Preview

Nicholas II Research

Powerful Essays
Open Document
Open Document
3161 Words
Grammar
Grammar
Plagiarism
Plagiarism
Writing
Writing
Score
Score
Nicholas II Research
Nicholas II research:
Source 1: “The daily work of a monarch he found intolerably boring. He could not stand listening long or seriously to ministers’ reports, or reading them.” Written by Kerensky in 1934. Kerensky was the leader of the government which took over when the Tsar abdicated in 1917.
Source 3: “Nicholas II was not fit to run a village post office.” Said by an unknown cabinet minister
Source 4: “He never had an opinion of his own … always agreeing with the judgement of the last person he spoke to.” By Grand Duke Alexander Mikhailovich
Source 8: “Nicholas would sooner spend time with his family than deal with governmental affairs. [He] could be cruel and merciless. He would not stand for opposition. His answer was always the same – violence.” From a modern GCSE school textbook.
Source 11: Nicholas was “even more poorly prepared than his father for the burdens of kingship. Nicholas had no knowledge of the world of men, of politics or government to help him make the weighty decisions that in the Russian system the Tsar alone must make.” From H. Rogger, Russia in the Age of Modernisation and Revolution, 1983
Source 13: “Nicholas’ problem was that he could understand many points of view and wavered between them … his personality meant that he was not very good at exercising it.” From Nicholas II, Emperor of All the Russians, by Dominic Lieven, 1994.

Source 2: “His ancestors did not pass on to him one quality which would have made him capable of governing an empire.” Written by Trotsky in 1932. Trotsky was one of the revolutionaries who overthrew the Tsar in 1917.
Source 9: “He kept saying … that he was wholly unfit to reign … And yet Nicky’s unfitness was by no means his fault. He had intelligence, he had faith and courage and he was wholly ignorant about governmental matters. Nicky had been trained as a soldier. He should have been taught statesmanship, and he was not.” From the private diary of the Tsar’s sister, the Grand

You May Also Find These Documents Helpful

  • Good Essays

    As Nicholas respected Alexandra’s wishes he ignored the problems Rasputin was causing him and allowed her to have Rasputin around. He also took her advice in appointing ministers as he was unable to be there to make sufficient judgement himself. She rather took advantage of this position and dismissed any ministers that insulted or ridiculed Rasputin,…

    • 1166 Words
    • 5 Pages
    Good Essays
  • Better Essays

    Before World War 1, the Russian political state was extremely corrupt and fragile. Nicholas II held absolute power and his dynasty had ruled Russia for 500 years and was increasingly unpopular. Nicholas II traditional ruled Russia without a parliament. The Noble class of Russia owned most of the countries wealth and land. Nicholas II assigned family members to important political roles; this caused him to have absolute power over Russia without any threats of being over powered. Not only was Nicholas II corrupt with assigning important roles, but also he had insufficiency of the training and experience needed for the Russian Tsar, his failure to make decisions and his organization was extremely poor, “Unfit to run a village post office” This underlines the point that Nicholas II was extremely poor at making decisions and his lack organization was so poor that he would be unable to run a small village post office, that is normally very quiet, let alone Russia, one of the worlds biggest countries, this is backed up by “His ancestors did not pass on to him one quality which would have made him capable of governing an empire”. Therefore this shows that his leadership of the country…

    • 1818 Words
    • 5 Pages
    Better 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

    Even from a young age Alexander had strongly opposed the opinions of his father, joining the ‘party of action’ in the debate concerning war with Turkey when Alexander II was all in favour of keeping the peace. This attitude he emulated with his counter-reforms where he made it very clear that Russia would remain firmly an autocracy, and that advisors were simply there only to advise. The ministers in favour of his father’s governmental reforms were made to resign which, alongside his counter-reforms, made very clear to all his intentions to take Russia back to a firmly Tsar-run state.…

    • 1095 Words
    • 5 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

    Although well intentioned, Nicholas was a weak ruler, out of touch with his people, easily dominated by others and a firm believer in the autocratic principles taught him by his father. He ruled Russia as an autocrat. Propaganda and the teachings of the Russian Orthodox Church encouraged his people to love and respect their tsar and look on him as a father who had the right to rule them.…

    • 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

    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.…

    • 1455 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
  • Powerful Essays

    ‘Nicholas said over and over again: 'As God wills.' It wasn't as God wills. He had made mistakes and he was leading Russia in the wrong direction…’ - Robert K. Massie…

    • 1325 Words
    • 6 Pages
    Powerful Essays
  • Good Essays

    One mistake the Tsar made was taking over the army. By being in control of the army the Tsar Nicholas II not only was blamed for Russia’s poor performance in the war but he also left the Tsarina to run the government; this didn’t sit well with the people as she was unpopular amongst the people. The Tsarina was unpopular with the people as she was German- at that time the Germans were their enemies was accused of being in sympathy with the enemy- and her decisions were under the influence of the hated Rasputin. Rasputin was despised as he had a bad reputation for living an unorthodox lifestyle and was known for his sexual promiscuity, which was frowned upon. Rasputin was acting as Tsarina Alexandra’s confidant whilst Tsar Nicholas II was fighting in the war. As a result of this, loyalists who believed Rasputin was a danger to the regime tried to kill him, and after many attempts succeeded. However, this left Tsarina to be the…

    • 1104 Words
    • 5 Pages
    Good Essays