🚩 26 February
Some soldiers refused to fire on the crowds. In one regiment, men fired on the police instead.
Opposition to Tsarist Rule 1914-17: The Impact of War and the February Revolution » The February Revolution and the Tsar's Abdication
What you'll learn this session
Study time: 30 minutes
Edexcel spec: Paper 2 Section A, Investigation A2, Key topic 2
- How strikes and bread queues in Petrograd turned into a revolution in February 1917
- Why the soldiers' mutiny was the turning point
- How and why Nicholas II abdicated
- How the Provisional Government was set up
🔒 Unlock Full Course Content
Sign up to access the complete lesson and track your progress!
Unlock This CourseThe spark: Petrograd, 23-25 February
By early 1917 Russia was worn out by war: defeats, hunger and a government nobody trusted. The immediate causes of the revolution came together in the capital, Petrograd. In Russia's old calendar the month was February, which is why we say the February Revolution. (Western Europe used a calendar 13 days ahead, so 23 February in Russia was 8 March elsewhere.)
- Bread. Cold weather and snowed-up railways made food shortages worse, and the queues outside bakeries grew longer. Rumours that bread was about to be rationed sent people into panic buying.
- Workers' anger. The management of the huge Putilov factory locked out thousands of workers on 22 February after a dispute over pay.
- International Women's Day, 23 February. Women textile workers walked out and marched through the Vyborg district demanding bread. Many metalworkers joined them. Slogans soon turned against the war and the Tsar.
The protests grew each day. By 25 February hundreds of thousands were on strike and most of the city's factories had stopped. That evening Nicholas II, at army headquarters, ordered the commander of Petrograd to end the disorder by the next day. Troops were told to shoot, and on 26 February dozens of protesters were killed.
Key terms:
- Garrison: the soldiers stationed in a town or city. Petrograd's garrison was well over 100,000 men, many of them reserves and recent conscripts.
- Abdicate: to give up the throne
- Provisional Government: a temporary government, in place until a properly elected one could be chosen
The turning point: the army mutiny
In 1905 the Tsar had survived because the army stayed loyal. In February 1917 it did not. Many garrison soldiers were peasants in uniform, hungry like the crowds, and they did not want to shoot at women and workers or be sent to the front.
⚡ 27 February
The Volynsky regiment rose first, killing an officer. Other regiments followed. By evening tens of thousands of soldiers had joined the crowds. Prisons were opened and police stations burned.
The government had lost control of its own capital. The Tsar's ministers could no longer keep order.
Two new centres of power
On 26 February the Tsar ordered the Duma (the parliament) to stop meeting. Its leaders ignored him in practice. On 27 February a Provisional Committee of Duma members, headed by Rodzianko, took charge. The same day workers and soldiers set up the Petrograd Soviet. The Duma leaders wanted to save the monarchy by changing the Tsar. The Soviet leaders wanted far greater change.
The abdication, 2 March
Nicholas left headquarters on 28 February to return to his family, but unrest along the railway stopped his train. It was diverted to Pskov, the headquarters of General Ruzsky. There Ruzsky reported his talks with Rodzianko. General Alekseyev asked the front commanders for their views, and they told the Tsar that he should go. Without the army behind him he had no way to fight back. On 2 March (15 March elsewhere) he abdicated, first in favour of his son and then in favour of his brother Grand Duke Michael, because his son was so ill. Michael refused the throne the next day. Three centuries of Romanov rule were over.
The Provisional Government
The Duma committee announced a Provisional Government on 2 March, with Prince Lvov as prime minister. It promised to rule only until a Constituent Assembly could be elected to decide Russia's future. It had no army of its own and shared power with the Soviet. Its problems are the next lesson, The Provisional Government and the Petrograd Soviet.
Common mistakes
- Saying that the Bolsheviks planned the February Revolution. The protest began with ordinary women and workers, and no party led it.
- Writing that strikes alone toppled the Tsar. Crowds had been crushed before. The mutiny made the difference.
- Mixing up the Tsar's abdication (2 March) with the Bolsheviks seizing power later in 1917.
Exam-style question
Study Extract C and Sources A and B.
Extract C (a practice extract written for this lesson, in the style of a modern history book)
Strikes and riots did not topple Nicholas II. Crowds had been put down before, in 1905. What was different in 1917 was that the soldiers sent to restore order joined the protesters, and the generals then told him to go. The Tsar fell because he lost the army, not because workers demanded bread.
Source A: From a telegram sent by Mikhail Rodzianko, President of the Duma, to Nicholas II, 26 February 1917 (Russian calendar)
The situation is serious. The capital is in a state of anarchy. The government is paralyzed; the transport service has broken down; the food and fuel supplies are completely disorganized. Discontent is general and on the increase. There is wild shooting in the streets; troops are firing at each other. ...
Source B: From the diary of Nicholas II, 2 March 1917 (Russian calendar), in translation
... the situation in Petrograd is such that the Duma ministers are helpless to do anything since the soc.[ial]-dem[ocrat] party, in the form of the worker's committee, is fighting against them. They want my abdication. ... The bottom line is that in order to save Russia and keep the army at the front in tranquility [I] must decide on this step. I agreed.
Extract C suggests that the Tsar fell because he lost the support of the army, not because of protests by workers. How far do you agree with this interpretation? Use Extract C, Sources A and B and your own knowledge to explain your answer. [16 marks]
Model answer
Extract C argues that the army, not the workers, brought the Tsar down. I agree to a large extent, but the protests were still necessary.
The strongest support is the army's behaviour. Extract C says the soldiers 'joined the protesters'. Source A backs this up: Rodzianko tells the Tsar that 'troops are firing at each other' and that the 'government is paralyzed'. From my own knowledge, the Volynsky regiment mutinied on 27 February and tens of thousands of the garrison followed. In 1905 a loyal army had saved Nicholas, and now he had none in the capital. Source B also supports Extract C. The Tsar says he must abdicate 'to save Russia and keep the army at the front in tranquility'. From my own knowledge, General Alekseyev asked the front commanders for their views and they told him to go. It was the generals, not the strikers, who made his position impossible.
However, Extract C underplays the protests. Source A shows that 'food and fuel supplies are completely disorganized' and that 'discontent is general'. Without bread queues, the Putilov lockout, the women's march on 23 February and the strikes that closed most factories by 25 February, there would have been no soldiers to mutiny. Many soldiers joined because they did not want to shoot at hungry people. Source B also shows that workers mattered. Nicholas writes that the 'worker's committee' was fighting the Duma ministers and that 'they want my abdication'. This was the new Petrograd Soviet, which showed that workers and soldiers now had power of their own.
The Tsar's earlier failures also mattered. He had taken command of the army and left the government to the Tsarina, while the war went badly. Many of the elite had lost faith, which is why even Rodzianko, a loyal monarchist, wanted a new government.
Judged by what made the difference between a protest and the end of the monarchy, Extract C is largely right. Earlier protests failed because the troops obeyed. In February they did not. But the army turned only because hunger and war had pushed the capital into revolt, so the extract's contrast between soldiers and workers is too sharp.
What lifts this to the top level: it weighs support against challenge using the extract, both sources and precise own knowledge, and reaches a judgement against a stated criterion.
Exam tip
In a 16-mark interpretation question, quote from Extract C, Source A and Source B, and add at least two facts that appear in none of them. Then finish with a judgement that says how far you agree and why.