Brian Ernst 18th Century Russia...or Were There Two? There have been many historians argue whether the Petrine reforms and the reforms of the 18th Century Russian Czars caused a great rift in Russian society between the “world” of the nobility and that of the peasant majority, thus creating “two Russias”, that is, two Russian societies coexisting in the same era. To get to the heart of this debate, it is essential to look at the origin and development of both the nobility and the peasants in Russian history. After uncovering the developmental paths of each class, it is then necessary to look at the western movement started by Peter the Great and carried on by his successors throughout the eighteenth century. Specifically,
Nicholas II had tried his best to regain people’s support and stop the revolution tide through the reforms after the 1905 Revolution. After the 1905 Revolution, the Tsar still had to face the above problems. In order to prolong his rule, he was forced to reform Russia. At first, he agreed to set up parliament, Duma. It made Russia became a constitution country like Britain.
How significant was the work of reforming leaders in changing the nature of Russian government and society in the period from 1856-1964? Intentionalist historians such as Westwood, would say that the most significant factor for changing the nature of Russian government and society was the work of reforming leaders, such as Alexander II who carried out the Emancipation of the Serfs in 1861: “with the possible exception of Khrushchev, no other Russian ruler did so much to reduce the suffering of the Russian people”1. I agree with intentionalist’s views to an extent because reforming leaders did have a major impact in pushing reforms through however other factors of change must be considered. I also agree with a structuralist point of view, that the Russian people and key pressure groups like the Social Revolutionaries also played a significant part in changing the nature of Russian government and society. In addition, World War II introduced change through industrialisation, which was key to Russia’s success in the war.
Looking at repression, the problems they dealt with and how they solved them: the terrorist attacks and harsh punishments, reform groups and the black hundreds and finally the revolutionary ideas and closing of newspapers and trade unions. Then I will consider the reforms: poor, unhappy peasants and the abolishment of redemption payments and freeing of communes, underproductive agriculture and ‘The Peasant Land Bank’ and lastly the effect of the Duma. Overall I think that both the repressions and reforms had equal impact in stabilising Russia, but are also dependant on each other. Firstly, Repression, Russia had a terrorist problem during and following the 1905 revolution. In 1907, 1,200 government officials were murdered in political terrorist attacks by revolutionaries.
An outstanding individual involved in Russia’s development was Sergei Witte. As minister of finance from 1892 to 1903 he set himself the huge task of modernising the Russian economy to compete with the advanced nations of the West. It was Witte’s belief that modernisation could be achieved only through state capitalism. He was impressed by the results of the industrial revolutions in the West, and argued that the same ideas could successfully modernise Russia. However, given the backwardness of the Russian economy particular difficulties were presented.
As a noble man, Becket's loyalty is toward King Henry. Becket is a close friend of King Henry and would follow every command that he gave him: “While [Thomas Becket] wears the seal of England, [his] duty is to the king,” but Henry knew that “[Henry] would put a knife in [his] back.” Becket’s honor for Henry is shown when Becket gave Guinevere to Henry. Even though Becket loved her deep down, his honor to his king was stronger. King Henry gives Becket the title of Archbishop of Canterbury who anticipates conflict in serving both his king and serving God. Becket knew that there would be complications between him and the king.
In 1898, a new party arose in Russia, the Social Democrats; their aim was to achieve revolution in Russia by following the ideas of Karl Marx. Marx, a German revolutionary, had the idea that “the history of all hitherto existing society is the history of class struggles”; he described this as dialectic. Marx based much of his thinking about history, economics and philosophy; the French revolution had helped the German revolutionary to extend his ideas about the struggles between different classes in society. He came at a very convenient time for Russia as she was just beginning her industrial revolution, this promised revolutionaries to create the industrial conditions that would make a successful revolution possible. The 'great spurt' of the 1890s saw a formation of a new social class; the proletariats.
RUSSIA NOTES: OPPOSITION Themes: Division, strength of govt., disorganisation OR Intelligentsia, minorities, peasants The Russian Revolutionary Tradition Westerners Liberals (Intelligentsia etc.) look towards European ideas: Want Liberal democracies, Middle Classes, want industrialisation and technology, create a WC Socialism and Marxism led by intellectuals Russia is morally weak and outdated Humiliation in war (Crimea, RT, RJ). No longer “great power”. Modernisers (Libs, Marxists) Technocrats (With, Stolypin) support govt. and opponents Slavophils Looked towards Russian history Peasant communes (Mir) say socialisms already there (PC) Agricultural society (land) Religious purity/ racial purity of Russia Russia
Preliminary Modern History Task: Decline and fall of the Romanovs Alex Lai Due: Wednesday 28 March 2012 Under the repressive and conservative rule of Nicholas II from 1894 to 1917, the Russian autocracy experienced a failure in satisfying the demands of its populace. Through the reversal of earlier policy and further imposition of repressive policy, this inability to govern fuelled the mentality of revolutionists and secured the fall of Tsardom. Nicholas’ conservative upbringing concerning the maintenance of autocracy within Russia largely influenced his policy platform and how he responded to the various situations he encountered during his reign. His mindset was heavily influenced by his personal tutor, the arch conservative Pobedonostev, who possessed a concrete belief that autocracy was the only viable
'Chelkash' written by Maxim Gorky, a writer in the early 20th century Russian society, is the founding base for my theme, this boy, Gavrilla, he wants to change his life from the way that he grew up. Maxim Gorky really shows this with this story because Gavrilla wants to change from how he was brought up to being a new person. “”Give me that money, there's a good fellow! For the love of Christ give it to me. What do you need with it?