• 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)

    were critics of the Tsar and Nicholas was not comfortable with this political situation. Nicholas made sure the Duma would have very little power. Two months after the elections were held Nicholas issued a set of fundamental laws; that gave him total control once again.

  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?

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

    They did a lot of work for the country, but the middle and upper classes got everything. Without Rasputin's help, the Tsar's reign may have been even shorter, as he would have had absolutely no link to the peasant class, which was over 70% of the Russian population.

  2. The blance sheet for russia.

    He noted that in the large industrial cities the Bolsheviks had almost everywhere been ahead of the other parties. They secured an absolute majority in the two capitals taken together, the Kadets here being second and the SRs a poor third.

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

    of the day to day running of Russia was because of the war, however it was Nicholas' fault that this decision was made and this decision was a big factor in his downfall.

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

    As the army were disintegrating the Tsar decided to take command of the military. In August 1915, the Tsar made a mistake. He took personal command of the armed forces, but had very little experience, so as commander he was held personally to blame for any and every defeat.

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