In 1861 was the Emancipation of the Serfs. The Serfs originally belonged to landowners but the Tsar bought land for the Serfs to live on. However, the landowners sold the Tsar bad land for the Serfs to live and work on. This made the Serfs extremely unhappy as they had to start work from the beginning on bad land which they were paying a lot for.…
Initially a significant departure from the previous system, Serf emancipation had the unexpected consequence of substituting the serf’s personal relationship with the land owner with a more formal and commercial relationship with the state. Under the proposed emancipation, the Serfs would receive the land upon which they currently worked and the landowners would be compensated by the government. The newly liberated serfs, would in theory, be able to independently farm and manage their own land which they could use to generate profit. However in reality, the government was woefully short of money and instead of simply granting the new peasants their land, the peasants would now have to pay 49 years worth of redemption taxes as well as paying taxes which they had never had to pay previously. Furthermore, the land owning nobility (who were tasked with formulating the emancipation) greatly overvalued the land and as a result many of the newly liberated peasants were working 20% land then they had previous to their emancipation. Indeed far from receiving more freedoms and liberties, peasants were now legally forced to carry a passport, were unable to freely migrate and, crucially, were now liable for conscription. Yet, to 1881, the peasants were on the whole more autonomous, though in practicality they were limited by having to pay taxes…
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.…
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…
The February revolution was a big turning point in Russian history; demolishing the Tsarist autocracy and breaking the Romanov dynasty that had ruled Russia for hundreds of years. Due to many factors, involved in the war or long standing issues before the war, Tsar Nicholas II was forced to abdicate to Grand Duke Michael, desperate to keep the rule of Russia in the Romanov family. Grand Duke Michael stated he did not want to rule, therefore ending the absolute monarchy. This essay will explore the main reason for the February revolution of 1917, questioning whether the war started the revolt among the Russian people or simply acted as a catalyst for a result of long standing issues and opinions dating back to the previous revolution of 1905.…
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.…
In the years 1881-1905 the Tsarist regime was facing large amounts of opposition from many people. The peasants and lower classes caused uprisings, their aims to remove the Tsar from power, while some educated middle class went on strike in an attempt to reform the regime. Many people were revolting and 3 main political groups emerged. The divides in these political groups were heavily responsible for the survival of the Tsarist rule, however there were other factors responsible such as the repression in Russia, which lead to the eventual removal of all opposition groups, and the loyalty of the Tsars supporters, which meant that his power was still stronger than the opposition he was facing.…
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…
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.…
Throughout his time as Tsar, Nicholas II was faced with constant threats due to terrorist groups such as the peoples will. Many of these groups were oppressed by ‘The reaction’ that began under the reign of Alexander III, however not all opposition was destroyed. This meant that Nicholas was in constant Jeopardy. This essay will discuss whether or not Tsar Nicholas II was truly in serious Jeopardy during the events of 1905.…
Tsarism in Russia survived the revolution of 1905 but not that of March 1917 due to the difference in support it had in both years. It faced many difficulties throughout much of its late history; from the assassination of Alexander II and the similar attempts on Alexander III, to the downfall of the Romanov dynasty and the final abdication of Tsar Nicholas II on the 2nd of March. The way the country was being run and the strongly Slavophile views within Russian society made it difficult for any kind of revolt to occur at any time. There were, however, two main revolts against the Tsarist government; these were the 1905 revolution and the March revolution of 1917. The first of these predominantly failed to make any major changes to the government for lack of organisation and coordination of the Tsarist regime’s opponents and the persistently loyal attitude of the armed forces towards The Tsar. The March 1917 revolution, however, resulted in major political revolution and a brand new government due to the impact of the First World War and social and economic discontent within Russian society. The attitudes of the regime’s Liberal opposition greatly varied from 1905 in 1917, and this also played a significant part in pressuring the Tsar Nicholas II to abdicate.…
Under many aspects it is arguable that the 1905 Revolution and the March 1917 Revolution in Russia were very similar. Both years found the country still struggling from a war (one bringing humiliation and the other incomprehension and outrage); both found hostility from the streets directed against perceived governmental incompetence. Yet something had changed from 1905 to 1917 for Tsarism not to be able to survive the second revolution like it did the first. The reasons are to be researched in the impact that World War 1 had on the country, the October Manifesto issued by Nicholas II on 1905, and the loyalty that the population and the Armed Forces were not willing to give the Tsar anymore.…
In 1905 the massacre of innocent people during a peaceful protest outside the winter palace in St Petersburg sparked the start of a nationwide revolution. This mass murder of the innocent protestors became known as ‘Bloody Sunday’. During the revolution strikes occurred across the nation involving more than 400,000 people, peasants attacked and raided the homes of their landlords and the Tsar’s uncle, the Grand Duke Sergei, was assassinated. Although Bloody Sunday was the immediate reason for the revolution, there were several causes which had caused long term grievances towards the Tsarist regime among the population of Russia leading up to 1905. These include the developments in the countryside and the lives of the peasants, the treatment of the inner-city working class and ethnic minorities, the repression and growth of the political opposition and the impact of the Russo Japanese war. Although all these factors contributed to the initiation of a revolution in Russia, I believe that the attitudes towards and treatment of the working class and the peasants was the most prominent reason for the uprising in 1905.…
The Russian Revolution was one of the most important revolutions in history. Just like the French people, Russians got tired of being treated unfairly by the Higher classes, and so decided to revolt against them. However unlike the French, they could not be satisfied, or entertained for long by a single revolution, reason why they did many revolts. Each time retreating at its middle, until they finally were annoyed and determined enough to overthrow the Government and change their lives as they knew it. Even so, that wasn’t the only cause of the Russian Revolution, along the many revolts came various relevant causes and events, but only few of them stood out, with such importance to today’s history of the causes for the Russian…
The government sought to balance the interests of lords and serfs, but in this balance, the terms of emancipation were unfavorable to most peasants. Serfs won their freedom, had their labor obligations gradually After serfs were emancipated and went to find work elsewhere, they found that they still could not get away from the difficulties of their feudal position. Peasants who worked in Russian factories between 1750 and 1914 were overworked and underpaid, and serfs who attempted to farm had to pay to do so. Serfs won their freedom, had their labor obligations gradually canceled, and gained the opportunity to become landowners. However, they had won few political rights and had to pay a redemption tax for most of the land they received. Most peasants and serfs found themselves in debt for the rest of their lives; a source of alienation and…