Tsar Nicholas II and the Russian Revolution(s)

Discussions on all aspects of the First World War not covered in the other sections. Hosted by Terry Duncan.
User avatar
Matt H.
Member
Posts: 554
Joined: 15 Aug 2003, 19:34
Location: Keele, Staffs, UK

#46

Post by Matt H. » 02 Oct 2003, 17:55

In Kornilov's listing of ongoing ministers Kerensky was the first. Milyukov, L'vov and Rodzyanko (Octyabrist leader) were included also.
I thought Guchkov was the leader of the Octobrists? I seem to remember Rodzianko (or is it "Rodzyanko?") being Chairman of the Third and Fourth Dumas. Prince Lvov and Milyukov were two of Russia's most prominent liberals, with Milyukov being leader of the Kadets and Lvov being a product of the liberal nobility generation, post-1861.

Docent P
Member
Posts: 272
Joined: 13 Jan 2003, 11:16
Location: Canada

#47

Post by Docent P » 06 Oct 2003, 15:03

>I seem to remember Rodzianko (or is it "Rodzyanko?") being Chairman of the Third and Fourth Dumas.

Undoubtly. You may check historian textbooks to see what party he belonged being the Chairman if you are interested. I'm too lazy to look at it.

And about the number of 40% of former officers within the Red Army command staff, mentioned by Joel Pacheco. As I said it's very important to see what date this number refers to. I've just occasionally seen met the number of 39% - that means the percentage of former officers after the end of the Polish campaign - or Autumn 1920. I was a period when many former Russian officers decided to join to the Red Army due to some reasons:

1 they had lost any hope on the White's victory;
2 they had to work for living, there were no private companies, so a former officer, after he had sold his furniture, clothes, and all other property had to cooperate with the Soviet authorities, it was the only way not to die;
3 the Soviets opened a loud propagandist campaign, appealing to patriotism - now guys, you don't have to fight your natives (the Whites), it's time to fight a foreign (Polish) agression.

Famous Brusilov invented even a smarter reason to join the Red Army, as he said to his friends: if we gather in a big number inside the Red Forces then we'll try to redirect the Red Army against the Bolsheviks.

What I want to say - there is a VERY big difference between the situations in autumn 1917 and autumn 1920. And the fact that 39% of Red Commanders had been officers once IN NO WAY means that the Comrades had any support of officers in 1917.


Karman
Member
Posts: 744
Joined: 23 Aug 2004, 11:39
Location: Russia

Re: Tsar Nicholas II and the Russian Revolution(s)

#48

Post by Karman » 27 Aug 2004, 16:18

Matt H. wrote:We all know the of the circumstances which led to the downfall of Imperial Russia, and the rise of Bolshevism, but do you believe that such a chaotic sequence of events could have been avoided? Did the opportunity exist for the Tsar to retain the monarchy of Imperial Russia, and protect the Romanov Dynasty?


Thanks...
Dear Matt H.

Actually this is the question of questions in Russia what should have been done to escape the gruesome revolution: either to bring more democracy to the country or to keep safe the authorized monarchy. My strong believe is that keeping immoderate the political system of Imperial Russia was the ever best solution to preserve the country from the revolt.

Late in 1916 in the group of Rimsky-Korsakov there was produced a note to the Czar expressing the opinion of Caesarians what the democratization of the country might have produced. The note reviewed the main political parties of Russia and their background and advised what should be done in the future. When I read the note the first time in the "Archive Russkoy Revolutzii" published by I. Guessen in Berlin in the 20-th I was really impressed with their description of the future events. They advised that neither oktiabrists nor kadets would have been able to hold the power even being united into the progressists block.

About the oktiabrists they wrote that those were devoted monarchists if some peasants pillaged a noble estates and then turned into fair republicans if Czar did not award some of their members for some reason. Kadets: strange party of strange guys whom though being landlords supported the demands of the socialists to give all their land properties to peasants. Progressits called themselves monarchists and nationalists and were elected in strictly anti-semitic Ukrainian regions but support the idea of emancipation of Jews. All those guys do not have either a real economic or social program. They are abstractionists and far-out people. So they will definitely loose the power soon after they got it and will hand the country to the left extremists. But they also were the same abstractionists and dreamers. So their rule will launch a gruesome civil war which will end up with the reign of an autocratic peasant czar.

They have seen all that in the mirror.

Russia was doomed because all literate people believed that the truth and all the answers to all questions might have been found in smart books. They did not care if the Czar Russia was economically and military successful but they cared that it did not look progressive in the eyes of Europe.

But Russia under Nicholas did was economically and military efficient and was developing really fast. Stolypin reforms launched by Czar lowered the social tension and Lenin once said that if they would have been completed no revolution would happen.

Rasputin is a product of anti-czar propaganda and had no influence on the politics at all. Example: the last chief of the Czar personal guard general Voyekov took his position in 1913 when Rasputin's glory was on the peak according to mass media. When the general examined the see (Czar's palace) he saw a man at the control filter post. The General asked the officer in charge who was the man and was advised that it was Rasputin. - Does not he have a permanent pass? - No. Not at all. - How often does he visit the palace? Once a month or two months -And is he always waiting at the CP? - Yes, sometimes for an hour if he was not called by Czar to help His son. When the boy does not feel good he comes more often. If nothing happens he just leaves. - So why does not he have the pass? - We did not have any order about that. Voyekov ordered to issue the permanent pass for Rasputin and was called his zealous supporter by historians. (Voyekov. "S tzariom i bez tzaria").

I cannot believe that it is a story about a mighty minion.

The same propaganda is the stories about the powerful Czarina who ruled Her husband.

Propaganda is the stories about the war that caused the collapse of the country. During the war period until the January 1917 the prices increased twice but the workers salaries increased 2,5 times. And only in January-February 1917 when the Duma conspirators organized a factitious shortage in food products (especially in big cities) the growth of prices drastically over exceeded the growth of salaries. But immediately after the revolution the situation was improved.

The revolution was not a spontaneous peoples revolt. it was a well planned and well-organized plot produced by Grand Duke N.N. - the initiator of Manifest of 1907, Generals Alekseev and Ruzsky, Duma members Guchkov, Lvov and Purishkevich. Who completely f#cked up their project.

Do not forget that the Czar signed the orders to assigned Grand Duke N.N. to be The Supreme Commander in Chief and general Kornilov to be the commander of Petrograd command before He signed His abnegation.

So the guys got all power.

Karman
Member
Posts: 744
Joined: 23 Aug 2004, 11:39
Location: Russia

#49

Post by Karman » 27 Aug 2004, 17:11

Matt H. wrote:

But who would have been able to assume control in Petrograd in his absence? Alexandra? Grand Duke Michael? Prince Yusopov?
The Decree on the foundation of the position of the Supreme Commander-in-Chief (SCIC) of the Russian Army is one of the most under-estimated documents of the pre-revolutionary Russia. According to that Decree the Russia at war was divided into two parts: so called battlefield and immediate following battlefield provinces and 2. the rest of Russia. SCIC got all the imperious power in the first section that included all western provinces and both capitals (Petrograd and Russia). Government and all other civilian authorities did not have any power in those provinces and were subordinated to military command. Their main objective was to insure logistics and provision for the army. All the researches agree that Nikolay formed that position for himself. But he faced the furious opposition from his relatives Duma and some governmental members (who realized that they were loosing power). So GD N.N. became SCIC. and almost lost the war. Nikolay succeeded him when the situation was really bad. When he occupied the position of SCIC he started to play with the Government. Rodzianko got he chance to form the Cabinet even in 1915 and he did it. He did not like the lack of power and said that Duma would be pleased to see one of her members being a Prime-Minister. No problem You got Protopopov (kadet then oktiabrist). I am sure you know the stories about the "leapfrog in the corrupted rotten Czar government" in 1915 - 1916 then it were the Rodzianko's attempts to form the government equally dear to Czar and to Duma. Czar did not care he got all the power being the Czar and SCIC and he permanently screwed up the "Kremlin dreamers" to ensure all necessary ammo and products to be delivered to the front. Early in 1917 everybody perfectly understood that the Summer 1917 Russian offensive should crush down the Eastern Front. Lots of reserves, perfectly equipped and trained and experienced soldiers would do that.

Petrograd and its garrison were subordinated to the Commander of North Front General Ruzsky. That was a perfect professional general as well as Alekseev was the best Czar's Chief of Staff. But both were politically corrupted and joined the Duma chief in the plot against the Czar. Being at war Nikolay could not just imprison his two best senior officers. And He ordered to withdraw the capital out of Ruzsky's command. The separate Petrograd Militar District was formed late in 1916 with the Cossack General Khabalov. The latter demanded loyal Cossack regiments to be sent to Petrograd instead of corrupted garrison but Ruzskiy postponed all the time.
Actually no nobles, Czarinas or Grand Dukes were required but Generals honestly doing their duty.

So revolution happened.

User avatar
Dr Eisvogel
Member
Posts: 414
Joined: 24 Nov 2006, 19:26
Location: Croatia

Re: Tsar Nicholas II and the Russian Revolution(s)

#50

Post by Dr Eisvogel » 19 Oct 2014, 16:01

Karman wrote: Propaganda is the stories about the war that caused the collapse of the country. During the war period until the January 1917 the prices increased twice but the workers salaries increased 2,5 times. And only in January-February 1917 when the Duma conspirators organized a factitious shortage in food products (especially in big cities) the growth of prices drastically over exceeded the growth of salaries. But immediately after the revolution the situation was improved.

The revolution was not a spontaneous peoples revolt. it was a well planned and well-organized plot produced by Grand Duke N.N. - the initiator of Manifest of 1907, Generals Alekseev and Ruzsky, Duma members Guchkov, Lvov and Purishkevich. Who completely f#cked up their project.

Do not forget that the Czar signed the orders to assigned Grand Duke N.N. to be The Supreme Commander in Chief and general Kornilov to be the commander of Petrograd command before He signed His abnegation.
Dear Karman,

can you recommend any literature (in Russian language) which deals with the plot of the generals and Duma politicians to depose Nicholas II?

Bestr regards,
Eisvogel

Post Reply

Return to “First World War”