More handpicked essays just for you.
Tsar nicholas ii biography essay
The reasons for the downfall of tsar nicholas the second
The reasons for the downfall of tsar nicholas the second
Don’t take our word for it - see why 10 million students trust us with their essay needs.
Recommended: Tsar nicholas ii biography essay
Nicholas Romanov II
Although, Tsar Nicholas was called a tyrant he was actually a nice man. He made Russia into a better place for many people. He and his wife lived a secluded life for most of their marriage. Nicholas Romanov was a great role model because he was the Tsar, rich and powerful, and a genius military strategist.
First of all, Nicholas Romanov was the royal Tsar of Russia. He was part f a long line of royals from all across Europe. Nicholas was Cousins with the king of England King George V (5th). Nicholas was a very Powerful Tsar before WWI. But during WWI he began to lose power over his people. That would be the start of his downfall.
Although, he was rich and powerful many of the nobility in Russia at that time had 90% of all
In 1900, Russia was an autocracy led by a Tsar who had a total control over the country. The Tsar was Nicholas II. Along with his family and all other nobles, he was very wealthy and lived in luxury. Other wealthy groups of people were: Ÿ Upper class- Church leaders and lesser nobles. Ÿ Commercial class- Bankers, factory workers all known as capitalists.
Nicholas was an inadequate leader, the film shows this by portraying him as a man who put his family first, who was too stubborn to appoint a Duma and who didn’t want to be in power. The film implies that this insufficient leadership is what led to the collapse of the old regime however what it doesn’t put enough focus on is the fact that Russia was behind when it came to industrialisation. This too was a major contributing factor that led to the collapse of the old regime. Tsar Nicholas II was a family man who put his family before the wellbeing of the country.
Nicholas II ruled Russia from 1894-1917 and was to be its final tsar. He ascended the throne under the impression that he would rule his whole life as it's undisputed leader. Accompanied by his wife, Alexandra, they lived a comfortable life of luxury while the country suffered around them. Nicholas was determined to rule as harshly as his father; however, he was a very weak and incompetent character who did not posses the qualities capable of guiding Russia through its time of turmoil.
I can use this source in my research project to defend why Czar Nicholas II is innocent to the abuse of power of the office of Czar.It reveales to me that even thouch Nicholas struggled with being the new Czar he truly did a lot for Russia to improve in learning abilities.Above all else, Nicholas loved Russia first and then his family; He thought the fate of the two was inseparable. No one knew the fault of the Romanov Dynasty better than him. Czar Nicholas sincerely felt his responsibility for the country, He thought that his destiny was within the country he ruled. I think it was really difficult for him but it was the only way to admit his mistakes and to say "sorry" to his people.
Certain aspects of Tsar Nicholas 2's behaviour definitely contributed to bringing about the fall of the Russian Empire, however most of these qualities were not weaknesses in character as such, they were qualities we would associate with poor leadership. When we say 'weakness in character' we mean being easily influenced/controlled by others. Nicholas himself was a firm believer in autocracy; he was virtually unmovable in this belief. And this obstinant belief clearly illustrates he stuck to his beliefs, although in his early years as tsar his uncles had huge influence. That said, the fall of the Russian Empire was not all a result of Nicholas' character and poor leadership qualities, we must also see that the huge socio-economic changes happening as well as the outbreak WW1 hugely influenced the coming about of and the timing of the revolution. These changes would be hard for any government to manage.
Nicholas I (1796-1855) was born at Tsarskoe Selo, the third son of Czar Paul I. Nicholas came to throne in 1825 after his brother Alexander I had died and his older brother Constantine had given up his claims to the throne. Nicholas’ first action was to put down, with great harshness, a revolt of officers and soldiers who had fought in Europe during the Napoleonic wars and favored reform in Russia. This uprising occurred in the month of December and the rebels became known in Russian history as “Decembrists.'; The new czar ordered the principal leaders killed and the rest exiled to Siberia. He felt there was something wrong with the government of the country, and he thought that Russia needed more discipline rather than liberal reform. Nicholas ordered the codification of Russian laws, reformed finances, and attempted to set limits to serfdom. He made the censorship of newspaper and all opinion even stricter than before, and set up a secret...
Consequently they were not susceptible to some of the Tsars. discrimination. Also the Nobility who made up just one 1% of the 128. million population owned 25% of the land therefore meaning they had a large amount of power within the country. To try and console his power. The Tsar banned all political parties, thus allowing him to do what ever he wanted to.
Tsar Nicholas’ poor leadership of Russia came to show following the 1905 Revolution which nearly
Tsar Nicholas failing to address issues led him to his own ultimate downfall. Nicholas II was an autocratic monarch rather than a constitutional leader and this was a factor leading him to his own downfall. He faced many issues socially, economically and politically such as; the influence of Rasputin, World War I, and Bloody Sunday.
During the course of his reign, Nicholas II only really gave freedom and opportunity to his peasants on a theoretical basis, and in fact implemented little effective reform in order to satisfy their needs. His decisions or lack of decisions, personality, as well as his leadership incompetence all contributed to his down fall and the eventual end to the Romanov dynasty in 1917. It is impossible for a revolution of such a large scale to occur solely based on one factor. Although the First World War contributed to the collapse of Tsarism as it highlighted the existing problems in Russia, I personally believe the countless displays of poor judgement by Nicholas II
The great and horrible man, Ivan IV Vasilyevich, usually called Ivan “The Terrible,” ruled Russia in the time of Shakespeare. Crowned as the initial Tsar of Russia, he controlled
At the beginning, tensions within the country appeared to disappear, and the Tsar was popular amongst his people, applauded for his actions. There was a huge surge of patriotism within the country and many were almost excited for the war, which was a good decision for Nicholas in the short term as he gained a lot of support. However, this was quick, as throughout the war the Russian people were once again shown what an incapable leader they had, and paid the consequences for the war. The army were mostly conscripted, and fought bravely to defend their country from the Germans. However, they were ill equipped and suffered great losses. They were fighting a losing battle from the start, as the sometimes only had 3 bullets a day, fighting the advanced German war machines which fired 3 bullets a second. Nicholas stepped in and took personal control over the army, which did not help as he was not a great leader and the Russian people just blamed him for everything that went wrong with the army. Although he could not have done anything to better the situation, the Russians now had a scapegoat to blame their losses on, and this huge blow to Russia was blamed entirely on Nicholas II. There were also food and fuel shortages, as the government could no longer be relied upon to pay for the goods by 1916. The food was still being grown, but farmers were more hesitant to sell it, wondering if they’d ever see the money. The railways could not cope with the needs of the army and the cities, and by 1917, most working class citizens did not have enough food and fuel to live, and cursed the Tsar for causing this. The Tsar was engaged in a war he could not possibly win, and his refusal to admit this was killing his people, on and off the battlefield. His decisions in the war, taking personal command, left his faults projected onto Russia, and this caused most people who had stood up for him to turn against the Tsar
By 1917 the people of Russia had had enough of Czar Nicholas and his family. The family was put on house arrest and "Nicholas abdicated his throne peacefully"(Nicholas). After the Grand Duke Michael refused to become the crowned Czar, the monarchy off almost 300 years (Nicholas) " perished without a murmur from either the dynasty or its supporters" (Nicholas).ADD SOMETHING HERE. Later the communists killed Czar Nicholas and his family. Cs
Tsar Nicholas II was the last tsar of Russia. He was born in Pushkin, Saint Petersburg, Russia on May 6, 1868 and would live to reach the age of 50. His actions during his rule could be credited to the rise of communism in Russia, and opposition of him led to his forced abdication in 1917. Because of his significance during his reign, Nicholas is also represented in the novel Animal Farm by a farmer named Mr. Jones, as this character symbolizes Nicholas’s non qualification for ruling, as well as how he plunged his country into devastating poverty and eventually fell out of rule.
The government and reform; the actual character of Nicholas II hindered his time in office, for example his outlooks on situations meant he did not trust a lot of his advisors, he was also seen to have been very lazy with respects to making decisions, other observations included him being, weak, timid and lacked guts. This all adds up to a very weak leader that is vulnerable to opposition, due to his tunnel vision and un-ability to see the main needs of the country. The duma was another challenge to the tsar; after the 1905 revolution the tsar had set up an elected body called the duma, this was a way of showing the public that he could be open minded in that delegating decisions to other people, looking back in hindsight this would also be seen as a challenge to the tsar as he never gave the duma any real power, and were easily dissolved, this meant that people were further angered and he was receiving opposition from all sides, it did however hold off opposition for a small period of time in order for the tsar to retain his power. Other individuals had an influence to the challenges facing the tsar, Nicholas had brought some new people in to try and conquer some problems, these included Rasputin who he had originally appointed to become saviour of family, he managed to influence the tsar in many of his decisions, this inevitably caused there to be conflict as the he was relying on Rasputin to relay details of the state of the country, these were not accurate which meant that tsar could not act upon opposition. Other people did help the tsar for example stolypin and his reforms.