Preview

History

Good Essays
Open Document
Open Document
845 Words
Grammar
Grammar
Plagiarism
Plagiarism
Writing
Writing
Score
Score
History
Assess the reasons for the 1905 revolution in Russia.
Assess the reasons for the opposition and unrest in Russia from 1894 to 1905.
How serious were the problems facing Tsar Nicholas II from 1894 to 1905?

• The Tsar believed in autocracy and absolute power
• The Tsar was not prepared or cut out for ruling Russia
• Tsarist government
• Backwardness of Russia
• Witte’s economic policy
• Grievances of the peasants
• Russo-Japanese war in 1904
• Bloody Sunday
Why did the 1905 Revolution fail to overthrow the Tsarist regime?

• Loyalty of the army and it willingness to destroy Soviets
• The Black Hundreds
• October Manifesto
• Disunity of the opposition
• No clear or capable leadership among the social groups
• The middle classes were scared of anarchy
• The role of Witte
How far was Tsar Nicholas II able to restore his authority after the 1905 Revolution?
‘The 1905 Revolution changed little for the Tsar or the Russian people’. How far do you agree?

How far was Russia politically stable from 1905-1914?

• Lena Goldfields – workers were shot for causing unrest (x)
• Massive increase in strikes (x)
• October Manifesto
• Fundamental Laws 1906 (x)
• Creation of the dumas
• Vyborg appeal
• Stolypin

To what extent was Nicholas II responsible for his own downfall in the revolution of March 1917? (February)

• Nicholas’s refusal to make concessions
• Russia’s performance in WW1
• Impact of the war at home
• The Bolshevik
• The people
• The Soldiers
• The ruling class
• The Peasants
• Rasputin’s bad influence

Was Lenin the main reason for the Bolsheviks success?
• Pragmatic leadership skills
April Theses
- Policies of ‘Bread, Peace and Land” and “All power to the Soviets” appealed to the peasants and the workers
- Received support at such an early stage was crucial
Pragmatic leadership skills
• Promised land reform for The power of the army
- the peasants
- With the Petrograd Soviet being in
Continue Reading
View Writing Issues

You May Also Find These Documents Helpful

  • Good Essays

    How Successful Was Czar Nicholas's Rule In Russia
    • 613 Words
    • 3 Pages

    How Successful Was Czar Nicholas's Rule In Russia

    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
    Read More
  • Good Essays

    To what extent did Russia undergo economic and political reform in the years 1906-1914
    • 1040 Words
    • 3 Pages

    To what extent did Russia undergo economic and political reform in the years 1906-1914

    To what extent did Russia undergo economic and political reform in the years 1906 – 1914?…

    • 1040 Words
    • 3 Pages
    Good Essays
    Read More
  • Better Essays

    The Role Of Nicholas II In The Downfall Of The Romanov Dynasty
    • 1391 Words
    • 6 Pages

    The Role Of Nicholas II In The Downfall Of The Romanov Dynasty

    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
    Read More
  • Better Essays

    russian revoloution empathy task
    • 944 Words
    • 3 Pages

    russian revoloution empathy task

    The Russian Revolution of February 1917 was not directly attributed to the Tsar’s failure to solve economic problems. There were a wide range of causes to the downfall which can’t be directly associated to the failure to solve economic problems.…

    • 944 Words
    • 3 Pages
    Better Essays
    Read More
  • Satisfactory Essays

    Modern History - Decline and Fall of the Romanov
    • 1142 Words
    • 6 Pages

    Modern History - Decline and Fall of the Romanov

    - Concerned with frontiers and borders, protect territory; (surrounded by Turkey, Iran, China, NK) – brought into conflict with other nations.…

    • 1142 Words
    • 6 Pages
    Satisfactory Essays
    Read More
  • Good Essays

    Nicholas Romanov
    • 597 Words
    • 3 Pages

    Nicholas Romanov

    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
    Read More
  • Good Essays

    How The Romanov Family Affect The Romanov Family
    • 742 Words
    • 3 Pages

    How The Romanov Family Affect The Romanov Family

    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
    Read More
  • Good Essays

    How Far Was Tsar Nicholas Responsible For His Own Downfall?
    • 1442 Words
    • 6 Pages

    How Far Was Tsar Nicholas Responsible For His Own Downfall?

    How far was Tsar Nicholas responsible for his own downfall? In 15th March 1927 Tsar Nicholas of Russia abdicated in this essay I will be analysing to what extent it was his fault and what extent he had no control over His mistakes…

    • 1442 Words
    • 6 Pages
    Good Essays
    Read More
  • Powerful Essays

    The Last of the Romanovs
    • 3074 Words
    • 13 Pages

    The Last of the Romanovs

    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
    Read More
  • Good Essays

    Why Did Tsar Nicholas II Survive The 1905 Revolution Essay
    • 877 Words
    • 4 Pages

    Why Did Tsar Nicholas II Survive The 1905 Revolution Essay

    Tsar Nicholas II survived the 1905 revolution because of extensive repression, political and economic reforms and Russification. These combined led to his survival because the reforms appeased some of the opposition, reducing its size, and the weak opposition, combined with extensive repression, led to the silencing of the opposition, and hence Tsar Nicholas’ survival. Furthermore, the Russification helped increase the loyalty of some of Russia’s minorities to the Tsar. Firstly, according to Leo Tolstoy, “One third of Russia is under a regime of reinforced surveillance……

    • 877 Words
    • 4 Pages
    Good Essays
    Read More
  • Good Essays

    History
    • 423 Words
    • 2 Pages

    History

    Question: Identify the most important lesson to be learned about human nature in Lord of the Flies. Demonstrate how the novel makes these lessons clear to us…

    • 423 Words
    • 2 Pages
    Good Essays
    Read More
  • Powerful Essays

    History
    • 1367 Words
    • 6 Pages

    History

    The decision to bring the Ohio National Guard onto the Kent State University campus was directly related to decisions regarding American involvement in the Vietnam War. Richard Nixon was elected president of the United States in 1968 based in part on his promise to bring an end to the war in Vietnam. During the first year of Nixon's presidency, America's involvement in the war appeared to be winding down. In late April of 1970, however, the United States invaded Cambodia and widened the Vietnam War. This decision was announced on national television and radio on April 30, l970 by President Nixon, who stated that the invasion of Cambodia was designed to attack the headquarters of the Viet Cong, which had been using Cambodian territory as a sanctuary.Protests occurred the next day, Friday, May 1, across United States college campuses where anti-war sentiment ran high. At Kent State University, an anti-war rally was held at noon on the Commons, a large, grassy area in the middle of campus which had traditionally been the site for various types of rallies and demonstrations. Fiery speeches against the war and the Nixon administration were given, a copy of the Constitution was buried to symbolize the murder of the Constitution because Congress had never declared war, and another rally was called for noon on Monday, May 4.Friday evening in downtown Kent began peacefully with the usual socializing in the bars, but events quickly escalated into a violent confrontation between protestors and local police. The exact causes of the disturbance are still the subject of debate, but bonfires were built in the streets of downtown Kent, cars were stopped, police cars were hit with bottles, and some store windows were broken. The entire Kent police force was called to duty as well as officers from the county and surrounding communities. Kent Mayor Leroy Satrom declared a state of emergency, called Governor James…

    • 1367 Words
    • 6 Pages
    Powerful Essays
    Read More
  • Better Essays

    history
    • 1234 Words
    • 5 Pages

    history

    Prime Minister Pierre Elliot Trudeau had an intelligent influence on Canada, its culture and society in general. The four important areas that will be focused on this essay are the great leader of Canada, his life style, FLQ cries and how he scarified his life to Canadians.…

    • 1234 Words
    • 5 Pages
    Better Essays
    Read More
  • Good Essays

    To what extent was the Tsarist system of government modified in the years 1881-1914?
    • 1624 Words
    • 7 Pages

    To what extent was the Tsarist system of government modified in the years 1881-1914?

    The Tsarist system of government underwent many changes throughout the years of 1881-1914. Both Alexander III and Nicholas II created several modifications, being both good and bad, to the government during these years. Alexander III created mostly negative changes, due to him being seen as a reactionary, whereas Nicholas II created mainly positive changes to the government as a result of the 1905 revolution. These changes can be categorised into political, economic and social modifications.…

    • 1624 Words
    • 7 Pages
    Good Essays
    Read More
  • Better Essays

    To What Extent were The Policies of the Tsars Most Responsible for Opposition to The Regime? (1881-1904)
    • 1470 Words
    • 6 Pages

    To What Extent were The Policies of the Tsars Most Responsible for Opposition to The Regime? (1881-1904)

    The Tsar’s remodelled regime was highly opposed by the Russian people, which encouraged opposition towards their regime. The Tsars in general were majorly violent. They implemented this by the use of the Okhrana, which were the Russian secret police. They would fight out against people that did not believe in the Tsarist regime, usually killing them or sending them to Siberia, to where they would have to live in extreme conditions until their death. This meant that people were worried about their freedom in their own country and therefore disliked the leaders of their country, as they did not like the way the Tsars dealt with Russians who broke the law, or the powers they gave the Okhrana. The Tsars also believed they were chosen by God. This was because of the importance of the Christian church in the country, and by the Tsar, and this meant the Tsars believe they were valued highly by God to be born a Tsar. This infuriated the people, because of their strong Christian believes on equality “in God’s image”. This meant the Tsars had opposition from some of the Christian church because of their strong beliefs on why they were in power. The Tsar also had the problem of their knowledge of their people; the fact was they did not have much knowledge of them. The Tsar, because of the poor communication and connections throughout the country…

    • 1470 Words
    • 6 Pages
    Better Essays
    Read More

Related Topics