Russia’s involvement in the First World War exacerbated internal tensions, leading to economic collapse, political unrest, and ultimately the abdication of Nicholas II in February 1917.
Political and Economic Dislocation Caused by WWI
Economic Breakdown
Russia’s economy was ill-prepared for the demands of a modern, prolonged war:
Inflation surged as the government printed money to finance military operations. The rouble’s value dropped precipitously.
Prices of essential goods soared. By 1916, food prices had quadrupled in urban areas, outpacing wages and reducing the purchasing power of the working class.
The national budget deficit grew dramatically, pushing the economy into deeper crisis.
War expenditure between 1914 and 1917 totalled over 17 billion roubles, straining already limited state resources.
Food Shortages and Agricultural Disruption
The war’s strain on infrastructure and manpower critically affected agriculture:
Many peasants were conscripted, leading to a shortage of rural labour and reduced agricultural output.
Horses and fertiliser were requisitioned for the war effort, further reducing productivity.
Although grain harvests remained relatively stable, distribution failed. Food was often left to rot in the countryside due to logistical failures.
Urban areas, particularly Petrograd and Moscow, suffered acute food shortages due to the failure of internal distribution systems.
Transport Collapse
The Russian transport network buckled under wartime pressures:
Railways were overwhelmed by military logistics, leaving insufficient capacity for civilian goods.
The Trans-Siberian Railway, vital for supplying cities, became clogged with military convoys.
Coal and fuel shortages affected both trains and heating supplies, especially in winter.
The breakdown in transport led to widespread famine conditions in urban centres by the winter of 1916–17.
Nicholas II’s Leadership and Command of the Army
Decision to Take Supreme Command
In September 1915, Nicholas II made a critical decision:
He assumed personal command of the Russian army on the Eastern Front, replacing Grand Duke Nikolai.
The intention was to inspire national unity and morale, but it backfired disastrously.
Consequences of Nicholas’s Decision
The Tsar now bore direct responsibility for Russia’s military failures.
Defeats in battles such as Brusilov’s campaign in 1916 (though initially successful) highlighted the poor state of the military.
Nicholas’s absence from Petrograd created a power vacuum, which was filled by the Tsarina and Rasputin.
The Tsarina and Rasputin’s Damaging Influence
Alexandra’s Unpopularity
While the Tsar was at the front, Empress Alexandra effectively governed in his stead:
As a German-born royal, she was viewed with deep suspicion during wartime.
Her staunch support for autocracy and dismissal of reform made her unpopular among politicians.
Rasputin’s Role and Court Scandals
The mystic Grigori Rasputin gained enormous influence due to his perceived ability to treat the Tsarevich’s haemophilia:
Alexandra saw Rasputin as a holy man and relied heavily on his advice.
He was involved in ministerial appointments and sackings, contributing to a revolving door of incompetent leadership.
Between 1915–16, there were four Prime Ministers, three War Ministers, and three Interior Ministers, demonstrating the government’s instability.
Rumours of an affair between Rasputin and Alexandra—though unfounded—further undermined the monarchy’s credibility.
Rasputin was assassinated in December 1916 by conservative nobles hoping to salvage the regime, but it was too late.
Social Unrest and Strikes in Petrograd
Working-Class Discontent
As living conditions deteriorated, discontent grew rapidly:
Wages stagnated while inflation surged, making basic goods unaffordable.
Workers endured long hours in unsafe factories with little recourse to protest due to censorship and police repression.
By 1916, Petrograd’s workforce was organising frequent strikes over food shortages and wage cuts.
Escalation of Strikes
Strikes became increasingly political:
In early 1917, tens of thousands of workers took to the streets.
Slogans moved from economic demands to calls for the end of autocracy.
The combination of hunger, cold, and political frustration created a volatile environment.
The February Revolution of 1917
The Spark: February 23rd (March 8th, New Style)
International Women’s Day protests were the trigger:
Thousands of working-class women demonstrated in Petrograd, protesting bread shortages and demanding change.
Their action drew in male workers, who joined in with calls for “bread, peace, and freedom.”
Growth of the Uprising
Over the next days, unrest escalated:
Factories closed due to strikes, leaving over 200,000 workers on the streets by February 25.
Cossack troops, traditionally loyal to the regime, refused to fire on protestors in many instances.
Demonstrators attacked symbols of Tsarist authority, including police stations and government buildings.
Army Mutiny and Collapse of Order
The turning point came with the mutiny of the Petrograd garrison:
On February 27, soldiers of the Volynsky Regiment mutinied after being ordered to fire on protestors.
The mutiny spread quickly through the capital’s military units.
Mutinous troops began arming demonstrators, seizing arsenals, and taking control of key points in the city.
The Duma formed a Provisional Committee, while the Petrograd Soviet re-emerged to represent workers and soldiers.
Abdication of Nicholas II
As unrest spread and railway lines were blocked, Nicholas was stranded at Pskov.
Military leaders advised him to abdicate to restore order.
On 2 March 1917 (15 March, New Style), Nicholas abdicated in favour of his brother, Grand Duke Michael, who refused the crown, ending over 300 years of Romanov rule.
The Provisional Government, led by Prince Lvov, assumed power, pledging to hold elections for a Constituent Assembly.
While Nicholas believed his abdication would preserve the monarchy, the events of February 1917 marked the end of autocracy in Russia. The cumulative pressures of war, poor leadership, social unrest, and economic collapse had rendered the regime unsustainable. The stage was now set for the Bolsheviks and the October Revolution.
FAQ
The Russian working class grew increasingly radicalised between 1914 and 1917 due to a combination of deteriorating economic conditions, political frustration, and the influence of revolutionary ideologies. War mobilisation led to an influx of peasants into urban industrial centres like Petrograd, intensifying overcrowding, housing shortages, and food scarcity. Real wages declined dramatically due to rampant inflation, while working hours increased to meet wartime production demands. Despite enduring these hardships, workers saw little government support or relief. The continued repression of trade unions and political activity further alienated them. Factory discipline became harsher under military production regulations, and strikes were met with police brutality. Radical political ideas, particularly socialism and Marxism, gained traction through underground pamphlets and agitators who blamed the Tsarist regime for their suffering. By 1917, the working class was not only economically embittered but politically awakened, viewing revolution as the only viable solution to end their exploitation and improve their lives.
Women played a pivotal role in sparking the February Revolution, especially through their leadership in the International Women’s Day protest on 23 February 1917 (8 March, New Style). Amid severe bread shortages and rising food prices, thousands of working-class women in Petrograd—many of whom worked in textile factories or queued daily for food—organised mass demonstrations. Their demands were initially centred on food and survival, but quickly evolved into calls for peace and political reform. The scale and passion of their protests inspired widespread sympathy and participation, drawing in male workers and expanding the strike movement across the city. The authorities underestimated the seriousness of these actions, but women’s determination helped ignite a city-wide uprising. Their role is especially notable because it was spontaneous and grassroots in nature, highlighting the depth of discontent across all layers of Russian society. Ultimately, women’s activism on this day was the catalyst for the broader revolutionary events that followed.
By early 1917, much of the Russian elite—including senior military figures and aristocrats—had lost faith in Nicholas II’s ability to rule. They were alarmed by his isolation, the undue influence of Rasputin and the Tsarina, and the worsening situation at home and on the front lines. When the February Revolution erupted, many in the elite recognised that continued autocracy could lead to complete societal collapse. General Alekseev and other top army commanders advised Nicholas to abdicate, believing it was the only way to restore stability and prevent anarchy or a full-blown revolution. Crucially, the military leadership refused to back any violent suppression of the Petrograd uprisings, effectively withdrawing their support from the Tsarist regime. Members of the Duma, once loyal to the monarchy, formed a Provisional Committee to assume control. Thus, elite disillusionment and military neutrality were instrumental in ensuring that the revolution succeeded with minimal resistance and that Nicholas was forced to abdicate.
Railway workers were central to both the logistical collapse of Russia during World War I and the success of the February Revolution. The war placed immense strain on the transport network, which was poorly maintained and heavily overburdened with military demands. Railway lines prioritised troop and munitions transport, leading to serious delays or complete breakdowns in the distribution of food and coal to urban centres. Railway workers themselves were underpaid, overworked, and often exposed to freezing conditions, fostering strong resentment. By 1917, many railway workers were sympathetic to revolutionary causes, and their strikes helped cripple infrastructure further. During the February days, their refusal to transport troops into Petrograd and their decision to block the Tsar’s train from returning to the capital significantly weakened Nicholas’s ability to respond to the crisis. Without the cooperation of rail workers, communication between the monarchy, army, and government disintegrated, hastening the regime’s collapse and allowing revolutionaries to seize control more easily.
Nicholas II’s abdication on 2 March 1917 was intended to preserve the monarchy by transferring power to Grand Duke Michael. However, Michael declined the throne, arguing that any new ruler should be chosen by a democratically elected Constituent Assembly. This created a power vacuum. The Provisional Government, hastily formed by moderate Duma members, lacked both legal authority and popular legitimacy. At the same time, the Petrograd Soviet claimed to represent the workers and soldiers, creating a system of Dual Power that was inherently unstable. Key issues—such as land reform, peace negotiations, and economic relief—were not addressed promptly. The government’s decision to continue the war further alienated the population. Moreover, political authority was fragmented, and revolutionary groups like the Bolsheviks used the chaos to build support. The abdication removed the central pillar of autocracy, but without a clear and unified alternative, the country descended into deeper instability, culminating in the October Revolution later that year.
Practice Questions
To what extent did World War I contribute to the downfall of Nicholas II in February 1917?
World War I played a critical role in the downfall of Nicholas II by exposing the weaknesses of his leadership and accelerating Russia’s political and economic collapse. The Tsar’s decision to assume command of the army made him personally responsible for military failures, while leaving the government under the unpopular Tsarina and Rasputin. Economic dislocation, food shortages, and transport breakdowns led to mass unrest. Although discontent predated the war, the pressures of war intensified revolutionary sentiment. Therefore, while other long-term issues contributed, World War I was the decisive factor that undermined support for the Tsarist regime.
How significant was the role of social unrest in Petrograd in causing the February Revolution of 1917?
Social unrest in Petrograd was highly significant in causing the February Revolution. Worsening living conditions, strikes, and food shortages radicalised the working class and undermined Tsarist authority. The February 23rd women’s protest rapidly escalated into mass demonstrations, with over 200,000 workers striking within days. Crucially, the unrest triggered the mutiny of the Petrograd garrison, which turned the protests into a revolution. However, this unrest was itself a product of wider wartime pressures and political mismanagement. Therefore, while social unrest was a vital immediate cause, it was inseparable from the broader crisis of wartime governance and economic collapse.
