Preview

How Far Was Ww1 the Main Cause of the Fall of the Romanovs in February 1917?

Good Essays
Open Document
Open Document
735 Words
Grammar
Grammar
Plagiarism
Plagiarism
Writing
Writing
Score
Score
How Far Was Ww1 the Main Cause of the Fall of the Romanovs in February 1917?
How far was WW1 the main cause of the fall of the Romanovs in February 1917?

Tsar Nicholas II was the head of the Romanov family who had ruled Russia for five generations from 1613 to 1762. When Nicholas had inherited the throne he married Alexandra Fyodorovna of Hesse, who was from Germany. They had five children together, but their popularity was starting to fall by 1914. When there was the outbreak of the war, the Russian people criticised Alexandra’s German heritage and Nicholas’s failure to treat Russia’s social, political and economic problems caused further discontent among the Russian people.
In 1905, Nicholas made himself Commander of the Russian Military and left Petrograd for his new military headquarters on the war front. Because he had left, the Tsarina Alexandra was left to rule. Her most trusted advisor was a faith healer called Grigori Rasputin. Because of him, Alexandra became very paranoid and appointed and dismissed government officials at her own personal choice. Russia had 4 different Prime Ministers who were appointed in 16 months and their policies all varied from repressive to oppressive. Rasputin was murdered in 1916 by some of his opponents, and Alexandra who was left alone to rule tightened her grip on authority over the Russian people.
While this was happening, World War 1 was not going well for Nicholas, who had still not won a large battle which he could tell the people about. This meant that most of the Russian moral had gone and the war effort had lost all of its momentum first gained. Also the severe winter did not help, it meant that there was a shortage of food for all classes of people, and the means of transport were disabled.
The anarchy in Petrograd was finally brought to the attention of Nicholas, but only a limited amount because the reports were censored. It was not until he tried to return to Petrograd that he realized how many strikes there were and how critical they were to Russia. This was just like the Tsar’s

You May Also Find These Documents Helpful

  • Satisfactory Essays

    5. How far was Nicholas II responsible for the fall of the Romanovs in 1917?…

    • 313 Words
    • 2 Pages
    Satisfactory Essays
  • Powerful Essays

    Summary: Romanov Dynasty

    • 4116 Words
    • 17 Pages

    This was a disastrous move as it left Alexandra in control back in the cities. She had become increasingly under the influence of the one man who seemingly had the power to help her son, Alexis, afflicted by haemophilia. Alexandra believed that Rasputin was a man of God and referred to him as “Our Friend”. Others, appalled at his influence over the tsarina, called him the “Mad Monk” – though not in public unless they wanted to incur the wrath of Alexandra. Rasputin brought huge disrepute on the Romanov’s. His womanising was well known and he was considered by many to be debauched. Rasputin was a great believer in the maintenance of autocracy. 'The growing influence of Gregory Rasputin over the Romanov’s did a great deal to damage the royal family ' - Historian Chris Trueman. Ironically, with the devastation that World War One was to cause in Russia, it was Rasputin who advised Nicholas not to go to war as he had predicted that Russia would be defeated. As his prophecies seemed to be more and more accurate, his influence within Russia increased. Rasputin had always clashed with the Duma. They saw his position within the monarchy as a direct threat to their position. Alexandra responded to their complaints about Rasputin’s power by introducing legislation that further limited their power. 'Rasputin brought huge disrepute on the Romanov’s ' - Historian Chris Trueman.…

    • 4116 Words
    • 17 Pages
    Powerful Essays
  • Good Essays

    After the riots of 1917, the Tsarist regime collapsed, and many would argue that it was mainly as a result of the First World War beginning in 1914.…

    • 1166 Words
    • 5 Pages
    Good Essays
  • Good Essays

    World War 1 was a crucial and defining factor which led to the collapse of the Romanov Dynasty in February, 1917. Without it a revolution would not have happened at this point in time. This is not to say a revolution would not have eventually happened, as there were many other contributing factors that sparked the revolution. However, what World War 1 essentially did was to heighten discontent throughout society enough for it to revolt.…

    • 875 Words
    • 4 Pages
    Good Essays
  • Good Essays

    Nicholas I faced a multitude of problems when he ascended to the throne in 1825, first and foremost of all these was the Decembrist Revolution by Russian officers. Second was Russia’s crippling economic backwardness, and the slowly crumbling social systems of the old autocracy. Due to Nicholas the I Slavophil outlook on economics he had all but refused to modernise the Russian economy instead leaving it to sit stagnant whilst Western economies of Britain and France thundered ahead. This neglect of industry was keenly felt during the Crimean War where the allied forces of Britain and France thoroughly defeated and embarrassed the Tsars armies. The Russian army was terribly equipped, only capable of supplying 50%…

    • 958 Words
    • 4 Pages
    Good Essays
  • Better Essays

    Assess the role of Nicholas II in bringing about the downfall of the Romanov Dynasty in March 1917.…

    • 1391 Words
    • 6 Pages
    Better Essays
  • Good Essays

    The February Revolution of 1917 brought the 300-year-old Romanov dynasty to an end. I believe that the immediate cause of the February Revolution of 1917 was the collapse of the Tsarist regime under the gigantic strain of World War I. The underlying cause was the backward economic condition of the country, which made it unable to sustain the war effort against powerful, industrialized Germany. All the other contributing factors only had a slight impact, I believe that they were not as important as the Great War.…

    • 1065 Words
    • 3 Pages
    Good Essays
  • Good Essays

    Russia was still an autocracy, this meant that the Tsar had complete power and his rules and beliefs could not be challenged. The autocracy system was growing old, people in Russia wanted westernization and democracy, however Nicholas II opposed these beliefs. After the events of…

    • 1510 Words
    • 7 Pages
    Good Essays
  • Powerful Essays

    Assess the role of the Bolsheviks for the decline and fall of the Romanov dynasty.…

    • 2102 Words
    • 9 Pages
    Powerful Essays
  • Good Essays

    There were massive socio-economic changes taking place . This created a new class of factory workers . The working class , mostly the peasants - who comprised of 84% of the Russian population - were moved to the city to work in factories . Little could have been done about this as products had to be manufactured in the country , as trade routes were cut off due to WWI . On one hand , due to Tsar Nicholas II autocratic policies, there were no trade unions,to look out workers rights. For that reason living and working conditions were very bad . Workers worked for 14 hours a day and slept in overcrowded lodging houses , as illustrated by Father Gapon in 1905. On the other hand if the workers were treated better , they wouldn't have been so quick to go against the Tsar . His epathy further allienated his…

    • 789 Words
    • 4 Pages
    Good Essays
  • Powerful Essays

    The war had an adverse effect on the Russian economy. The rising cost of food caused food shortages. Industrial workers went on strike to increase wages and by the end of the war and a new government emerged following Nicholas II abdication. The already delicate domestic political situation in Russia would be imperiled by Nicholas II’s personal affiliation with the military wealth of his country. Any other military commander could be blamed for a disaster and then dismissed, but by taking personal command the Emperor would now take personal as well as political responsibility for all military failures. The crumbling of the Russian position in the field after he assumed command made such an outcome inevitable regardless of innumerable…

    • 1728 Words
    • 7 Pages
    Powerful Essays
  • Good Essays

    In 1917, a famous revolution led tsar Nicholas II and his immediate family to be abdicated from the Russian throne. The same year, the family was killed, leading to the Romanov family to end its several century long reign. But why exactly was the Romanov family killed? Did they not care for the wellbeing of their citizens? Were they simply just too corrupt for any good? There are several answers to this question, the main ones being governmental corruption, a belief of superiority, and an unreasonable amount of bloodshed in WWI.…

    • 1127 Words
    • 5 Pages
    Good Essays
  • Good Essays

    The Tsar’s flaws as a leader were an extremely important reason as to why he was losing control of his country. Russia was an autocracy- this meant that the Tsar had full control of the country and had the final say in every decision. This could have been positive, but I think it was a negative thing. He was not a very decisive person, and he would not delegate to others (An example of this being, how he interfered in the appointments of local midwives.) While he was busy doing the wrong jobs he needed employees that were capable of the best. Another flaw of Nicholas’ was that he was extremely suspicious of those cleverer than him and fired many of his best workers (Count Witte) and preferred to hire only family and friends. This helped to weaken his control on Russia because not only did he lose respect from his people, but also he was not doing his job and as the only ruler of the country, Russia did not have a focused authority figure.…

    • 1597 Words
    • 7 Pages
    Good Essays
  • Good Essays

    Soon after becoming Tsar he would ask Alix for support instead of trusting the “bureaucrats and sycophants” (Atchison). Nicholis would shy away and find himself lonely throughout his reign (Atchison). Nicholas II knew that his time as Tsar would be short lived and his people had grown tired and angry with him. He believed the only reason Russia was still holding “at the seams” was because of the monarchy (Atchison). This led to the Revolution in February of 1917 which was an “uproar” (Biography).…

    • 742 Words
    • 3 Pages
    Good Essays
  • Good Essays

    History

    • 1023 Words
    • 5 Pages

    Assess the view that the First World War was the main cause of the collapse of Romanov rule…

    • 1023 Words
    • 5 Pages
    Good Essays