Top-Rated Free Essay
Preview

What caused the Romanov Dynasty to fall? Explain the fall and decline of the Romanov Dynasty.

Good Essays
1713 Words
Grammar
Grammar
Plagiarism
Plagiarism
Writing
Writing
Score
Score
What caused the Romanov Dynasty to fall? Explain the fall and decline of the Romanov Dynasty.
The Romanovs had ruled Russia since 1613. When the last tsar of all, Nicholas II, was appointed to the throne in 1894, there was no hint of the fate that awaited him. Many among the huge crowds that lined the streets for his coronation celebration saw him as their "little father." They believed God had supposedly appointed Nicholas to rule an empire covering about one-sixth of the earth's land area.

In 1894, Russia was at peace. Foreign investors promoted its industrialization. Russia was ranked among the world's greatest powers under the autocracy of the Romanovs.

Although well intentioned, Nicholas was a weak ruler, out of touch with his people, easily dominated by others and a firm believer in the autocratic principles taught him by his father. He ruled Russia as an autocrat. Propaganda and the teachings of the Russian Orthodox Church encouraged his people to love and respect their tsar and look on him as a father who had the right to rule them.

Nicholas II ruled a police state, called the okhrana, which responded brutally to anyone who dared question his authority. He had absolute power. He declared the law and could overrule any existing law. Political parties were illegal until 1905. There was no parliament until 1906 and even then, Russia was hostile to its existence. He was free to appoint and dismiss his advisers without giving reasons.

In 1900, the Russian empire compromised 23 different nationalities; many resented Russian rule. Russians made up 40% of the empire's 132 million people. 77% of the population were peasants; 10% belonged to the middle class, and 1% to the nobility. The remaining 12% included priests, urban workers, officials, Cossacks, and foreigners.

In the early 1900s, Russia was on the brink of crisis. Failed harvests, inflation, and economic depression saw Russia's peasants and urban workers increasingly resort to riots, demonstrations, and strikes to protest at their poor conditions. Russians people demanded the redress of numerous political, social, and economic problems. The Tsar persisted in the belief that to grant reforms would undermine his autocratic power.

Peasant poverty was a long-standing problem. Russians peasants gained their emancipation in 1861 in the form of a decree from Tsar Alexander II. They then received pay for their work and were freed from ownership. However, there were significant limitations on their freedom. They paid redemption payments (compensation) for the land, which had been 'given' to them. Peasants continued to use old fashioned farming methods and their living standards were poor.

From 1880 onwards, the Russian government encouraged industrial growth. Many peasants began to leave the countryside in the hope of a better life in towns and cities. By 1900, Russia had about 2 500 000 urban workers. They lived in unhygienic, poorly built, and overcrowded factory dormitories, which did not even have running water or sewerage systems. The workers gained poor wages and had no trade unions to fight for them, as this was illegal.

Revolutionary activist from parties such as the Social Democrats and Socialists Revolutionaries had a wiling audience. Workers increasingly went on strike to demand improved working and living conditions.

The Russian nobility controlled 25% of Russia's land and relied on government salaries to maintain their extravagant lifestyle to which they were comfortable.

Russia's middle class consisted of intellectuals and factory and industry owners, who criticised tsarist form of government and resented limits placed on their free expressions.

The decision to go to war with Japan in February 1904 increased the government's weaknesses. The war degenerated into a series of Russian military blunders that demonstrated the inefficiency of the Russian army and navy. The war ended with humiliation of Russia's defeat in august 1905. Evidence of Russia's military weakness increased the people's discontent and demands for reform.

On 9th January of 1905, in St. Petersburg, a procession of peasants and workers came to respectfully present a petition to the tsar outlining the problems that they hoped they could resolve. The tsar's soldieries fired on the protesters when they refused to go home. The day ended with 1000 deaths and many more casualties. The day went down in history as the Bloody Sunday. It began the revolution of 1905 and the image of the tsar as 'little father' gave away to a view of him as 'Bloody Nicholas'.

Hostility to the events of Bloody Sunday reverberated throughout the empire. The people responded with nine months of strikes, peasant revolts, mutinies, in the army, navy, and the formation of organized groups demanding change and reform. Events reached a crisis in October 1905 when the different opposition groups united in a general strike. Transport, communications, factories, shops, schools universities, and government offices - all stopped functioning. Workers participated in street demonstrations, riots, looting, and destruction of the symbols of tsarist authority.

Nicholas II remained in power in late 1905 largely because he introduced some reforms. In the October manifesto of 17 October 1905, the tsar announced the creation of a duma. The manifesto allowed freedom of speech and made political parties legal. This meant that the tsar could no longer consider himself as an autocrat. In November 1907, the tsar announced the cancellation on the redemption payments i.e. the peasants would finally have the ownership of the land.

However, the manifesto did not address problems of poverty, low wages, and poor working conditions. Workers in Moscow and St. Petersburg continued their strikes.

The October manifesto gained Nicholas support among the liberals, especially among the Octobrists - a new party named in the manifesto's honour. The tsar's position was gradually restored.

It soon became apparent that in April 1906, with passing of the fundamental laws that the tsar did not intend to keep the promises that he had made in the October manifesto of 1905. Instead, Nicholas II wishes to regain his power and to reassert his autocracy. The October manifesto was a "con" trick by Nicholas to get the Russian people to call off the general strike. Nicholas's "strategy" from 1906 to the outbreak of war to 1914 was based on the following strategies:

*To introduce laws which would make the duma a weak parliament

*To introduce agrarian reforms to win back the support of the peasantry

*To instruct Peter Stolypin his prime minister

Peasants resented the strip framing that gave them only scattered parcels of land. Stolypin had hoped that his plans for agrarian reform would succeed in ending the major causes of peasant discontent. But Stolypin believed that it would take about 20 yrs for his reforms to work. This period during 1906-1914 became a period of severe representation in Russia with Stolypin ordering the death of many people. The period was known as the "Stolypin period." In 1911, Stolypin was assassinated with the Tsar losing his most skilful advisor.

World War I broke out in August 1914 - perhaps saving the tsarist government from a major revolutionary outburst. Russia fought with its allies, France and Britain. In the beginning, most Russian people responded enthusiastically.

In reality, the decision to go to war sounded death knell of the Romanov government. By late 1914, dreams of a short victorious war gave way to the realities of high casualty rates, inadequate medical care, shortages of gun and bullets and loss of land. By 1916, the war alone was costing nearly five times the 1913 budget allowance.

Russian soldiers suffered because of tsar's poor decision-making and poor financial planning. Many soldiers lacked boots and warm clothes for survival in the cold conditions. Living standards declined. Russia's railway network and food production was very poor. War also increased the pressure on Russia's industries.

In July 1915, the tsar took personal command of his troops at the battlefront. It was an unwise decision, because from then on he had to accept personal blame for Russia's military failures.

When Nicholas II was in the battlefront, the tsarina, Alexandra, took personal responsibility for the day-to-day business of government. The tsarina's poor political ability caused distrust and hostility towards her by the Russian. It was rumored that she was, largely under the control of Rasputin (self-appointed mystic, infamous for his drunkenness and womanizing), and he was rumored to have become the chief influence in the empire, controlling even military decisions. His presence at court was so resented, not least as a danger to the survival of the monarchy, that in December 1916, a group of aristocrats, including members of the imperial family, murdered him.

In June 1915, zemtovs (local provincial government) united with similar organizations in the towns to form ZemGor, an organization with the goal of assisting the sick and wounded.

The duma challenged the tsar's authority. The Progressive Bloc (consisted of the members of the key parties e.g. Octobrists) demanded "a government of public confidence" (whose ministers are appointed by the duma). The tsar refused.

By late 1916, discontent within Russia had reached its crisis point. Over two million soldiers were dead. The duma, ZemGor, the War Industries Committee (WIC) and the majority of the upper class no longer supported the tsar. The tsar also lost his authority in the eyes of the working class people. They were no longer willing to meet the expectations of loyalty and respect that he had demanded.

By early 1917, Nicholas II was probably the most hated man in Russia. The condition of Russia on the eve of the 1917 revolution included:

*A severe winter

*Inflation

*No breads and hunger

*Strikes

*Anti-government protest

*Breaking laws

*Poor railway/transport systes

*Military could not control situation.

In February 1917, riots began in St Petersburg (renamed Petrograd in 1914). When troops were ordered to fire upon the rioters, they joined them instead. Demands for changes in the government finally resulted in the abdication of Nicholas II and his son on March 15. Over three centuries of Romanov rule were at an end.

In the summer of 1918, the Russian royal family was imprisoned in Ektaerinburg in the Ural Mountains. On July 1918, soldiers ordered the family down to the cellar to face a firing squad.

In conclusion, even though Nicholas's objectives were different, but his position was greatly affected by lack of care for the people, growth of political and social parties, growth of industrializations, involvement in World War I, increased hardships and poverty and his self obsession, as at times his reforms didn't seem to work. His loss of power could have been ignored if he responded at the right time to the problems that his peoples were facing.

You May Also Find These Documents Helpful

  • Good Essays

    One thing that had changed in Russia from when Alexander had come into power in 1881 was that there was increased repression regarding politics. The Statue of State Security was introduced which brought government-controlled courts into the country and could now put on trial political opponents and they could also be arrested too without the need of a jury. This shows change as a lot harsher punishments were introduced that could be imposed on opponents of the government such as being sent to and exiled in Siberia and being hunted down by the Okhrana – Russia’s secret police. Although there was repression of political opponents before Alexander III’s reign, the punishment wasn’t as harsh and the violence that was encouraged by extremist groups was a lot more widespread and happened regularly compared to when Alexander III had introduced the Statue of State Security where attacks were something that didn’t happen as often. Therefore, it contributes to the idea that Russia was unrecognisable in 1894 compared with 1881.…

    • 824 Words
    • 4 Pages
    Good Essays
  • Good Essays

    Czar Nicholas was famous for his autocratic ideas, meaning that he theoretically had total power. His autocratic belief led to an ineffective rule. Nicholas II was the leader of the Russian Empire; however, he was not prepared for the tremendous obligations of administration. The Britannica article, “Nicholas II” claims, “Neither by upbringing nor by temperament was Nicholas fitted for the complex tasks that awaited him as autocratic ruler of a vast empire.” This suggests that Czar Nicholas’s rule was doomed from the start of his czarship. Nicholas’s inexperience explained his ineffectiveness as a ruler. In addition, Czar Nicholas’s absolutist beliefs blinded him from change. Nicholas II’s belief that he had absolute power and stubbornness clouded his view of change. According to Encyclopedia.com’s “Nicholas II,” “[Nicholas] was too stubborn and very slow to recognize the need for change. Nicholas found it…

    • 613 Words
    • 3 Pages
    Good Essays
  • Good Essays

    All state leaders across the whole period held qualities that didn’t please the whole of the population in Russia. During the reign of Alex II, the government showed some strength with controlling opposition from the peasantry through the emancipation of the serfs in 1861. It was thought that to prevent revolt from below, this was a key movement that had to be made, and therefore prevented future unrest and opposition. However, the new liberated serfs had to deal with more laws concerning land ownership with led to further unrest and repression in the peasantry by the state. The state moreover, appeased the most vocal critics but in such a way that allowed dissenters to express themselves in the knowledge that Tsar’s decision would be final. Compared to Nicholas II’s reign, this showed a decisive leading technique, as Nicholas’s style was more conservative, and showed weakness, relying on others’ advice to fuel his decisions. A key failure throughout his period was the mixed rule attempt with the Duma introduced from 1906 to 1917, it is arguable that Nicholas II made concessions only to keep opposition temporarily at bay and that his aim was to uphold the principle of autocracy.…

    • 1646 Words
    • 7 Pages
    Good Essays
  • Satisfactory Essays

    In July 1918, the royal Romanov line was suddenly and brutally ended by the Bolsheviks. The Romanov family had ruled the Russian Empire for over three centuries. The Romanovs reign was one of strict tyranny. Tsar Nicholas II of Russia made one big step toward a more equal Russia by freeing the serfs but because the serfs owned no land they had little to no money still. After WWI when nicholas led Russia to a crushing defeat there was lots of unrest throughout Russia. I think that the main reason the Tsar was forced to abdicate the throne and then was slaughtered is that he made a more equal Russia but in doing so he made the serfs more impoverished than ever, that he had led Russia into multiple wars that had ended badly and that the technology…

    • 151 Words
    • 1 Page
    Satisfactory Essays
  • Good Essays

    Tsar Nicholas II was a very poor leader for the people of Russia, he lacked leadership skills. His poor leadership qualities lead too many problems within Russia that were not dealt with efficiently. For example he did not trust the Duma, in 1906 the first Duma was introduced; after 72 days Nicholas dissolved the Duma as he did not believe in their policies and he did not trust them. This angered many people, Nicholas was not giving anyone a chance to speak and help him to change Russia.…

    • 1510 Words
    • 7 Pages
    Good Essays
  • Better Essays

    Undeniably, Nicholas II had an enormous role in bringing about the downfall of the Romanov Dynasty in March 1917. Whilst many historians argue the fall of the Tsarist regime to be the direct response and product of World War I, it is quite evident that it was Nicholas’ inefficient and fatal autocratic ruling which led to the March Revolution of 1917. The effects of Russia’s involvement in numerous wars only heightened and highlighted Nicholas’ unsuitability for the role of Tsar, and his absolute and stubborn belief in autocracy. Had Nicholas’ various choices throughout his reign differed, the Romanov Dynasty could in fact, have existed…

    • 1391 Words
    • 6 Pages
    Better Essays
  • Good Essays

    Nicolas Romanov was not at all a very effective or strong leader. Above anything, he did not do anything to help the peasants who took up 84 percent of the country, and barely ever had enough food for the family. The peasant population was constantly increasing and Nicholas did nothing to help it. Another poor quality is that he secretly supplied the Black Hundred with weapons, used to eliminate anyone again the autocracy. Because he became so against the idea of the Duma, he became a much less caring ruler.…

    • 997 Words
    • 4 Pages
    Good Essays
  • Good Essays

    Essay On Tsarist Autocracy

    • 1209 Words
    • 5 Pages

    Many Russians were infuriated by the government because the Tsar did not take action when the country was deteriorating. In addition, he failed to carry his people during the war. With this catastrophe, the Russians demanded for their voices to be heard and for a change in the government and as a result, war occurred within the country. Selfish people, like Nicholas II who kept all the power to himself, often affect others deeply, or foster terrible consequences. For example, one may take all the credit for working on a group project. Other group members will feel injustice and demand for credit to be given to them since they worked as hard as all the others did. Likewise, the Tsar’s decision to maintain power led to citizens rioting and the fall of his power. People should always think about their actions before executing them, or else the aftermath would be…

    • 1209 Words
    • 5 Pages
    Good Essays
  • Best Essays

    The Russian Orthodox Church was a major influence in instigating the tsar’s autocratic powers. As the primary religion of Russia, the church claimed that it was the Tsar’s ‘divine right’ to rule and that his autocratic powers were derived from God. The church taught the Russian people to embrace autocracy and to love and obey the Tsar’s supreme power. The Tsar was described as being a dictatorial emperor and that 'neither a constitution nor other institutions limited the Tsar’s authority.…

    • 2229 Words
    • 9 Pages
    Best Essays
  • Good Essays

    Russian Revolution and Tsar Nicholas II The Russian Revolution, a 20th century period of political and social change, had many factors, the most impactful being Tsar Nicholas II’s incompetence. His self-centered goals and struggles to meet the people's needs caused uprisings throughout Russia. We see Tsar Nicholas II’s incompetence in his overall management ability, how he reacted to Bloody Sunday, and his delegation of power to his wife. When Nicholas II became Tsar in 1896 following his father's death, Russia was already behind in the world of industrialization.…

    • 639 Words
    • 3 Pages
    Good Essays
  • Better Essays

    Tsar Nicholas soon decided (or knew no other way) that he would rule the same as his father, and all the Romanov generations before him ruled, with absolute power. He decided to rule this way because he saw no need for change - 'it's worked for nearly 300 years, why change now?' the tsar was once quoted saying. What the Tsar didn't realize is that he is ruling with a 17th Century mind-set, and it was now the 20th century.…

    • 1855 Words
    • 5 Pages
    Better Essays
  • Good Essays

    Nicholas Romanov

    • 597 Words
    • 3 Pages

    Nicholas II was the last of the Romanov dynasty rule as the Czar of Russia. His rule began on 1st of November and finished on the 15th of 1917. During the time of Nicholas’s reign Russia saw him go from the great and powerful “little father” to a much more dishonorable and weak “bloody Nicholas”. Nicholas II was unsuccessful and the reason behind all of Russia’s many downfalls such as WW1 and the Russo-Japanese war. Bloody Sunday, The October Manifesto and the Russo-Japanese war were all events that support how unsuccessful he was as Czar and prove that he was the worst ruler of his time.…

    • 597 Words
    • 3 Pages
    Good Essays
  • Good Essays

    He worried that what he had worked so hard to accomplish would be destroyed by his son who had no lessons in how to rule a country. Nicholas II, as a child, was sheltered from his parents; and the Russian people’s point of views, or beliefs, and he developed an outlook toward his future with “honor, service and tradition” (Atchison). Nicholas enjoyed the military field and had an “excellent education and was perhaps the best educated European monarch of his time.” Nicholas II wanted to please…

    • 742 Words
    • 3 Pages
    Good Essays
  • Good Essays

    Alexei, who puzzled the people - they didn’t know about his condition - and was seen as spoiled and unloveable by politicians, was reasonably killed. He followed his father’s way of life, one that the people of Russia greatly disliked. It also made sense that Alexandra, the tsarina, was killed, as the people mistrusted her and Rasputin. Wherever Alexandra went, Rasputin went too. On the other hand, Nicholas’s brother, Grand Duke Michael, was asked to take the throne. (He later on refused) Eventually though, as history tells, most of the Romanov family was led to their deaths. OTMA, on the other hand, were possibly murdered due to the fact that their parentage led people to believe the children would turn out like Nicholas II and Alexandra. Nicholas was actually an uneducated man. “He had few intellectual pretensions” and instead preferred to leave the politics and papers to others. His parents did not bother educating him well either; Nicholas was tutored by average and undesirable people. The upbringing of the tsar helped Nicholas rule the way he did, and look at other people the way he did. The tsar was not very smart, so he sent away all ministers that he thought were more intelligent than him due to superiority belief. The people might have thought that OTMA and Alexei would turn out the same way - as Alexei showed he…

    • 1127 Words
    • 5 Pages
    Good Essays
  • Good Essays

    I never wanted to become one. I know nothing of the business of ruling”(Biography.com Editors 2). Now that he had such a important job he felt overwhelmed but kept on trying to do his best, although that did work out. NIcholas II had started to become very hated between the russian population, he didn't not look out for them and made horrible decisions such as when Japan attacked Russia, Russian military was brutally destroyed they had lost such a big war, and on January 5, 1905, there was a sizeable but peaceful demonstration of workers in…

    • 815 Words
    • 4 Pages
    Good Essays