Tsar Nicholas Ii Downfall
- Submitted by: toddwaugh
- Views: 1182
- Category: History: Russian
- Date Submitted: 11/30/2010 12:33 PM
- Pages: 8
- Report this Essay
Asses the extent to which Tsar Nicholas II can be held personally responsible for the collapse of the Russian monarchy.
‘What weakened the Tsarist regime in the period before 1917 was not its tyranny but its incompetence’.
A small portion of Tsar Nicholas II’s downfall can be seen as his own accountability; however his autocratic ruling style, mixed with the inevitable disasters that were to come his way was a recipe for failure. Due to his natural ruling style inherited from his father Alexander, Nicholas Tsar was unwilling to reform to a nation urgent to modernise. One would say he is simply not a natural ruler, in a time where Russia depended greatly on one.
With an understanding of the type of person Nicholas was, we will look at the catastrophes that came his way; that being 1905 revolution, influencial personalities, his policies and implications that possibly added to his breakdown, opposition parties to the Tsar and how they contributed to his collapse, and World war I playing a major role in breaking down the regime for Nicholas, and how this whole culmination of occurrences throughout his reign ended the Romanov dynasty.
The first real challenge for Nicholas arose in 1905, and his ability to react effectively was about to be tested. Previous to the mayhem that was waiting to erupt, innocent civilians were over-flowing the jails. Police patrolled most of the streets of Russia. Peasants were in heavy debt, most not being able to pay off expensive mortgages, and the general public of Russia were disallowed political or religious expression. These factors painted a very bleak and violent picture of Russia at this time, mainly due to Nicholas’ repressive regime. On the 22nd January, Father Georgy Gapon, a priest, lead a peaceful march to Nicholas’ palace in St Pietersburg, in an attempt to voice an opposing opinion to the way Nicholas had the country at the present state. Nicholas was not staying in his Winter palace. As the marchers approached...
‘What weakened the Tsarist regime in the period before 1917 was not its tyranny but its incompetence’.
A small portion of Tsar Nicholas II’s downfall can be seen as his own accountability; however his autocratic ruling style, mixed with the inevitable disasters that were to come his way was a recipe for failure. Due to his natural ruling style inherited from his father Alexander, Nicholas Tsar was unwilling to reform to a nation urgent to modernise. One would say he is simply not a natural ruler, in a time where Russia depended greatly on one.
With an understanding of the type of person Nicholas was, we will look at the catastrophes that came his way; that being 1905 revolution, influencial personalities, his policies and implications that possibly added to his breakdown, opposition parties to the Tsar and how they contributed to his collapse, and World war I playing a major role in breaking down the regime for Nicholas, and how this whole culmination of occurrences throughout his reign ended the Romanov dynasty.
The first real challenge for Nicholas arose in 1905, and his ability to react effectively was about to be tested. Previous to the mayhem that was waiting to erupt, innocent civilians were over-flowing the jails. Police patrolled most of the streets of Russia. Peasants were in heavy debt, most not being able to pay off expensive mortgages, and the general public of Russia were disallowed political or religious expression. These factors painted a very bleak and violent picture of Russia at this time, mainly due to Nicholas’ repressive regime. On the 22nd January, Father Georgy Gapon, a priest, lead a peaceful march to Nicholas’ palace in St Pietersburg, in an attempt to voice an opposing opinion to the way Nicholas had the country at the present state. Nicholas was not staying in his Winter palace. As the marchers approached...