War broke out in 1914, with Tsar Nicholas becoming commander-in-chief in 1915, meaning he was away from Petrograd. Not only was this poorly thought out by Nicholas because it gave the people an opportunity to plot against him, but as he was away he left Tsarina (also a German princess), Alexandra, in charge during his absence. Due to the war being against Germany, this made the Russian people nervous and skeptical towards the extreme power she had over them during such a crucial time. Not only were they disgruntled by this, but also Alexandra’s close friendship to Rasputin, a Serbian peasant. This particularly angered the aristocracy and middle classes as they believed they were being led by someone of lower demeanor than that of themselves. This weakened support for the autocratic rule and lost the Tsar many of his supporters, which put him in a vulnerable position in the case of revolutionary upturn. This also could have inspired the peasantry to discover greater aspirations and encourage their belief that they could have greater status which in turn could trigger new revolutionary ideas amongst the lower classes. This demonstrates a link between Nicholas being away in order to commandeer army movement for the war, however it is arguable that it was a lack of authority and respect for the Tsarist regime that caused the change of opinions towards the Tsar amongst all classes, lessening his support and leaving him far more vulnerable in the case of a revolution.…
Tsar Nicholas II’s lack of military experience and inability to rule the throne all together, additionally contributed to the devastating outcome of WW1 on Russia. “A quick intelligence, a cultivated mind, method and industry in his work, an extraordinary charm that attracted all who came near him- the Emperor Nicholas had not inherited his father’s commanding personality nor the strong character and prompt decision which are so essential to an autocratic ruler...” stated Sir G. Buchanan, British ambassador to Russia in 1910, emphasizes how the urban lower classes were not the only ones unsatisfied with the Tsar Nicholas…
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 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 addition, Russia had endured many more hardships and downfalls following the conclusion of World War I. According to The Making of the West, “the government’s incompetence and Nicholas II’s stubborn resistance to change had made the war even worse in Russia than elsewhere” (Hunt et al. 683). The. In the early revolution in February, the monarchy was overthrown and a provisional government was put into place, however it failed to meet all the desires of the working class and…
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.…
In addition to the huge casualties, food supplies ran short and prices rose by 150%. People became dissatisfied as the war dragged out, and they felt it wasn't worth the cost and human suffering. Once again, the leadership of the Tsar came into question by the…
Firstly, the breakdown of social order was instigated by the leadership of Nicholas II. The Tsars’ archaic policy’s led to the persecution of racial minorities and oppression of the working class, which held Russia’s population majority and contributed to over half the nations’ income. Nicolas II was very easily influenced, which led to him being easily persuaded by his advisors and wife. His wife, Tsarina Alexander was a very strong believer of the autocratic system and believed that power should not be shared. The Tsarina was very politically strong-minded, however she was ill-informed. The Tsar often relied on his advisors to help make decisions, as he himself had not been exposed to the harsh reality of life in Russia. His lack of determination and his political naiveté led him into his decision to be the front command for the Russian troops in WWI, which would eventually prove fatal, as behind him, he left his ill-equip wife to lead with the highly influential Rasputin with her. The support from Nobles and army generals began to diminish, as they saw…
By early 1917, the existing order in Russia verged on collapse. The country's involvement in World War I had already cost millions of lives and caused severe disruption in Russia's backward economy. In an effort to reverse the steadily worsening military situation, Emperor Nicholas II commanded Russian forces at the front, abandoning the conduct of government in Petrograd (St. Petersburg before 1914; Leningrad after 1924) to his unpopular wife and a series of incompetent ministers. As a consequence of these conditions, the morale of the people rapidly…
When discussing why public opinion of the tsar was so easily pliable in the lead up to revolution in 1917, we must acknowledge that Russia was evolving rapidly. As modern historians and public spectators, it is simple to map out how Russian society became a pressure cooker of discontent and anger. Mass industrialisation made living for a working, urban class almost unbearable, the class divide was still rigid, revolutionary ideas from the West offered a foundation to base claims for the removal of the autocratic system, and the pressures of World War 1 served to unite the people in one cause to end hardship. These factors stoked a population already vying for change and such an environment made revolution in Petrograd (St Petersburg) in the February of 1917 almost inevitable, foreshadowing the end of the…
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.…
Tensions were rising as the Russian Revolution was getting closer to a start. Russian people were not better off after the revolution than they were before. The Russian Revolution led to many changes under the Russian rule. The first change was that the serfs were "freed." The second reason was when the provisional government failed and made the people fight against their wishes. The third reason is when the czar kept on making serious mistakes.…
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…
In World War I, Rasputin’s influence over Russian politics was demonstrated with his ability to appoint his friends to high government positions regardless of their incompetence. When Tsar Nicholas II left for the front line in 1915, Tsarina Alexandra took responsibility for domestic affairs with Rasputin as her advisor. Rasputin saw this as an opportunity to control and destabilise government by replacing senior ministers with his benefactors, whom he could manipulate.…
WWI developed during an era of unprecedented global conflict, political fractioning, and breakdown of diplomatic Balkan relationships that rapidly expanded globally. Russia was undergoing worsening stress of the existing class structure, political instability under the developing constitutional monarchy, and aggressive pressures by the intelligentsia to gain more control of the country. The Russian military was comprised predominantly of a peasant class that was overwhelmed with a poor sense of nationalism and feelings of abuse and disregard. With a collapsing class structure, continued political conflict among…