Question Plans

‘There was more change than continuity in the ways Russia was ruled

in the period from 1855 to 1956.’ To what extent do you support this view?

Key Phrase is ‘More change than continuity’

Good starting point would be 1917 and the overthrow of the Tsarist system

This would suggest a complete break with the pastAutocracy overthrown, landed gentry lost power, the Church reduced in status

Elections organised in 1917 which would give Russia a truly representative parliament for the first time

But how much change was there?

• Constitutional Assembly dissolved• Lenin instituted One Party state • Forbade criticism of the Party• Lenin re-created secret police – the CHEKA• Introduced centralised economic control• Under Stalin growth of elite class• Leadership cult and use of propaganda• The Great Purges

Change or continuity under the Tsars?

Alexander II made fundamental changes to Russian society and made the first steps towards a more democratic/liberal society

It is important to question his motivesSome changes forced upon him as the result of Edict of Emancipation

Dismayed at reaction to the Edict Alexander II fell back on repression

Repression continued under Alexander III who aimed to undo previous reforms

Status of gentry re-established – Land Captains

Change or continuity under the Tsars?

Nicholas II introduced national Duma – first in Russian history

Technically Russia now no longer an autocracyHarsh methods used against demonstrators/protesters eg Bloody Sunday 1905 and Lena Goldfields 1912Policy of Russification forcing uniformity onto citizens in Empire

Persecution of specific groups eg Jews under all Tsars

Change or Continuity?

• Weak Duma• Secret Police• Autocrat supported by

small elite• Autocracy• Persecution of

minorities• Tsar worshipped

• Dissolution of Constit Assembly

• Cheka/OGPU/NKVD

• Stalin supported by small elite

• Dictatorship of the Proletariat

• Persecution of minorities

• Cult of Lenin

Turning points in Russian History 1855-1955

1. Assassination of Alexander II

2. The 1905 Revolution

3. The abdication of Nicholas II

4. The Bolshevik take-over in 1917

5. Stalin’s accession to power

1. Death of Alexander II

• Reign had given hope of new attitude towards reform

• Emancipation marked greatest change for centuries

• Death saw return to repression as tool of government

• Aim was to strengthen the autocracy

• Reforms were pragmatic

• Reign showed more repression than reform

2. 1905 Revolution

• Duma established – autocracy ended

• Stolypin’s reforms saw change in tack for peasants

• Dumas's power very limited

• Stolypin used force to regain control

• Small percentage of peasants benefited

• Consider reasons for reform

• How much change had occurred?

3. Abdication of Nicholas II

• Marked change in government – end of 300 years of Tsardom

• Introduced liberal govt under PG

• This led to Bolshevism – Dictatorship of the Proletariat

• One form of autocracy replaced by another

• Peasants still being exploited

• Persecution of minority groups continued

• Lack of freedom continued

• Better life for some

4. Bolshevik take-over

• Nicholas II’s abdication led to first truly democratic govt

• Ended War for Russia

• Lenin ended Constit Assembly

• Decree on Land

• Success in Civil War cemented control

• DoP established

• Little real change in the nature of Prov govt

• DoP = new autocracy• Centralised control of

economy• Peasant suffering

continued in long term

5. Stalin’s accession to power

• Accession saw imposition of personal control

• Huge changes for peasants

• Impact of 5 Year Plans

• Change in Russia’s status

• Link with Lenin• Stalin = ‘Red Tsar’• Exploitation of

peasants not new• 5 Year Plans =

Witte’s ‘Great Spurt’• Party bureaucracy =

gentry

Factors of change

Reasons why change occurred

• Trotsky described war as the ‘locomotive of history’. How far can it be argued that change in Russia in the period 1855 to 1956 was caused only by involvement in wars?

•  ‘Military needs were always the main reason for Russia’s economic development.’ To what extent do you agree with this judgement?

•  ‘The need to modernise their backward economy was the most important why the rulers of Russia introduced reforms.’ How far do you agree with this assessment of the period from 1855 to 1956?

 

War as a Factor of Change(1)

Impact of First World

War

War caused collapse of the economy and of the political system

Gave opportunity to enemies of the tsarist system

1914 Tsarist state still quite strong

Counter-argument

Russia in 1914 on verge of collapse – still far behind western powers in economic/social/political development

War as a Factor of Change(2)

Impact of Russo-Jap

War

Direct link with 1905 Revolution

Tsar forced to make concessions via the October Manifesto

Attempt at social engineering by Stolypin

BUT political changes limited – pragmatic? How likely without pressures of revolution?

Agrarian reforms were limited in scope – attempt to redress balance of industrial expansion?

War as a Factor of Change(3)

Civil War1918-20

Factories nationalised, small businesses seized, food supplies requisitioned = War Communism

War brought famine and suffering to millions

Kronstadt Revolt forced change of direction – introduction of the NEP

How significant was this?

War as a Factor of Change(4)

CrimeanWar

Huge social changeEdict of Emancip

Political changesEg local govt

Change to judicialsystem

Education andArmy reform

Serfdom had already been recognised as a weakness

Other factors of change?

1) Military needs

• Defeat in Crimean War triggered reform – Edict of Emancipation

• Under Witte economic expansion to strengthen Russia as Great Power

• Stalin’s ‘Socialism in One Country’ designed to defend new communist state

Other factors of change?(2)

• Serfdom already identified as major problem – holding Russia back

• Alexander II looking to strengthen autocracy• Industrial expansion under Alexander III &

Nicholas II result of wanting to close gap with West- not as result of defeat

• Stalin (as above) – expansion during time of peace – Lenin had left behind problem of NEP

2. Economic considerations

• Crimean War demonstrated backwardness of Russian economy

• Emancipation of Serfs pre-requisite of changing economic base

• Local government, legal and Army reforms have no link with this

2. Economic considerations(2)

Witte’s ‘Great Spurt’

• Argued that State must play major role in promoting industrial development in order to compete with other GPs

• Only effected transport and the peasants –did not lead to political or social changes

2. Economic considerations(3)

• Political changes introduced by Nicholas II NOT result of economic considerations

• Changes in regime in 1917 political not economic

• NEP introduced to save the regime?

• Stalin’s reforms linked with need to strengthen the state (like Witte?)