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

Was it the Failures of the Provisional Government or the skills of Lenin that enabled the Bolsheviks to take control in 1917?

Extracts from this document...


Was it the Failures of the Provisional Government or the skills of Lenin that enabled the Bolsheviks to take control in 1917? In 1917 the Russian Tsar Nicolas II abdicated leaving the Provisional Government in charge. However the provisional government were no better than the Tsar and Russia's economy continued to decline. Later that year in October 1917 the Bolsheviks seized power from the Provisional Government led by Kerensky. Some historians see the revolution as a united working class led by Lenin but others see this as inevitable due to the failings of the Provisional Government. Source H says it was the failing of the Provisional Government and it appears to give a clear account mentioning lots of well known problems. ...read more.


Source G also shows that the Provisional Government was weak as it describes the widespread desertion. The Russian officer says "for hundreds of miles one can see deserters" who are in "high spirits, certain they will not be punished" as "authority and obedience no longer exists" The officer is likely to be lying as it is an official letter to the Provisional government and not a piece of propaganda. So far the sources have clearly indicated that it is the failure of the Provisional Government that allowed the Bolsheviks to take control unlike the next two sources which say it was also the weakness of the Provisional Government but this time indirectly. ...read more.


Source D appears to give a balanced view of the events which says that Lenin "had a greater impact on the course [of the revolution] than anyone else" though "great changes are not brought by individuals". He also says that there were "other mighty factors at work in Russia in 1917" such as the Provisional Governments inability to solve Russia's problems. Source K also appears to give a balanced viewpoint despite the fact it was written by Trotsky who was one of the leaders of the Bolshevik party. Trotsky's account makes it look like that Lenin was the person who did most the work and worked out how to take over Petrograd. He does however admit that the Bolsheviks only had to mount two small machine guns because of the lack of resistance from the Provisional Government. ?? ?? ?? ?? Mitul Patel 5P ...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 Politics 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 Politics essays

  1. Was the Provisional Government doomed to failure?

    in Russian society that did not like to surrender to Germany and defeat would have meant loss of land and national humiliation. Thirdly, the Kadets and other conservative forces thought that a successful offensive might put the generals and officers back in control of the army, who were not operating under the Petrograd Soviet.

  2. Was the Provisional Government fatally weakened from the first? Notes

    The essence of Lenin's argument was summed up in a set of provocative Bolshevik slogans: 'Peace, Bread and Land' and 'All Power to the Soviets', These proved to be more than just mere slogans. They identified the chronic food shortage, and the disruption in the countryside.

  1. Was the collapse of the provisional government inevitable

    feel that the government cannot lead them and this contributed quite a lot on the collapse. So if perhaps the provisional government had not gone ahead with the war, the people might not have been so unhappy when they lost and thus the collapse could have been evitable in this case.

  2. Was the provisional government doomed to failure from the beginning

    During the year of 1917 many events occurred that weakened the position of the provisional government but also some that showed its surprising strength. One of these events was the Kornilov revolt. General Lavr Kornilov was the commander of the Russian army.

  1. Gun control

    Gun is a "weapon of mass destruction". Guns are only supposed to be used for war and defense, neither as an accessory nor for an expression. Guns should only be used for military purposes and not for self-defense, hunting, and gang issues.

  2. It was the weakness of the provisional government that brought the October revolution about ...

    Government insisted on Russia continuing to fight in the First World War. Millions of Russians had been killed, a large percentage of them "peasants in uniform", that is farmers who were untrained and unprepared for what awaited them. The professional conscripts of the Russian army had been wiped out in

  1. The Successes and Failures of Charles Stuart Parnell!

    After the failure of the First Home Rule Bill, the Liberal Party fell from power and in the General Election the majority of the votes went to the Conservatives who continued to oppose Home Rule. However, the Conservatives did make some improvements to Ireland, which discouraged the Irish from seeking Home Rule.

  2. The Provisional Government, March-November 1917.

    The Provisional Government had to take account of the soviets. Therefore they were essentially sharing the power (dual authority). In July the liberal prince Lvov was replaced as prime minister by the socialist Kerensky. Kerensky was a member of the Duma and of the Petrograd Soviet.

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