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

Authors Avatar

           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. Source B is a lot more reliable than Source A as it agrees with what we know as the truth. It talks about the soldiers going on strike, which is true because they refused to fire upon the demonstrators who were most likely their friends and neighbours, as most of the soldiers were peasants. It also agrees with the timescale as the soldiers went on strike the day before. Source B also shows us four phrases, which the demonstrators were supposedly shouting out, these were:

‘Land and Freedom’ ‘Down with the Dynasty’ ‘Down with the Romanovs’ ‘Down with the Officers’  

This would be true as these four things were what the peasants wanted. The peasants had be campaigning for more land as their numbers were increasing fast and the Nobles still had most of the land. The peasants also wanted to get rid of the Tsars altogether as they felt they weren’t treated fairly under the system.

        I think this source is highly reliable because it agrees with history. This source is more useful than the first as it gives a more historically correct version of the events leading up to the February revolution.

        The first major difference between the sources is that one is a lot more reliable than the other. I think another reason for source B being more reliable is because a lot of confusion surrounding the first two days would have been over, which is why Tsaritsa Alexandra’s is so inaccurate because everyone was probably unsure what was happening. Which leads to another difference that the sources were written on different days, before and after the soldiers had gone on strike. Also another difference is that Mikhail probably saw what was happening first hand whilst Tsaritsa Alexandra had messengers for her and the information was probably distorted by the time it reached her. Historically Source B is more accurate and therefore more trustworthy.

c) Study sources A, B, C and D. Does the evidence of Source C and D support the version of evidence given in Source A or in Source B?

        Source C is a table of the estimated workers on strike in Petrograd in late February 1917. Mainly it is sourced from Richard Pipes ‘The Russian Revolution, 1899 – 1919’, written in 1990. Although it was written decades after the events I still believe it to be accurate. This is because it agrees with the historical knowledge of that period in time. Using my historical knowledge of the events leading up to the February Revolution that the strikes in Petrograd started with small groups (of thousands) of workers firstly went on strike because of the price of bread, as the days went on the numbers of workers on strike increased as the strike became more political as they voiced their opinions about the Tsar.        

Join now!

Source D is an extract from the diary of a British nurse who was working in Petrograd in 1917. This source gives us an accurate account of what happened on the 26th February. It is likely to be accurate as it comes from an eyewitness account, most likely to be written on the day from an unbiased point of view. As this source is highly accurate it is very useful in helping piece together the events leading up to Nicholas II abdicating. The source tells use how the nurse had seen the Tsars soldiers fire upon the demonstrators. She also comments ...

This is a preview of the whole essay

Here's what a teacher thought of this essay

Avatar

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.