Preview

Long and short-term causes that contributed to the 1917 Russian Revolution

Better Essays
Open Document
Open Document
2462 Words
Grammar
Grammar
Plagiarism
Plagiarism
Writing
Writing
Score
Score
Long and short-term causes that contributed to the 1917 Russian Revolution
Long and short-term causes that contributed to the 1917 Revolution

By early 1917, the existing order in Russia was on the verge of collapse. The spark to the events that ended tsarist rule was ignited on the streets of Petrograd in March 1917. Driven by shortages of food and fuel, crowds of hungry citizens and striking workers began spontaneous rioting and demonstrations. The Rominov dynasty was to end after 304 years, bought down by the March 1917 revolution. There were many long term causes such as the Nicholas personal ruling style, the Russian economy, and general feeling of discontent, but ulitimaly the outbreak of revolution was the caused by Russia entering World War I.

Nicholas was a weak and incompetent ruler. He allowed himself to be influenced by people who did not want any changes to take place in Russia. In Russia there were huge differences between the rich and the poor. About four-fifths of the population were peasants many of whom could not read or write. In the towns workers were squashed into very poor accommodation. The Tsars autocracy was very badly organized and caused many conflicts between the people and the Russian government. It had been like this for a long time and needed a complete change. The Tsarist system meant that the Tsar had complete power and authority. He was the head of the state and had control over the Russian Orthodox Church. All the important decisions were made in St.Petersburg, without asking the people of Russia what their views were - decisions that were made were announced by thousands of officials and bureaucrats. This angered the people as they felt the Tsar was ignoring them and did not care about their opinions. Nearly 90% of people were peasants and most were poverty stricken. Political parties tried to make use of these conditions. Peasants worked with the most basic tools. Half the farming land belonged to 300,000 landowners but the other half was shared with 15 million peasant families. In the cities and

You May Also Find These Documents Helpful

  • Good Essays

    Nicholas II came to the throne during an arduous time in Russian history. It was a combination of factors, including his political ineptitude that led to the fall of the Romanov dynasty and eventually cost Nicholas II, the Tsarina Alexandra and their five children their lives. Russia was late in modernising, partly due to the Tsar?s lack of reforms, and was behind Britain, France and the United States. Russia was also slow to emerge from feudalism, and was undergoing difficulty as industrial and agricultural production declined. Additionally, Russia was not socially advanced, as the peasants and working class had an extremely low standard of living, while the Royal Family lived a life of luxury. Politically, Russia was behind as there were no legal political parties, and the people had absolutely no power. The final event that pushed revolution to where it could not return from was World War I, which inflicted serious pain on Russia.…

    • 1455 Words
    • 4 Pages
    Good Essays
  • Satisfactory Essays

    In July 1918, the royal Romanov line was suddenly and brutally ended by the Bolsheviks. The Romanov family had ruled the Russian Empire for over three centuries. The Romanovs reign was one of strict tyranny. Tsar Nicholas II of Russia made one big step toward a more equal Russia by freeing the serfs but because the serfs owned no land they had little to no money still. After WWI when nicholas led Russia to a crushing defeat there was lots of unrest throughout Russia. I think that the main reason the Tsar was forced to abdicate the throne and then was slaughtered is that he made a more equal Russia but in doing so he made the serfs more impoverished than ever, that he had led Russia into multiple wars that had ended badly and that the technology…

    • 151 Words
    • 1 Page
    Satisfactory Essays
  • Good Essays

    War broke out in 1914, with Tsar Nicholas becoming commander-in-chief in 1915, meaning he was away from Petrograd. Not only was this poorly thought out by Nicholas because it gave the people an opportunity to plot against him, but as he was away he left Tsarina (also a German princess), Alexandra, in charge during his absence. Due to the war being against Germany, this made the Russian people nervous and skeptical towards the extreme power she had over them during such a crucial time. Not only were they disgruntled by this, but also Alexandra’s close friendship to Rasputin, a Serbian peasant. This particularly angered the aristocracy and middle classes as they believed they were being led by someone of lower demeanor than that of themselves. This weakened support for the autocratic rule and lost the Tsar many of his supporters, which put him in a vulnerable position in the case of revolutionary upturn. This also could have inspired the peasantry to discover greater aspirations and encourage their belief that they could have greater status which in turn could trigger new revolutionary ideas amongst the lower classes. This demonstrates a link between Nicholas being away in order to commandeer army movement for the war, however it is arguable that it was a lack of authority and respect for the Tsarist regime that caused the change of opinions towards the Tsar amongst all classes, lessening his support and leaving him far more vulnerable in the case of a revolution.…

    • 1166 Words
    • 5 Pages
    Good Essays
  • Good Essays

    All state leaders across the whole period held qualities that didn’t please the whole of the population in Russia. During the reign of Alex II, the government showed some strength with controlling opposition from the peasantry through the emancipation of the serfs in 1861. It was thought that to prevent revolt from below, this was a key movement that had to be made, and therefore prevented future unrest and opposition. However, the new liberated serfs had to deal with more laws concerning land ownership with led to further unrest and repression in the peasantry by the state. The state moreover, appeased the most vocal critics but in such a way that allowed dissenters to express themselves in the knowledge that Tsar’s decision would be final. Compared to Nicholas II’s reign, this showed a decisive leading technique, as Nicholas’s style was more conservative, and showed weakness, relying on others’ advice to fuel his decisions. A key failure throughout his period was the mixed rule attempt with the Duma introduced from 1906 to 1917, it is arguable that Nicholas II made concessions only to keep opposition temporarily at bay and that his aim was to uphold the principle of autocracy.…

    • 1646 Words
    • 7 Pages
    Good Essays
  • Good Essays

    The immense cost of the war led to dramatic price inflation in Russia; by the end of 1916 were four times those of 1914. Wages rose more slowly than prices, and this lag contributed to the revival of strikes in the capital at the end of 1916. Food supply was an additional problem, which led to an outbreak out of rioting and strikes in Petrograd and spread to other parts of Russia. This caused the first revolution of 1917, where on March 15th the Tsar was forced to abdicate from power and authority passed to a provisional government, made up of members of the Duma.…

    • 875 Words
    • 4 Pages
    Good Essays
  • Good Essays

    Tsar Nicholas II was a very poor leader for the people of Russia, he lacked leadership skills. His poor leadership qualities lead too many problems within Russia that were not dealt with efficiently. For example he did not trust the Duma, in 1906 the first Duma was introduced; after 72 days Nicholas dissolved the Duma as he did not believe in their policies and he did not trust them. This angered many people, Nicholas was not giving anyone a chance to speak and help him to change Russia.…

    • 1510 Words
    • 7 Pages
    Good Essays
  • Powerful Essays

    Nicholas Romanov was appointed as Tsar of Russia in 1894 and during his rule his fatal flaw was to address the concerns of Russia. Tsar Nicholas II was a conservative leader and possessed few of the skills that were vital to effectively rule the huge Russian population. He ruled Russia as an autocrat with his fantasy of absolute power rather than…

    • 2194 Words
    • 9 Pages
    Powerful Essays
  • Good Essays

    Essay On Tsarist Autocracy

    • 1209 Words
    • 5 Pages

    The Tsarist autocracy has succeeded for more than three hundred years, but the Russian Revolution that occurred on November 1917 ended the long term autocracy. During this time period, Tsar Nicholas II was the leader of Russia and indeed the last one. He caused Russia’s downfall and made many Russians frustrated about the government. The Tsar did not acknowledge the nation's problems and failed to improve the lives of the citizens. As the Russians struggled with limited rights and lack of help from Nicholas II, they had to make a move. Although peasant unrest led to the Russians protesting and rebelling against the country, the Russian Revolution occurred because of Tsar Nicholas II’s weak leadership, in which he failed to accomplished the Russian’s goals, horribly managed the military, and thought that the system should not change.…

    • 1209 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

    Tsar Nicholas II couldn’t stop the progression of revolution as he came to rule at a difficult time. He was out of touch with his people and was known as a leader that was no good, weak, hesitant; and extremely hard-headed. Tsar Nicholas II was at the time mainly concerned with his family issues instead of being focused on the political issues. He was also not prepared to efficiently rule a country where there was a massive variety of people with different languages, race, religion; and culture. It is reported that during Nicholas’s earlier years while his father was still in power, that he found government meetings boring and was not interested in the affairs of state. The Tsar wanted the country to still be ruled as an autocracy where the peasants and the working class had extremely below average standard of living, while the royal family live in a life filled with riches and extravagances.…

    • 966 Words
    • 4 Pages
    Good Essays
  • Good Essays

    Based on events in history, the main cause of the Russian Revolution was the state that the government was in and the conditions the working class was in. The Czar gave up his throne and the government began to be corrupt along with the build up of repression from the working class, who suffered for many years before, about to burst. These events set the basis for the revolution and grew with the circumstance of instability throughout the government and Dumas. Even before and after the abdication of the czar Dumas have formed and dissolved adding to the instability of the government as a whole. We see this here, “These disorders… Forced the government to promise the establishment of a consultive Duma, or assembly, elected by limited franchise.” (“Russian Revolution”) Along with this workers rioted for their working conditions and rations, soon enough the military refuse to break up the protesters and rioters involved. It now turned chaotic and violent. A peaceful protest gone bad was the influence for most of the violence because it was a weak spot to the government. The revolution caused an outcome of twelve years in suffering from a transaction of a different political standing. Negotiations came forth and at ended with Germany cutting in.…

    • 493 Words
    • 2 Pages
    Good Essays
  • Good Essays

    Firstly, the breakdown of social order was instigated by the leadership of Nicholas II. The Tsars’ archaic policy’s led to the persecution of racial minorities and oppression of the working class, which held Russia’s population majority and contributed to over half the nations’ income. Nicolas II was very easily influenced, which led to him being easily persuaded by his advisors and wife. His wife, Tsarina Alexander was a very strong believer of the autocratic system and believed that power should not be shared. The Tsarina was very politically strong-minded, however she was ill-informed. The Tsar often relied on his advisors to help make decisions, as he himself had not been exposed to the harsh reality of life in Russia. His lack of determination and his political naiveté led him into his decision to be the front command for the Russian troops in WWI, which would eventually prove fatal, as behind him, he left his ill-equip wife to lead with the highly influential Rasputin with her. The support from Nobles and army generals began to diminish, as they saw…

    • 478 Words
    • 2 Pages
    Good Essays
  • Good Essays

    Nicholas II came into the throne with a mutual attitude as his grandfather, Alexander II. He listened to ministers who recognised the necessity of economic modernisation, but failed to see the potential degree of political change if implemented. Albeit, Tsar Nicholas II’s idea of Russia’s future was one of modernisation and economic development, however with the combination of the political system that still retained the traditional features of autocracy, it looked potentially slim. The Tsar failed to recognise and adapt to the social and economic changes that had taken place. Expressions such as the emancipation under the great reforms of 1860 that made peasants freer and more prosperous gave birth to various political groups, which could no longer tolerate the Tsar’s unquestionable autocratic obedience as acceptable. These social and economic changes were largely accountable for the great revolutionary outburst in 1905. The defiance wasn’t only coming from the side of peasants and the urban workforce in general, but also from the literate middleclass who could no longer stand the autocratic state, consequenting in the establishment of secret political groups and opposition to the Tsar Nicholas II such as social democrats, comprising of Bolsheviks, Mensheviks as well as Kadets and many other social revolutionaries. The…

    • 843 Words
    • 4 Pages
    Good Essays
  • Good Essays

    The serfs were "freed", the provisional government failed and the czar made serious mistakes. The serfs were "freed" then again got tooken over by the Communist party and were told what to do, where to live, and where to work. The provisional government failed fatefully by continuing war against Germany and got defeated. The czar, well he made a couple of serious mistakes. He fought in the Russo-Japanese War and got defeated. Then he went to war with Austria and Germany and got defeated. The last mistake he made was moving the headquarters to the front and leaving the Russian government under the Alexandra's hands. Conditions were desperate under her rule. The Russian Revolution should have never happened because so many Russian lives were lost under the Russian…

    • 942 Words
    • 4 Pages
    Good Essays
  • Good Essays

    Nicholas seemed not to understand the real nature of the problems his nation and his dynasty faced. Firstly, what the tsar’s power showed was how little Russia had advanced politically compared with other European nations. By the beginning of the twentieth century all major western European countries had some form of democratic or representative government. Not Russia, it had remained outside the mainstream of European political thought. There had been reforming tsars (Peter I, Alexander II) but achievements had not included the extension of political rights. In Russia in l894 it was a criminal offence to oppose the tsar or government, political parties had no legal right to exist, there had never been a free press in imperial Russia and government…

    • 821 Words
    • 4 Pages
    Good Essays