• 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 ...

    This growing internal unrest and factionalism further put pressure on the Tsar and ruling elites to make reforms and change the direction of the war. However, without the involvement and support of the Petrograd workers it seems doubtful that the Duma would have assembled the courage to challenge the authority of Nicholas II and the governing elites.

  1. Why did the Tsarist regime fall in 1917?

    Source G was produced in 1916, by opposition to the Tsar. The purpose of the cartoon is to stir up discontent amongst ordinary Russians. The cartoon tries to suggest that the Tsar and Tsarina were heavily influenced by Rasputin. The cartoon shows this by depicting the Tsar and Tsarina in

  2. How far did the 1905 revolution weaken then Tsarist regime?

    In addition, the Duma did not reduce the Tsar's power. The Duma had limited powers to begin with, it could only pass laws. The Tsar could dissolve the Duma should he not like their proposals and they could only give suggestions to the Tsar.

  1. How far was Nicholas II responsible for his own downfall?

    other than violence when dealing with any opposition and he was did not listen to what the people of Russia thought. He ruled Russia as a complete autocrat and although he inherited this position it did not mean he couldn't change things and improve Russia.

  2. Why was the Tsarist regime able to survive the revolution of 1905?

    This meant that striking workers had to end their protests and begin production again or they would face starvation. Stolypin was a powerful man and he even hired thugs in the countryside so that they could kill any peasants who were suspected of causing any trouble.

  1. The blance sheet for russia.

    the Russian Revolution, Orlando Figes loses no opportunity to display a particularly poisonous hostility to Bolshevism. This is typical of the new style - one might almost call it a genre of "academic" histories, the sole intention of which is to slander Lenin and identify the October Revolution with Stalinism.

  2. To what extent was Nicholas II himself responsible for the collapse of the Tsarist ...

    Like Nicholas, Rasputin held a strong influence over the Tsarina and he used this to get church and government positions for his friends. Ministers were sacked regularly. The government was in chaos and the aristocracy, who made up most of its personnel, was beginning to lose faith in the regime as an instrument for preserving power.

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