Preview

The Decline And Fall Of The Romanov Dynasty

Good Essays
Open Document
Open Document
1455 Words
Grammar
Grammar
Plagiarism
Plagiarism
Writing
Writing
Score
Score
The Decline And Fall Of The Romanov Dynasty
Nicholas II came to the throne during an arduous time in Russian history. It was a combination of factors, including his political ineptitude that led to the fall of the Romanov dynasty and eventually cost Nicholas II, the Tsarina Alexandra and their five children their lives. Russia was late in modernising, partly due to the Tsar?s lack of reforms, and was behind Britain, France and the United States. Russia was also slow to emerge from feudalism, and was undergoing difficulty as industrial and agricultural production declined. Additionally, Russia was not socially advanced, as the peasants and working class had an extremely low standard of living, while the Royal Family lived a life of luxury. Politically, Russia was behind as there were no legal political parties, and the people had absolutely no power. The final event that pushed revolution to where it could not return from was World War I, which inflicted serious pain on Russia.

Tsar Nicholas II succeeded in making a bad situation in Russia even worse. He became a leader at a difficult time, and could never stop the process of revolution. The Tsar was not a good leader, and was out of touch with the Russian people. He was also weak and indecisive, and extremely stubborn. Nicholas II was not equipped to effectively rule a country the size of Russia, and with a vast variety of people with different language, religion, race and culture. Additionally, Nicholas II was mainly concerned with family issues, instead of being concerned with political issues. It was these traits in Nicholas II?s personality that hindered him in being able to attempt to steer Russia away from revolution.

The seeds of revolution had been sowed before Nicholas II came to the throne. The Russian people had wanted changes for a long time. Most of the people wanted a constitutional monarchy, such as Britain. They wanted the Tsar?s powers to be limited but still wanted the Tsar to stay as a figurehead. Nicholas II though, was stubborn and a

You May Also Find These Documents Helpful

  • Good Essays

    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.…

    • 1166 Words
    • 5 Pages
    Good Essays
  • Good Essays

    Revolts were frequent, 1467 of them since 1800. Nicholas I saw this and created nine secret committees to find a way to end serfdom. Alexander II was part of one of those committees. He was also there to be the acting Tsar when Nicholas I was away. Therefore Alexander II was the most prepared heir to the Tsar the empire has ever had. Alexander made a very good start in change when he became Tsar. He stopped all army recruitment, which meant it was no longer forced to enter the army, nor was it a punishment for crimes. Applying for military was completely voluntary. Alexander also released all of the Decembrists, who are people who tried to overthrow his father in 1825 and the Poles, who revolted in 1830. He also lifted restrictions for travelling, 26,000 passports were granted in 1859. Allowing people to travel to Western Europe and learning more about liberal culture and allowing Russia to catch up with the rest of…

    • 1434 Words
    • 6 Pages
    Good Essays
  • Good Essays

    Essay On Tsarist Autocracy

    • 1209 Words
    • 5 Pages

    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.…

    • 1209 Words
    • 5 Pages
    Good Essays
  • Better Essays

    Czar Nicholas II Impact

    • 1570 Words
    • 7 Pages

    Czar Nicholas II, also known as Nikolai Aleksandrovich Romanov, was born on 18 May 1868. Czar Alexander III, Nicholas’s father, died with kidney diseased at the age of 49, and Nicholas II “succeeded his father in 1894” (NicholasII BBC). Czar Nicholas II was neither trained nor ready to rule Russia. Even though as kid, he had private tutors, his father did not inform or teach him…

    • 1570 Words
    • 7 Pages
    Better Essays
  • Good Essays

    The revolution of 1917 was the culmination of a number of factors coming together and causing the volatile mix of reasons to come together and boil over. The people of Russia where fed up with the horrible conditions they had to put up with and decided to do something about it. Some factor I will discuss include the industrialization,…

    • 1471 Words
    • 6 Pages
    Good Essays
  • Good Essays

    Nicholas II would be the Tsar that Russia would ever have, the Romanov dynasty would wiped out along with Nicholas II and his family. The Tsar was a caring father and a dutiful husband which could ultimately be the reason he abdicated, to protect his family but ended the way in he and his family would die. Because of his abdication. Russia was facing a series of problems when Nicholas II came to the throne; he had a series of poor harvest in 1891, 1892, 1898 and 1901. To complement this situation there was a serious rise in population. In 1796 the rural population was 35 million and this represented 96.4% of the population, whereas in 1897 the…

    • 1556 Words
    • 4 Pages
    Good Essays
  • Good Essays

    Tsar Nicholas II was a very poor leader for the people of Russia, he lacked leadership skills. His poor leadership qualities lead too many problems within Russia that were not dealt with efficiently. For example he did not trust the Duma, in 1906 the first Duma was introduced; after 72 days Nicholas dissolved the Duma as he did not believe in their policies and he did not trust them. This angered many people, Nicholas was not giving anyone a chance to speak and help him to change Russia.…

    • 1510 Words
    • 7 Pages
    Good Essays
  • Better Essays

    Tsar Nicholas soon decided (or knew no other way) that he would rule the same as his father, and all the Romanov generations before him ruled, with absolute power. He decided to rule this way because he saw no need for change - 'it's worked for nearly 300 years, why change now?' the tsar was once quoted saying. What the Tsar didn't realize is that he is ruling with a 17th Century mind-set, and it was now the 20th century.…

    • 1855 Words
    • 5 Pages
    Better Essays
  • Good Essays

    The Romanovs had ruled Russia since 1613. When the last tsar of all, Nicholas II, was appointed to the throne in 1894, there was no hint of the fate that awaited him. Many among the huge crowds that lined the streets for his coronation celebration saw him as their "little father." They believed God had supposedly appointed Nicholas to rule an empire covering about one-sixth of the earth's land area.…

    • 1713 Words
    • 7 Pages
    Good Essays
  • Satisfactory Essays

    - 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
  • Good Essays

    Tsar Nicholas II was the head of the Romanov family who had ruled Russia for five generations from 1613 to 1762. When Nicholas had inherited the throne he married Alexandra Fyodorovna of Hesse, who was from Germany. They had five children together, but their popularity was starting to fall by 1914. When there was the outbreak of the war, the Russian people criticised Alexandra’s German heritage and Nicholas’s failure to treat Russia’s social, political and economic problems caused further discontent among the Russian people.…

    • 735 Words
    • 3 Pages
    Good Essays
  • Good Essays

    Nicholas seemed not to understand the real nature of the problems his nation and his dynasty faced. Firstly, what the tsar’s power showed was how little Russia had advanced politically compared with other European nations. By the beginning of the twentieth century all major western European countries had some form of democratic or representative government. Not Russia, it had remained outside the mainstream of European political thought. There had been reforming tsars (Peter I, Alexander II) but achievements had not included the extension of political rights. In Russia in l894 it was a criminal offence to oppose the tsar or government, political parties had no legal right to exist, there had never been a free press in imperial Russia and government…

    • 821 Words
    • 4 Pages
    Good Essays
  • Good Essays

    The Tsar’s flaws as a leader were an extremely important reason as to why he was losing control of his country. Russia was an autocracy- this meant that the Tsar had full control of the country and had the final say in every decision. This could have been positive, but I think it was a negative thing. He was not a very decisive person, and he would not delegate to others (An example of this being, how he interfered in the appointments of local midwives.) While he was busy doing the wrong jobs he needed employees that were capable of the best. Another flaw of Nicholas’ was that he was extremely suspicious of those cleverer than him and fired many of his best workers (Count Witte) and preferred to hire only family and friends. This helped to weaken his control on Russia because not only did he lose respect from his people, but also he was not doing his job and as the only ruler of the country, Russia did not have a focused authority figure.…

    • 1597 Words
    • 7 Pages
    Good Essays
  • Good Essays

    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
  • Good Essays

    Tsar Nicholas II couldn’t stop the progression of revolution as he came to rule at a difficult time. He was out of touch with his people and was known as a leader that was no good, weak, hesitant; and extremely hard-headed. Tsar Nicholas II was at the time mainly concerned with his family issues instead of being focused on the political issues. He was also not prepared to efficiently rule a country where there was a massive variety of people with different languages, race, religion; and culture. It is reported that during Nicholas’s earlier years while his father was still in power, that he found government meetings boring and was not interested in the affairs of state. The Tsar wanted the country to still be ruled as an autocracy where the peasants and the working class had extremely below average standard of living, while the royal family live in a life filled with riches and extravagances.…

    • 966 Words
    • 4 Pages
    Good Essays