In Tsarist Russia, the conflict between the Nobility and the Serfs were at an all-time high, especially have the Decembrist uprising in 1825 at the beginning rule of Nicholas 1. As for Tsar Nicholas who ruled from 1825-1855, as Chapter 18 states that Nicholas was “obsessed with keeping Russia sealed off from Western ideas”. This state of mind was heighten with the Revolutions of 1848 of Central and Western Europe. For Example, Tsar Nicholas established the Third Section who were the political police, who tried to seal off the ideas from reaching the people. In trying to do this, they found out that it was impossible to completely seal off the entire empire. As Merriman states in Chapter 18, that many men were influential in spreading the reality …show more content…
Tsar Alexander in 1861 emancipated the Serfs in which he was hailed as a hero by the Serfs in Russia. This attempt was entirely clean not bloody. By April 5, 1861, Russia became the last European state to be free of serfdom. Merriman continued with the reforms that Tsar Alexander rooted out. He established “district or village assemblies” which were called “zemstvos”, he also established “councils” which went by another name called “dumas”. As Alexander continued to grow a loyal following (especially in the military), we can see that the Russian Empire began to grow day after day. One instance of Tsar Alexander flexing his newly gained military muscle was in Poland, when the Polish revolted and were crushed by Alexander. Alexander integrated zemstvos and transformed Poland into a province. The new movement in these regions was the growth of “Pan-Slavism”, which proclaimed that all Slavs were family, this new rising mood was holding firm by the Austrians and the Hungarians who prevented Russia from reaching the Dardanelles Strait in the Russo-Turkish War. This hindered the Russians, but did not stop them from conquering Turkistan and then reaching Afghanistan. The Russian Empire now controlled “one-seventh of the world’s land …show more content…
The Revolutionary group that he talks about is the “Nihilists” who believed that the emancipation of the Serfs would help them in their cause of rising up against their oppressors according to Merriman. Some Nihilist were more aggressive than the others especially a group called the “Land of the Freedom” and “The Organization” which plotted Assassination attempts on the Tsar. Another group that were known in Russia, which were closer to the more insane side of things, were the Anarchist that was headed by “the devil in the flesh”, Michael Bakunin. He mainly believed according to Merriman, that “destruction is a creative passion”. The last group to mention was the Populists, which was based off nihilism and “believed the Slavophiles faith of peasantry”, also according to Merriman that they were “Romantic Collectivists who idealized the Russian peasant community.” With all of these Revolutionary ideals sparking up in the Empire, Tsar Alexander escaped numerous assassination attempts and was basically forced to disband the Third Section from fear of an uprising. Even though he was assassinated by the “People’s Will” who threw a bomb at the Tsar’s
For centuries, autocratic and repressive tsarist regimes ruled the country and population under sever economic and social conditions; consequently, during the late 19th century and early 20th century, various movements were staging demonstrations to overthrow the oppressive government. Poor involvement in WWI also added to the rising discontent against Nicholas as Russian armies suffered terrible casualties and defeats because of a lack of food and equipment; in addition, the country was industrially backward compared to countries such as Britain, France, Germany, and the USA. It had failed to modernize, this was to do with the tsars lack of effort for reforms. The country was undergoing tremendous hardships as industrial and agricultural output dropped. Famine and poor morale could be found in all aspects of Russian life. Furthermore, the tsar committed a fatal mistake when he appointed himself supreme commander of the armed forces because he was responsible for the armies constant string of defeats.
The Russian Revolution occured in two stages/times, February nd October of 1917. As cited in document 1, "Tsar Nicholas II was overthrown and a liberal democratic government came to power." What lead to the Febraury Revolution was the peasant agriculture to the Russian population, autocracy, and the outbreak of WW1. A long-term cause was the peasant agriculture to the Russian population. As said in document 1, "For all of its history before the 20th cwntury, 80-95% of the population were poor pasants, farmers just barely scratching a living form the land. For most of that history (between 1694-1861) the majority of these peasants were enserfed." to enserf means to be aprovd of liberty and personal rights. Before 1917 peasants recieved sympathy from
While most of Europe had develop strong central governments and weakened the power of the nobles, Russia had lagged behind the times and still had serfs as late as 1861. The economic development that followed the emancipation of peasants in the rest of Europe created strong industrial and tax bases in those nations. Russian monarchs had attempted some level of reforms to address this inequality for almost a century before, and were indeed on their way to “economic maturity” (32) on par with the rest of Europe. But they overextended themselves and the crushing defeats of the Russo-Japanese War in 1905 and the First World War in 1917 lost them the necessary support from their subjects and created “high prices and scarcity” which were by far “the most obvious factors in the general tension”
Even though the political system was shadowed by Nicholas' unwillingness to fully democratise, through the fundamental laws (1906) Nicholas had begun to transform Russia into a modernised industrial power. When compared with Alexander's political inactivity, it can be deduced that Alexander was more autocratic than Nicholas. When examining which Tsar was more autocratic, the role of opposition and how it was dealt with should not be overlooked.
situation is not serious at all and if it is ignored, it will go away.
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,
In order to be able to assess the reasons as to why it was that the
After the crippling defeat in the Crimean War, Alexander II knew that Russia could not be allowed to lag behind the Western world any longer if it was to maintain its independence. The reform of the state had been advisable for a long time, but for Alexander III it was necessary. He knew that before any real changes could be achieved, the main problem had to be solved: the problem of serfdom. However many limits and imperfections his edict of Emancipation carried with it, most importantly it allowed for further modernizing reforms in the legal, government, education and military spheres.
Russia's overthrows and shortage caused revolutionary upheaval and massive inflation, which led to deprived infrastructure. During World War I, Russian society naturally caused great dissatisfaction among the serfs. As the revolution wore on, numerous reform and Tsar Nicholas II, a ruler, tried to change Russia's social structure and government. Among the masses, there was discontentment with Russia's social system and living conditions. Laborers worked and lived in horrendous conditions, which played a crucial role in aggravating the condition of workers and peasants. As a result, peasants starved and Russia’s armies were overpowered on the battlefield because much of its terrain was occupied by enemies. Hence, Imperial Russia was a catastrophe. Some scholars believe that despite the Russian empire's undeveloped economic, social, and political weakness during World War I, Russian empire's economic and social advances occurred decades before World War I, which shows that World War I was not a crucial reason of the Russian Revolution. Although a reason of the Russian Revolution was possibly Tsar's deprived governance because of his misconduct towards inhabitants, the main cause of the Russian Revolution was World War I because The First War demonstrated poor infrastructure in the Russian government politically and economically.
The Russian revolution of February 1917 was a momentous event in the course of Russian history. The causes of the revolution were very critical and even today historians debate on what was the primary cause of the revolution. The revolution began in Petrograd as “a workers’ revolt” in response to bread shortages. It removed Russia from the war and brought about the transformation of the Russian Empire into the Union of Soviet Socialist Republic, replacing Russia’s monarchy with the world’s first Communist state. The revolution opened the door for Russia to fully enter the industrial age. Before 1917, Russia was a mostly agrarian nation. The Russian working class had been for many years fed up with the ways they had to live and work and it was only a matter of time before they had to take a stand. Peasants worked many hours for low wages and no land, which caused many families to lose their lives. Some would argue that World War I led to the intense downfall of Russia, while others believe that the main cause was the peasant unrest because of harsh living conditions. Although World War I cost Russia many resources and much land, the primary cause of the Russian Revolution was the peasant unrest due to living conditions because even before the war began in Russia there were outbreaks from peasants due to the lack of food and land that were only going to get worse with time.
It was Tzar Nicholas 2 political naivete and extreme obstinance that led to the downfall of the Russia
Wood, A. (1986). The Russian Revolution. Seminar Studies in History. (2) Longman, p 1-98. ISBSN 0582355591, 9780582355590
Rents and taxes were often unaffordable, while the gulf between workers and the ruling elite grew ever wider. After their defeat in the Crimean war (1853-1856), Russia’s leaders realized they were falling behind much of Europe in terms of modernisation and industrialisation. Alexander II took control of the empire and made the first steps towards radically improving the country’s infrastructure. Transcontinental railways were built and the government strengthened Russia’s economy by promoting industrialisation with the construction of factory complexes throughout rural Russia.... ...
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.
The Nature of Tsarism and the Policies of Nicholas II as the Cause for the Revolution of February in Russia 1917