The decline of the Romanovs and the Russian revolution occurred due to varying influences externally and internally. The social and economic state of Russia and the changes transpiring had a large impact of the fall of the Dynasty. The actions of the Tsar and the influence from figures such as Rasputin helped to create discontent in Russian society. The character of Nicholas also helped to increase the social uprising and it was seen clearly that he lacked the capacity to effectively lead a country. The introduction of revolutionary ideas assisted sealing the fate of the Tsar.
This meant serfdom was already coming to its own natural end, and for Alexander II to support his nobles he had to emancipate the serfs so they could go start increasing their wealth and get out of debt. Serfdom was also holding Russia back, with the rest of Europe liberalising and making vast economic progress Russia’s economy was starting to look inferior and for them to advance as a nation they had to increase productivity of the serfs and the simple solution was to emancipate them. The serfs were inefficient and had a low productivity due to poor farming methods and constantly being oppressed by their nobles. This oppression and poor farming was caused by the extremely conservative rule which refused to modernise, had the Tsar modernised the farming techniques and stopped the
Hence, though peasant life was at its best in its history, all these reforms did for the majority was ignite the hope that more liberating reforms were to come. Unfortunately the untimely assassination of Tsar Liberator by the extremist group, ‘The Peoples Will’ led to the rise in power of Alexander 3rd, who’s views towards the ruling of Russia differed greatly from his fathers. Many of the liberties granted through the reforms were stripped by Alexander 3rd’s own reforms. Peasants control over courts was restricted as courts for government opponents became government controlled. Many government opponents would have been protesting about how unfair the Russian system was towards peasants and hence through trial by jury, they would have been sympathised with.
The areas to investigate include political, economic, social and military reforms from the Russian government in order to see if they are ‘reluctant reformers’ or not. Socially, Alexander II introduced arguably the most radical reform in 1861 by emancipating the serfs and granting peasants freedom. This is by far the reform that affected the population most widely in the period – by granting this, peasants were allowed to own themselves in body and soul and could dictate their own lives as far as they could. Class bias was reduced and education was given more widely across Russia, regardless of social standing. This certainly fights against the view that Alexander II was reluctant in his reforms on the surface – however, once investigated, the limits of emancipation are clear.
However, the ruling class enacted to squeeze and exploit with their political power, which sharpened the contradiction and resulted in the uprisings. The nobles had to make concessions to increase the salaries and reduce the land rent. Due to most of the nobles’ income was from land, it caused the tremendous decrease of the income and put their finance into a difficult situation. The suzerainty of the nobles was lowered while merchants and financiers took the opportunities to grab more money and become the main decision maker in the government. It weakened the political power of the original ruling class.
However this was not the only problem that showed why they were so short-lived. * Left behind with The problems that the Tsar had faced were still very prominent. * War – continued to fight for loan and duty. * People of Russia wanted to get out war – what the Bolsheviks were offering, whereas Kerensky saw it as defensive war. * Lost terriorty in Poland & Western Russia – PG were blamed for losses just like the Tsar was when took charge.
Other factors include political issues which were made worse by the Tsar’s lack of understanding of the proletariat society and the poor living and working conditions which were caused due to the Tsar’s … to run a country. All these factors link back to Tsar Nicholas II and imply that Tsar Nicholas was very much to blame for the downfall of the Romanovs in 1917. However, some historians argue that it wasn’t the fault of Tsar Nicholas II and claim that the fall of the Romanovs was down to Nicholas II inheriting a bad situation from his father Alexander III. They also say that Rasputin’s involvement, which had nothing to do with Nicholas II, played a part in the downfall of the Romanovs. Some historians even put the fall of the Romanovs down to the Russian people as they claim that Nicholas made reforms and attempted to listen to the people however, the Russian people were just unhappy.
They saw both slaves and indentured servants as property and could abuse that power as they saw fit. Many slaves and indentured servants simply did not live- the rate of death seems horrific by today’s standard of living in the United States. Both could earn their freedom, but each individual case was as different as the masters they
The laws enlisted upon Athens were Draco’s laws, which pitted the wealthy against the poor and started this entire divide between social classes. Following Draco’s laws, the poor citizens had to mortgage parts of their lands to wealthier citizens in exchange for food and seeds for plants. This resolved in many poor citizens enslaving themselves to clear their debts (3). While, Solon’s laws were not as severe and also covered most aspects of society, including: marriage, economy, crime, punishment and politics. Although, Solon’s laws did not establish a democracy, they were a crucial step towards Athenian democracy.
Opposition to the Tsarist regime increased due to a number of reasons many of which could have been helped and others that were more natural. The key aspects of the opposition of the Tsars was Wittes programme of industrialisation, which while vital to Russia, exchanged the loyalist peasants into the disgruntled working class. While there were problems that the Tsar could not control such as the great amounts of other nationalities wanting independence and resisting Russification, such as the Poles and Jews. In 1881 opposition started due to ordinary people having little to no rights, as it was a criminal offence to question the Tsar and with no parliament to try and change the course of their country they would have to rely on the rich autocratic Tsar to decide to make changes to help the common people. As the government had strict censorship on books and journals when information did get through it would usually be made even more powerful as the government had attempted to ban it.