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

To what extend was Nicholas II prepared to become tsar in 1894?

Extracts from this document...

Introduction

To what extend was Nicholas II prepared to become tsar in 1894? By Diederik ten Brink, IS11 Nicholas Romanov came to power of the Russian throne in 1894. At this point, the dynasty was under threat. The Russian Empire was under threat by social unrest and was facing the threat of a revolution. Nicholas Romanov had major problems to deal with, which he could still solve if he was well prepared. In this essay it will be discussed to what extend Nicholas Romanov was prepare to become tsar and how he dealt with the important position. Of character, Nicholas was considered to be very shy and childish. Part of this was caused by Nicholas' appearance, because he was quite slender. (Gurko, V. I.) His father, Alexander III called him 'girlie' and thought of him as a weakling (Figes, Orlando). Nicholas' appearance caused his family to call him 'Little Nicky, which resulted in a lack of self-confidence. Even though Nicholas was quite smart, his father thought that he was stupid because of his shyness and low self esteem. ...read more.

Middle

Nicholas had great manners and was very polite (partially caused by his own self image and how he looked up to other people). Politeness and manners are generally considered good for a ruler, however, in Nicholas' case; it came to more extreme levels. Since he was so polite, he didn't dare to speak against someone, even though he didn't agree. During his reign, this caused ministers to think that Nicholas' agreed with their points, meanwhile Nicholas would not agree and send a letter afterwards. Since there were no meetings of the ministers together (Nicholas prevented it), all agreements had to be made on personal meetings between Nicholas and the ministers. There were no debates or arguments, since Nicholas was too polite to oppose the minister's view. Nicholas did however have a very good memory, but this was not of great importance for his position. Nicholas had little practical knowledge about how to lead a country, since he was not well prepared for it. ...read more.

Conclusion

One could almost say that Nicholas was a power vacuum. He didn't trust others to do the job, but was scared to do the job himself. This behavior really caused nothing to get done in the Russian Empire. Nicholas' personality, the way in which he was brought up and his miniaturist way of ruling had major impact on Russia. The impotence of Nicholas caused little reforms to be put through and deepening of the revolutionary crisis. While Nicholas II was very willing and devoted to the autocracy, he was poorly prepared and not up for the scale of the problems in Russia at the time. Nicholas was not prepared for the job because he hasn't had the education required for someone to rule a whole country by himself. Figes, Orlando. A People's Tragedy: The Russian Revolution 1891-1924. London: Random House Group Limited, 1996. Print. Gurko, V. I., Figures and Features of the Past: Government and Opinion in the reign of Nicholas II, Stanford, 1939. Print Chubarov, Alex. "Nicholas, Czar II." Allrussias.com. 2009. Web. 10 Apr. 2012. <http://www.cartage.org.lb/en/themes/biographies/mainbiographies/n/czarnicholas/2.html>. Simkin, John. "Tsar Nicholas II : Biography." Spartacus Educational. Spartacus Educational. Web. 10 Apr. 2012. <http://www.spartacus.schoolnet.co.uk/FWWtsar.htm>. ...read more.

The above preview is unformatted text

This student written piece of work is one of many that can be found in our International Baccalaureate History 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 International Baccalaureate History essays

  1. The policies of Alexander II and III of Russia

    There are several major differences between the social policies of Alexander II and Alexander III, such as education, censorship and university regulation. The emancipation of the serfs may have had economic benefits, however it also created major social problems.24 The chaotic effect that emancipation had on the legal system was a major.

  2. Was the Tsar to blame for his own downfall?

    This was a great problem for the Tsarist order as the army had been the body who had maintained stability and order in Russia under the Tsarist regime. Without the army's support, the government was in fact weak and incapable of controlling the country.

  1. Compare and Contract the policies of Alexander II and Alexander III in Russia?

    Foreign trade, banking and planned railway network was re-established financial stability after the Crimean war defeat. Greater construction of railways - 1,100 Km at the start of his reign and 20,000Km was built at the end of his reign. Government guarantee of an annual dividend attracted foreign investors and the amount of track and traffic grew..

  2. To what extent did Alexander Tsar II deserve the title of Tsar Liberator

    With the Crimean War a unique movement of self-accusation was evoked and, according to VV Zenkovsky: the young people began to speak a language which had not previously been heard in Russia1. A time had come when even the aristocratic bureaucracy realized that a pivotal point in history had been

  1. IB History HL, Extended Notes: Russia, the Tsars, the Provisional Govenment and the Revolution.

    Worked to organize the war effort under the Tsar and supported the idea of a decentralized system of government. 2. Milyukov (Minister of Foreign Affairs)- real force in government, originally wanted British-style constitutional monarchy but was forced out of government over disagreement over WWI and then supported a military government so save Russia from the Soviet system.

  2. To what extent did the reforms of Alexander II achieve his aims

    Without a strong economic base, it would be nearly impossible to achieve imperial and military success, that would restore some of Russia?s international status and prestige that was lost during the war. Even though the Emancipation Edict had provided some sort of platform for the future development of money-based economy, it was too risky to leave it all to chance.

  1. Assess the strengths and weaknesses of Alexander II of Russia's reforms.

    In 1873, it was also given the power for certain topics to be forbidden. This reform just meant that a book could be printed without prior approval but not published. An unpublished book cannot spread its ideas as quick. But a printed book can still be distributed.

  2. Was Napolean an Heir to the French Revolution?

    The Marxist interpretation of the French Revolution states that it was in essence a power struggle between the middle classes or the bourgeoisie and the upper classes, aristocracy and the nobility. This is proven by the view that it was the Third Estate, which began the revolution and this was dominated by the bourgeoisie.

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