How far does Alexander II deserve the Title “Tsar Liberator”? Prior to the reign of Alexander II, his father, Nicholas I ruled Russia under repressive and old fashioned policies. Alexander felt there was a lot of change needed to help boost the Russian economy. Russia’s economy was largely based around agriculture which was seen as backward for the time. One of Alexander’s reforms was to boom industries to start competing with the west who had more developed technology and whose economies were much more stable.
Vladimir Lenin was one of the leading political figures of the 20th century, he was the visionary that founded the Bolsheviks and masterminded the Communist take-over of power in Russia in 1917. Without Lenin’s leadership it is hard to imagine that the Bolsheviks would have been able to have such a growing hold on power in the years 1917-24. During the February Revolution, Lenin had been living in exile in Switzerland, he returned to Russia in April 1917 with the belief that Russia was ‘ripe for change.’ Many historians believe that Lenin’s journey was logistically and financially aided by the German Government, who hoped that Lenin’s return would spur revolutions, leading to imminent military defeat. Lenin arrived in Petrograd on 3rd April, his arrival was enthusiastically awaited and he was met by a large crowd cheering as he stepped of the train. However rather than greeting the Russian populace with warmth, Lenin immediately condemned the policies and ideologies of both the Provisional Government and the Petrograd Soviet.
Having dealt with Denmark and Poland-Saxony, Charles turned his attention back to Russia. Dismissive of the Russian performance at Narva, Charles had ignored Peter to his cost. Narva was Peter’s second campaign and was the first test for his newly remodelled army who were faced what were considered to be the best and most aggressive soldiers of Europe. The result was almost inevitable. While Charles concentrated on Poland, Peter had conducted small campaigns in other areas of the Swedish Empire.
Besides all this such industrialization improved the overall military capability of Russia. Therefore during this period Russia’s economy was dramatically and successfully transformed. Russia's industrialization was further hindered by the financial state of both its government and its people. The government was highly in debt and forced
A Tale of Two Tsars: Comparisons of the Regimes of Tsars Ivan IV and Peter I Philip Jia Perhaps no two rulers in the history of Russia before the Revolution of 1917 capture the image in one’s mind of the Tsar as completely as Ivan IV (“The Terrible”) and Peter I (“The Great”). Their very mention summons iconic images of the fearsome power and horrific excesses of the Russian monarchy from a Western perspective, while from a Russian perspective they evoke the idea of a “model” for absolutist rule, a mythos carefully fostered by the government during the Soviet period. In particular, the reign of Ivan IV has long been held up, at least in Western memory, as a key example of what is thought to be a long history of abusive Russian absolutism. Yet, while the rule of the former Tsar is often described as one of Russia’s most calamitous and that of the latter thought of as one of its finest, Ivan IV and Peter I had much more in common than is normally thought to be the case. Both Tsars were thoroughly progressive, bringing reform to Russian bureaucracies and institutions that had slowly stagnated.
Tsar Alexander III’s reforms were reverse ‘reaction’ of what his father, Alexander II, did before him to improve the country he ruled over. Repressive policies under Nicholas II were continued right up until early 1905 when Bloody Sunday took place outside Winter Palace and hundreds of Russian citizens were massacred by the Cossacks. It appears that there was extremely little, if any, political reform during 1881-1905. Political reform after 1905 began to rise. A clear turning point for politics in Russia was the publishing of the October Manifesto.
There were many factors that created a base for the reformist groups to flourish at that time in Russia which in turn created a Revolution. Alexander III was determined to upkeep Russia’s image as a major European power, unlike his father; however he was a conservative, believing that his father’s reforms were a mistake and took to reverse them as much as he could. The counter-reforms initially may have looked like a success due to the period of stability during Alexander III’s reign; however with the Revolution a few years later it seems to be that the counter-reforms were not as successful as they may have seemed. The political oppression resultant of these counter-reforms meant Russia politically was behind its major European counterparts, whilst England and France by now had a form of democracy, Russia was still being ruled by total autocracy, and this increased the resentment against the government and added to the growth of reformist groups. Because of the political structure in place in Russia at the time, without a revolution the only way change was possible was from the Tsar being willing to change things, the Tsar was not willing and he clearly demonstrated this through the counter-reforms, leaving an angry population
Prior to 1917, Russia was run by a Tsar, and its system of government was based on autocracy. There was much dissatisfaction with the Tsar during World War One, which led to his abdication – the March revolution. The provisional government took charge of Russia, whose authority and power was taken over by Lenin’s Bolsheviks in the second revolution in October. The Romanov family had been ruling Russia since 1613, but in March 1917, Nicholas Romanov II was forced to abdicate. Nicholas was a sensitive man with high pride and always preferred to be with his family rather than to involve himself in the running of his nation.
History Essay – Russia To what extent did Witte achieve economic modernisation in Russia? Russia saw a lot of changes in the years 1881-1903. A lot of these were due to Witte. The Russian empire wasn’t strong as it seemed and it was certainly not modern. Witte tried to change this with a series of projects, to help the economy and industry of Russia.
In many respects, there is no doubt that Alexander III was the most effective Tsar in such the short reign that he had. He was referred to as a reactionary, unlike his father Alexander II who was known as a reformer. He managed to please the people with his Russian figure and attitude, he changed their attitude and he made tsarism look all the better, all in a short period of time. Despite their different policies, they had the same ambitions inside their head in the long run, and that was to strengthen autocracy in the Russian empire but Alexander III did this by reversing what his father had done as he felt he knew better ways of dealing with the situation and strengthening the Tsarist position. The first thing that Alexander III did when he came into power to contradict his fathers’ reforms was to recall the decision of creating the constitution.