Tsar Nicholas II: The Causes Of The 1905 Revolution

Good Essays
Register to read the introduction… Tsar Nicholas II's reaction to the peaceful protest the workers staged, his inability to meet the demands of his people, and the rising prices and lowering conditions that came with World War I all led to the inevitable- a revolution. "Peasants burned the estates of their landlords, destroying everything they could get their hands on." (As It Was Lived: 4-18) This was an accurate portrayal of the behavior of the peasants after the events of the 1905 revolution, also called ‘Bloody Sunday'. The causes of this were severe food shortages, deteriorating living standards, and the fact that the Tsar did not allow any political involvement of the peasants. Famines and land shortages caused suffering of thousands. Also, Russia was losing the Russo- Japanese war, where the Russian army endured a …show more content…
I never wanted to become one. I know nothing of the business of ruling." (As It Was Lived: 4-18) Tsar Nicholas II uttered these very words on becoming Tsar in 1894, and he was right. The Tsar was a terrible leader. He was infuriatingly indecisive, and didn't know how to run the Russian government at all. Unable to manage the continuing strikes that had risen up all over Russia, he pretended that everything was all right and that the peasants were just making a fuss because they were ‘bored'. When the Duma (the Russian people's elected parliament, which had little power) tried to warn him of the seriousness of the situation, he ignored and dissolved them instead. This brewed even more hatred toward the Tsar amongst his people. The Tsar was also influenced very easily by people around him, especially his wife, Tsarina Alexandra. She in turn was being manipulated by a ‘holy man' called Rasputin, on whom she depended completely. Rasputin's influence grew through the Tsarina (whom the people hated), and even though he had little education, he gained recognition and authority in the Russian court. However, his influence was not one that was positive. Because of his bouts of drinking, womanizing, and ability to pressure the Tsar to do anything he wanted, he became one of the most hated men of the 20th Century. However, one of the very worst things Tsar Nicholas II did was to show the people how truly bad of a leader he was. Because of the growing …show more content…
This eventually led to the Tsar's downfall." (As It Was Lived: 4-18) All in all, the overthrow of the monarchy was inevitable and unavoidable, the way things were going. The peasants' reaction to ‘Blood Sunday', the Tsar's inability to look beyond his own interests, and the extreme conditions of WWI fueled the need for a change. Totally frustrated, the common masses of Russia were forced into rebellion and anarchy. Absolute disregard for their situation and needs led to the collapse of a country… and allowed communism to raise its head. If the Tsar had been a strong leader, or if the Russian people had just had a say in how their country was being run, the whole revolution would have been avoided. This would have altered the history of many countries that were affected by communism, and in turn the world, which was the result of the Russian

Related Documents

  • Decent Essays

    His incompetence was characterized by a proud tyranny that damaged his status and provoked both his opponents and supporters. Throughout his reign, Tsar Nicholas II had increasingly lost connection with his people. On his orders, Cossack guards brutally repressed the 1905 revolution, memorialized as ‘Bloody Sunday’, and the 1912 Lena goldfields protests. Suddenly, people discovered that their leader was not the caring idol they had previously idolized, but a ruthless official determined to keep order. His most grave mistake was when he took over full control of the armed forces in August 1915.…

    • 755 Words
    • 4 Pages
    Decent Essays
  • Decent Essays

    He was unqualified to govern Russia because he did not allow Russia to be more modernized and they lack industrialization. The citizens suffered and were treated as slave; they decides to revolt against Tsar. Additionally, Tsar’s wanted extreme power. He refused to share that power with anyone also not doing his job correctly. Also, his poor leadership in war led to the Russian revolution.…

    • 1177 Words
    • 5 Pages
    Decent Essays
  • Decent Essays

    The public heard of this and became uneasy with the idea, but Creon decided to do it anyways and disregarded what everyone was saying around him. This similar theme occurs in The Declaration of Independance also. The king of Britain let his power and pride get the best of him similar to Creon in Antigone which also resulted in an unhappy society. The people had no say over his “Tyranny over the States,” which cause the people to become angry and separate from Britain. Having too much power and unfairness usually comes from having one person speak for everyone.…

    • 1176 Words
    • 5 Pages
    Decent Essays
  • Decent Essays

    To what extent was Tsar Nicholas Responsible for the fall of the Romanov dynasty Tsar Nicholas was responsible for the fall of the Romanov dynasty and accelerating the russian revolution. Tsar Nicholas was a major cause of the downfall but his wife tsarina and Rasputin also contributed. The tsar left to the war which was already creating uproar in russia as it was weakening the economy, creating worldwide hunger and unhappiness throughout. Unhappiness lead to demonstrations that developed into political action against the tsar. Furthermore the tsar;s leadership and understanding of reality was abysmal during the war.…

    • 1200 Words
    • 5 Pages
    Decent Essays
  • Decent Essays

    Since Tsar Alexander III took away all reforms and brutally eliminated all opposition the people of Russia were not happy with the Tsarist regime and wanted to revolt. The revolutionary parties all had their own agendas as to why each of them wanted to rule Russia. The parties believed that their own way was the best way for Russia to be ruled but they all agreed that it was time for the monarch to be ended. Tsar Nicholas II was one man and could not be expected to control the whole of Russia alone. He entrusted the Tsarina and Rasputin to help him rule and they failed to do so in a way that would improve Russia and the people’s opinion of the Tsarist regime.…

    • 1333 Words
    • 6 Pages
    Decent Essays
  • Decent Essays

    As is states “Unfortunately, the Tsar knew little about the command and organization of large military forces, and the series of defeats and humiliations continued” (The Cause if the Russian Revolution). Politically, the Tsar was unaware of the command tactics. Anything could have gone wrong with the full authority in his hand. As aHe was inexperienced and due to the lack of experience in the field, he continued to lead the military force to disappointment and humiliations. Battle after battle was lost due to the Tsar.…

    • 1178 Words
    • 5 Pages
    Decent Essays
  • Decent Essays

    There was panic in the police ranks and the peaceful protestors were fired upon and charged at as they approached their destination. Journalists at the time estimated 4600 had been killed or wounded. Nicholas II wasn 't present at the time and didn 't directly order the troops to fire however he was blamed by the people for the outcome and was held responsible for Bloody Sunday. Nicholas II’s lack of strong leadership after the Bloody Sunday massacre made a significant contribution to the revolutionary situation because the people of Russia begun to see his incompetence as a leader. He was once called “Little Father” by the people of Russia, who adored him, however this was replaced with “Nicholas the Bloody” and the people of Russia’s attitude changed after the event.…

    • 1841 Words
    • 8 Pages
    Decent Essays
  • Decent Essays

    In May 1896, the coronation of Tsar Nicholas II only succeeded in highlighting the conceited opulence, indulgence of the Romanov dynasty, and the complete lack of caution regarding the ever-increasing discontent among the Russian peasantry of the late 19th century. The actions or lack thereof of the Tsar and his dignitaries to the tragedy that plagued the coronation itself emphasised the lack of compassion toward their citizens. While it is obvious to see from the collection of diary entries from the day of the coronation, not everyone in the Romanov dynasty was as Cold-blooded as the Tsar exhibited. Such as grand duchesses Xenia and Olga, who showed great concern over how Tsar Nicholas II conducted himself on the day, which in fact was just…

    • 864 Words
    • 4 Pages
    Decent Essays
  • Decent Essays

    The Russian and Iranian Revolutions have very similar causes: an ignorant leader. In Russia, the Tsar was taking Russia into a dead end. His first mistake was to take personal control over the Russian army, which lead to the people blaming the Szar for every defeat that occurred in World War 1 (Class Discussion). Following WW1, the loss of precious resources and the sacrifice of countless lives lead to Russia to be in a state of extreme famine and poverty (Jerry and Ziegler, 1). The crumbling army, food shortages, numerous uprisings, and taking away people’s right of speech and press in the proletariat class lead to a very successful February Revolution in 1917(Jerry and Ziegler, 1).…

    • 1056 Words
    • 5 Pages
    Decent Essays
  • Decent Essays

    Lenin imposed war communism to ensure victory. Farmer 's crops were taken without payment. Workers were forbidden to strike and were placed under military discipline. Farmers refused to plant crops because the didn 't want the government to take them. This led to a famine that killed 7.5 million Russians.…

    • 1196 Words
    • 5 Pages
    Decent Essays