OCR Specification focus:
‘Continuing war eroded legitimacy and contributed to overthrow.’
The ongoing First World War fatally weakened the Russian Provisional Government (March–October 1917), eroding its legitimacy, deepening social unrest, and paving the way for Bolshevik seizure of power.
The Provisional Government and the Burden of War
The Provisional Government, formed after the abdication of Tsar Nicholas II in March 1917, inherited a nation already exhausted by World War I. It was a temporary authority, meant to govern until elections for a Constituent Assembly could establish a permanent system. However, its decision to continue the war profoundly shaped its short and troubled existence.
Legacy of War Fatigue
By 1917, Russia had endured almost three years of devastating conflict:
Over 1.7 million soldiers killed and millions more wounded or captured.
Severe economic dislocation: industrial production collapsed, transport networks faltered, and food shortages intensified.
Urban populations suffered acute famine and inflation, with bread rationing and long queues becoming commonplace.
Morale within the army plummeted, as soldiers grew weary of heavy casualties and unclear objectives.
The Provisional Government, led initially by Prince Georgy Lvov and later by Alexander Kerensky, underestimated the depth of this war-weariness. Instead of prioritising peace, they pledged to honour Russia’s commitments to the Triple Entente and pursue a “war to victory”.
Legitimacy: The right and acceptance of an authority, often a government, to rule. Legitimacy depends on public trust and consent.
Military Crisis and the Kerensky Offensive
Strategic Miscalculations
In summer 1917, War Minister Alexander Kerensky launched a major offensive against Germany and Austria-Hungary.
A clear Eastern Front map of the Kerensky (July) Offensive showing Russian and Central Powers deployments and movements in Galicia and Bukovina. It illustrates the scale and direction of the failed Russian advance that deepened military and political crisis in 1917. Source
The goal was to:
Restore military morale and reverse defeats.
Demonstrate to the Allies that Russia remained a committed partner.
Strengthen domestic political legitimacy through victory.
The plan backfired catastrophically. Poorly supplied and demoralised troops refused to advance, while others deserted en masse. The offensive quickly collapsed, resulting in further territorial losses and deepening disillusionment.
Consequences of Military Failure
The army’s collapse accelerated desertions, with over two million soldiers abandoning the front by autumn 1917.
Revolutionary soviets (workers’ and soldiers’ councils) gained influence within the military, undermining central command.
Soldiers began electing their own committees and disobeying orders, further eroding discipline.
The government’s inability to control the armed forces exposed its fragility and loss of authority.
Domestic Unrest and the War’s Social Impact
Economic Breakdown
War intensified Russia’s already fragile economy:
Industrial output declined sharply as resources were redirected to the front.
Railways, essential for grain transport, became overloaded, worsening urban food shortages.
Inflation soared — by 1917, prices were four times higher than in 1914.
The urban population faced hunger and unemployment, fuelling strikes and demonstrations. In Petrograd and Moscow, workers’ protests often turned into political demands for “peace, bread, and land” — slogans later adopted by the Bolsheviks.
Rural Radicalisation
Peasants, many of whom had been conscripted, returned from the front to seize land from landlords. The Provisional Government’s failure to address agrarian reform alienated the countryside:
Land seizures increased sharply in mid-1917.
Local authorities were often powerless to enforce government policy.
Revolutionary ideas spread rapidly among returning soldiers and rural communities.
The government’s focus on the war prevented effective domestic reforms, deepening resentment across both urban and rural Russia.
Dual Power and Political Fragmentation
The February Revolution of 1917 had produced a unique situation known as dual power — a coexistence of the Provisional Government and the Petrograd Soviet, an elected council of workers’ and soldiers’ deputies.
The Petrograd Soviet meets in 1917, reflecting the rise of workers’ and soldiers’ representation during wartime breakdown. Its authority over garrisons and factories limited the Provisional Government’s ability to pursue the war. This supports the syllabus focus on how continuing war eroded legitimacy. Source
The Soviet wielded real power in the streets, particularly over the military and working classes.
The Provisional Government, though legally recognised, depended on Soviet cooperation to enforce policies.
The war exacerbated tensions between these two bodies. The Soviet increasingly demanded immediate peace, while the government insisted on continuing the fight. This deep divide paralysed decision-making and undermined state authority.
Dual Power: The coexistence of two rival authorities — the Provisional Government and the Petrograd Soviet — after the February Revolution, each claiming legitimacy in 1917 Russia.
The Kornilov Affair and the Final Blow
Attempted Restoration of Order
In August 1917, General Lavr Kornilov, alarmed by revolutionary disorder and army collapse, attempted to march on Petrograd to restore discipline. Kerensky, fearing a right-wing coup, dismissed Kornilov and called on the Petrograd Soviet and its armed supporters — including the Bolsheviks — to defend the revolution.
Political Fallout
Kornilov’s failed coup discredited Kerensky among conservatives and liberals, who saw him as weak.
It boosted Bolshevik credibility, as they appeared to be defenders of the revolution.
Armed Bolshevik units, once released to stop Kornilov, remained active and influential, particularly in Petrograd.
The affair fatally weakened the government’s authority, demonstrating its inability to control either the right or the left.
Bolshevik Rise and the October Overthrow
Exploiting War-Weariness
The Bolsheviks, led by Vladimir Lenin, capitalised on discontent. Their promise of “Peace, Land, and Bread” directly addressed the population’s war fatigue and economic misery. By October 1917:
Bolsheviks held majorities in the Petrograd and Moscow Soviets.
Their armed militia, the Red Guards, were well-organised and increasingly powerful.
Popular support for Kerensky’s government had virtually collapsed.
October Revolution
On 25 October (7 November, New Style) 1917, Bolshevik forces stormed the Winter Palace, arresting members of the Provisional Government.
The uprising faced minimal resistance, illustrating the depth of governmental collapse.
The continued prosecution of the war had eroded the Provisional Government’s legitimacy, fragmented its support base, and provided revolutionary groups with the opportunity to seize power. In prioritising external military commitments over internal stability, the government ensured its own downfall.
FAQ
The Tsarist regime pursued expansionist aims, including control of the Straits and influence over the Balkans. The Provisional Government initially maintained these ambitions, promising to honour commitments to the Allies and fight for victory. However, as the war dragged on and domestic unrest grew, some ministers began favouring a negotiated peace. This inconsistency undermined confidence in the government and fuelled criticism from both the Petrograd Soviet and radical groups, who demanded an immediate end to hostilities.
Disillusioned soldiers became increasingly politicised as the war continued:
Desertions soared, with many troops returning home to seize land or join revolutionary movements.
Soldiers’ and sailors’ committees often challenged orders from traditional officers, weakening discipline.
The Kronstadt sailors, in particular, were instrumental in supporting Bolshevik uprisings and undermining government authority.
Their loss of loyalty deprived the government of reliable military backing, making suppression of revolutionary activity almost impossible by October.
The slogan addressed three pressing demands that the Provisional Government failed to resolve:
Peace: promised an end to the devastating war.
Land: appealed to peasants frustrated by lack of agrarian reform.
Bread: spoke to urban workers suffering from shortages and inflation.
Its simplicity and directness contrasted sharply with the government’s vague promises and continued war effort. The Bolsheviks’ ability to offer a clear alternative vision helped them gain mass support and positioned them as the only party capable of solving Russia’s crises.
Britain and France, deeply reliant on the Eastern Front to divide German forces, pressured Russia to stay in the war. They provided financial aid and military supplies, which the Provisional Government feared losing if it sought peace. Diplomatic correspondence and Allied representatives in Petrograd repeatedly emphasised the need for Russian participation in planned offensives. This external pressure limited the government’s options and pushed it into the disastrous Kerensky Offensive, which ultimately hastened its collapse.
The July Days (3–6 July 1917) were a series of armed demonstrations in Petrograd demanding Soviet power and an end to the war. Although the uprising was disorganised and suppressed, it exposed the government’s vulnerability and deep public discontent. The temporary arrest and exile of Bolshevik leaders did little to weaken their influence; instead, the crisis highlighted the regime’s dependence on unreliable military forces. The episode further discredited Kerensky’s leadership and showed that revolutionary momentum was shifting irreversibly towards the Bolsheviks.
Practice Questions
Question 1 (2 marks):
Give two ways in which Russia’s involvement in the First World War weakened the Provisional Government in 1917.
Mark scheme:
Award 1 mark for each valid point, up to a maximum of 2 marks.
Possible answers include:
The continued war caused severe economic disruption, leading to food shortages and strikes. (1)
Military defeats and the failed Kerensky Offensive lowered army morale and increased desertions. (1)
The war deepened opposition to the government, strengthening revolutionary groups like the Bolsheviks. (1)
Resources diverted to the war effort limited the government’s ability to implement domestic reforms. (1)
Question 2 (6 marks):
Explain why continuing the First World War contributed to the overthrow of the Provisional Government in October 1917.
Mark scheme:
Level 1 (1–2 marks): Basic statements showing limited understanding, possibly generalised.
Mentions that the war made people unhappy or caused problems for the government.
Very limited explanation or detail.
Level 2 (3–4 marks): Some explanation with relevant knowledge, though lacking depth or range.
Explains one or two reasons, such as military defeats or worsening economic conditions, but may lack specific examples or links to overthrow.
May mention Bolshevik gains but not fully connect them to war discontent.
Level 3 (5–6 marks): Clear and well-supported explanation showing secure understanding of causation.
Explains multiple factors linked to the war: economic breakdown, desertions and military collapse, political fragmentation (dual power), and Bolshevik exploitation of war weariness.
Links these clearly to the erosion of the Provisional Government’s legitimacy and ultimate overthrow in October 1917.
Uses accurate and relevant examples such as the failed Kerensky Offensive, the Kornilov Affair, and Bolshevik slogans like “Peace, Land, and Bread.”
