Preview

The Abdication Of Tsar Nicholas II In 1917

Good Essays
Open Document
Open Document
886 Words
Grammar
Grammar
Plagiarism
Plagiarism
Writing
Writing
Score
Score
The Abdication Of Tsar Nicholas II In 1917
The abdication of Tsar Nicholas II in 1917 was a major event in Russian history. This was caused by a variety of reasons, including appalling conditions suffered by the people, the Tsar’s weak autocratic rule and the revolution of March 1917, which ended with the Tsar being forced out of power. The abdication of the Tsar also had several consequences, which changed the course of Russian history. Firstly, the newly formed Provisional Government and the Petrograd Soviet vied for power for several months in the wake of the Tsar’s sudden abdication. Russia then left World War One following the treaty of Brest-Litovsk in early 1918. This was followed by a six-year Russian Civil War, resulting in Bolshevik Victory.

The immense adversity endured
…show more content…
130 million people resided within the borders of Russia during the early 1900's and over 80% were peasant labourers, meaning they lived in abject poverty working for barely any pay. The vast majority of peasants farmed the land, and due to Russia's harsh climate, crops would often fail, leaving the peasants starving and penniless. Particularly huge famines occurred in 1900 and 1902, which resulted in famines across large parts of rural Russia. Due to the land-owning conditions of 1861's Edict of Emancipation, peasants had to pay instalments of money every year for 49 years, so there was virtually no hope of peasants being able to farm their own individual land. With the rise in city factories, peasants who formerly lived in the country were lured to Russia's major cities with hopes of a stable income and better living conditions. However, they worked long, tough shifts of up to 15 hours and were payed virtually nothing for it. A witness from the time, Father Gapon, wrote a book detailing …show more content…
Tsar Nicholas II chose to uphold the values of the Romanov rulers that held complete power before him. His determination to maintain his autocracy whilst lacking the ideas and abilities to do so resulted in growing public resentment and discontent. Naïve and incompetent, Tsar Nicholas II remained ignorant the peasant population’s problems, focussing his attention on retaining the medieval system of society that was in place when the Romanov family first gained power. This way, he ensured that the equality gap between the rich and poor stayed the same. The poor had no way to improve their desperate situation, as there were no opportunities for peasants to gain higher qualifications. Because of this, the peasants became increasingly disgruntled. In addition to this, the Tsar was a pious man, who had been brought up believing that he and his family were specifically chosen by God to rule Russia. Therefore, he believed that no one could contest his decisions. During his 23-year rule, the Tsar made many great mistakes that further increased discontent among his subjects. In 1905, he sent his feared Cossacks to several uprisings that occurred during that year. By killing innocent protestors, he only increased the people’s hatred of him. As a response to the uprisings of 1905, he created a government called the Duma, which appeased the public for a short time. However, it was soon realised that

You May Also Find These Documents Helpful

  • Good Essays

    Another factor that was responsible for the survival of the Tsarist rule was the reluctance of the Peasantry to support opposition. The Peasants were extremely uneducated and they didn’t understand how these policies could change their lives. The Tsar had been the political power since the 13th century so it was all that they knew. They believed that the Tsar was appointed by god so whatever he did, they believed it was for the best. They were fearful that if they joined an opposition group the Tsar would be able to ‘see’ them and…

    • 824 Words
    • 4 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
  • Good Essays

    The Russian nobility was the least important factor contributing to keeping the Tsar in power. Despite including leading members of the Russian Orthodox Church and comprising of the ruling elite who possessed considerable social and political power, ‘the Court’ nobility had begun to question some of the decisions made by the Tsar. Some nobles had relatives or were themselves involved in anti-tsarist organisations, for example Sophia Perovskaya, daughter of Lev Perovsky (governor-general of St. Petersburg), was involved in several unsuccessful and the one successful attempt to assassinate Tsar Alexander II. This shows that though the majority of the nobility supported the Tsar as he protected their interests by taxing the poor and repressing revolutionaries who would make Russia’s government more fair, which wouldn’t benefit the nobility as theu would lose land and profit made from the tenants on the land.…

    • 1091 Words
    • 5 Pages
    Good Essays
  • Powerful Essays

    Throughout this time period the ruling elite, who made up 1.1% of the population despite owning 25% of the land, maintained constant support of the Tsar. This support was based on reliance in the Tsars rule in order to ensure their own aristocracy. The nobles controlled the land Therefore through the nobility’s control of land and as a result the means of production, the Tsar had autocratic power over the majority who worked this land; the peasants, both of state (32.7%) and through the nobility 50.7% as despite the emancipation of serfs in 1861 the lives of these peasants were heavily restricted and reliant on the land owners through the Mir, censorship, tax and redemption payments, of which many could not pay for and so were forced into debt. the peasants themselves, being both restricted in the Mir and due to their traditional attitudes and acceptance of social situation, what Marx would call a lack of revolutionary consciousness, can be attributed to the Tsarist survival.…

    • 2563 Words
    • 11 Pages
    Powerful Essays
  • Better Essays

    Like his father, Nicholas was prepared by his tutor Constantine Pobedonostsev, an extreme nationalist, who instilled in Nicholas a stubborn belief in the divine right of kings and absolute power. Many historians such as George F. Kennan, argue that it was this wholehearted belief and upholding of autocracy, which was in fact, the main reason for the March Revolution in 1917. By 1905, the changing needs of the rapidly industrialized Russia were disregarded by Nicholas, who instead ruthlessly repressed any opposition to the government and its’ autocratic system. Nicholas’ heavy censorship and policing developed a huge level of oppression and discontent amongst the Russian public. Protest was met with relentless violence such as the Bloody Sunday incident on the 22ND January 1905. With over 1000 civilians killed by Nicholas’ army, the massacre which came to be known as “Bloody Sunday” highlighted the regime’s brutal approach and the Tsar’s autocratic unwillingness to address the issues of the Russian population. The incident caused a significant decline in the Tsar’s authority, destroying Nicholas’ image as the people’s benevolent father. Bloody Sunday also triggered widespread protest and revolt, which led to the 1905 revolution. The growing resentment towards Nicholas was furthered after his failure to accept the Duma which he promised in…

    • 1391 Words
    • 6 Pages
    Better Essays
  • Good Essays

    When Nicholas II ascended the throne in 1894 he wasn’t facing any single issue left by a single Tsar he was facing the culmination of the three previous rulers’ mistakes that they had left behind or inherited and made worse. However the biggest problems had arguably been left by Russia’s most “liberal” Tsar, Alexander I.…

    • 958 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
  • Better Essays

    The early twentieth century in Russia saw people from many different levels of society experience grievances due to the poor leadership and decision making of Nicholas II. Nicholas failed to see the problems his people were dealing with and was too caught up in keeping Russia under autocratic rule. The grievances the Russian people experienced ranged from political, social and economic. Each social class had different criticisms and issues with the Russian government but the dissatisfaction with the government was a shared feeling all over Russia. The social classes that experienced major grievances included the peasants, industrial workers and the nobility.…

    • 1124 Words
    • 5 Pages
    Better Essays
  • Good Essays

    Nicholas II kept the power to approve laws and declare war and continuously denied Dumas' push for a constitutional monarchy. Tsar feared the loss of autocratic rule, leading him to sign a decree on February 25th, 1917 to dissolve the Duma. This angered many of Russia's people who had vast growth due to industrialization, for they were drawn to the socialist reforms proposed by the Duma, believing these reforms would immensely improve their…

    • 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
  • 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

    When Alexander II became the Tsar, Russia was in total disarray. Her once widely respected and feared army was humiliated on the battlefields in the Crimean Peninsula, 80% of the people were in poverty and illiterate. Russia was still stuck in the middle ages while the rest of Europe was steaming in through the Industrial Era. Alexander II saw this as a need for change, primarily in response to the Crimean War, however to be able to do this, he also had to change the Russian society, therefore in 1861 he abolished serfdom, becoming the most significant events in Imperial Russian history, giving him the name as the ‘Tsar Liberator’ (Watts, Peter, History Review, 2014). However, although Alexander II’s reforms did pave the way for a more educated,…

    • 1434 Words
    • 6 Pages
    Good 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