Nikolai Aleksandrovich Romanov: The Last Tsar of Russia

1626 Words4 Pages
bulb-icon

Recommended: Tsar nicholas 11 ccea essay

:Nikolai Aleksandrovich Romanov, the last standing Tsar of Russia officially known as Tsar Nicholas II, autocrat of Russia. Nicholas II was born on 18th May, 1868 in Tsarskoe Selo, Russia. Nicholas II was the eldest son of Alexander III and his Empress Marie Romanova. Nicholas was eldest of six children. He had three younger brothers, Alexander, George, Michael and two younger sisters, Xenia and Olga. Nicholas II ruled from 1894 until his abdication on 15 March 1917, his reign saw imperial Russia go from being one of the foremost great powers of the world to an economic and military catastrophe. Tsar Nicholas II influenced and sought change in the historical events of Russo - Jap War, Bloody Sunday, October Manifesto, The First Russian Revolution, World War One and the abdication of the throne. Thus bringing about change in Russia and the autocratic system of ruling that lead to the downfall of the Romanov Dynasty.

Nicholas firmly believed in the same traits as his father, Tsar Alexander III. After the sudden death of his father in 1894, Nicholas II was crowned Tsar of Russia, and left to rule without any knowledge and training of leadership skills. The state of Russia’s economy and military was in the fate of Nicholas II. As he was unprepared for the new and challenging role to govern the extensive Russian empire. Nicholas II complained to his brother-in-law stating that, ‘I am not prepared to be a Tsar. I never wanted to become one. I know nothing of the business of ruling’. Nicholas II was different compared to that of the past Tsars, Nicholas’ II early interests did not revolve around political matters. His father, although wanted him to be tough but his personality was the exact opposite. Soon after the death of his fath...

... middle of paper ...

... factor within it self that contributed to the downfall of the Romanov dynasty.

As a result the impact of World War One and tensions that arose in Russia, Tsar Nicholas II was forced to abdicated by the Duma. As the primary source, ‘At Last’ –Brisbane worker, 22nd March 1971, indicates that the majority of the people did not want a Tsar ruling Russia thus the need for the a revolution. The big hand, in the source represents the size of the people and the forcible removable of the Tsar as it burst through chair. By the second revolution the Romanov dynasty has ended due to the execution of the Romanov’s. The fall of the Russian Empire was a result of a complex web of factors. The ultra conservatism and political inexperience of Tsar Nicholas II greatly contributed to the fall, as did the huge socio-economic changes, modernisation, industrialisation of the period.

Show More
Related

  • Assess the impact of World War I on the Fall of the Romanov Dynasty

    968 Words  | 2 Pages

    With the coinciding of a revolution on the brink of eruption and the impacts of the First World War beginning to take hold of Russia, considered analysis of the factors that may have contributed to the fall of the Romanov Dynasty is imperative, as a combination of several factors were evidently lethal. With the final collapse of the 300 year old Romanov Dynasty in 1917, as well as the fall of Nicholas II, a key reality was apparent; the impact that WWI had on autocratic obliteration was undeniable. However, reflection of Russia’s critical decisions prior is essential in the assessment of the cause of the fall of the Romanov Dynasty.

    Read More

  • Does Nicholas And Alexandra Show Inadequate Leadership That Led To The Collapse Of The Old Regime

    1380 Words  | 3 Pages

    Tsar Nicholas II was a family man who put his family before the wellbeing of the country. In the Bloody Sunday scene thousands of people were marching to the Winter Palace to request help and protection from the Tsar because he was supposed to be in St Petersburg. However he was not there, he had gone home to tend to his son because he was ill. This resulted in the massacring of approximately 200 people who meant no harm . After his abdication in a conversation with his son Alexi he tells him that he abdicated for him. He tells Alexi, “I didn't want you to pay for my mistakes.” Whether this was the reason for his abdication or not the movie led the viewers to believe that everything he did was for his family. The leader of a country should make decisions that will be better for the country, not their family. He put the wellbeing of his family before the country which shows inadequate leadership that ultimately led to the collapse of the old reg...

    Read More

  • Essay On Tsar's Power Crumbled In 1917

    572 Words  | 2 Pages

    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.

    Read More

  • Czar Nicholas II's Abuse Of Power

    128 Words  | 1 Pages

    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.

    Read More

  • The Failure of the Provisional Government and the Rise of the Bolsheviks

    1871 Words  | 4 Pages

    New York, Replika Press Pvt. Ltd. Deutscher, Isaac, Ed 1967. The Unfinished Revolution Russia1917-1967. U.S.A. Oxford University Press. Fitzpatrick, Sheila, Ed 1982.The Russian Revolution.

    Read More

  • Czar Nicholas II: The Fall Of The Tsar Of Russia

    2251 Words  | 5 Pages

    The Romanov Empire had reign the Russian Empire for about 300 years before Nicholas II became the monarch. Unfortunately, the new Tsar of Russia was also advised by Konstantin Pobedonostsev, who promoted autocracy, condemned elections, representation and democracy, the jury system, the press, free education, charities, and social reforms; an outdated ideology by the turn of the twentieth century. Although Nicholas II possessed some skills that would have been advantageous as the leader but, overall he was not suitable to be the Tsar of Russia. Even though Czar Nicholas II implemented limited reform that were beneficial for the empire; there were more fiascos during his reign thus lies the collapse of the Romanov Empire on his political skill,

    Read More

  • Czar Nicholas II

    683 Words  | 2 Pages

    Czar Nicholas’ poor leadership forced him to abdicate and caused the Bolshevik takeover. One of the reasons I say that is because of the way he handled “Bloody Sunday”. “Bloody Sunday” was when troops killed over a thousand people in a peaceful worker assembly. After “Bloody Sunday”, workers all over Russia went on strike, and peasants caused uprisings that were suppressed by Nicholas II’s troops causing tensions to increase. Another reason was his disastrous involvement in World War I. In the beginning of the war, Russia’s armies did not do well. To fix this, Nicholas became the commander. Now under his command, their continued failure reflected the Czar himself, further decreasing his popularity. Lastly, civil unrest grew as food riots, chronic food shortages, and labor strikes continued to proceed. This eventually erupted into open revolt, and Czar Nicholas had no choice but to abdicate. Soon after, the new government was overthrown by the Bolsheviks, led by Vladimir Lenin.

    Read More

  • Tzar Nicholas II - Downfall of Russia

    1098 Words  | 3 Pages

    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.

    Read More

  • Personal Influence of Grigori Rasputin

    1920 Words  | 4 Pages

    The topic of this investigation is to analyze to what extent did the personal influence of Grigori Rasputin lead to the fall of the Russian Empire. The analysis will investigate the relationship of Rasputin to those in positions of power, starting from the time when Rasputin first treated Alexei to the last days of the Romanov Dynasty. Statements from those acquainted with Rasputin and historical analyses of Rasputin’s life will be analyzed to elucidate the extent of Rasputin’s influence.

    Read More

  • The Family Romanov Sparknotes

    1032 Words  | 3 Pages

    In this instance Nicholas did not understand the magnitude of his people's, more specifically the soldiers suffering while at war with Austria and Germany. Often times the war minister, Vladimir Sukhomlinov, misinformed Nicholas regarding the conditions of soldiers leaving the Russian army without food, clothing and weapons. Through this miscommunication, it left not merely the soldiers without defense, but the country defenseless along with them. As a result, “By the following spring, the shortage had grown so severe that many soldiers charged into battle without guns. Instead, commanders told them to pick up their weapons from the men killed in front lines. At the same time, soldiers were limited to firing just ten shots a day. Sometimes they were even forbidden to return enemy fire” (134). This was just one piece of the puzzle that led to the crumble of the Russian autocracy. Especially considering the fact that everyone could see their efforts for winning the war were dissipating all except for one, “. . . everyone in the tsar’s government knew it… everyone, that is, except Nicholas himself” (135). As shown in this instance, basic misconceptions can begin a ripple effect that has the power to put a country in

    Read More

  • The Iranian Revolution and the Russian Revolution

    1667 Words  | 4 Pages

    Wood, A. (1986). The Russian Revolution. Seminar Studies in History. (2) Longman, p 1-98. ISBSN 0582355591, 9780582355590

    Read More

  • Russian Reforms In The 19th Century

    886 Words  | 2 Pages

    In the 19th century, Tsarist Russia was in need of various significant reforms and changes. Westernizers and Slavophiles had varied points of view about how Russia should be governed and what to be done with the crumbling country. Slavophiles believed in conserving traditional Russian autocracy and Russian culture and tradition, while Westernizers sought to modernize and adopt western beliefs and systems. These two viewpoints can be generalized into two main categories; liberal and conservative. From the years 1855-1881, Alexander II led the autocracy. He was known to by many as the “great reformer”, because he emancipated the serfs and put in place many other radical reforms. After the assassination of Alexander II, his son, Alexander

    Read More

  • 1917 Russian Revolution Essay

    1101 Words  | 3 Pages

    In the years leading up to the revolution, Russia had been involved in a series of wars. The Crimean war, The Russo-Turkish war, The Russo-Japanese war and the First World War. Russia had been defeated in all except the war with Turkey and its government and economy had the scars to prove it. A severe lack of food and poor living conditions amongst the peasant population led firstly to strikes and quickly escalated to violent riots. Tsar Nicholas II ruled Russia with an iron hand while much of Europe was moving away from the monarchical system of rule. All lands were owned by the Tsar’s family and Nobel land lords while the factories and industrial complexes were owned by the capitalists’. There were no unions or labour laws and the justice system had made almost all other laws in favour of the ruling elite. Rents and taxes were often unaffordable, while the gulf between workers and the ruling elite grew ever wider.

    Read More

  • Challenges Faced by the Tsar Nicholas the Second of Russia

    871 Words  | 2 Pages

    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.

    Read More

  • Was the 1905 Revolution a ‘dress rehearsal’ for the events of either February or October 1917?

    2018 Words  | 5 Pages

    ̳Act of abdication of Tsar Nicolas II‘ in Chamberlin, The Russian Revolution, vol. 1, pp 430– 431.

    Read More

More about Nikolai Aleksandrovich Romanov: The Last Tsar of Russia

Open Document