The impact of the First World War was a key factor in the downfall of Tsarism as it created enormous pressure on the Tsar. However there were also a number of other factors which too helped to destroy the Tsarist state including the fact that Nicholas II was ill suited to the role which he was poorly prepared to face. However Nicholas II’s ability was not in question because he was next in line and whether he was fit for the challenge was not an issue of concern.

One of the weaknesses of a hereditary system such as that of Tsarist Russia is that it does not rely on the ability of the person it instead depends upon the line of inheritance. Nicholas II, the last Tsar of Russia was ill-suited to the role of Tsar and hence found the responsibilities it brought challenging and difficult to handle. For generations Russia had ruled by the system of autocracy that is rule by one person as the see fit. Therefore the decision to enter the war was purely a catalyst which helped accelerate the collapse of a system which was beginning to look outdated by the 20^th century. The personality of Nicholas II was not however the only factor in the downfall of Tsarism in 1917.

The growth of industry and with it new industrial classes both middle and working class exaggerated the division between those citizens with power and those without. The demand for a measure of parliamentary democracy was growing which put the Tsar and his supporters from the landed aristocracy under increasing pressure. However the demand for democracy in the form of a parliament was only growing from a small minority of the middle classes and the liberals who looked at what was happening in countries such as Britain and Germany. The new economic and social conditions caused by this rapid industrialisation aided the growth of groups opposed to the Tsar

Revolutionary groups targeted their ideas at industrial workers. The large industrial centres gave an added edge to the revolutionary groups who targeted their ideas at the industrial workers. However the support for these groups was minimal because their main concern was economic for example, wages as opposed to fundamental economic change. The majority of Russia’s populations were peasants of which the revolutionary groups found difficult to organise. "They were frightened by the primitive forces they had helped to unleash" As mentioned there were a number of long term factors which contributed to the destruction of the Tsarist state however there was one major factor which contributed immensely, this of course being the Great war.

When Russia joined WWI in 1914 there was a wave of enthusiasm and patriotism. The regime felt reassured by this and felt sure of its prospects of survival. The general acceptance of a ban on the sale of vodka showed just how willing people were to support their country. The people had great faith in the army and had high expectations for the Russian ‘steamroller’. However this initial wave of enthusiasm did not last long. Defeats by the Germans at the Masurian Lakes and Tannenburg in which 100,000 troops were captured quickly dampened the morale of many of the soldiers. 4 million troops were killed or wounded in the first year of war and feelings of pessimism and defeatism spread quickly the training of troops and quality of officers deteriorated due to great losses of officers and men. However some historians believe that the Russian army was not disintegrating for example Russia produced more shells than Germany in 1916. The generals and officers of the army were by and large aristocratic and held on to their positions due to favouritism rather than on merit and their inexperience contributed towards the large-scale defeats the Russian army suffered. The war also brought many of the other weaknesses of the regime into sharp focus. Such as the inadequacies of military planning.

The inadequacies of planning for military mobilisation were revealed in the war. The armed forces began to soon suffer shortages. Rifles were in short supply, over 2 million of the 6 million men who had been mobilised did not have rifles and by 1915 artillery was limited to 2 or 3 shells a day. One of the main causes of shortages in military supplies was inefficient distribution rather insufficient production. On the other hand by 1916, supplies to the army improved. The Government recognised the importance of ensuring food supplies reached the army. However food supplies to the cities were less which was crucial as the revolution was centred on Petrograd and Moscow.

The mobilisation of the economy for war production was slow to take effect and the government had to rely on imports. Plans were implemented to fear industrial output to the needs of the war effort and substantial increases in production were achieved. As factories were converted to armaments production of other consumer goods became scarce. The result was rapid increase in flour prices which increased by 200% and meat by 300%. This inflation was accelerated by the government’s policy of printing more money. Between 1914 and 1917 average earnings doubled while the price of food quadrupled. In an attempt to increase the production of goods War Industry committees were set up to identify problems in production and solve them quickly. However many historians believe that these provided the workers with a useful platform for airing their grievances and hence to some extent lessened the likelihood of revolution. In order to improve administration the government set up Zemgor, to represent town councils and regional Zemtvos. The committees were given the task of co-ordinating additional medical supplies to be sent to the frontline and organising refugees. The work of the Zemgor was limited however by the tight restrictions imposed on it by the government it was evident that even in times of crisis the government still wanted to retain all their power. The strains caused by mobilisation had an impact on every social group, especially the peasantry.

During the war years the peasants (who made up the bulk of the army) became much more radical. Revolutionary groups soon began to find the peasants more susceptible to new political ideas. However conditions for these peasants became even more difficult at home due to the large number of men who had been conscripted into the forces. Farming was left mainly to women and elderly men. Much of the food produced was sent to the army by the government and the prices the peasants received were inadequate. Discontent mounted and was fuelled further by stories of discontent by the frontline soldiers who sent news home. Industrial workers too found themselves more in tune with the demands of the revolutionary groups. Even supporters of the regime whose wealth many believed would have protected them against the hardships of war suffered. Landowners were hit by the collapse in the value of their land and a severe shortage of farm labourers. Many small businesses were forced into bankruptcy. Even those who benefited from large government contracts were seldom grateful to the Tsar. The war not only revealed poor government planning, it also revealed the political ineptitude of the Tsar.

The Tsar made clear his view that he should be in sole control over the conduct of war. In September Nicholas took command of the armed forces and went to the front to direct them. Many historians that this was a huge mistake as Nicholas could now be seen as being responsible for military defeat and become subject to officers’ criticisms of the war effort. With Nicholas away at the fronts he left his wife Alexandra in control of government in the capital. She further added to the demoralisation of the government by taking the advice of Rasputin who used his influence to get both church and government positions for his associates. This upset many aristocrats at court who saw their own influence over the Tsar threatened. The government was in chaos and the aristocracy who made up most of its personnel began to lose faith in the regime as an instrument for preserving its power. Although there is evidence to suggest that Rasputin was an important factor in the fall of the regime, historians view his influence, which undoubtedly grew during the war years as a symptom of decay rather than a cause. After his murder in 1916 by Prince Yusupvo the reputations of the Tsar and Tsarina continued to decline. By 1916 the government underlined by rumours and speculation was in chaos and was paralysed in hesitancy and inaction.

The First World War produced hardships, which fed discontent and revolution and seriously weakened the capacity of the regime to deal effectively with them. The radicalisation of the peasants, industrial workers and soldiers increased the potential for serious unrest. The aristocracy suffered directly from military failures and the Tsar’s refusal to allow them any meaningful role in the running of the country gave them little reason to support the regime. The immediate factor which caused the collapse of the regime was a combination of this unrest with a failure of the Tsar’s own supporters to carry on propping up a regime in which they no longer had faith as an effective system for ruling the country. The First World War did contribute to the downfall of Tsarism but is best simply view as a catalyst which helped to speed up the collapse of an outdated system.