Petrograd ---> Moscow?

[Imposter Marxist]

Why did the Bolshevik's make Moscow the capital again? Was there any big reason?

[Sperm-Doll Setsuna]

Why did the Bolshevik's make Moscow the capital again? Was there any big reason?

Further inland?

[Gravedigger01]

They had to forfeit land after WW1 and Petrograd/St Petersburg was too near the new border to be safe so they moved to Moscow.

[Q]

It might have had to do with Petrograd being the capital of the Tsar, but I'm not sure.

[Omsk]

I prefer to use "Leningrad"

Petrograd was a symbol of the Tsarist way of life,its palaces and luxurious castles,and Moscow at that time was not on the same level as Petrograd,(later Leningrad)

Officially the capital of Russia is Moscow. However St. Petersburg is often called the Northern Capital. This isn’t by chance. These two cities came to prominence at separate times, and they have been competing with each other for 300 years, beginning in 1703, when Emperor Peter the Great founded St. Petersburg on the banks of the river Neva.
French was more popular in Petersburg in the time of the Tsar,and the corrupt lieges who controlled the pesentry.Petersburg was the direct opposite of Moscow,it was the European oriented capital,which nursed a tradition of the Tsars and richness,while Moscow was the representative of the new Soviet way of life,and it flourished.

Leningrad, in 1918, the city was still considered the cultural capital of Russia. Many Muscovites will debate this. Take rock music. In the 1980s St. Petersburg spawned many leading rock groups. Aquarium, Kino were from St. Petersburg, whereas Mashina Vremeni and Zvuki Mu were from Moscow. Whether Moscow or St. Petersburg music was better or worse, was a heated topic for most young people.
There is a lot of differences between the two cities,while Moscow if fast and furious,Petersburg is slower,calmer and smaller.

Leningrad was the second city of the glorious Soviet State,and the people,as it was,by some,the true cultural center of the Soviet motherland.

Here are some pictures of the art-work sketches that would serve as a basis for the Soviet Moscow,the new capital: http://englishrussia.com/index.php/2007/11/20/the-old-moscow/

And a number of pictures from Moscow (on the working days) - http://englishrussia.com/index.php/2007/11/20/the-old-moscow/

Here are truly fantastic pictures of Leningrad,mixed up with special black-and white segments from the siege of Leningrad. - http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Siege_of_Leningrad

Moscow flourished greatly in the process of the modernization,while Leningrad got less attention.

[ComradeOm]

Why did the Bolshevik's make Moscow the capital again? Was there any big reason?Quite a major reason - the advancing German armies. Petrograd was evacuated in a panic in March 1918 after Estonia had fallen to the Germans and the possibility of the capital following suit became very real indeed. The Soviet government was painfully aware of just how precarious their situation had become (http://www.marxists.org/archive/lenin/works/1918/feb/21b.htm). This was the overriding reason for the move of government to Moscow and it was forced by military realities, not choice

Certainly it was not the Tsarist legacy of Petrograd. Not least because Moscow - the 'second capital' - had an equally illustrious Imperial heritage and was actually the favoured capital of Nicholas II and the Slavophiles. More to the point however, any Tsarist reputation had been eradicated by 1905 and 1917 (twice). Petrograd was the city of revolution and was hailed as 'Red Petrograd', the birthplace of the world revolution, etc. It also happened to be a massive centre of industry and a real Bolshevik stronghold

[Tommy4ever]

There are a mixture of reasons.

The most important of which are of couse the practical military problems of the time. With enemy armies advancing on the city there was a real risk it would fall an even at the best of times it was always going to be to be at risk.

Then there is the fact that Moscow lay at the heart of Red territory and a the main point where Russia'smost important railroads converged. Making it a very strategic location and a much better place from which to manage both the front and the country.

This was also the symbolic abandonment of the old Imperial capital.

Finally, in an idea often trumped up by right wingers, there is the idea of a symbolic withdrawal from Europe into Asia. From an outward looking but inwardly crumbling Tsarist Empire to an inwardly looking but more secure Soviet Republic.

[Die Neue Zeit]

Quite a major reason - the advancing German armies. Petrograd was evacuated in a panic in March 1918 after Estonia had fallen to the Germans and the possibility of the capital following suit became very real indeed. The Soviet government was painfully aware of just how precarious their situation had become (http://www.marxists.org/archive/lenin/works/1918/feb/21b.htm). This was the overriding reason for the move of government to Moscow and it was forced by military realities, not choice

Certainly it was not the Tsarist legacy of Petrograd. Not least because Moscow - the 'second capital' - had an equally illustrious Imperial heritage and was actually the favoured capital of Nicholas II and the Slavophiles. More to the point however, any Tsarist reputation had been eradicated by 1905 and 1917 (twice). Petrograd was the city of revolution and was hailed as 'Red Petrograd', the birthplace of the world revolution, etc. It also happened to be a massive centre of industry and a real Bolshevik stronghold

There's a difference between Sankt Peterburg and Petrograd. The former has entirely reactionary connotations.

[ComradeOm]

Not particularly. In fact the Bolshevik 'Petersburg Committee' deliberately chose to retain their name in 1914 (as opposed to becoming the 'Petrograd Committee') in protest against the imperialist World War