Why did the Tsar lose power in 1917

It would be ignorant to say that the Tsarist regime collapsed because of one factor, when in fact it was numerous factors that caused the regime to collapse; some more important than others. The long term factors such as the out dated system of autocracy, the weak leadership of Nicolas II, and the industrialisation of the working class all contributed to the instability of Russia in 1914. However, although in 1914 it could be said that Russia was unstable, the instability was beneath the surface and was not strong enough to cause a revolution.Russia’s involvement in the First World War could be considered to be one of the most important factors as to why the Tsar lost power because it highlighted the weaknesses of the Tsarist regime.

However, we also have to realise that the reasons as to why the Tsar lost power were not solely down to Russia’s involvement in the war. The war acted more as a catalyst that emphasised the stresses and strains on Russian society caused by the long term factors.We do recognise that the war didn’t help Russian society as it had a drastic impact on the economy causing food and fuel shortages and inflation which resulted in the price of meat rising by 300%, which caused upset among many civilians as their wages couldn’t cover the costs of living. Then adding the Tsar’s mistakes during that period to the concoction combined with everything else they had suffered including the millions of losses, the inflation, the defeats, and the corrupted government, it made everything become amplified; everything seemed a whole lot worse. By the end of 1916 the Tsar’s position was really weak.

Rasputin and Alexandra had caused an out roar in the public with their management of the government; the army had suffered several defeats including Tannenburg and Rava Ruska which dampened the morale of the civilians, the Duma had lost faith in the government, and the army’s loyalty was starting to drift. By early 1917 there were a series of demonstrations and strikes in Petrograd, on the 18th February the strike at Putilov began, followed by the international women’s day demonstrations on 23rd February, bringing hundreds of thousands of workers onto the streets to demand bread, after the rationing of bread on the 19th February.The army’s loyalty to the Tsar disintegrated on the 26th of February when the troops refused to fire on the crowds and joined them in the strikes. When explaining why the Tsar lost power, all of the factors have to be taken into consideration as it was not just one factor that caused him to lose power but a number of factors that had built up over time that were then emphasised by the impact of the war.

In 1914, Russia was not on the brink of revolution as it had been in 1905; however there were some elements of instability in 1914 from the previous long standing factors, which helped contribute to the Tsars loss of power in 1917.One of the long standing issues was the system of autocracy itself, it was outdated and relied on the army using repression to keep everything in order and it relied on the ability of the Tsar. The ability of the Tsar in this case was not very strong; Rasputin described him as a ‘sad man that lacked guts’. The Tsar’s weak leadership skills were not brought to the forefront as he had skilled men such as Witte who managed to keep the army loyal during the 1905 revolution and Stolypin, who managed to mix both reform and repression in the period 1906-1911.

If it wasn’t for Witte the Tsar may have lost power in 1905 and if it wasn’t for Stolypin the revolution would have probably come significantly before 1917. However Witte’s dismissal in 1906 led to the new comer Stolypin, as both of these men were good at what they did the Tsar’s position was safe, but after Stolypin’s death in 1911 everything went downhill from there on. Stolypin’s death also meant that his reforms were unfulfilled as opposition still existed among the peasants and urban proletariats.Repression was still needed in 1912 at the Lena Goldfields massacre to keep order which suggests that there was some instability in 1912 as they still relied very much on the army. Another problem was Russia’s industrialisation and the speed at which it was happening.

The modernisation and industrialisation of Russia resulted in the growth of the urban proletariat and the creation of a middle class. This made more people move to the cities where living conditions were worse so it therefore angered a lot of people.Before 1914 there was already tension in Russia as shown when Stolypin created the Kulaks which were the higher skilled peasants. This made the peasants very angry but it was acceptable because their anger was directed at each other and away from the Tsar. Nicolas II was in a position he didn’t want to be in, he wasn’t the right person to autocratically rule the country; he was weak.

He relied too much upon the advice of others and wasn’t definitive enough in the choices he made.Sergei Witte said ‘his character is the source of all our misfortunes’ suggesting that if Nicolas II had a stronger sense of character he wouldn’t be facing the problems he was facing at the time. In hindsight the long term issues did play a big part in the Tsar losing power however this was only when combined with the short term and immediate factors. In isolation the long term factors weren’t enough of a problem to bring about a revolution. In 1914 Russia was not prepared to go to war.Their military programme wouldn’t be ready until 1917.

They also weren’t ready economically; Figes said ‘war will necessitate expenditures which are beyond Russia’s financial means’ stating that Russia couldn’t afford this war. Figes also said ‘a European war is mortally dangerous for whomever wins’ which is suggesting that even if Russia was to win the war the Tsar’s position would not be safe because the expenditures the war required would have had a disastrous affect on the economy resulting in discontentment among the civilians.When the war began in 1914 everyone pulled together to support their country, the sale of vodka was banned in order to produce more artillery equipment. However the defeats at Tannenburg (August 1914), Masurian Lakes (September 1914) Rava Ruska and Brusseloffensive heavily impacted Russian society, it killed everyone’s optimism and dampened morale.

These two defeats resulted in the loss of hundreds of thousands of soldiers; in the first year Russia lost 4 million men. This helped change the composition of the army because the loyal soldiers had been killed off and were being replaced by angry disloyal peasants.As the peasants were becoming the new soldiers they were more susceptible to the revolutionary groups as they were more impressionable, and didn’t care much for the Tsar. They were also less trained which meant that the army as a force was becoming weaker.

The military were nowhere near ready for war in 1914. Pipes said ‘politically, economically and socially the institutions were incapable of meeting the demands of war’ in other words Russia was in no financial state to accommodate the costs of war.In 1915 only 1 in 10 soldiers had a rifle; soldiers had to wait for the men in front to fall down before they could pick up a weapon. They were also limited to 2 to 3 shells a day. In comparison to Germany and Austro-Hungary, Russia was no match. By 1916 the military economy had improved.

Russia had imports coming in from the West and artillery production had risen by 400%. However as the military economy increased, the civilian economy decreased. During the war Russia abandoned the gold standard and started to print more money to try to accommodate the costs of war, this resulted in inflation.The cost of living increased due to inflation; the price of meat increased by 300% and the price of flour increased by 200%. As the cost of living went up the worker’s wages also went up, although not enough to match the living costs, this angered the urban proletariats.

There were food and fuel shortages across the cities; Petrograd was affected to most because of its geographic location. By 1916 Petrograd was only receiving 1/3 of the food it needed and ? of the fuel, the influx of refugees from the country side made these problems even worse as there were more people and not enough food.As the army were away and repression couldn’t be reinforced the opposition became much stronger as the society radicalised itself. There was a Turkistan rebellion as they didn’t want to be conscripted into the army, and the peasants began hoarding food as they weren’t getting enough money for it. By 1916 the Tsar had lost quite a lot of support because of the mistakes he had made during the period.

Nicolas should not have got Russia involved in the war; they couldn’t afford it, the military programme was not ready and he was related to the leader in Germany so there was no need for full mobilisation.The setting up of the War-industries committee was good because it would link the military and civilian economy together. However it was a mistake from the Tsar as he wasn’t willing to give any of his power up and so the committee was limited and it led people to blame the government for the problems which led to the idea that the removal of the Tsar would fix the problems in the economy. In 1915 the Tsar made the biggest mistake he possibly could when he made himself Commander and Chief of the army.

This could be considered as being detrimental to his loss of power in 1917 because by putting himself in charge it made him responsible for all of Russia’s defeats, this meant that people could blame him directly for the disastrous results in war. During the war the government proposed a Progressive Bloc which would be a national government to help keep things under control whilst the Tsar was away. This gave people hope that the system of autocracy would start to be reconsidered, it appealed to everyone.The Tsar, not wanting to give up any power rejected the progressive bloc which alienated all of his supporters. A monarchist said ‘the whole point of the Progressive Bloc was to prevent revolution’ showing that people just wanted to help out and keep things running, however Nicolas’ inability to give up a little bit of his power may have been what cost him his title.

By 1916 the Tsar had lost many of his supporters, even the Duma had turned against him ‘we have lost faith in the abilities of this government to achieve victory.We will fight you with all legitimate means until you go. When Nicolas left to be in charge of the army he left Alexandra in charge of the government, this was a big mistake as she was German in 1915 there were already slogans saying ‘down with the German woman’ showing that the people were not happy with her ruling the country. The thing that made it worse was Rasputin’s influence upon Alexandra; the civilians got the wrong idea and accused them of having an affair and Rasputin ruling the country. During 1915 13 major ministries saw 36 ministers come and go, there was no consistency within the government anymore, and the Tsar was losing support because of the way the government was been run.The short term factors along with the long term factors made the regime more unstable than ever, however it was the immediate factors that tipped everything over the edge.

In early 1917 Nicolas the II’s position was not in a safe place. At the start of 1917 150,000 workers took to the streets in remembrance of bloody Sunday, followed by the Putilov strike beginning on the 18th February this then coincided with International Women’s Day on the 23rd of February. Thus resulting in hundreds of thousands of people taking to the streets.The Tsar was away whilst all of this was happening and received a letter from Alexandra telling him to come back, he ordered the army to fire on the crowds. On the 25th the army fired on the crowd, however on the 26th of February most of the soldiers refused to fire on the crowds and joined them.

As the Tsar was trying to make his way back to Petrograd his line was blocked by disloyal troops who were ordering him to step down as Tsar. Nicolas didn’t want to step down in favour of his son because on his son’s condition, so he decided to step down in favour of his brother.However his brother didn’t want the responsibility and no Nicolas II abdicated on the 2nd March 1917 and that was the end of the Romanov Dynasty. The regime collapsed it was not overthrown.

The long term factors had built up and when the short term factors and immediate factors were added it was all too much for the regime to up hold, and so it caved in on itself. In conclusion the Tsar power in 1917 due to a number of reasons, not just one. The regime collapsed because of the effects of the long term factors, the impact of the short term and immediate factors.