Source D and source E do not support what is said in source B but do support source C. Source D is showing the numbers of workers on strike each day from the 22nd to the 25th of Feb. The amount of workers on strike increase by over 800% in 3 days. This shows exactly how serious the situation is and goes against Alexandra’s view because it proves that the workers will not stop when they get cold and it is not just to get attention, it is something far more serious. However it agrees with Rodzianko’s view because he realises the seriousness of the situation, because he is president of the Duma and realises that a revolution is quite likely. Source E is written by a British nurse working in Petrograd who saw soldiers fire into happy workers on strike for no reason. She says that nothing will stop the revolution now. This also goes against Alexandra’s view because once again it shows the seriousness of the situation, which Alexandra doesn’t realise and agrees with Rodzianko because he understands the situation and realises the high probability of a revolution.
On March 2nd, 1917 Tsar Nicholas II abdicated for several reasons. First of all, from source B, the fact that he wasn’t sure what was happening around the time of the revolution. Source B shows this because it shows that Alexandra doesn’t really know what is going on because she thinks that the strikes are not serious and everything will die down in time. However her and therefore the Tsar are obviously wrong because looking at other point of view from that time, revolution is quite likely.
The next reason is the fact that the soldiers have begun to mutiny. From source C, Rodzianko says that the soldiers who are mealy peasants with uniforms have found it in their interest to mutiny. This is a reason because the soldiers were the only things keeping the area in order and without them the towns are in ruin.
Source D shows the sheer number of workers that are on strike by the 25th February. This is a reason for the Tsar to abdicate because it shows that the strikes are very serious and that he may easily loose control of the city,
Source E again gives the Tsar a reason to abdicate because it shows that revolution is inevitable and he is going to loose control.
In Source F, soldiers are shown to be very serious about revolution and carry banners saying ‘Down with the Tsar. Long live the republic’. These same soldiers, the day before had shot down demonstrators and therefore it is now obvious that all control is lost and there is almost no hope of regaining the people’s support.
Source G shows that the capital is in complete chaos and a new government is wanted and needed. It also shows that Nicholas ignored all the warnings given to him. This is a reason for his abdication because again, it shows that Nicholas has lost all control and is not wanted anymore.
All these reasons show why Nicholas abdicated because when they are combined they show that there is no hope for Nicholas any more and the capital is in complete ruin and everyone blames him for it. For instance, if Nicholas had known exactly what was going on then he wouldn’t have ignored all the warnings he had and would have done something in order to try and stop the soldiers from mutinying and stop more workers from going on strike. If you extract one of the reasons then it may have caused an end of the revolution. For instance if Nicholas knew what was going on then he wouldn’t have ignored all the warnings given to him. If the soldiers hadn’t mutinied then there would still be hope for the capital.
I think that Nicholas was responsible for letting the situation in Petrograd getting out of control in February, 1917 because when looking at the sources, it is his fault that the situation went out of hand and there were points when he could have stopped it. For example source A, the Durnovo memorandum, tells Nicholas exactly what he thinks is going to happen, and he is exactly right. However Nicholas chooses to ignore the warnings given to him and carries on with what he thinks is right, rather than listening to Durnovo who knows best at the time. In Sources D and E it is shown that more and more workers are going on strike and getting angry because they are being fired upon. This is entirely Nicholas’ fault because it was him that ordered the shooting, and it is this that causes a lot of people to get angry and was one of the main reasons for complete revolution. Sources C and F show that the soldiers are now mutinying and there is almost no hope for the capital at all now. This is Nicholas’ fault because he ordered them to do things that did not want to when they had to fire upon demonstrators and they realised that it was better for them to be on the revolution side. Finally, source G shows that the last attempt made to warn Nicholas about the events that were happening was completely ignored and dismissed by him. It says that the capital is in anarchy but still Nicholas chooses to ignore the warning given to him.
All these reasons show that it was Nicholas’ fault that the situation went out of control because the Tsar had several opportunities to rectify the situation and change the outcome of Petrograd but instead chose to dismiss these warnings and carry on with what he thought right. Even if he had changed one thing then the situation may have been saved. For instance, if he had chosen not to shoot into the crowd of protestors and instead reasoned with them, then fewer workers may have gone on strike and the revolution may not have happened. Also if Nicholas had not been so oblivious to what was going on around him and listened to Rodzianko then maybe the revolution wouldn’t have happened. However he chose to ignore any warnings, which meant that he was responsible for allowing the situation to get out of control
However some people may argue that a revolution in Russia was inevitable for several reasons. First off, Russia was backward and different from other great powers like Britain, France and Germany, who all had elected parliaments and political parties, the Tsar ruled alone as and autocrat. Industrialisation had not yet happened in Russia as in the other great countries, and peasants made up 80% of it. However the peasants were not happy because they wanted the nobles land, because they worked on it and thought it rightly belonged to them. The workers were also not happy because of increasingly bad working and living conditions.
For these reasons, it is also shown that although it was Nicholas who triggered of the revolution in February 1917, a revolution was bound to happen some time in Russia. However this is from other historical knowledge and when only looking at the sources, it is obvious that it was Nicholas’ fault that the situation got out of hand in Petrograd in 1917.