Why Couldn't The Regime Of Nicholas Ii Reform Itself In The Years Between 1905 1917?

2089 words - 8 pages

By early 1917, the existing order in Russia was on the verge of collapse. The defeat by Japan in the Russo-Japanese War, the 1905 and 1917 revolutions, World War I are factors which resulted in the regime of the Tsar, Nicholas II, being unable to reform itself and the nation between 1905 and 1917. Other external and internal pressures on the Russian government, such as the Balkan crisis of 1908-1909, the growing discontent of the Russian people with the Tsar's government and the failing economy also contributed. Additionally, the approach to leadership of Russia held by Nicholas II further accounts for the defeat of the Romanov dynasty after more than three hundred years of rule.The Tsar himself can certainly be held partly accountable for the inability of his regime to reform itself in the years between 1905 and 1917. Crankshaw commented that "the impact of Nicholas, considerable by all means, was almost wholly negative." Other historians have observed similarly, that "he was the living negation the idea of autocracy." Much criticism has derived from the inability of Nicholas II to measure up to his father, Alexander III. Pares notes that "Nicholas II (was) brought up in the awesome presence of his father in a close atmosphere of domestic regulations and immensely impressed by his father's powerful personality." Undoubtedly, on coming to power in 1896, Nicholas II had set himself to continue the recuperation of Russia, which had marked the reign of his father.However, there existed a tremendous contrast between what he was and what was expected of the Tsar. Sympathy exists, nevertheless, between some historians, who claim Nicholas II was known for his "earnest solicitude for all his subjects" and "the idea that he was stupid, was a sheer illusion confined to revolutionaries who knew nothing of him." This being said however, varied examples exist to prove Nicholas II's failings as the ultimate authority of Russia. One example regarding his selection and treatment of Ministers, historians note that Nicholas II was the very opposite of his father. It has been argued that "his choices were often haphazard and sometimes incomprehensible. While they were with him, he seemed constitutionally incapable of saying anything to them which might cause them unpleasantness, and more usually than not, their dismissal came as a complete surprise by post afterwards."Nicholas II cannot be held solely accountable, however, for his regime's inability to reform itself between 1905-1917. The advisers Nicholas II chose compounded his apparent incompetence. Rempel notes that "there was the sinister influence of a journalist by the name of Meshchevsky, the dominating influence of a certain M. Phillippe and the notorious monk Rasputin." Whilst the latter two worked through the tsarina, especially after 1911, Nicholas also retained the ministers of the reactionary Alexander III, particularly Pobedonestsev and Witte. Additionally, Nicholas's choice of Prime Minister,...

Find Another Essay On Why couldn't the regime of Nicholas II reform itself in the years between 1905-1917?

Why did the Revolution of 1905 occur?

1272 words - 5 pages , while paying even more extensive taxes to the bourgeois. With the formation of an intellectual class, industrialization which concentrated the population and revolutionary societies that could now see the discrepancy between other democratic nations, people became more aware of what kind of living standards they should be entitled to. Nicholas II (1894-1917) only fanned the flame of discontent with his dictatorial and imprudent ruling style and

What Happened in February 1917 and Why Nicholas Abdicated

1502 words - 6 pages What Happened in February 1917 and Why Nicholas Abdicated 1) Already suffering from the lack of food, the Okhrana report states that further unrest from the proletariat especially was caused by: the prohibition of all labour meetings; the closing down of trade unions; the persecution of men taking an active part in the sick benefit funds and the suspension of labour newspapers. 2) Rodzyanko was the president of the duma

Why did the Tsar abdicate in 1917?

1030 words - 4 pages Why did the Tsar abdicate in 1917?The title 'Tsar' means a male monarch or emperor. Russia had always had a Tsar for 300 years; Nicholas II was the last .There is a number of reasons that led Nicholas abdicating in 1917.One of the main reasons that led the Tsar abdicating was failures of Wars. In 1904 Russia planned what was meant to be a surprise attack on Japan so it can stretch its empire, but ended up loosing which meant the tsar was

Why Did the Revolutions of 1917 Happen?

1558 words - 6 pages World War I. Coupled with agricultural turmoil, the famine of 1917 finally breached the larger cities and the railway was paralyzed by the strikes of the workers. Nicholas II's imprudence in planning and pervasive dependence and protection of the aristocracy, coupled with his incompetence as an economic leader were direct causes of the Russian Revolution in 1917.Socially, Russia's over three centuries-old chasm between the wealthy landowners and

Why was the Tsar overthrown in 1917?

619 words - 2 pages The Tsar abdicated in the year 1917. Three important problems which contributes to the over throw of the in the year 1917 are, first of all the Tsar made mistakes by taking personal charge of the army and the actions he took after he did. Secondly, World war one played a big part in his over throw and thirdly one of the Tsar's strengths was that he had support of the army so when the army abandoned him, he lost one of his strengths.In 1917 the

Why did Tsarism Survive the Revolutionary Crisis of 1905?

1506 words - 6 pages . Despite having occasional army mutinies due to the army's low morale after the war, a crucial reason for restoration of power for the Tsar was the loyalty of the army. This highlights a key difference between 1905 and 1917; in the latter case, the First World War had a far more significant impact on the army and discouraged them from being loyal to the Tsar.The Tsarist regime was very much under genuine threat from the 1905 revolution; however, its

Comparison Of Nicholas I And Nicholas II

952 words - 4 pages and he was dominated by conservative and reactionary persons. By 1905 the demands for reform following the defeats in the war with Japan led to a general strike and several uprisings. All of these were put down with much bloodshed, but Nicholas was forced to issue the “October Manifesto'; which promised civil liberties and a legislative body representing the people called the “Duma';. However even with these reforms, there

How accurate is it to say that the growth of reformist groups in the years 1881 was the main cause of the 1905 revolution?

1027 words - 4 pages country but this didn't happen so they lost credibility and this tarnished their reputation to all other countries so would have affected the Russian people in a major way compared to the growth of reformist groups.Also due to the weak leadership of Tsar Nicholas II, Bloody Sunday became a factor that contributed to the 1905 revolution. Due to his lack of understanding towards the seriousness of the situation of the poor conditions that workers

Why did the Bolsheviks appeal to the people of Russia in 1917?

607 words - 2 pages The Bolsheviks appealed to the people of Russia in 1917 mainly because Russian society craved change. The tsar was now a part of the past and Russian society wanted to try something new. This is mainly why the Bolshevik party appealed to the people of Russia in 1917.The initial triumph of the Bolshevik Revolution at the end of October, 1917 did not mean that the entire population of Russia had been converted to Bolshevism. Leninwas aware of this

How and why did the Russian Revolution of 1917 and the US entry in World War

1222 words - 5 pages involved but in general there were three main reasons why it ended the war and why it turned the course of the war; US entry in war generally made the war finish earlier, Germany isolation in war also made the war earlier and Russian Revolution made the turning point in the course of war.The first major reason that affected the end of war was US entry. But first we should think why US got involved in the war. There are two major points why the US

Analyse the key aspects Tsar Nicholas II played until the collapse of the Romanovs

1108 words - 4 pages reform. Straight away Nicholas II rejected these proposals and dissolved the Duma in July 1906.Elections for the Second Duma took place in 1907 which the Chief Minister at the time, Peter Stolypin, used his powers to exclude large numbers from voting. This reduced the influence of the left but again the Second Duma was shutdown by tsar Nicholas only two months later.But unlike the first and second Duma, the people did not elect the third one

Similar Essays

Outline The Problems Facing The Tsarist Regime During The Reigns Of Alexander Iii And Nicholas Ii. How Successful Were They In Tackling These Problems?

1311 words - 5 pages aggressive policies of Russification paved the way for the Russo-Japanese war which would then spark the various revolutions -- including the 1905 revolution.The tsarist regime was bound to fail. It developed many internal problems due to the large geographical area of Russia and the weak leaders which represented it, particularly in Nicholas II.

Why Did The Revolution Fail To Topple The Tsar In 1905, But Succeed In 1917?

1670 words - 7 pages a time of change in Russia. Over the forty years preceding 1905, and thirty years following 1917, the Russian Empire underwent huge transformations. This meant that though many events can be seen as part of the Revolution, much of them happened against different backdrops within the country.Nicholas II did not abdicate and was not dethroned in 1905. However the Revolution of February 1917 did remove him from his position. When asking why

Tsar Nicholas 2nd's Survival Of The 1905 Revolution

1506 words - 6 pages Tsar Nicholas 2nd's Survival of The 1905 Revolution There are several factors that help our understanding of how the tsar and his regime endured the turmoil of the 1905 revolution. However, one thing is for sure, after the uprising and swift, brutal suppression of the revolutionaries on the 22nd of January 1905 outside the gates of the Winter Palace, the Nicholas 2nd and his administration received a drastic wake up

Exploring Why The Tsar Abdicated After The 1917 Revolution But Not After The 1905 Revolution

2839 words - 11 pages Exploring Why the Tsar Abdicated after the 1917 Revolution but not after the 1905 Revolution Introduction: Before the 20th century Russia was still very much living in the medieval age with a Medieval standard of living. Before the mid 19th century, Russia’s peasants were subjects to a form of slavery and were known as “Serfs”. This from of slavery was abolished in 1861and peasants were aloud land for themselves – but