Romanov Dynasty Research Paper

1102 Words3 Pages
bulb-icon

Recommended: The fall of the Romanov dynasty

The fall of the Romanov Dynasty
Much of the blame for the fall of the Romanov Dynasty lays with Nicholas II. His abortive role as a leader and his failure to provide for the people of Russia were just some of the factors that lead to the collapse of the 300 year old dynasty. The fall however was not something that happened instantaneously but instead was a gradual collapse that had many contributing factors such as the influence of Revolutionaries, and the impact of World War I which introduced the detrimental rule of Alexandra and Rasputin while Nicholas was away at the front. Alexandra and Rasputin played a role in developing the social and economic grievances of the country.
It is indisputable that Nicholas II had a substantial influence on the demise of the dynasty. He had an ardent devotion to his family, he was kind with only benevolent intentions towards his wife and children. It was this devotion that ultimately shifted Nicholas’s priorities, putting his role as a father and husband above his role as a Tsar.
This blurred distinction between his family and his duties as a ruler caused many to attribute the fall of the dynasty on Nicholas.” He could not stand listening long or seriously to ministers reports or reading them”-Kerensky. Many suggested that Nicholas was ill-prepared to run a country and that he did not have imperative qualities needed in order to maintain power. His ineptitude to rule effectively was an amalgamation of difficult events and poor judgment often caused by people around him conferring their own biases and opinions into his decisions. Despite the influence by Alexandra and others in his inner circle it all came back to the Tsar’s inability to rule effectively.
Nicholas’s official title was “Empe...

... middle of paper ...

... the basement of the house.
Nicholas in the end was the one to blame. He had the ability to aid in the situations and make different choices but didn’t. In the end it was evident that there were many contributing factors to the collapse of the Romanov Dynasty, such as the Revolution, the influence of Rasputin and Alexandra and World War I, which all lead to the social and economic issues in Russia. Even with all these factors it still all comes back to Nicholas. His incapability of supplying the Army with the needed weapons and aid, the lack of preparation and direction to the Army and his failure to provide for or even listen to the needs of his people certainly do not make Nicholas look good. Even though it seems that Nicholas had good intentions he was incompetent as a leader and he in fact was one of the main causes of the demise of a 300 year Romanov Dynasty.

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 to the war is essential in the assessment of the cause of the fall of the Romanov Dynasty. No war is fought without the struggle for resources, and with Russia still rapidly lagging behind in the international industrialisation race by the turn of the 20th century, the stage was set for social unrest and uprising against its already uncoordinated and temporarily displaced government. With inconceivable demands for soldiers, cavalry and warfare paraphernalia, Russia stood little chance in the face of the great powers of World War One.

    Read More

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

    1380 Words  | 3 Pages

    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.

    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 Kitchen Boy

    859 Words  | 2 Pages

    Not only did the Romanov family have to go through a terrible death sentence, but they were ridiculed and belittled at almost every possible chance along the way by the Bolsheviks. They were forced to live in awful conditions, to be tormented because of vicious gossip and rumors, and to find a way to keep their faith when they had no opportunity. The Russian Imperial family had to endure all of this and more, just because of their bad luck and poor judgment.

    Read More

  • Literary Techniques Used by Fyodor Dostoyevsky in Crime and Punishment

    2235 Words  | 5 Pages

    In mid-19th century Russia, an oppressive rule is a result of the Romanov monarchy and this in... ... middle of paper ... ... ition to being important in portraying Raskolnikov's changing personality. By making such dissimilarity between the two ways that the two characters affect Raskolnikov, we are able to see his downfall and subsequent rise much more clearly.

    Read More

  • Tsar Nicholas II Research Paper

    433 Words  | 1 Pages

    Most people know that there were multiple important people in World War I. A few of them were Woodrow Wilson, Vittorio Orlando, and George Clemenceau. One major person was Tsar Nicholas II.

    Read More

  • Ivan The Terrible Research Paper

    479 Words  | 1 Pages

    About a week and a half after Christmas, I went to stay at my grandmother's house while my parents were away. When I arrived, my grandmother handed me a small wrapped package. I think that I must have expressed my confusion very visibly because my grandmother immediately backtracked. "You know how it is," she said. "I buy Christmas presents all year long then I hide them so you won't see them. By the time Christmas comes around, I've already forgotten about their existence, where I've put them is a mystery to me too. I found this one in the pantry next to the Malt-o-meal." I nodded and opened the gift; inside the packaging was a tiny and fragile-looking porcelain doll. This is rather how I imagine Ivan the Terrible dealing with his library. Only instead of forgetting about a relatively meaningless doll, Ivan IV (The Terrible) forgot to tell anyone about the location of his fabulous, fascinating, and very important library.

    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

  • Tsarism, Leninism And Stalinism

    1607 Words  | 4 Pages

    Nicholas I was the “Iron Tsar” and ruled from 1825-1855. He came to power by crushing the Decembrist Rebellion. He was a military man never meant to be Tsar because he was the youngest of his brothers. He was very intelligent but also narrow-minded, orderly, and precise. Nicholas I was not originally a total reaction. Even though he came to power after crushing a rebellion, he did not become thoroughly reactionary until after the Polish rebellion in 1830-1831. Before the Polish rebellion, he even wanted to abolish serfdom, but afterwards all liberalism stopped and oppression increased. Nicholas II’s beliefs about ruling

    Read More

  • Tsar Nicholas II Mistakes

    912 Words  | 2 Pages

    The assassination of Tsar Nicholas II of Russia was unjustified because, while he did not rule in the best possible way for his country, he abdicated the throne, no longer posing a threat to the welfare of Russia; however, many Russian citizens claim that it was for the good of the people. From the beginning of his rule, Nicholas Romanov was not seen as fit for the throne. He made many mistakes as a leader that brought distress to his country, and handled many national issues, such as World War I (BBC para. 6) and Bloody Sunday, a day on which protesters were open-fired upon by the Royal Guard, extremely poorly (History para. 1). After a series of unfortunate events, the Tsar was forced to abdicate the throne. Soon after, he and his family

    Read More

  • Rasputin

    2796 Words  | 6 Pages

    ...holas had set a path to glory for Nicholas, who himself is man of poor intellect. Tsarevich Nicholas Alexandrovich. At the time of his father's death in late 1894, Nicholas was an inexperienced youth wholly unprepared for the great task destiny had placed on his shoulders. Nicholas II was barely twenty-six years old at the time of his accession. During his son's golden youth, Alexander III did not allow his son Nicholas much participation in affairs of government. It is likely that Alexander III feared that his eldest son was not intellectually capable of handling the inheritance that was rightfully his. Therefore, the father kept postponing the son's introduction in to the daily running of Russia. Not one person, most of all Alexander III, ever imagined that this young and inexperienced Romanov would ascend the throne as early in life as he did. Czar Nicholas II’s mother Czarina Maria-Feodorovna was nortorouis as a mother who did not allow her children to grow. Therefor altering the young Czar’s behaviour to that all would regret. As Leon Trotsky once said:

    Read More

  • Reasons for the Downfall of the Russian Empire in 1917

    595 Words  | 2 Pages

    There is so much that can be said in regards to the question “Why the Downfall of the Russian Empire? “ You cannot blame it on just a few individuals or because of any single factor, but you have to consider the historical and spiritual situation during the time Tsar Nicholas reigned. You have to consider historically development of Europe, its spiritual changes and also of course, the political aspects that had deeply affected the internal life of the Russian Empire and contributed to the downfall of the Tsar and the empire. In Russia, there were various spiritual changes that took place. Citizens began to turn away from their beliefs in God, and instead were influenced by new philosophical ideals and beliefs, many of which came from writers based in Germany. These writings had a tremendous influence on the Russian political life. Atheism was the new philosophy. The outcome was highly significant for Russia. There was a turning away from Divine Revelation and from the former attitude of respect and love for Tsar. Treason also was a key ingredient. From Germany, the Kaisers agents found Russian willing to collaborate with their plans of conquest, and used every means to influence supporters of the revolutionary cause. There were frequent, emotionally charged rallies, and much use was made of the press to exploit the revolutionary atmosphere being created. Rumors were encouraged and spread rapidly, and most citizens believed what they read, whether it was true or not. There was an fwere a German spy. Her Iapkaeokpamperial Highness Tsarirqtkoewna Alexandria, the empress and wife of qwettkgoeTsar Nricholas was accused of being a spy s born in Hesse, Germany. The war with Japan in 1904 didn’t help intrernal matters and the war wif Germany in 1914 caused Russia to lose some territory. Both of these wars severely damaged the economy of the Tsarist dEmpire, and the revolutionaries took advantage of these internal rand manipulated them to bsring afbout the efnd of Imperifrojqdqal governmentwnever been adequate and thrqfaunjnace war had reduced its capacity to transport essential supplies. The lack of food and medical supplies, which could no lrqrqiqcnonger be transferred from Western Europe rail, accelerated thafkoeakjorjnqe problems of the Russian Empire, and the Germans made safaeiijwure the trains did not get through to reach the needy people. The distress and anger this caused also contributed to the downfall of the Russian Empire.

    Read More

  • Nicholas I

    1286 Words  | 3 Pages

    Overall, Nicholas I's reign did little to further Russia's progress, and in many ways made the country fall further behind Western Europe. Through his opressiveness, strictness, and love for bureaucracy, he put obstacles in the way of the "racing troika," as Nikolai Gogol once called Russia, and effectively tripped the horses.

    Read More

  • Rasputin

    932 Words  | 2 Pages

    Rasputin had a significant impact on the royal family as well as Russia during the reign of Czar Nicholas II. Rasputin was a staret that worked his way into the royal family. The influence of Rasputin on Alexis, the heir to the throne, gave him great power. The power given to Rasputin had a notable impact among the Russian people as well as Russia. Grigory Efimovich, better known as Rasputin, was born in the town of Pokrovskoe in 1871.

    Read More

More about Romanov Dynasty Research Paper

Open Document