Why was so little effort made to save Tsardom on February (March) 1917?

In 1914 when W.W.I broke out the Tsar was more popular than at any other time of his reign: he was the “Little Father” of all the Russians, the defender of “Mother Russia”. And yet on 15th March 1917 Nicholas II was forced to abdicate. He tried to pass the throne to his brother, the Grand Duke Michael, but he refused and it seems there was no attempt to find another candidate. Within a very few days the monarchy which had ruled for three hundred years came to an end and Russia became a republic. Why had Nicholas become so unpopular that very few were interested in saving Tsardom?

Russia under the Tsars was an autocracy, which meant that the Tsar had absolute power. Already starting from Alexander II’ s reign there was resentment of the autocratic system, and by the end of the 19th century several revolutionary groups and political parties were beginning to develop. They began to demand changes in the way the country was run but political opposition was confined to a small minority of the population. Under Nicholas II resentment grew and support increased for opposition groups such as the Socialist Revolutionaries and the Kadets. Nicholas II remained in power with the support of the army - and in particular the Cossacks - the Church, the nobles, the civil service and the hated secret police (the Okhrana) who hunted down and eliminated trouble-makers. In 1906 a parliament called the Duma was set up, not because the Tsar really wanted one but to try and calm unrest after the “Bloody Sunday” massacres, but it had little influence and could only criticise the Tsar’s government. The Council of Ministers were all appointed by the Tsar and the Duma had no means of controlling ministers. The Tsar also had the power to govern by decree when there was no assembly . Many of the Duma’s members wanted to make Russia more democratic and wanted the Duma to play a more important role in governing the country.

This is a preview of the whole essay

The First World War and the defeats of the Russian army gave the government’s political opponents more reasons to criticise it. The Duma was not allowed to take an active part in conducting the war and this caused discontent. The Duma was dismissed on 15 September 1915 and not convened again until January 1916. In November 1916 members criticised the conduct of the war(“stupidity or treason?”) and said they had “lost faith in the ability of this government to achieve victory” , and by January 1917 there was talk of asking the Tsar to abdicate in favour of his son. After the Petrograd strike and the revolt of the army the Duma was once again ordered to disperse by Nicholas but instead liberal members turned themselves into a Provisional Committee (12 March). Some liberals still hoped that Nicholas would abdicate in favour of a more popular, constitutional Tsar and tried once more to call for reforms but Nicholas refused this “nonsense”. The Tsar preferred to abdicate than lose his autocracy and on 15 March the Provisional Committee became the Provisional Government of the new republic.

If the politicians had little reason to support the Tsar in 1917 the masses, the peasants and workers had even less reason to love him or his government. There was great social injustice and rigid class distinctions. Peasants, who formed 80% of the population were poor, illiterate and used primitive methods of farming. Despite the Emancipation of the Serfs Decree in 1861 in which a large number of them were freed this solved only a few of their problems and caused resentment. There was a serious shortage of land for them and financial difficulties for the peasants by the end of the century, not helped by the fact that the population of Russia was growing rapidly. After Russia’s defeat in the Russo-Japanese War the peasants had an even harder time because they were heavily taxed. They were also very dissatisfied because of the heavy burden of redemption payment from the days of serf emancipation. Workers who were concentrated in the cities after industrialisation were also dissatisfied because of their terrible working and living conditions. But despite their poverty and hardships the common people were not really interested in politics because they were too busy trying to survive. They thought of the Tsar as their “Little Father” and did not blame him personally for their problems. This changed on 22 January 1905, however, when a peaceful workers” demonstration in St. Petersburg was brutally crushed by the Imperial troops and thousands were shot, hung and imprisoned. “Bloody Sunday” as it was called “did more than perhaps anything else during the whole of the reign to undermine the allegiance of the common people to the throne” . A peasant”s union was formed , the All-Russian Peasant Union, in 1905, and there was a lot of unrest. The Tsar was forced to agree to a set of concessions in the October Manifesto, such as the cancellation of redemption payments and an attempt was made to carry out some land reforms but the problem of the “land-hungry” peasants was not solved.

The First World War was disastrous for both the urban workers and peasants. Millions of men were taken away from the land to go and fight. Since there were not enough railways and roads were in a very poor state , horses were taken from the peasants for transport of goods to the front. Taxes were again raised and the government paid the peasants low prices for food for the army, consequently they produced less and food and fuel shortages became worse. As the war continued prices rose and the poor in the big cities of Petrograd and Moscow began to starve. In the winter of 1916-17 there were frequent strikes and demonstrations but the Tsar ignored the situation and left Petrograd for the front on 7 March. For the next few days there were increasingly violent strikes and food riots by urban workers and the situation soon got out of control.

As we have said, The Tsar relied on the army to keep internal order and on the secret police which imprisoned, killed or sent to Siberia anyone accused of political activities. One of the most important reasons why Tsar Nicholas II was forced to abdicate in February 1917 was because by then he had lost the full support of the army. The Russian army had suffered defeat and humiliation in the Russo-Japanese war of 1904-05 and after the Bloody Sunday massacres there were some mutinies in the army and navy, although the majority remained loyal. During the First World War the army had more reason to feel resentment: Russian industry could not produce enough war materials, the nobility serving as officers were mostly bad leaders, food and supplies could not get to the front because of the inefficient railway system, troops moved too slowly to where they were needed and there was no transport for the wounded. Thousands were killed, wounded or taken prisoner, and territory and resources were lost to the Germans. In September 1915 Tsar Nicholas II took personal command of the army and this was a mistake as he was then blamed for the army”s problems and defeats. By 1917 morale was very low and the fact that the army had become disloyal is shown by the attitude of the soldiers at Petrograd in February/March 1917. The previously loyal troops in the capital refused to obey orders to crush the striking workers and instead actively supported them.

Another reason why discontent with the Tsar grew was the unpopularity of the Tsarina, Alexandra, partly because she was of German origin and partly because of her total dependence on the debauched Starist monk Rasputin. When Nicholas II left Petrograd to take command of the army he left his wife (and consequently Rasputin) in charge. In 1916 Rasputin, who some said was a German spy, was assassinated by the nobility who resented his power over Alexandra and the government.

Although there was opposition in Russia to the Tsar”s autocracy before the Great War, W.W.I was the major factor that caused his downfall. In February 1917 “the scale of Russian defeats made it more difficult for the Tsar”s supporters to hold back the growing number of critics to the Tsar’s style of ruling Russia” . The fact that he had run the war as an autocrat , refusing to “co-operate with patriotic elements in the Duma and elsewhere, and his personal assumption of military responsibility all served to alienate elements which might otherwise have provided moderate conservative support for Nicholas. When the hardships of the war produced riots and strikes at the beginning of 1917 important elements in the army, in the Duma, and even within the Imperial family, could no longer see any reason to support a leader whose methods of government now appeared foolish and bankrupt.” Little effort was made to save the Tsardom in February/March 1917 also because this time, unlike in 1905, there was an alternative form of government ready to take the place of the Tsar, settle the unrest and hopefully end the war successfully.