Preview

Tsar Nicholas Ii

Good Essays
Open Document
Open Document
964 Words
Grammar
Grammar
Plagiarism
Plagiarism
Writing
Writing
Score
Score
Tsar Nicholas Ii
Nicholas II abdicated the throne in 1917 up until then, the Russian Royal family had ruled for over three hundred years. Throughout this period, they faced many problems and uneasy predicaments, a lot of these centering on Nicholas II as Tsar. A combination of long and short-term problems led to the decline and eventual fall of the Romanov dynasty. Tsar Nicholas II ignored these issues, staying true to his coronation vow to uphold Autocracy, and therefore played a critical role in the plummet of the Empire.

A flaw in Tsar Nicholas II Autocratic style of ruling was his conflicting personality. He was a family orientated man, and they often took priority over ruling and looking after his country especially his son, Alexei who suffered severely from Hemophilia which consumed most of him, and his wife, Tsarina Alexandra’s time caring for him. Another flaw in his personality was that he required absolute power and that all decisions were to be made by The Tsar himself. He was blind to the political and social realities of his expansive and diverse empire. These aspects were key components in Nicholas II role in the fall of The Romanov Dynasty.

Due to Tsar Nicholas II failure to address economic and social grievances, Russia was in a state of unease, regularly holding strikes to express their grievances. One of their main concerns was the effect of industrialization. Even though Russia ranked fifth among the industrial nations of the world in terms of industrial productions, the conditions of the workers were bad. Their wages were low, their working hours were long and their living conditions were intolerable – crowded together in barrack with no healthy and sanitary facilities. As well as enduring poor living conditions at home, the conditions in the factories were not of higher quality. Due to the many years of oppression, the workers demanded change from the Tsar and became crucial elements in the downfall of the Empire.

Many critical events occurred in 1905

You May Also Find These Documents Helpful

  • 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 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.…

    • 735 Words
    • 3 Pages
    Good Essays
  • Good Essays

    In 1894 Russia’s last tsar, Nicholas II, inherited the throne when he was unprepared to do so. It is hard to do something when you are not ready. It is like letting a bull out of the chute when you were not ready, so you fall, but in Nicholas’s case a lot of things came down with him.…

    • 247 Words
    • 1 Page
    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

    Ivan IV (The Terrible)

    • 1710 Words
    • 7 Pages

    Pretend that the greatest leader to ever rule your country wanted to resign. You would want him to come back, but the price of that is to give him complete and absolute power. Would you pay that price? The people of Russia did, and as soon as Ivan IV came back, he killed them by the thousands. Ivan Vasilyevich began as Tsar at the age of 16. He was a great ruler for the first part of his life. He unified, and vastly improved his country, creating a more modern government. Unfortunately, his mental state unraveled as he got older, and he was prone to violent fits of rage that would lead to his own people calling him Ivan the Terrible. During his time as Tsar, he conquered vast amounts of land, greatly contributing…

    • 1710 Words
    • 7 Pages
    Good Essays
  • Powerful Essays

    Nicholas Romanov was appointed as Tsar of Russia in 1894 and during his rule his fatal flaw was to address the concerns of Russia. Tsar Nicholas II was a conservative leader and possessed few of the skills that were vital to effectively rule the huge Russian population. He ruled Russia as an autocrat with his fantasy of absolute power rather than…

    • 2194 Words
    • 9 Pages
    Powerful 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
  • Better Essays

    In 1894, Tsar Alexander III died suddenly of Kidney failure at a very young age. His son, Nicholas II took over the position (he was only 26) through succession, not knowing that he would soon become the tsar who brought the Romanov rule to an end after more than 300 years of autocratic rule.…

    • 1855 Words
    • 5 Pages
    Better Essays
  • Powerful Essays

    Tsar Dmitrii I

    • 1667 Words
    • 7 Pages

    At the beginning of the seventeenth century Russia experienced a period of great upheaval that has since been called the Time of Troubles (1598-1613). The period was an incredibly complex period of intersecting political, social, and economic issues that culminated into this tumultuous period. During this period, the Russian Orthodox Church became the only social institution and political symbol that offered Russians a sense of continuity, unity, and stability. Orthodox Christianity played a fundamental role in the Russian conscience and in the absence of strong governance, many Russians looked to the Orthodox Church for cues on how to navigate the political crisis at hand. During the Time of Troubles, the presence of samosvanents, pretenders or royal impostures, became a central factor that would shape the Russian political landscape. The reign of Tsar Dmitrii I (r. 1605-1606) is an authoritative and exemplary case study on the nature of samosvanents within Russian politics and religion, and how by understanding the narrative surrounding Dmitrii I’s reign we can begin to understand the broader…

    • 1667 Words
    • 7 Pages
    Powerful Essays
  • Good Essays

    There were a great amount of horrible features in the Russian factories. First of all, there were no special quarters for the workers. Skilled hand craftsmen slept on or under their looms, the velveteen cutters slept on the tables they worked on, carpenters slept on their work benches, and other workers of both sexes and all ages slept together on damp pieces of mats. This was certainly unhealthy because most of the areas were musty and the air was saturated with various, sometimes poisonous, fumes. Another horrible feature included the many different fines workers were frequently given that was taken out of their pay. Workers were fined for leaving the factory before their contract expired, failure to maintain silence and cleanliness, singing in the courtyard, bringing food or drinks into the weaving building, and writing with pencil or chalk on the walls of the dyeing and weaving buildings. A final horrible feature included wages being paid out only twice a year. The wages would never be paid in full and would not be given directly to the workers. They would be given to the village elders and village clerks and the workers would be left without money year round. Compared to Western Europe, Russia had much harsher factory conditions. Western European factories contained long hours and little pay for both children and adults but they were given a slight amount more of freedom. There were certainly not as many fines as Russian factories contained. The demeaning and dirty conditions of the factory definitely boosted a revolutionary mood among Russian workers. Russian workers were treated as serfs and literally did not own a single thing for themselves. Russian workers would have definitely rebelled to change the poor way they were being treated.…

    • 401 Words
    • 2 Pages
    Good 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

    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
  • Powerful Essays

    Ivan the Terrible

    • 1492 Words
    • 6 Pages

    Ivan IV, or also known as Ivan the Terrible, gained huge amounts of land during his reign and created a centrally controlled Russia. He had a complex personality. He was intelligent but brutal and sadistic. He watched as prisoners were boiled, burned and fried. He destroyed villages, towns and even cities. Thousands were slaughtered, leaving others to wonder if Russia would survive this era.…

    • 1492 Words
    • 6 Pages
    Powerful Essays
  • Good Essays

    The living conditions for the peasant population across Russia were atrocious. This presented itself as a major problem for the Tsar, as over 80% of the population was comprised of peasants, and this lead to them demanding reform. Over 25% of the wealth of Russia was owned by just 1% of the population, this alarming statistic created a colossal division between rich and poor, further stressing the peasant’s point of reformation. By 1904 life expectancy in Russia was 40, despite serfdom being abolished, peasants had to pay redemption reparations to cover landowner’s workforce losses, these repayments lasted for 49 years, longer than a peasant’s lifetime, sometimes even two. These problems all lead to the widespread strikes and protest that spread across Russia between 1905 and 1917.…

    • 823 Words
    • 4 Pages
    Good Essays
  • Good Essays

    Investigating the first of the long-term factors causing the revolution, it seemed necessary to go back to examine the structure of Tsarist Russia pre-1905 to get a fuller picture. This period posed a problem for Nicholas II. The regime itself reinforced any class divisions from the bureaucracy to the peasants and alienated them even further. As, "the truth is Nicholas was never in touch with the common people. He never knew what it was like to worry where the next meal was coming from. He never had to. " He did not understand the way that Russia worked in practise. He could not, or would not, empathise with the peasants' hardships of the land and his ideas of Russia's troubles were laughable. Consequently, by 1905 he had estranged his subjects, including even some of the gentry' folk that had been so loyal to Tsardom in the past. They were a class in decline and it was partly due to the…

    • 2347 Words
    • 10 Pages
    Good Essays