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

Was the Tsar to blame for his own downfall?

Extracts from this document...


Was the Tsar to blame for his own downfall? In 1917, the great Russian Revolution took place overthrowing the Tsar and turning Russia into a republic. Bringing about the end of the Romanov Dynasty and the Tsarist system that had ruled Russia since 1613, the revolutions was a major turning point in Russian history. Historians have long debated who was in fact to blame for the significant event. Was it the Tsar Nicholas II himself who brought about his own downfall or were there other factors that contributed to the cause? There are several external factors that contributed to the downfall of the Tsar. First of all, "The Soviet View" argues that revolution was going to happen anyway. During the 19th century, Russia had endured great changes that began to question the Tsarist system such as the growth of capitalism in the 1890s with the "great spurt" under Witte, the chief minister. Between 1905 and 1914 Russian industrial production doubled. Industrialisation thus helped a working class emerge and soviets mantain that workers became class conscious and therefore revolutionary under the influence of the Bolsheviks. There was also political discontent bringing about an increase in strikes from 1912 showing the rise of the working class and their discontent with the system due to poor conditions in factories. ...read more.


Moreover, war made the transport system collapse as the improved railway system did not prove to be adequate for the demands of the war. People in St Petersburg became even more discontent and angry with the Tsar over this as they were far away from the food-producing regions. What made matters worse was that its population had increased due to the destitute refugees that were moving to the cities increasing demand for resources at a time were resources were scarce. The food intake of Petograd workers feel by a quarter and infant mortality rates doubled. Furthermore, Russia's heavy defeats against the world's best army during war such as the Battle of Massurian Lakes and Tannenberg badly affected the Tsarist government's reputation. War clearly undermined the Tsarist system. In fact, the Liberal View argues that if there had not been a war Revolution would never have come. Pavlovsky stated "Then, as a thunderbolt came the terrible catastrophe of 1914, and progress changed into destruction". The factors mentioned above convey that it was not the Tsar himself but rather the Tsarist system and the events that took place at that time that were to blame. The truth was that Russia due to its immense territory and ethnic diversity was difficult to reform and also difficult to rule. ...read more.


He also ignored the warnings from Michael Rodzianko who clearly told him that "Discontent is general and on the increase" and that the "formation of a new government was required". He, thus, did not accept the Duma's proposal to share government in time and when he finally did, Rodzianko told him it was simply too late for this concession. The actions of the Tsar and his government made even his closest and most loyal supporters turn against him. Even, the Tsar's cousin Prince Yusupov went against him and killed Rasputin in 1916. In 1917, at the eve of his downfall the Tsar was unaware of the seriousness of the situation and Alexandra disregarded warnings. In conclusion, although several external factors that aimed for the abolition of the Tsarist system were greatly to blame for the Tsar's downfall it was the Tsar's actions and incompetent nature that was mainly responsible for the revolution. His actions made his regime weak as he lost support from all his followers and from the army, his guarantor of stability. Although, war made things worse, it was only a catalyst to a revolution that was bound to happen due to the general discontent in the country. Without any support, the Tsar was made to abdicate his throne on 15th March 1917, bringing to an end his regime and the Tsarist system. ?? ?? ?? ?? ...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. Was the Russian Revolution due more to tsars inadequacy as a ruler of the ...

    "On the city's main thoroughfare, Nevsky Prospekt, crowds shouted 'Down with the autocracy!' and 'Down with the war!' Here and there, mobs sacked food stores."18 Had Nicholas II been a competent ruler, those issues would not have occurred in the first place for the radical groups to use propaganda to sway the public.

  2. China's socio-economic changes under Deng Xiaoping

    The role of free markets for farm produce was further expanded and, with increased marketing possibilities and rising productivity, farm incomes rose rapidly. In industry the complexity and interrelation of production activities prevented a single, simple policy from bringing about the kind of dramatic improvement that the responsibility system achieved in agriculture.

  1. Russia in 1682 was under an absolute monarchy with the Tsar adopting a complete ...

    for a ruler in that he'd have the capability to make quick decisions and his position was secured by his complete power. Economically the Tsar would immediately have an advantage in that the royal families had the ability to command monopolies upon businesses which were going through a stage of

  2. How far was the Russo-Japanese War responsible for the outbreak of the 1905 Revolution?

    Consequently, the economic problems brought about a dent in national pride and by Russia's being unable to solve any of its other problems due to financial constraints was responsible for the outbreak of the 1905 Revolution. The political implications of the Russo-Japanese War perhaps were the most important reason as

  1. 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

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

    Development in industry led to poor living conditions, houses were built quickly and cheaply but there was still a shortage. 5. Large sleeping halls where drunkenness and filth were commonplace, no privacy. 6. Poor health from town living and long hours.

  1. Why did Tsarism fail to survive the first world war

    This was a bold move that the Tsar made seeking to improve his relations with the people, this meant that he was held responsible for each victory the Russian army gained. Unfortunately, he was also held responsible for every defeat, and given the state of the Russian military and lack

  2. Notes on the History and Development of the Arab-Israeli Conflict

    In January 1970, Nasser flew to Moscow to seek more aid. The Soviets soon had 15,000 advisors in Egypt and they did much to beef up Egyptian air defences. Even the expulsion of Soviet advisors in 1972 by Nasser's successor, Sadat did not end Soviet influence as by the end

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