After February: a provisional government and divided authority
Compare the cabinet’s reform programme with Soviet influence over soldiers and unresolved questions of land and war.
Exam scope and assessment notes
Partial 2026 course: introductory context across the twelve AS topics, with selected document workshops, not full AS or A Level preparation. All three Paper 3 alternatives have introductory context, historiography and original interpretation exercises; Italy, Stalin’s Russia, Hitler’s Germany and Britain have introductory depth pathways across their four enquiries. The USA in the late 1940s/1950s and the 1960s/1970s have introductory American depth pathways; the 1980s/early-1990s theme now introduces all four enquiries with original teaching and two longer essay workshops. All four American themes now have introductory teaching and longer essay workshops, including US foreign policy, 1944–1992. The US–Soviet theme introduces all four enquiries through thirty core lessons and two longer essay workshops. Forty-one lessons introduce all four East and Southeast Asia enquiries: eight on post-war change, nine on Korea, twelve on Vietnam and twelve on Sino-American relations. Eight lessons introduce the African independence enquiry through Ghana, Nigeria, Senegal, Kenya and comparative reasoning. Nine further lessons introduce government, economic and social challenges after independence. Thirteen further lessons introduce Cold War involvement, Chinese support, non-alignment and Pan-Africanism. Twelve further lessons introduce UN involvement in Congo and Somalia, with 1993–1995 explicitly labelled as later context beyond the theme’s 1992 endpoint. Ten lessons introduce the creation-of-Israel enquiry. Twenty further lessons introduce wars and peace efforts in 1948–1979. Seventeen further lessons introduce superpower motives, oil, American and Soviet policies and their consequences through 1991. Twenty-one further lessons introduce the Iranian Revolution, Iran–Iraq War and 1990–1991 Gulf War. All four 2026 Middle East enquiries have introductory lessons; broader reading, depth, specialist review and full assessment remain unfinished. The separate 2027–2029 requirements are not mapped by these 2026 lessons. A separately labelled revised-year orientation and Eastern Europe enquiries 7.1–7.4 introductions and South Africa enquiries 8.1–8.3 and Zimbabwe enquiry 8.4, followed by Malaya enquiry 9.1 and introductory sequences for Malaysia formation enquiry 9.2 and Indonesian nationalism enquiry 9.3, with partial preparation, revolution, 1950s challenges and New Order teaching in enquiry 9.4, are available; other revised teaching remains unfinished. Source summaries are original StudyForA paraphrases, not quotations, complete documents or simulated eyewitness sources. Primary documents, historians’ arguments and original exercises are identified separately. Guided source comparisons, interpretation exercises and analytical models are not full papers, calibrated marking or Cambridge grades. Broader authentic source reading, historical depth and subject-specialist review remain required. Russia is the European Paper 1 topic in 2026. Russian events before 1918 use Old Style dates unless a paired Old Style/New Style date is supplied. The paired dates shown for 1905–1917 differ by 13 days; that offset should not be applied to dates before March 1900. Dates from 1918 use New Style. Read the linked documents in full: these selected paraphrases are teaching aids, not a complete examination source set.
Before you begin
- Place events in chronological order
- Distinguish a historical document from a later account and from a student argument
Work on paper. Try each question before revealing help, and explain why your method works.
Quick readiness check
What turns a list of causes into a historical explanation?
What you will learn
- Explain the formation and provisional purpose of the new government
- Distinguish formal office from practical authority under dual power
- Read Order No. 1 precisely rather than as a universal abolition of military discipline
Develop an evidence-based answer
- Write your answer before opening the model.
- Read the linked source alongside the short StudyForA paraphrase. Distinguish primary documents from later accounts, and what each source claims from what it proves.
Partial 2026 course: introductory context across the twelve AS topics, with selected document workshops, not full AS or A Level preparation. All three Paper 3 alternatives have introductory context, historiography and original interpretation exercises; Italy, Stalin’s Russia, Hitler’s Germany and Britain have introductory depth pathways across their four enquiries. The USA in the late 1940s/1950s and the 1960s/1970s have introductory American depth pathways; the 1980s/early-1990s theme now introduces all four enquiries with original teaching and two longer essay workshops. All four American themes now have introductory teaching and longer essay workshops, including US foreign policy, 1944–1992. The US–Soviet theme introduces all four enquiries through thirty core lessons and two longer essay workshops. Forty-one lessons introduce all four East and Southeast Asia enquiries: eight on post-war change, nine on Korea, twelve on Vietnam and twelve on Sino-American relations. Eight lessons introduce the African independence enquiry through Ghana, Nigeria, Senegal, Kenya and comparative reasoning. Nine further lessons introduce government, economic and social challenges after independence. Thirteen further lessons introduce Cold War involvement, Chinese support, non-alignment and Pan-Africanism. Twelve further lessons introduce UN involvement in Congo and Somalia, with 1993–1995 explicitly labelled as later context beyond the theme’s 1992 endpoint. Ten lessons introduce the creation-of-Israel enquiry. Twenty further lessons introduce wars and peace efforts in 1948–1979. Seventeen further lessons introduce superpower motives, oil, American and Soviet policies and their consequences through 1991. Twenty-one further lessons introduce the Iranian Revolution, Iran–Iraq War and 1990–1991 Gulf War. All four 2026 Middle East enquiries have introductory lessons; broader reading, depth, specialist review and full assessment remain unfinished. The separate 2027–2029 requirements are not mapped by these 2026 lessons. A separately labelled revised-year orientation and Eastern Europe enquiries 7.1–7.4 introductions and South Africa enquiries 8.1–8.3 and Zimbabwe enquiry 8.4, followed by Malaya enquiry 9.1 and introductory sequences for Malaysia formation enquiry 9.2 and Indonesian nationalism enquiry 9.3, with partial preparation, revolution, 1950s challenges and New Order teaching in enquiry 9.4, are available; other revised teaching remains unfinished. Source summaries are original StudyForA paraphrases, not quotations, complete documents or simulated eyewitness sources. Primary documents, historians’ arguments and original exercises are identified separately. Guided source comparisons, interpretation exercises and analytical models are not full papers, calibrated marking or Cambridge grades. Broader authentic source reading, historical depth and subject-specialist review remain required.
Document focus and short analytical model
Each document card is an original English paraphrase of selected provisions or arguments. It is not a quotation or a complete Paper 1 source set. Russia is the European Paper 1 topic in 2026. Russian events before 1918 use Old Style dates unless a paired Old Style/New Style date is supplied. The paired dates shown for 1905–1917 differ by 13 days; that offset should not be applied to dates before March 1900. Dates from 1918 use New Style. Read the linked documents in full: these selected paraphrases are teaching aids, not a complete examination source set.
Petrograd Soviet Order No. 1 · 1/14 March 1917 · original StudyForA paraphrase
[1] Addressed to the Petrograd garrison, the order calls for elected soldiers’ committees and Soviet control of political actions and weapons. Commands from the Duma’s military commission are to be followed when compatible with Soviet decisions. Military discipline remains required on duty, while civic equality applies off duty. The order is not evidence of instant uniform compliance by every army unit.
Provisional Government programme · 2/15 March 1917 · original StudyForA paraphrase
[1] The new cabinet announces amnesty, civil freedoms and preparation for a Constituent Assembly elected through universal and secret voting. It also recognises soldiers’ civic rights while retaining on-duty discipline and says revolutionary troops will remain in Petrograd. This is a programme of intended government, not proof that each promise was immediately implemented.
1. Why was dual power a problem for the Provisional Government?
Compare after trying
The cabinet had formal responsibility for governing, but the Petrograd Soviet possessed influence among workers and soldiers on whom implementation depended. Order No. 1 illustrates how political obedience and control of weapons could be mediated through Soviet-linked committees rather than simply through ministers and officers.
This did not mean two equal administrations controlled every field, nor did the order abolish all discipline. Its terms retained on-duty service obligations. However, maintaining a war effort and imposing difficult decisions became harder when orders relied on conditional acceptance.
The government also postponed land settlement and continued the war while claiming a provisional mandate pending a Constituent Assembly. Civil liberties were genuine changes, but did not resolve those pressing demands. Divided authority therefore interacted with unresolved policy choices; the cabinet’s difficulties cannot be explained by constitutional form alone.
Why this response fits
- Uses the order’s actual conditions rather than an exaggerated summary.
- Connects divided authority with policy and legitimacy without treating collapse as inevitable.
A government pending a representative settlement
The initial Provisional Government under Prince Lvov emerged from Duma politicians after the collapse of monarchy. It promised an amnesty, civil liberties and preparation for a Constituent Assembly. Its provisional character meant that it claimed to govern until a representative body could determine the future constitution. The announcement of universal suffrage for that assembly was not proof that an election had already taken place.
The Petrograd Soviet commanded influence among workers and soldiers. Initially dominated by Socialist Revolutionaries and Mensheviks rather than Bolsheviks, it conditionally supported the new government while maintaining an independent base. Dual power describes overlapping and competing authority, not two fully separate governments with equal power over every policy.
Orders depended on relationships of obedience
Order No. 1 addressed the Petrograd garrison and provided for elected soldiers’ committees. It subjected political actions to Soviet authority and made orders from the Duma’s military commission conditional on compatibility with Soviet decisions. It also required discipline on duty while ending some off-duty inequalities. The text is not a blanket instruction that every soldier everywhere should ignore officers.
Its provisions expose limits on the cabinet’s practical command of armed men. Yet a statement of rules does not show uniform obedience or the exact effect at every front. Compare its scope, institutions and conditions before drawing a conclusion about all Russia. Soldier influence could support the overthrow of monarchy while complicating an effective continuing war effort.
The costs of postponement
The government kept Russia in the war, partly from alliance commitments, hopes of protecting national standing and beliefs about defending the revolution. Land redistribution was deferred to a future Constituent Assembly, while peasants and soldiers pressed for immediate answers. These choices had reasons, but delay could reduce confidence when shortages and losses continued. Civil freedoms were substantial changes; their introduction did not itself settle peace, land or the basis of legitimate coercion.
Sources for this lesson
- Cambridge History 9489 · 2026 Version 3 · content pp. 9–41, assessment pp. 43–45, changes p. 52
- Cambridge History 9489 · December 2025 update · 2026 only
- Petrograd Soviet · Order No. 1, 1/14 March 1917 · document and introduction, Virginia Tech
- Provisional Government · formation and programme, 2/15 March 1917 · document and introduction, Virginia Tech
- Lenin · April Theses, presented 4/17 April 1917, published 7/20 April · Marxists Internet Archive
Pause and explain
Which reading of Order No. 1 is defensible?
Worked example
Did Order No. 1 remove all military discipline?
Show the worked solution
- Read its geographical and institutional address.
- Separate political oversight from on-duty rules.
- Explain the resulting tension in authority.
Answer The order protected soldiers’ political and off-duty rights and gave committees important powers, but explicitly retained discipline in service. It reveals divided authority without proving that all officers lost every function or that the same rules operated uniformly throughout the army.
Try a topic test
Choose Easy, Normal or Difficult. Save your answers and open worked review after finishing.
Test this topic →From guided practice to a new situation
Write your answer and reasoning first. Use a hint only if you are stuck. The model solution is for self-checking; your written work is not automatically marked.
Guided: Explain one difference between holding a cabinet office and possessing effective authority in March 1917.
Give me a hint
Identify who had to accept or enforce a decision.
Compare my reasoning
- State the cabinet’s formal position.
- Identify soldiers’ Soviet and committee links.
- Explain why obedience could be conditional.
Cabinet office supplied a claim to executive government, but orders depended on armed men and local bodies accepting them. Soviet and committee influence meant that formal office did not guarantee implementation. Dual power therefore concerned practical relationships of authority as well as constitutional labels.
Look for these in your work
- Connects institutions to enforcement
- Avoids assuming equal power in all fields
Independent: Why did postponing land reform carry political costs even if the government wanted a representative decision?
Give me a hint
Explain its reason and its audience’s different timetable.
Compare my reasoning
- Identify the future assembly’s intended authority.
- Explain peasants’ immediate land demands.
- Link continued uncertainty to confidence.
Waiting for the Constituent Assembly could be defended as respecting a representative mandate, but peasants wanted immediate access to land. Continued uncertainty made the cabinet appear unable to deliver change. A reasoned policy could therefore be politically costly without being literally a refusal ever to consider reform.
Look for these in your work
- Explains intention and reception
- Avoids inventing a permanent refusal
Application: Compare the cabinet programme’s civil freedoms with Order No. 1’s soldiers’ rights. Give one agreement and one limit on your inference.
Give me a hint
Compare a specific issue instead of labelling the whole documents opposite.
Compare my reasoning
- Identify expanded civic rights in both.
- Explain the military order’s distinct conditions.
- State what provisions cannot prove.
Both recognise expanded rights for soldiers alongside continuing service discipline. The military order additionally makes political obedience and weapons subject to Soviet-linked committees. This is partial agreement within divided authority, not proof that the institutions either agreed on everything or immediately fought over every issue.
Look for these in your work
- Identifies common ground and distinction
- Qualifies institutional and practical claims
Common mistakes
- Describing the early Petrograd Soviet as already Bolshevik-controlled
- Equating a promise to call a Constituent Assembly with a completed election
- Omitting Order No. 1’s retention of on-duty discipline
What can you explain now?
Which reading of Order No. 1 is defensible?
Compare with the explanation
Political and committee powers coexisted with an explicit requirement for discipline on duty
Its conditional instructions and stated scope matter; it did not simply abolish every military obligation.
After trying it yourself, choose your next review. This is your self-assessment.
Your review choice appears on Today. Sign in to sync it across devices.
Make it stick
Which reading of Order No. 1 is defensible?
If you needed the solution, close it and solve the problem again from a blank page. A correct answer is stronger when you can explain the reason for each step.