the february revolution of 1917 and land property of the russian monarch: nation-wide dimension and regional factor

The article deals with the poorly studied issue on the land property of Nicholas II after his renunciation of throne. The primary attention of historians to political elimination of autocracy sets the purpose to study motives, factors and events associated with the elimination of emperor’s land tenure in Russia. By the beginning of 1917 the lands included the Altai and the Nerchinsk districts under the Cabinet of his Emperial Majesty. Cabinet’s land tenure was considered to be personal property of the emperor. The authors show that for the first days of work the Provisional government hadn’t designated accurately its attitude to the land property of the overthrown emperor. Only on March 7 the Minister of Agriculture was entrusted to establish an order of management and use of the Cabinet’s lands. The pressure upon the Provisional government was conditioned by the tense situation developing during the February revolution in the Altai district, the largest possession of the emperor. After overthrow of autocracy the population of the region had initiated mass unauthorized capture of the woods, removal of local officials of the Cabinet in response to former tough policy of the Cabinet. Therefore new local authorities demanded the fastest solution of the question of Cabinet’s land tenure from Provisional government. Pressure from the region had influenced the choice of radical fate of Cabinet’s land tenure by the government. Lands and incomes of the Cabinet had been announced to be the property of the state. But the resolution of Provisional government turned to be ill-considered. It didn’t explain the legal bases of this transfer, the order of use of lands for the population of the region. In the Altai district the resolution of Provisional government led to disorder of a uniform complex of the Cabinet’s land. Elimination of the Cabinet property in the region had only strengthened resistance of local officials of the Cabinet and radical moods of the population concerning the former property of the emperor. E. V. Demchik analyzed the activities of the Provisional government on the question of land property of the overthrown emperor. P. A. Afanasyev revealed the regional context of the problem and the importance of the adopted government decisions.