Source A is from Russia and History’s Turning Point, the memoirs of Alexander Kerensky (1965)
The Winter Palace was cut off, and even telephone contact was broken. After a long meeting that had lasted into the early hours of the morning, most of the members of the government had gone home to get some rest. Left along together, Konovalov and I walked over to the district military staff, which was a stone’s throw away on the palace Square. Another minister, Kishkin, one of Moscow’s most popular Liberals, accompanied us. After a brief discussion it was decided that I should drive out at once to meet the troops. We were all quite sure that the paralysis of will that had seized democratic Petrograd would pass as soon as it was recognised that Lenin’s plot was by no means a ‘misunderstanding’, but a perfidious blow that left early Russia entirely at the mercy of the Germans.
How useful is Source A for understanding events surrounding the October Revolution? 12
Source A is from the memoirs of Alexander Kerensky who was the man in charge of the Provisional Government at the time of the October Revolution. He is recalling events that happened just before the Revolution took place. Kerensky will not be in favour of Lenin and the Bolsheviks and this reflected in the source. The source is useful because Kerensky notes that all telephone lines were cut just as the October Revolution took place. He also notes that the Winter Palace was cut off from the outside world by the Bolsheviks. But the source fails to mention some other key events surrounding the October Revolution. When seizing power the Bolsheviks captured key buildings and positions like bridges and post offices. In the morning no one noticed that the revolution had taken place because nothing appeared to be different around the city. Kerensky also failed to note that it was a peaceful revolution because there was no rioting or gun fights in the streets. Another event is that everything from transport to food supply was already under control the moment the Bolsheviks took power because Trotsky had his Military Revolutionary Committee set up to deal with these areas as soon as they took power. Finally the source does not mention that the war with Germany also continued after the revolution until the beginning of the civil war. Figes notes that the reason why no one protested to the take over was because it was a popular revolution supported by the people. Whereas Pipes argues that it was a coup d’état and that is why a civil war took place soon after. Source A shows a basic understanding of events surrounding the October Revolution but fails to touch on everything.
Source A is written by Kerensky the leader of the Provisional Government at the time of, and in the moments leading up to the October Revolution. He was an eyewitness to the events surrounding the revolution and would have had to have had a detailed knowledge of events, since he was so crucial to the survival of the government. This makes the source useful. In his writings Kerensky aims to describe the situation on 24th, 25th and 26th October which is also useful. However, his views may contain bias against the Bolsheviks who opposed him in the revolution, which may leave his recollection of true events incorrect, which brings into question the use of the source.
The source states that the Provisional Governments central base was cut off from the outside world, with no means of communication to the outside of Petrograd. We know that, on the night of 24th October, members of the Red Guard quietly seized all the communication stations in the city, putting them in control of the telephone and telegram networks. Many workers on these station were Bolshevik supporters and were happy to surrender control of communications to the Bolsheviks.
The evidence also reveals that the Bolsheviks also took control of the railway networks in Petrograd, rendering any means of escape out of the city useless. Again, their influence with many groups of workers helped them enormously. Fitzpatrick claims that it was indeed the workers who created conditions allowing the Reds to take power, especially through risings such as the July Days and on the night of the revolution, where little or no resistance was offered by workers to the take over of power.
The source goes on to mention that there was a revolutionary feeling throughout the city of Petrograd, in support of Lenin’s ‘plot’ to overthrow the government. This had been proved three months earlier in the July days revolt, which played an important role in leading to the eventual revolution. After the failed summer offensive of 1917, 20,000 Kronstadt sailors marched on Petrograd demanding a change in government. Although the revolt was denounced by Lenin at this stage and was crushed by government troops, it showed the level of public (and military) feeling towards the government. This would suggest an uprising from the masses.
However Pipes disagrees with this notion, claiming that the October Revolution was a coup d’état and was a forced take over of power by a small group. Figes also disagrees with the idea of a mass revolution and states there was not anti-government feeling in Petrograd, the actual take over of power was a coup d’état by Lenin, Trotsky and the Bolsheviks.
This idea is backed by the setting up of the Military Revolutionary Committee by Trotsky. This highly sophisticated organisation planned the revolution and the seizure of power. Pipes uses this to claim that it was a coup d’état saying that spontaneous revolutions are not planned in this way.
The source does not mention these pieces of evidence to build a picture of events surrounding the October Revolution, but does give a useful insight into Kerensky’s experience of the period, and the views of his provisional government. As a result, this source, at least to some extent, is of use.