Preview

How far was World War 1 the most important reason for the collapse of Tsarism in 1905-1917?

Better Essays
Open Document
Open Document
1818 Words
Grammar
Grammar
Plagiarism
Plagiarism
Writing
Writing
Score
Score
How far was World War 1 the most important reason for the collapse of Tsarism in 1905-1917?
Nicholas II fell from power in February 1917, there are many reasons for the collapse of Tsarism but to what extent was World War 1 the most important reason? World War 1 seems to be the most contributing factor to why Tsarism collapsed in 1917; the huge effects and problems that the War had on Tsarism was able to overturn the monarchy, that before then, had never died. This is due to the impact of War on Russia’s Political state. In 1915 Nicholas II as Tsar toke power of the Russian army, this had a huge effect on the outcome of World War 1 on Russia. Despite this, the collapse of Tsarism could be blamed on different factors of Russia, such as the civilians; the percentage of peasantry in Russia was extremely high, not only the percentage but also the conditions of peasants was awful.

Before World War 1, the Russian political state was extremely corrupt and fragile. Nicholas II held absolute power and his dynasty had ruled Russia for 500 years and was increasingly unpopular. Nicholas II traditional ruled Russia without a parliament. The Noble class of Russia owned most of the countries wealth and land. Nicholas II assigned family members to important political roles; this caused him to have absolute power over Russia without any threats of being over powered. Not only was Nicholas II corrupt with assigning important roles, but also he had insufficiency of the training and experience needed for the Russian Tsar, his failure to make decisions and his organization was extremely poor, “Unfit to run a village post office” This underlines the point that Nicholas II was extremely poor at making decisions and his lack organization was so poor that he would be unable to run a small village post office, that is normally very quiet, let alone Russia, one of the worlds biggest countries, this is backed up by “His ancestors did not pass on to him one quality which would have made him capable of governing an empire”. Therefore this shows that his leadership of the country

You May Also Find These Documents Helpful

  • Good Essays

    War broke out in 1914, with Tsar Nicholas becoming commander-in-chief in 1915, meaning he was away from Petrograd. Not only was this poorly thought out by Nicholas because it gave the people an opportunity to plot against him, but as he was away he left Tsarina (also a German princess), Alexandra, in charge during his absence. Due to the war being against Germany, this made the Russian people nervous and skeptical towards the extreme power she had over them during such a crucial time. Not only were they disgruntled by this, but also Alexandra’s close friendship to Rasputin, a Serbian peasant. This particularly angered the aristocracy and middle classes as they believed they were being led by someone of lower demeanor than that of themselves. This weakened support for the autocratic rule and lost the Tsar many of his supporters, which put him in a vulnerable position in the case of revolutionary upturn. This also could have inspired the peasantry to discover greater aspirations and encourage their belief that they could have greater status which in turn could trigger new revolutionary ideas amongst the lower classes. This demonstrates a link between Nicholas being away in order to commandeer army movement for the war, however it is arguable that it was a lack of authority and respect for the Tsarist regime that caused the change of opinions towards the Tsar amongst all classes, lessening his support and leaving him far more vulnerable in the case of a revolution.…

    • 1166 Words
    • 5 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

    Tsar Nicholas II’s lack of military experience and inability to rule the throne all together, additionally contributed to the devastating outcome of WW1 on Russia. “A quick intelligence, a cultivated mind, method and industry in his work, an extraordinary charm that attracted all who came near him- the Emperor Nicholas had not inherited his father’s commanding personality nor the strong character and prompt decision which are so essential to an autocratic ruler...” stated Sir G. Buchanan, British ambassador to Russia in 1910, emphasizes how the urban lower classes were not the only ones unsatisfied with the Tsar Nicholas…

    • 875 Words
    • 4 Pages
    Good Essays
  • Satisfactory Essays

    Nicholas II being the last tsar of the Romanov dynasty that lasted for over 300 years, is accountable for the fall of the Romanovs in 1917, however, there are various other reasons too that involved in the ultimate fall of tsarism in Russia in February 1917. While Nicholas’s indecisiveness played a major role in portraying his negligence, the other factors that involved the fall of tsarism were, the declining economic standards and the growth of political opposition along with Nicholas II’s penultimate absence when he was most needed in his country, due to the involvement in the first world war, which was another mistake made by the tsar.…

    • 313 Words
    • 2 Pages
    Satisfactory Essays
  • Good Essays

    The Great War was the main cause of the February 1917 Revolution. The Russian army suffered badly in the First World War due to a lack of equipment, inadequate training and poor leadership. The Tsar decided to take personal command of the army. As a result, he was blamed for the army's problems and defeats. World War I was a total disaster for Russia due to the Russian army suffering defeat after defeat at the hands of Germany. Cost of the war led to the economic collapse which then led to more anger and outrage, this shows that the Great War started a chain reaction of problems for Russia. Morale during this time was at an all-time low and soldiers and civilians alike were looking for someone to blame. In 1915, Tsar Nicholas II took personal command of the army and left St. Petersburg and moved to army headquarters in Russian, Poland. Nicholas II may have believed that, by taking charge, his army would be inspired and would fight with renewed vigour, however this had the opposite effect. Unfortunately, the Tsar knew little about the command and organisation of large military forces, and the series of defeats and humiliations continued. The organisation of the Russian army deteriorated and there were massive shortages of ammunition, equipment, and medical supplies which led to possibly the largest asset Nicholas had, the army, to lose belief and faith in…

    • 1065 Words
    • 3 Pages
    Good 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

    Nicholas I faced a multitude of problems when he ascended to the throne in 1825, first and foremost of all these was the Decembrist Revolution by Russian officers. Second was Russia’s crippling economic backwardness, and the slowly crumbling social systems of the old autocracy. Due to Nicholas the I Slavophil outlook on economics he had all but refused to modernise the Russian economy instead leaving it to sit stagnant whilst Western economies of Britain and France thundered ahead. This neglect of industry was keenly felt during the Crimean War where the allied forces of Britain and France thoroughly defeated and embarrassed the Tsars armies. The Russian army was terribly equipped, only capable of supplying 50%…

    • 958 Words
    • 4 Pages
    Good Essays
  • Good Essays

    Essay On Tsarist Autocracy

    • 1209 Words
    • 5 Pages

    The Tsarist autocracy has succeeded for more than three hundred years, but the Russian Revolution that occurred on November 1917 ended the long term autocracy. During this time period, Tsar Nicholas II was the leader of Russia and indeed the last one. He caused Russia’s downfall and made many Russians frustrated about the government. The Tsar did not acknowledge the nation's problems and failed to improve the lives of the citizens. As the Russians struggled with limited rights and lack of help from Nicholas II, they had to make a move. Although peasant unrest led to the Russians protesting and rebelling against the country, the Russian Revolution occurred because of Tsar Nicholas II’s weak leadership, in which he failed to accomplished the Russian’s goals, horribly managed the military, and thought that the system should not change.…

    • 1209 Words
    • 5 Pages
    Good Essays
  • Satisfactory Essays

    March 14 1917, Nicholas II fell from power, there was lots of reasons but my three main reasons are; The State of the Army and how they weren't ready for war, The Role of the Duma and how they wanted the Tsar out of power, and Rasputin how he had control over Nicholas's wife…

    • 945 Words
    • 4 Pages
    Satisfactory Essays
  • Good Essays

    Furthermore he decided to take matters into his own hands by becoming Commander in Chief . He thought that his tactics,maneouvering and royal presence would win Russia the war . Unfortunately this did not go as planned, and Russia was defeated. Although they had lost the war , Nicholas as a leader had stepped up and tried to make his country victorious . It was his lack of military experience that had devasted the Russian army , not a weakness in his character .Nevertheless, Russian citizens seen this as another failure in their leader, as they suffered more losses than any other country.This damaged Russias morale.The people had ,had…

    • 789 Words
    • 4 Pages
    Good 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
  • Powerful Essays

    The war had an adverse effect on the Russian economy. The rising cost of food caused food shortages. Industrial workers went on strike to increase wages and by the end of the war and a new government emerged following Nicholas II abdication. The already delicate domestic political situation in Russia would be imperiled by Nicholas II’s personal affiliation with the military wealth of his country. Any other military commander could be blamed for a disaster and then dismissed, but by taking personal command the Emperor would now take personal as well as political responsibility for all military failures. The crumbling of the Russian position in the field after he assumed command made such an outcome inevitable regardless of innumerable…

    • 1728 Words
    • 7 Pages
    Powerful Essays
  • Powerful Essays

    The Last of the Romanovs

    • 3074 Words
    • 13 Pages

    The first person to impact the fall of Imperial Russia was Nicholas II, the last Russian Emperor. In particular, Nicholas’ coronation marked the beginning of a downward spiral for the Romanov family. Tsar Nicholas II was born on May 6, 1868 and was the eldest son of Alexander III (Levykin, 1999). Nicholas II had to assume the throne earlier than the Russian population would have liked. Nicholas’ father fell ill in the spring of 1894 and his health never fully recovered. On October 20th, 1894, Alexander III died of nephritis, forcing Nicholas to become the next Tsar of Russia at a young age (Lincoln, 1976). After the untimely death of his father, Nicholas was in dismay about becoming Tsar of Russia, a position he never really wanted. This is exemplified when Nicholas II refers to being the Tsar as, “the awful job I have feared all my life” (Massie, 1967, p. 59). To further Nicholas’ fears, the Russian people and government believed he didn’t have enough political training to rule Russia effectively (Harcave, 1968).…

    • 3074 Words
    • 13 Pages
    Powerful Essays
  • Good Essays

    History

    • 1023 Words
    • 5 Pages

    I believe that one of the main reasons for the Tsar’s abdication and the collapse of the Romanov rule was the poor state which Russia was in. Russia’s economy was at the worst it had ever been. The economy was far worse than other countries in the War. There were millions of peasants in Russia who had very limited amount of money. With such a limited amount of money, many peasants were unable to buy food, and drink to help them to survive. Peasants believed that they weren’t getting rewarded fairly for the work which they were doing. The upper classes’ benefit greatly due to work done by the Peasants. This created a negative atmosphere around Russia and helped fuel the need for a change. Peasants wanted change; they wanted to be rewarded more for their efforts at work. Russia was in an economic crisis. They had borrowed a huge amount of money from capital countries in order to fuel Russia’s war effort. This was a problem for Russia because they simply didn’t have the money to repay these countries. During the war the country had suffered inflation. Prices had risen dramatically for everyday items such as bread. The country was suffering and the Russian people’s families were dyeing in a war which wasn’t being funded. The Russian people were bound to be discontent and they only had one person to blame and that was the Tsar.…

    • 1023 Words
    • 5 Pages
    Good Essays