over the price of bread that created a platform for the other problems, the workers and peasants faced, to be shown. All the reasons had a part to play in sparking off the revolution. However, as shown above if you took out or altered some of the causes the revolution might never of occurred. Without Tsar Nicholas' ignorance and lack of planning for war, he could of avoided revolution in February 1917. These reasons I think are the most important as they both sparked of a chain reaction previous to 1917. However, Nicholas' ignorance towards events and peoples advice building up to the revolution has the greater importance of the two as he could of crushed any stirring revolutionaries long before it reached a large scale. In conclusion, I think revolution in Russia was inevitable by 1917. Nicholas' ignorance is the main factor, which led to the revolution. This is evident in many of the sources where he refused to accept people's advice. Although Nicholas' ignorance features in other factors which led, in the short term, to the revolution. It was a character defect, which would have been with him most of life and therefore his ignorance along with other factors made revolution inevitable by 1917. ...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

Here's what a teacher thought of this essay

4 star(s)

This is a well answered source paper, with many useful comments on provenance and a good understanding of why the revolution occurred. At times, the author could answer the question more directly and offer more explanation of points. 4 out of 5 stars.

Marked by teacher Natalya Luck 14/03/2012

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. How and why did the tsar nicholas II survive the 1905 revolution?

    He was preventing the country from developing unlike other countries, and put them under serious threat. Indeed, if it wasn't for certain individuals, nothing would have changed at all. Sergie Witte Minister of Finance played a particularly important role in putting a stop to Russia's backwardness; along with Stoylpin.

  2. What were the causes of the Russian Revolution in March 1917?

    However, then there was an industrial slump in 1902, which caused thousands of the new workers to lose their jobs. Strikes and demonstration broke out in many cities. To make matters worse, disaster struck in the countryside. There were poor harvests in 1900 and 1902.

  1. Nov 97 : How serious athreat to the French Revolution was presented by the ...

    and the Manifesto ( Duke of Brunswick declared that if the king was again humiliated similar to the incident of 20 June 1792 then he would carry out military execution and total subversion with the guilty rebels put to the death they deserved).

  2. What caused the 1917 Russian Revolution.

    During the next 2 days about half of the workers in Petrograd became involved. They demanded "Down with the war, down with autocracy". The strikes became violent, with the police and the strikers both suffering casualties. The first elections of the Soviet Workers' Deputies were held in several factories.

  1. The Causes of the October Revolution

    People no longer wanted to fight a war; they would rather admit defeat and conserve what little they had left as opposed to throwing it all away for Russian glory. The failure of the Tsar's control of the war meant that the demoralisation of the army had started to spread to the Russian people.

  2. How did the rule of Stalin affect the Soviet Union?

    The secret police used torture, false promises of mercy and threatened their family members to convince the prisoner that they were guilty and admit to crimes they hadn't committed. Some people accused other people as enemies of the state to prove their loyalty to the Soviet Union so they wouldn't be arrested next.

  1. How secure was Nicholas II as Tsar in 1914? Nicholas II was Tsar for ...

    However in many respects Witte's reforms hindered Nicholas' security. This is because industrialisation created the working class, which moved to the cities. These people were deeply unhappy due to their poor, cramp, and dirty living conditions. It was these people who rose against him in the 1905 revolution and obviously did not support him.

  2. What Led to the Downfall of the Tsar?

    This policy was particularly disliked in areas such as Poland, Finland and Latvia. Interestingly, of the Russian Empire, only half of the population was actually originally Russian, or of Moscovy descent. This was a potential time bomb, as seen in the 19th century in Europe during the rise if nationalism.

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