Russian Revolution Essay

The Great War Catapulted Russia into Revolution

The Russian revolution saw the downfall of the Romanov dynasty which had ruled Russia for over three hundred years. In just a few days, political discontent merged with anger at military defeat and economic and social grievances. (Gibbons 1965, p.175) The implications of this turning point in history were immense, and its impact upon the international community shaped the world for generations to come. The fall of Tsarist Russia has often been likened as the greatest event since the fall of the Bastille, (Gibbons 1965, p.175) yet what was the spark that set off a revolution? What had aroused the wrath of a nation so fiercely that they were willing to rebel against their Tsar – a man whom they had loved and respected? Only a significant event could spark such a reaction, which was destined to shake the very foundations and boundaries on which Europe was built. This event was the First World War, which generated conflict of an unprecedented scale and formed the basis for the downfall of the Tsars. It is this event in world history that was the catalyst for all of Russia’s problems, and united the people against their Emperor. It can therefore be stated, that the conflict of the Great War was the reason for the downfall of the Tsars. Although it has been argued that Tsarist Russia’s economy, regime and revolutionary leaders were responsible for its downfall, the war intensified these problems to such a degree that Russia could no longer cope.

The downfall of the Tsars can be traced directly to the Eastern Front, [where] desolation and conquest gave way to the Russian revolution. (Shermer 1973, p.134) Ironically, the war was perceived by the Tsar as a means of relieving pressure on his rule and indeed, for a brief period of time it united the Russian people. (Robottom 1972, p.57) However, as Russian defeats mounted in 1914 and 1915, the Russian novelist Bunin described the mood of the Russian people: ‘They don’t understand what they are fighting for. The war isn’t their business. They grow more furious every day.’ (White 1994, p.24) Finally the Tsar decided to take matters into his own hands, and assumed leadership of the army. Now every foot of ground that was lost, every death was directly attributed to him, for his subjects began to no longer see him as a God, but as very plainly human. With military defeat, came distrust; and the Russian people lost faith in their Tsar, for as Margot Tracey; the daughter of a Russian Industrialist remembered in 1939: ‘Everyone was fed up with the Tsar because they thought he was weak.’ (White 1994, 24) Furthermore, the Tsar’s decision to leave his wife – an Austrian princess – in charge of the country simply increased the royal couple’s unpopularity, and his decision to adopt conscription alienated him from the Russian people. Peasant families that struggled before now lost their breadwinner to a war that they had been dragged into by their Tsar. The repercussions upon the families of the millions of Russians killed in action (Appendix A) did little to help the image of the Tsar, and Russia’s economic plight offered no form of assistance. Both on the Eastern and Home Fronts, people were hit hard by Russia’s dwindling resources, as her economy struggled to keep up with the needs of a nation. Even before the war, Russia ‘both in trade and industry… lagged far behind the main foreign states,’ (Halsall, P. 2007) and the war simply exacerbated these problems. The Tsar recognised and admitted these deficiencies, when he wrote in a letter to his wife: ‘If we had a rest from fighting for about a month, our condition would greatly improve.’ (Learnthings. 2006) Socially, politically and economically, Russia was simply not prepared for the consequences which war would bring.

Tsarist Russia was a country whose economic deficiencies were rapidly pushing her over the abyss and into revolution. As Sergei Witte remarked in 1900 on the state’s budget: Russia’s ‘industry is still very backward both by comparison with foreign states and in relation to the needs of the population.’ (Halsall, P. 2007) Although these problems were evident before the outbreak of war, conscription exacerbated Russia’s economic deficiencies because the absence of peasants from the land led to food shortages in the cities. (Oxley 2001, p.23) Durnovo, a high-ranking Russian official in 1914 attributed Russia’s dwindling economy to the country’s ‘great dependence on foreign industry… [and its] insufficient network of strategic railroads.’ (Rempel, G. 1999) Russia’s dependence on foreign aid placed her in dire straits when she was blockaded upon Turkey’s entry into the war. The blockade separated Russia from its allies and destroyed it economically and militarily, for it could no longer be supplied from abroad. (Laffin 1980, p.13) The impact of this blockade impaired Russia’s war effort so significantly that the Allies were compelled to launch an attack at Gallipoli; with the purpose of opening the trade route between the Black Sea and the Mediterranean. As history has shown, the ultimate failure of the Dardanelles campaign sealed Tsarist Russia’s fate. Unable to import supplies, the impact on the Eastern Front was felt almost immediately. Felix Yusupov remarked on the state of the Russian soldiers fighting on the front line in 1915: ‘Our troops were underfed, ill-equipped, and had no ammunition, yet… they fought against the best-equipped army in the world.’ (Learnthings. 2006) As more peasants were conscripted into the army, and fewer supplies were imported, the Russian economy found itself floundering in a war with no end in sight. Families struggled to survive as more and more men were called to the front, and the Tsar; with his position at the head of the army, was now seen as responsible for the entire war effort. He now found himself at the forefront of his people’s displeasure, and because of the war many of his subjects began to explore alternative sources of government.

Ineffective and despotic rule by the Tsars was a key factor in the 1917 revolution; which ended over three hundred years of autocratic rule in Russia. Throughout their rule, the Tsars had ruthlessly suppressed numerous rebellions with scant regard for human life. An American diplomat who saw first hand the brutal manner in which the 1905 revolution was suppressed commented: ‘All classes condemn the authorities and more particularly the Tsar. The Tsar has lost absolutely the affection of the Russian people.’ (White 1994, p.22) Despite this, the Tsar retained power in 1905 simply because he held the loyalty of the Russian Army. All that changed on the Eastern Front upon the outbreak of war, for as Russia’s difficulties mounted in August 1915, the Tsar… decided to take over the command of the armed forces. (Gibbons 1965, p.175) For a man with no military training or prowess, this was a mistake. In the past, any decisions he had made, had simply meant the difference between hunger and prosperity for many of his subjects. Now on the Eastern Front they meant the difference between life and death. Hamilton Fyfe; a reporter at the front echoed the thoughts and feelings of many soldiers: ‘The Russian troops… were being wasted because of the incompetence, intrigues, and corruption of the men who governed the country.’ (Learnthings. 2006) Poor judgment by the Tsar had led Russia into a war it was not prepared for, and now he was feeling the consequences. As Russian defeats continued, the soldiers grew to despise their leaders; who they began to see as synonymous with defeat. One particular group of troops was overheard to comment that: ‘When ten or fifteen generals are on the gallows we shall begin to win.’ (Robottom 1972, p.55) As dissent in the army grew, the Tsar’s Ministers begged him to reconsider his position at the head of the army with the words: ‘Your adoption of such a decision threatens Russia, yourself and your dynasty with serious consequences.’ (Oxley 2001, p.23) Unfortunately for the Tsar it was too late. Now every defeat, every casualty rested squarely on his soldiers; and from then on his people’s anger and resentment about the war was directed solely at him. The difference between the 1905 revolution and the one that occurred in 1917 was that the Tsar had lost the loyalty of the one force that could assert or destroy his rule.

Political opposition to the Tsar inspired the widespread uprising of the 1917 Revolution. Powerful leaders such as Vladimir Lenin emerged; inciting widespread opposition to Tsarist rule. While such opposition had always existed, the political upheaval it wrought had, in the past always been suppressed by the army, under the direction of the Tsar. This had occurred during the 1905 revolution. However, when the Great War broke out, the majority of the Russian army was tied up fighting on the Eastern Front and as military defeat ensued, many revolutionaries saw the possibilities of turning; as Lenin put it: The ‘imperialist war into a civil war.’ (Learnthings. 2006) As public opinion turned against the war, the revolutionaries seized their chance. They promoted a smear campaign against the Tsar, portraying him as the foundation of all Russia’s problems. Milyukov, a Cadet Leader in 1916 was one of many who believed that the grievances of the Russian people were because of: ‘the incompetence and evil intentions of the present government.’ (White 1994, p.23) Just like in 1905, the Russian people revolted and soldiers were sent to suppress the revolution. However, unlike 1905, of the troops and police [who] were sent to break up demonstrations… many army units refused. (Shermer 1973, p.123) With the majority of his troops fighting on the Eastern Front, the Tsar was powerless to prevent the uprising. Powerful revolutionary leaders and the disasters on the Eastern Front had swayed public opinion against him. The few troops who remained in the capital were unable to assert his rule, deserting him and joining the revolutionaries. The Great War had been the Tsar’s downfall; for when the whisperings of revolution reached his ears, his army was bogged down on the Eastern Front, too far away to be of any use.

Based on compelling evidence, the conflict of the Great War clearly led to the downfall of the Tsars. The consequences of the armed conflict with Germany resulted in millions of Russian lives being lost; leaving an economy in tatters and a Tsar fallen from grace. The Great War sucked all of Russia’s resources to the front, draining government coffers and slowing the production of food. In such conditions, revolution was inevitable, with the masses turning on the monarchy and replacing it with a system of government that was arguably more draconian than Tsarist rule had ever been. All this could have been avoided had Nicholas II paid a little more attention to the moods of the people on which his rule was based. For, at the end of the day; the people cared more for potatoes than a constitution. (Robottom 1972, p.57)

Appendices:

Appendix A: Smele, J. (2004). War and Revolution in Russia 1914 – 1921. (Online).

Available: Source

[There] were rumours that the Tsarina, Alexandra, and her favourite, the infamous Rasputin, were German spies. The rumours were unfounded, but by November 1916 influential critics of the regime were asking whether Russia's misfortunes - including 1,700,000 military dead and 5,000,000 wounded - were a consequence of 'stupidity or treason'.

Annotated Bibliography

Gibbons, S. (1965). World War One. Essex : Longman Group

The author of this book holds a doctorate in international history, and has written several articles on the First World War. All sources are duly acknowledged, and the information was presented in a factual and unbiased manner. The purpose of this book was to provide a detailed description of the Great War, and included both primary sources and the author’s own inferences. Although this book was published in 1965, the information it provided is still current, and its coverage of the Great War was excellent. I found this book to provide a useful insight into the difficulties Russia encountered upon, and indeed before enter the war in 1914.

Halsall, P. (2007). Sergei Witte on the tasks for economic policy. (Online).

Available: Source

This website contained the original budget for Russia in 1900 and was extremely useful for my paragraph on Russia’s economy. The site had recently been updated, but since it is a primary source it never loses its credibility. The budget report was written in a factual manner and no bias was evident, it was published solely for educational purposes.

Laffin, J. (1980). Damn the Dardanelles. Lane Cove : Doubleday

The author has written many volumes on war and military history. He has provided an extensive bibliography, and his work is based on both primary and secondary quotes and sources. Throughout this source the author maintained a neutral tone, and there was no evidence of bias from the range of information provided. There is sufficient coverage of the topic to prove that the failure of the Dardanelles campaign had massive ramification upon Tsarist Russia, and this was an excellent resource for researching my essay. This source was published in 1980 so the information was still valid and useful.

Learnthings. (2006). Revolutionary Russia. (Online).

Available: Source

The section of this website that was used for this assignment consisted of a series of primary quotes. Although the organisation that established this site had its name prominently displayed, no individual could be found to be the author. Nevertheless I found this site to be an excellent resource, and since only primary quotes were listed on the site, no bias was evident.

Oxley, P. (2001). Russia. Oxford : Oxford University Press

This resource was published by Oxford University in 2001, so it contained recent information from a reputable source. It contains a wealth of primary sources, which are analysed throughout the volume. The information is presented in a factual and unbiased fashion. All resources are acknowledged and its extensive coverage of Tsarist Russia was extremely useful when researching this topic.

Rempel, G. (1999). War and Revolution. (Online).

Available: Source

The author of this website is a professor at the Western New England College. The information presented on this site was presented in a neutral tone with no bias evident for purely educational purposes. Primary sources were analysed, and I found the author’s insight on the revolution very useful to my assignment. The website was last updated in 1999 so the information was not outdated.

Robottom, J. (1972). Modern Russia. Essex : Longman Group

The author’s name was clearly labelled on the front page of this book, and all of its resources were acknowledged. Both primary and secondary sources were referred to in this volume and I found it a useful resource throughout this essay. The information was presented in a factual and unbiased manner, and no hidden agenda was evident. Although this book was published 35 years ago, I still found it an excellent resource and the information presented was not outdated.

Shermer, D. (1973). World War I. London : Octopus Books

The information presented in this small book was extremely helpful, and the primary resources quoted in it were insightfully analysed. The author’s name was prominently displayed on the cover, and all resources were duly acknowledged. The information presented was still relevant today, 34 years on and I found it to be extremely useful. No bias was evident in the text, as the information was presented in a strictly neutral manner as the books purpose was for education.

Smele, J. (2004). War and Revolution in Russia 1914 – 1921. (Online).

Available : Source

The author of this site held a doctorate, although admittedly the type was not specified. This website was published relatively recently, so you could be sure that the information was up to date. The site contained a wealth of primary and secondary quotes which were both insightful and unbiased. This website was extremely useful and I would readily recommend it as an excellent resource.

Unknown. The Great World War. Unknown

This source was a very old book that had had its bibliographic details torn out. The book provided a detailed description of the Great War and found it very useful. Although the information contained in this volume was consistent with other research, no quotes were used in this assignment because of the lack of bibliographic details. Nevertheless, it provided a mixture of excellent primary and secondary sources which was presented in a factual and unbiased manner.

White, A. (1994). Russia and the USSR. London : HarperCollins Publishers

Although no background information on the author was visible in the book, an extensive list of referenced sources was available at the back. The information appeared to be presented clearly and in an unbiased fashion, focussing on a multitude of primary sources. Although this book could have gone into greater detail about Russia’s involvement in the Great War, on the whole I found it to be a useful and informative source.