Romanov Dynasty Research Paper
The beginning of the 20th century brought radical changes to the social and political structure of autocratic Russia. It was a period of regression, reform, revolution and eradication. Eradication of a blood line that had remained in rule for over 300 years; the Romanov Dynasty.
World War 1 was a crucial and defining factor which led to the collapse of the Romanov Dynasty in February, 1917. Without it a revolution would not have happened at this point in time. This is not to say a revolution would not have eventually happened, as there were many other contributing factors that sparked the revolution. However, what World War 1 essentially did was to heighten discontent throughout society enough for it to revolt.
Before the 20th century, …show more content…
Political differences were put aside as Russians joined to fight the common enemy defending their homeland. Even urban discontent, which had been expressed in an increasing number of political and economic strikes in the first half of the year, …show more content…
The immense cost of the war led to dramatic price inflation in Russia; by the end of 1916 were four times those of 1914. Wages rose more slowly than prices, and this lag contributed to the revival of strikes in the capital at the end of 1916. Food supply was an additional problem, which led to an outbreak out of rioting and strikes in Petrograd and spread to other parts of Russia. This caused the first revolution of 1917, where on March 15th the Tsar was forced to abdicate from power and authority passed to a provisional government, made up of members of the Duma.
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
World War 1 was a crucial and defining factor which led to the collapse of the Romanov Dynasty in February, 1917. Without it a revolution would not have happened at this point in time. This is not to say a revolution would not have eventually happened, as there were many other contributing factors that sparked the revolution. However, what World War 1 essentially did was to heighten discontent throughout society enough for it to revolt.
Before the 20th century, …show more content…
Political differences were put aside as Russians joined to fight the common enemy defending their homeland. Even urban discontent, which had been expressed in an increasing number of political and economic strikes in the first half of the year, …show more content…
The immense cost of the war led to dramatic price inflation in Russia; by the end of 1916 were four times those of 1914. Wages rose more slowly than prices, and this lag contributed to the revival of strikes in the capital at the end of 1916. Food supply was an additional problem, which led to an outbreak out of rioting and strikes in Petrograd and spread to other parts of Russia. This caused the first revolution of 1917, where on March 15th the Tsar was forced to abdicate from power and authority passed to a provisional government, made up of members of the Duma.
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