In terms of Tsar Alexander I, II, III and Nicholas I, what political reforms, if any did they impose in Russia? I'm having a little trouble understanding their main influence and objective on the Romanov Dynasty.
Also, how much was Nicholas II responsible for the fall and decline of the Romanov Dynasty?
Hey Claudia!
Like before, been a while since I studied this stuff, so in terms of detail (particularly on the earlier Tsars) I'm a bit lacking, but I can provide a general overview that hopefully will help you out! The overarching political landscape of pre-revolutionary Russia (ie. the Romanov Dynasty) was heavily autocratic, which essentially means "whatever the Tsar says goes" - even if (like in the case of good ol' Nicky) they were pretty uneducated on the subject of politics. I've briefly outlined each Tsar below, however I highly doubt you'd need to know them all in explicit detail, apart from maybe Alexander II and III.
Nicholas I- "personification of classic autocracy" and the "emperor who froze Russia for 30 years" (we really didn't learn that much about him other than that).
Alexander I - Overall conservative
- Had Speranski draw up a plan for constitutional reform, which was basically based around the idea of the separation of powers (however supreme authority was still held by the Tsar) - Alexander rejected this separation.
- Created a state council to review laws, but their reviews were only guidance and had no actual weight in the decision.
- Formed the 'Holy Alliance' - became a symbol of repression, revolutionary groups start to pop up.
Alexander II- Attempted some political reform
- permitting each district to set up a Zemstvo (basically a local council). Rights to elect members held by the wealthy.
- When threatened with terror by The Peoples Will, Alexander announced that he would grant the Russian people a constitution, but this never came into fruition, prompting his assassination.
- Planned to introduce a representative assembly
Alexander III- Cancelled his fathers plans to introduce a representative assembly (increase of autocratic rule)
- Overall repressive regime, staunchly opposed to political reform and persecuted members of society who sought this.
In terms of how much was Nicholas II responsible for the fall and decline of the Romanov Dynasty, that is really up for you to decide and argue within your responses. In my personal opinion... a shit tonne. He greatly exacerbated a lot of the political and revolutionary tensions of Russia by joining WW1, his fairly apparent apathy and ineptitude for the position and continuing to employ discriminatory and oppressive political and social policies. However you can't ignore that his processors created these conditions, and that revolutionaries were also influenced by other things as well, for example the French Revolution.
Hope this helps!
Home
Help
Search
Login
