Preview

Russia: Tsar Nicholas the Second Essay Example

Good Essays
Open Document
Open Document
700 Words
Grammar
Grammar
Plagiarism
Plagiarism
Writing
Writing
Score
Score
Russia: Tsar Nicholas the Second Essay Example
In the reign of Nicholas II the autocracy, which ruled Russia, allowed him to have complete power over the country with no one to limit any extremes he may take. It was impossible for Nicholas to govern the whole Russian empire by himself, so he created civil servants to assist him in the affairs. Nicholas did not allow people to question or undermine his authority and to make sure this didn't happen he created the Okhrana or secret police. The Russian Orthodox Church also assisted the Tsar in maintaining loyalty and respect for the autocracy as the Russian society had great respect for their religion.

Nicholas II came into power in October 1894. The day after his father Alexander the Third died. Upon becoming ruler he stated "What is going to happen to me, to all Russia? I am not ready to be the Tsar. I never wanted to become one". Nicholas's first attitude towards ruling 130 million Russians was anything but confident and positive. However in January 1895 he had changed his attitude stating, "I shall preserve the principle of autocracy just as firmly as my late unforgettable father preserved it".

Nicholas used his autocratic power to its full advantages. He was able to make new laws without any consultation between ministers and advisers. He could also change taxes and do whatever he liked. Anyone who disagreed or acted against him would be sacked. Political parties were illegal and there was no parliament as the Tsar was unwilling to share power with anyone. His ministers were individually responsible to him and rarely met as a group to discuss policies.

Thousands of civil servants were employed by Nicholas to run the affairs of his vast empire. They were like most people throughout Russia at the time, underpaid and many accepted bribes from the people to get by, making the service corrupt. The service collected taxes from the people and made sure that the decisions made by Nicholas were carried out. The civil service was split into four different

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

    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

    The government was an autocracy which meant that all power resided in the hands of the Tsar. Nicholas II, however, had a weak and stubborn personality. He was not willing to share his authority with the Duma (parliament) and his government relied on oppression to remain in power. The army and Okhrana (secret police) were used to stamp out protests. A further key feature was that the government was dependent on a narrow social base of aristocratic supporters, which left it vulnerable to opposition from the vast majority of Russians. During the war years the growing scale of strikes and demonstrations was becoming too difficult for the government to handle.The war caused huge casualties (9 out of 15 million soldiers) for very little gain and a series of defeats in battle led to a collapse in morale. Consequently, the Tsar was blamed for failure because he had taken command of the army in 1915. As a result the Tsar was absent from the capital and he left his wife in charge. The Tsarina was distrusted because of her German origins and she was under the corrupt influence of Rasputin, who had the power to appoint and dismiss ministers at will. This led to a major loss of confidence in the government.…

    • 286 Words
    • 1 Page
    Satisfactory Essays
  • Better Essays

    When Alexander III became the tsar, Russia was in a crisis following the assassination of Alexander II. The problems that Tsar was facing were that many different groups wanted to change the political system, as not everyone agreed with the autocracy system of government in Russia. To solve this he had to get rid of all political parties and political opposition. Also he had to get rid of anyone who had or wanted political control. Alexander II’s liberals ministers, M,T. Loris-Melikov and N.P. Lgnatiev left the office, and were replaced with Alexandra III own mistiers, Pobedonostsev, chief procurator of the Holy Synod of the Russia Orthodox Church. Also he had to make sure that all power was given only to the Tsar, so he had to restrict the Zemstvas power, because the Zemstva meant that all power of the tsar was spread out to cities and towns. Furthermore, the organisation, the ‘Peoples Will’ needed to be destroyed as it was a threat to Tsar’s power, so immediately he destroyed the ‘Peoples Will’. He then introduced the Statute of State Security. This allowed the government to arrest and trial any political opponent without a jury. This gave the Tsar complete power. In addition, Russia was a huge multi-racial empire with 55% Russian and the rest Ukrainians, Polish, Jews and more. Because of these races Alexander III wanted to make sure that Russia remained Russian. He did this by a policy of ‘Russification’. This policy made Russian the official language. This meant all documents were in Russia. However this policy affected many people including the Jews. Finally, Russia’s main problem was financially. Russia was physically the largest in size and population, but was almost the most economically underdeveloped. Alexandra III had to increase its economic wealth in order to maintain its armed forces and to maintain its position as a Great Power. He did this by his finance…

    • 2108 Words
    • 6 Pages
    Better Essays
  • Good Essays

    Ivan The Terrible Legacy

    • 965 Words
    • 4 Pages

    The creation of the Oprichnina marked something completely new, a break from the past that served to diminish the power of the boyars and create a more centralized government. "...the revolution of Tsar Ivan was an attempt to transform an absolutist political structure into a despotism... the Oprichnina proved to be not only the starting point, but also the nucleus of autocracy which determined... the entire subsequent historical process in Russia."[20] Ivan created a way to bypass the Mestnichestvo system and elevate the men among the gentry to positions of power, thus suppressing the aristocracy that failed to support him.[21] Part of this revolution included altering the structure of local governments to include, "a combination of centrally appointed and locally elected officials. Despite later modifications, this form of local administration proved to be functional and durable." [22] Ivan successfully cemented autocracy and a centralized government in Russia, in the process also establishing "a centralized apparatus of political control in the form of his own guard."[23] The idea of a guard as a means of political control became so ingrained in Russian history that it can be traced to Peter the Great, Vladimir Lenin, who "... [provided] Russian autocracy with its Communist incarnation",[24] and Joseph Stalin, who…

    • 965 Words
    • 4 Pages
    Good Essays
  • Better Essays

    Nicholas’ autocratic method of ruling blinded him from the growing needs of Russia, and enforced a level of oppression which only heightened the discontent which led to the March Revolution in 1917. The diplomatic and military failures at war highlighted and showcased these flaws in Nicholas’s autocracy. If Nicholas had been more willing and able to adapt and reform, he could have ensured a gradual transition from an autocratic nation to a constitutional democratic nation, where the Romanov dynasty still existed to this…

    • 1391 Words
    • 6 Pages
    Better Essays
  • Good Essays

    Nicholas II was the last czar of Russia. He was born on the 6th of May 1868 and this day, ominously, turned out to be the Orthodox feast day of St. Job the Sufferer. This seemed to foretell the dangerous and troublesome life that Nicholas had ahead of him (“Czar”). Unlike his father Alexander Alexandrovich Romanov, a giant and intimidating leader, Nicholas was merely 5’6” and had a gentle personality. He was one of the best educated monarchs in Europe because his parents foresaw the obstacles of the 20th century and prepared him for every challenge that he might face. Terrorism constantly threatened the royal family. Nicholas was always surrounded by guards and grew up being very isolated from the outside world. After joining the military, which was expected of him, he enjoyed his carefree life by drinking and attending parties (Hunsucker). Irresponsibility, negligence, and separation from his people kept him from being a successful leader.…

    • 473 Words
    • 2 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
  • Powerful Essays

    Nicholas II Research

    • 3161 Words
    • 9 Pages

    Source 11: Nicholas was “even more poorly prepared than his father for the burdens of kingship. Nicholas had no knowledge of the world of men, of politics or government to help him make the weighty decisions that in the Russian system the Tsar alone must make.” From H. Rogger, Russia in the Age of Modernisation and Revolution, 1983…

    • 3161 Words
    • 9 Pages
    Powerful 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

    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
  • Satisfactory Essays

    conditions under the tsar

    • 285 Words
    • 2 Pages

    Living and working conditions for peasants and workers were terrible. Wages were very low and work hours were very low…

    • 285 Words
    • 2 Pages
    Satisfactory Essays
  • Good Essays

    Revolts were frequent, 1467 of them since 1800. Nicholas I saw this and created nine secret committees to find a way to end serfdom. Alexander II was part of one of those committees. He was also there to be the acting Tsar when Nicholas I was away. Therefore Alexander II was the most prepared heir to the Tsar the empire has ever had. Alexander made a very good start in change when he became Tsar. He stopped all army recruitment, which meant it was no longer forced to enter the army, nor was it a punishment for crimes. Applying for military was completely voluntary. Alexander also released all of the Decembrists, who are people who tried to overthrow his father in 1825 and the Poles, who revolted in 1830. He also lifted restrictions for travelling, 26,000 passports were granted in 1859. Allowing people to travel to Western Europe and learning more about liberal culture and allowing Russia to catch up with the rest of…

    • 1434 Words
    • 6 Pages
    Good Essays
  • Powerful Essays

    When Catherine II came to power, there were no institutional limits on the power of the ruler, no intermediate bodies as seen in the rest of Europe. Russia’s society was highly regulated and restrictive, while its government was lacking and negligent. The idea of a free citizen did not exist. With the second highest population in Europe, Russia was made up of millions of peasants and a small minority of nobility. Even the nobility was owned, in a sense, by the state. Until 1762, nobles were bound to serve the state in either the military or in civil service for twenty-five years or more. There was also a class of townsmen, registered in their town, collectively responsible for a series of unpaid tasks and the collection of a tax. The social institutions of Russia were extremely deep rooted and dissimilar to those in Western Europe; Catherine’s reforms to social structure would have to combat this severe system in a way other rulers would not need. It would be impossible to reform government because the structure of Russia was not able to handle internal administration as is. There were no established corporate structures, no noble assemblies, and no urban corporations, to which internal administration could be trusted. Catherine’s reforms began with organising and giving legal form and rights to…

    • 1508 Words
    • 7 Pages
    Powerful Essays
  • Good Essays

    Tsar Nicholas II succeeded in making a bad situation in Russia even worse. He became a leader at a difficult time, and could never stop the process of revolution. The Tsar was not a good leader, and was out of touch with the Russian people. He was also weak and indecisive, and extremely stubborn. Nicholas II was not equipped to effectively rule a country the size of Russia, and with a vast variety of people with different language, religion, race and culture. Additionally, Nicholas II was mainly concerned with family issues, instead of being concerned with political issues. It was these traits in Nicholas II?s personality that hindered him in being able to attempt to steer Russia away from revolution.…

    • 1455 Words
    • 4 Pages
    Good Essays