Nicholas II Characteristics

561 Words2 Pages

The cause of the February revolution has remained a widely contested debate among various historians, each possessing different interpretations, ideologies and political persuasion. All historians share slight contrasts in opinion, thus attributing the revolution to a diverse number of reasons. Despite the personality of Nicholas II and the impact of the First World War being the principal factors thought to have caused the revolution, the role of the regime on a long term basis can also be seen as significant, as can the failure to adapt to transforming circumstances and satisfy class expectations.

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 …show more content…

The Decembrist revolt in 1825 demonstrated that opinions in Russian society were changing and the Tsars could no longer rely on the full support of the Russian people. Despite the revolt being crushed by the regime without difficulty, the event can be seen to produce an early form of revolutionary feeling toward the autocracy. I believe the acts of the 3000 Russian army soldiers marked the emergence of a wider revolutionary movement between the regime and nobility, which would become more severe by 1917, when support of the army, intelligentsia, elite and workers melted away from Nicholas

Open Document