Nicholas II became Tsar in 1894, after his father Alexander III. In comparison to Alexander III, Nicholas had a weak character. He didn't have the personality of an autocrat: he disliked politics and preferred the arts, such as dancing, and he spoke both French and German. The main problem was however, was that Nicholas II was determined to upkeep the absolute autocracy of the Romanov dynasty. As Orlando Figes said, Nicholas II had the personality of a constitutional monarch, not of a Tsar. He was quite immature; he didn't trust his ministers, depended on his wife to make his decisions, and was even called "Nicky" in his 20s.
The big question is however: Was it Nicholas II's fault that revolution broke out in 1905? Or would it have happened to anyone in his place?
No comments:
Post a Comment