• Join over 1.2 million students every month
  • Accelerate your learning by 29%
  • Unlimited access from just £6.99 per month

How far was Nicholas II responsible for the collapse of the tsarist regime?

Extracts from this document...

Introduction

History seminar Girum Zerihun Mr. Hunt How far was Nicholas II responsible for the collapse of the tsarist regime? For the duration of Tsarist autocracy, Russia was considered by far the most rampant of all European nations. Under indispensable law, the despotic Tsar would be the solitary power ruling over all of the Russian empire. Equipped with such an immense power, the ability for an individual Tsar to practice articulate policies and rule efficiently was critical to Russia's survival. Under a coherent and an unwavering leader, one such as Alexander III, Russia had enough demeanor and agility to prosper as a nation. ...read more.

Middle

Such reactions were stimulated partly due to the abrupt halt of the rapid industrialization that was undergone by Russia during the reign of Alexander III. In addition however Nicholas's policies of tsarism and Russification shaped circumstances in which a large number of liberal and nationalistic groups were becoming gradually more aggravated (Tsarist Russia). Regardless of increasing police scrutiny, numerous well established opposition groups formed against the tsarist regime (history.com). In an endeavor to divert interest from domestic revolutions, Nicholas initiated conflict against Japan in 1905. Nicholas's primary aspiration in engaging in such a war was perhaps to merge and amalgamate the Russian public with the tsarist government. ...read more.

Conclusion

In the superficial "October Manifesto" Nicholas II reluctantly permitted the existence of a Duma (history.com). However this was by no means the beginning of the liberalization of the tsarist regime. Nicholas II aggressively restricted any anti-government activity, regardless of the presence of the selected duma. The Russian public had become increasingly motivated and revolts continued (Tsarist Russia ). The economic and social policies introduced by Alexander III were considerably large advances to a successful nation. Subsequent to his assassination and his heir's incompetence, Alexander's policies were not adequate to significantly change the deep rooted tradition of tsardom. The economic growth had offered unlimited opportunities, however a consistent policy of industrialization was required. This Nicholas was not willing to provide. ...read more.

The above preview is unformatted text

This student written piece of work is one of many that can be found in our GCSE Russia, USSR 1905-1941 section.

Found what you're looking for?

  • Start learning 29% faster today
  • 150,000+ documents available
  • Just £6.99 a month

Not the one? Search for your essay title...
  • Join over 1.2 million students every month
  • Accelerate your learning by 29%
  • Unlimited access from just £6.99 per month

See related essaysSee related essays

Related GCSE Russia, USSR 1905-1941 essays

  1. Marked by a teacher

    Was Nicholas II responsible for his own downfall?

    5 star(s)

    World War 1 had a huge impact on Russia not only because Nicholas left Russia in the hands of Alexandra and Rasputin but also because of how badly the war went for Russia. In 1914 Russia Joined in World War 1.

  2. How convincing is the argument that WW1 was the main factor in the collapse ...

    was due to the influence of the Bolsheviks who foresaw the revolution and encouraged it. Although Soviet historians claim that Bolsheviks were amongst the leaders of the unrest this seems unlikely when we take into account that Lenin at this time was in exile in Switzerland, Trotsky was in America and Stalin was living in Siberia.

  1. Why did the Tsarist regime fall in 1917?

    Both the sources show food shortages and discontent. As they both show the same things, they are equally reliable. Source E is unreliable because it is a painting and is therefore susceptible to artistic exaggeration. If adding snow on the ground, and a sign saying "No bread today" will make

  2. 'THE TSARIST REGIME WAS SECURE BY 1905'

    He was the catalyst in the 'great spurt' which offered a possibility that Russia might throw off its economic backwardness, and catch up the world powers. Witte was one of the few Russian ministers to appreciate the sheer magnitude of Russia's problems as it tried to modernise.

  1. To what extent was the Revolution of February/march, in Russia 1917, due to the ...

    The extent of emphasis on the war effort took its toll on Russian society and economy. As 15 million able men had been recruited to the army, factories were forced to close down due to lack of workers, and industry and agriculture were devastated.

  2. Tsar Nicholas II

    This meant that only one ruled and this was the tsar. This meant, that even though decisions would have been made quickly because it would not have needed to been discussed with others, problems would not have been solved very easily at all.

  1. Explain Rasputin's contribution to the collapse of Tsarism.

    The Tsar made a very bad choice when he decided to go and take charge of the army himself. He knew that they were losing, so he could have just pulled out at any time and had a chance to save Russia.

  2. The blance sheet for russia.

    Not a hand was raised in its defence, precisely because it was an unrepresentative anachronism. The reason for this was very well explained by the celebrated English historian of the Russian Revolution, E.H. Carr: "The SRs had gone to the polls as a single party presenting one list of candidates.

  • Over 160,000 pieces
    of student written work
  • Annotated by
    experienced teachers
  • Ideas and feedback to
    improve your own work