Sign up to access the complete lesson and track your progress!
Unlock This CourseRussia went to war with Germany and Austria-Hungary in August 1914. At first the war was popular. Crowds cheered the Tsar, strikes stopped, and the capital, St Petersburg, was renamed Petrograd because the old name sounded too German.
The good mood did not last. Russia had the biggest army in Europe, but it was badly led and badly supplied. Over the next two and a half years the war damaged the army, the economy and daily life.
Key terms:
The defeats began within weeks.
Why did the army do so badly? Russian factories could not equip it. By 1915 there were not enough rifles to go round, and some men were sent to the front unarmed and told to pick up the rifles of the dead. The guns were short of shells, and many soldiers lacked boots. Many officers were chosen for their noble birth, not their skill.
By the start of 1917 about 1.7 million Russian soldiers were dead, and millions more were wounded or prisoners. Almost every village had lost men. Soldiers stopped trusting their officers, and desertion grew.
Russia mobilised about 15 million men during the war. Most were peasants, taken by conscription, and the army took farm horses too. Women, children and old men were left to do the farm work. Even so, Russia still grew enough grain. The food simply did not reach the cities.
The railways could not cope. The army came first, so trains carried soldiers, guns and fodder to the front. Engines and wagons broke down and were not repaired. Grain sat rotting at country stations, and coal from the south did not arrive.
Factories were making weapons, so there were few goods to buy, and paper money was losing its value. Peasants saw no point in selling grain for it. Many turned to hoarding, or fed the grain to their animals.
The cities also had more mouths to feed. Several million refugees fled east from the lands lost in 1915, and new workers crowded into the war factories. In Petrograd and Moscow, women queued for hours for bread, often in the freezing dark, and sometimes went home with nothing.
Fuel ran short as well. Russia had lost the coal mines of Poland, and the railways could not bring enough coal and wood from elsewhere. Homes went unheated. Some factories and bakeries had to close for lack of fuel, which put people out of work and made the bread shortage worse.
The war cost far more than the government could raise.
More money was chasing fewer goods, so prices shot up. By the start of 1917 prices in the cities were around four times what they had been in 1914. Wages rose too, but only about half as fast.
Think of a Petrograd worker whose pay has doubled since 1914. That sounds good. But bread, rent and firewood now cost about four times as much. In real terms the family can afford only about half of what it could before the war.
These problems fed each other, and the cities suffered most:
The war did not create Russia's discontent, but it made every old problem far worse. How it damaged the Tsar's own position is covered in The Tsar, the Tsarina and Rasputin.
Don't say Russia ran out of food. There was grain in the countryside. The problem was getting it to the cities. And don't say wages stood still: they rose, but prices rose much faster.
Source A: From a letter by Tsar Nicholas II to his wife, the Tsarina Alexandra, written at army headquarters, 20 September 1916 (translated).
'Together with military matters, the eternal question of supplies troubles me most of all ... Prince Obolensky, the President of the Committee of Supplies ... confesses frankly that they cannot alleviate the situation in any way, that they are working in vain ... that the prices are soaring and the people beginning to starve. It is obvious where this situation may lead the country.'
Source B: From a report by the Petrograd Okhrana, the Tsar's secret police, on conditions in the city, October 1916 (translated).
'Despite the great increase in wages, the economic condition of the masses is worse than terrible ... the prices on all products have increased 100 to 500 per cent ... The impossibility of even buying many food products and necessities, the time wasted standing idle in queues to receive goods ... have made the workers, as a whole, prepared for the wildest excesses of a "hunger riot".'
Study Sources A and B. How far does Source A support the evidence of Source B about the problems of food supply in Russia in 1916? Explain your answer. [8 marks]
Source A supports Source B in several ways. Both say that prices were rising fast: Source A says 'the prices are soaring' and Source B says prices 'have increased 100 to 500 per cent'. Both also say people could not get enough food. Source A says 'the people beginning to starve', and Source B describes 'the impossibility of even buying many food products'. Both sources also see danger ahead. Source A says it is 'obvious where this situation may lead the country', and Source B warns of a 'hunger riot'.
However, there are differences. Source B says there has been a 'great increase in wages', but Source A does not mention wages at all. Source B describes 'standing idle in queues' and the angry mood of the workers, while Source A is about officials who 'cannot alleviate the situation' and are 'working in vain'. Source A is also less exact: it only hints at where the crisis 'may lead', while Source B names the danger.
Overall, Source A supports Source B to a large extent. They agree on the main points: soaring prices, hunger and a threat to the country. They differ mainly in detail and focus, because Source B is about the workers and Source A is about the government's failure.
What lifts this to the top level: it matches short quotations from both sources for each point, covers support and difference, and ends with a clear judgement on how far.
Work through Source B one point at a time (prices, food, wages, queues, the risk of riots) and check each against Source A. Sort your findings into 'both say', 'only B says' and 'only A says', then finish with a phrase that measures the support, such as 'to a large extent'. For more help, see the Exam Skills lesson Paper 2 Section A Question (b): How Far Does Source A Support Source B?