Preview

How Far Was Ww1 the Main Cause of the Fall of the Romanovs in February 1917?

Good Essays
Open Document
Open Document
735 Words
Grammar
Grammar
Plagiarism
Plagiarism
Writing
Writing
Score
Score
How Far Was Ww1 the Main Cause of the Fall of the Romanovs in February 1917?
How far was WW1 the main cause of the fall of the Romanovs in February 1917?

Tsar Nicholas II was the head of the Romanov family who had ruled Russia for five generations from 1613 to 1762. When Nicholas had inherited the throne he married Alexandra Fyodorovna of Hesse, who was from Germany. They had five children together, but their popularity was starting to fall by 1914. When there was the outbreak of the war, the Russian people criticised Alexandra’s German heritage and Nicholas’s failure to treat Russia’s social, political and economic problems caused further discontent among the Russian people.
In 1905, Nicholas made himself Commander of the Russian Military and left Petrograd for his new military headquarters on the war front. Because he had left, the Tsarina Alexandra was left to rule. Her most trusted advisor was a faith healer called Grigori Rasputin. Because of him, Alexandra became very paranoid and appointed and dismissed government officials at her own personal choice. Russia had 4 different Prime Ministers who were appointed in 16 months and their policies all varied from repressive to oppressive. Rasputin was murdered in 1916 by some of his opponents, and Alexandra who was left alone to rule tightened her grip on authority over the Russian people.
While this was happening, World War 1 was not going well for Nicholas, who had still not won a large battle which he could tell the people about. This meant that most of the Russian moral had gone and the war effort had lost all of its momentum first gained. Also the severe winter did not help, it meant that there was a shortage of food for all classes of people, and the means of transport were disabled.
The anarchy in Petrograd was finally brought to the attention of Nicholas, but only a limited amount because the reports were censored. It was not until he tried to return to Petrograd that he realized how many strikes there were and how critical they were to Russia. This was just like the Tsar’s

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

    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
  • Powerful Essays

    Summary: Romanov Dynasty

    • 4116 Words
    • 17 Pages

    Nicholas II, the last tsar of Russia, had neither the qualities nor the desire to rule imperial Russia. Born in Tsarskoye Selo in 1868, Nicholas was the eldest son of Alexander III, the fearsome tsar who had reimposed autocracy and oppression on the Russian empire after the murder of Alexander II. Those who met the young tsarevich, described him as pleasant and likeable, but otherwise unremarkable – hardly the traits of a man ordained by God to rule Russia. Nicholas famously expressed reluctance about taking the throne, declaring that he “never wanted to rule”. But tradition…

    • 4116 Words
    • 17 Pages
    Powerful 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
  • Powerful Essays

    Assess the role of the Bolsheviks for the decline and fall of the Romanov dynasty.…

    • 2102 Words
    • 9 Pages
    Powerful 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

    The Tsar’s flaws as a leader were an extremely important reason as to why he was losing control of his country. Russia was an autocracy- this meant that the Tsar had full control of the country and had the final say in every decision. This could have been positive, but I think it was a negative thing. He was not a very decisive person, and he would not delegate to others (An example of this being, how he interfered in the appointments of local midwives.) While he was busy doing the wrong jobs he needed employees that were capable of the best. Another flaw of Nicholas’ was that he was extremely suspicious of those cleverer than him and fired many of his best workers (Count Witte) and preferred to hire only family and friends. This helped to weaken his control on Russia because not only did he lose respect from his people, but also he was not doing his job and as the only ruler of the country, Russia did not have a focused authority figure.…

    • 1597 Words
    • 7 Pages
    Good Essays
  • Good Essays

    There were massive socio-economic changes taking place . This created a new class of factory workers . The working class , mostly the peasants - who comprised of 84% of the Russian population - were moved to the city to work in factories . Little could have been done about this as products had to be manufactured in the country , as trade routes were cut off due to WWI . On one hand , due to Tsar Nicholas II autocratic policies, there were no trade unions,to look out workers rights. For that reason living and working conditions were very bad . Workers worked for 14 hours a day and slept in overcrowded lodging houses , as illustrated by Father Gapon in 1905. On the other hand if the workers were treated better , they wouldn't have been so quick to go against the Tsar . His epathy further allienated his…

    • 789 Words
    • 4 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
  • Good Essays

    Soon after becoming Tsar he would ask Alix for support instead of trusting the “bureaucrats and sycophants” (Atchison). Nicholis would shy away and find himself lonely throughout his reign (Atchison). Nicholas II knew that his time as Tsar would be short lived and his people had grown tired and angry with him. He believed the only reason Russia was still holding “at the seams” was because of the monarchy (Atchison). This led to the Revolution in February of 1917 which was an “uproar” (Biography).…

    • 742 Words
    • 3 Pages
    Good Essays
  • Good Essays

    In 1917, a famous revolution led tsar Nicholas II and his immediate family to be abdicated from the Russian throne. The same year, the family was killed, leading to the Romanov family to end its several century long reign. But why exactly was the Romanov family killed? Did they not care for the wellbeing of their citizens? Were they simply just too corrupt for any good? There are several answers to this question, the main ones being governmental corruption, a belief of superiority, and an unreasonable amount of bloodshed in WWI.…

    • 1127 Words
    • 5 Pages
    Good Essays
  • Good Essays

    History

    • 1023 Words
    • 5 Pages

    Assess the view that the First World War was the main cause of the collapse of Romanov rule…

    • 1023 Words
    • 5 Pages
    Good Essays