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
The first reason that it was his fault is that he was a weak character who was not fit to rule a large nation such as Russia as we can see in source 12 “He keep saying that he was wholly unfit to resign…. But he was not. ” This is a very reliable source as it is his sister being critical of him and they would of been very close we can see this by how she calls him Nicky not his full name Nicolas. This shows he was not taught how to lead this country that is so vast. Also it showed a sort of arrogance that we thought …show more content…
Which brought change for a while a parliament system was brought in called the ‘Duma’. It gave more freedom of speech with things like uncensored newspapers and the right to form a political party. However the first and second Duma fell apart very quickly As source says that “ I created the Duma not to have in instruct me, but to have it advise me” This is trustworthy and useful as it is from a school textbook which is written to give good information on this subject. This shows that he only want it to advise him and not to run the country. He did not want to be a constitutional monarchy. However the third Duma had more power and was looked at by the tsar more for them to work together with Stolypin who in the end made good reforms on how to help out this low class of workers called “peasant” who were ex-serfs who had to pay for their own freedom from slavery which they could not afford until Petr Stolypin abolished this charge for freedom. So after the first two Dumas it started to look better for the Tsar, until Petr Stolypin was assassinated by a left wing activist called Dmitry Bogrov. After Stolypin was assassinated the Dumas started to fall
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
The first reason that it was his fault is that he was a weak character who was not fit to rule a large nation such as Russia as we can see in source 12 “He keep saying that he was wholly unfit to resign…. But he was not. ” This is a very reliable source as it is his sister being critical of him and they would of been very close we can see this by how she calls him Nicky not his full name Nicolas. This shows he was not taught how to lead this country that is so vast. Also it showed a sort of arrogance that we thought …show more content…
Which brought change for a while a parliament system was brought in called the ‘Duma’. It gave more freedom of speech with things like uncensored newspapers and the right to form a political party. However the first and second Duma fell apart very quickly As source says that “ I created the Duma not to have in instruct me, but to have it advise me” This is trustworthy and useful as it is from a school textbook which is written to give good information on this subject. This shows that he only want it to advise him and not to run the country. He did not want to be a constitutional monarchy. However the third Duma had more power and was looked at by the tsar more for them to work together with Stolypin who in the end made good reforms on how to help out this low class of workers called “peasant” who were ex-serfs who had to pay for their own freedom from slavery which they could not afford until Petr Stolypin abolished this charge for freedom. So after the first two Dumas it started to look better for the Tsar, until Petr Stolypin was assassinated by a left wing activist called Dmitry Bogrov. After Stolypin was assassinated the Dumas started to fall