AS History, Russia 1881-1924 (Edexcel Option D3)

ESSAY BANK

This booklet includes

1) Past Paper questions with associated Edexcel mark schemes

2) Exemplar questions with scaffolded answers from Derrick Murphy’s

Russia in Revolution, 1881-1924: From Autocracy to Dictatorship from

Phillip Allen Updates Student Unit Guide

3) Exemplar questions from Michael Lynch’s Reaction and Revolution: Russia

1894-1924, 3rd ed., from Hodder’s Access to History series

Important Note:

The type of scaffolding differs from each of the above three sources. The exam

mark schemes really show you how to get a Level 5, whereas the Phillip Allan

Updates and Access to History notes are more about what kind of detailed

content are required in your answer.

In the exam you will have no more time than that sufficient to write 800 words

for each essay. Do not exceed 1000 words when answering these essay

questions for homework. You need to develop the skill of getting your points

down in a concise manner with the necessary amount of factual knowledge to

evidence your points without getting in to too much detail.

1

1. To what extent did the Russian economy improve in the period 1894-1914? (From Access to History)

Focus on the economy only: ignore political and social aspects of the period.Evaluate the condition of the economy in 1894, and include an overview of industry and agriculture at that time.

What evidence is there of economic improvement in the period?

Explain the extent of the ‘Great Spurt’ in industry in the 1890s, coal and oil output

increased, foreign loans and investment.

What were the consequences of protectionist tariffs and joining the gold standard?

Evaluate railway production, especially the Trans-Siberian railway, higher national

production, a boost in exports and foreign trade, and growth of the urban industrial

labour force.

Contrast to any evidence of limitations of economic development:

Russia’s economic successes in the 1890s part of worldwide economic boom. In the

following global recession Russia suffered.

Witte’s neglect of light engineering and of agricultural needs, unemployment, famine,

and low per capita output were all a problem. Was the Trans-Siberian railway more

symbolic than useful?

In your conclusion compare the economy at each end of the period being considered. To what

extent did Russia modernize and industrialize by 1914?

2

2. How far were the economic reforms of Witte the most important development within Russia between 1881 and 1903?

(Phillip Allan Updates)

Period of modernization to catch up with the other European Great Powers led by Witte, but was it the most significant development?

Significance of Trans-Siberian railway and Witte’s financing and management of the project: economic consequences for Russia.

Other economic policies initiated by Witte: reasons for and consequences of expansion of capital goods. Geographical/statistical examples given to support points.

Other causes of economic growth: Vyschnegradsky and foreign loans in 1880s.

Failures of Witte’s economic policies: high taxes on peasants, rural resentment and failure to deal with famines led to regular peasant uprisings.

Other important developments: Growth of urban working class and urban social and economic issues.

Political repression under Tsars significant development. Police state, role of Okhrana. Russification and anti-semitism.

Evaluate Witte’s economic reforms in wider context of all major developments in Russia between 1881-1903.

3

Past Paper Question: Jan 2009

3. How far were divisions among its opponents responsible for the survival of Tsarist rule in the years 1881–1905?

The question is focused on the challenges mounted to Tsarist rule in the given period, and the extent to which divisions among opposition groups contributed to their failure.

Answers may consider the four main strands of opposition, their internal divisions and their intolerance of each other.

A tradition of revolutionary activity was established by the Populists and their appeal to the peasants, though they were weakened by the assassination of Alexander II and the repression established by Alexander III.

The Social Revolutionaries tried to gain support among both peasants and townspeople, but were divided between anarchists and revolutionaries.

The Social Democrats split into Bolsheviks and Mensheviks at the 1903 Congress.

The Liberals did not establish distinctive parties until after the 1905 Revolution.

Explain how the use of the Okhrana, Police and Army were used to oppress opposition.

Mark Scheme:A simple description of some of the revolutionary parties will be marked within Levels 1 and 2, and progression will depend on the range and depth of relevant material. Responses at Level 3 will begin to address causation but may include significant descriptive or narrative material.

At Level 4 candidates will offer reasonable range and depth of appropriate material and will address reasons for the failure of effective opposition to Tsardom, such as the role of the Okhrana, police and army.Those who can offer some evaluation of the failure of the reformers and revolutionaries, will access Level 5.

4

4. To what extent was the lack of political reform the main cause of the 1905 revolution? (From Phillip Alan Updates)

The question asks you to evaluate lack of political reform as the main cause of the 1905 revolution by comparing it in significance to other causes.

Outline political structures in Tsarist Russia; repression of political parties and limitations on local elections. To what extent parties demanded political reforms?

Evaluate extent of political reforms and the creation of the Duma as a means to stop the revolution once it had started. Who did the Duma appease?

Put demands for political reform in the wider context of demands for social and economic change.

Explain the demands of peasants and the causes of their social and economic conditions led to demands for reform.

Explain how rapid industrialization and urbanization led to poor working and living conditions in towns and cities, which led to urban working class revolutionary activity.

Evaluate the impact of the military defeats in the Russo-Japanese war on attitudes towards the Russian government.

In your conclusion weigh up the political forces against the social and economic forces that led to the revolution.

5

Past Exam Paper, June 2010

5. How far do you agree that the use of repression was the main reason for the weakness of opposition to Tsarism in the years 1881 – 1914?

The question is focused on the weakness of opposition to Tsardom in the years 1881-1914, and the significance of repressive policies in ensuring that weakness.

In 1881 it was a criminal offence to oppose the Tsar and his government: there was no parliament and parties had no legal right to exist. An important feature of this period is the constant use of the Okhrana to infiltrate and break up cells of opposition, and to prevent the publication and circulation of opposition newspapers and reforming tracts.

The assassination of Alexander II in 1881 led to a fierce crackdown on political dissent, and it was a feature of Nicholas II’s rule that he maintained this policy to 1914.

Opposition leaders, including Lenin and Stalin, experienced periods of internal exile.

Stolypin’s repression of opposition in 1906-11 suggests that the creation of the Duma had led to little change in government policy, which was only confirmed at the Lena goldfields in 1912.

Mark Scheme:

A simple description of some aspects of Tsarist repression will be marked in Level 1 or 2, and progression will depend on the relevance and range of material offered. At Level 3 will be answers which begin to address the significance of repression in muting dissent, but which may include significant descriptive or narrative material.

6

At Level 4 candidates will offer reasonable range and depth of accurate and appropriate material and will address some other reasons for the weakness of opposition. These may include divisions among opposition groups, including the split within the Social Democrats in 1903: the revolutionary programme of the Socialist Revolutionaries, the largest and most popular opposition group, and the ineffectiveness of more constitutional opposition such as the Kadets and Octobrists.

At Level 5 will be those who can offer some evaluation of opposition weaknesses by considering a range of relevant factors at work during the given period.

6. How accurate is it to describe the constitutional and land reforms of the years 1906-1914 as significant?

(From Access to History)

Focus on the two main areas of reform: firstly, the constitutional reforms of the 1905 October Manifesto and the creation of a legislative Duma; and secondly, the rural reforms by Stolypin.

Treat each area of reform according to its significant achievements and then its limitations.

Were Stolypin’s reforms significant because of their scope and vision? Or were they less significant because they were limited in their actual success?

Were the Dumas just the Tsar’s pawns, making no significant change from the autocracy from before 1905? OR were they significant in their practice and achievements?

Constitutional reforms good for: first elected legislative assembly in Russian history; Dumas met regularly and ministers were questioned, and to varying degrees, held to account. Committee system developed as a means for achieving reform and social reforms were enacted.

However, constitutional reforms were limited by Tsar’s Fundamental Laws; the first two Dumas were abruptly dismissed, and the third and fourth were elected on a limited franchise (ability to wield power).

7

Furthermore, you must consider government actions that limited political and social reforms throughout the period: government resistance to reform, restrictions on political parties, trade unions, media and individual opponents of the regime; Stolypin’s repressive policies; and the growth of repression, between 1911-1914.

In conclusion summarize how they were significant and how they were limited. Come to your own balanced conclusion.

Past Exam Paper Question, Jan 2010

7. To what extent did Russia undergo economic and political reform between 1906 – 14?

The question is focused on the years 1906-14, and requires a judgement on the extent to which Russia experienced a period of reform. Answers should consider both economic and political modernisation.

Economic Modernisation: Stolypin focused on agricultural reforms as a means of feeding the growing

population of the towns and cities, as well as ‘de-revolutionising’ the peasants. The abolition of outstanding mortgage payments and the creation of the Land Bank

were intended to create a class of prosperous peasants attached to the Tsarist system, while attempts to resettle peasants in remote areas and to abolish the strip system of farming were intended to boost agricultural production.

These reforms would take time to work, and the extent of modernisation was not clear when Stolypin was assassinated in 1911.

Political modernisation might be assumed from the creation of the Dumas, though they were hampered from the outset by the Fundamental Laws, which maintained the Tsar’s autocratic powers.

The first two Dumas were rapidly dissolved, with martial law and fierce repression used to quell unrest.

8

The third Duma was more cooperative thanks to the changed electoral system, and passed some useful social reforms.

The fourth Duma was even bold enough to criticise some aspects of government policy.

Mark Scheme:A simple outline of some of these points will be marked within Levels 1 and 2, and progression will depend on relevance and range of accurate material. Answers which attempt an explanatory focus with some support will access Level 3, though there may be passages of free-standing narrative.

At Level 4 there will be an attempt to analyse the nature and extent of economic and political reform, though the answer may lack balance.

At Level 5 will be answers which attempt to evaluate a number of relevant points, and which draw reasoned conclusions on the question.

8. How far do you agree that it was misjudgments by Nicholas II after 1911 that caused the collapse of Tsardom in 1917?

(Access to History)

‘How far…’ means you have to consider other factors that led to the downfall of the Tsar, as well as the misjudgments of Nicholas II.

Nicholas II failed to see the need to reform and make concessions, resulting in both an increase in opposition and a weakening of support for tsardom.

When considering Nicholas II’s misjudgements include, Nicholas II’s repressive policies resulted in mounting public disorder

before 1914. Nicholas II’s poor choice of government ministers after the death of

Stolypin in 1911. Government instability and the appointment of Rasputin. Nicholas II failed to limit court scandals, which directly affected the

public’s image of him. Nicholas II refusing to work with non-government organizations or the

Progressive Bloc in the Duma during WW1. This alienated the key sections of society who supported him: it was an aristocrat who took the

9

lead in refusing to disband on the Tsar’s orders in 1917. Nicholas II taking command of the army and so being associated with

military failures.However, you must evaluate his misjudgments in the wider context of the pressures on Russia’s institutions the war exerted.

Come to a clear conclusion to what extent you think it was his misjudgments that caused his downfall.

Past Paper Question, June 2010

9. To what extent does the impact of the First World War explain the outbreak of two revolutions in Russia in 1917?

The question is focused on the two revolutions of 1917, and the significance of the impact of the First World War in promoting both rebellions.

Answers may refer to Russia’s military difficulties from 1914, including defeats in the field, the inadequacies and shortages of military supplies, and the incompetence of the military leadership, including that of Nicholas II.

The domestic impact of the war may be assessed, including the rampant inflation, problems of providing adequate food supplies to the towns, and the dislocation of the transport system. The weakening of morale on the home front and the severe winter of 1916-17 all played their part in triggering the February Revolution.

How did the war also affect the Provisional Government? Explain how its determination to carry on the war meant that it faced many of the problems which had led to the overthrow of the Romanovs, and contributed to its own downfall in November.

10

Mark Scheme:

A simple outline of some events will be marked in Level 1 or 2, and progression will depend on the relevance and range of material offered. Those who begin to offer an analysis of the impact of war will access Level 3, although there may be significant narrative or descriptive material.

At Level 4 there will be an explicit attempt to assess the role of war along with some other relevant factors which led to revolutions. These may include the role of Rasputin and the Tsarina Alexandra, the power of the Petrograd Soviet, the Provisional Government’s failure to address the land question, and the single-minded determination of the Bolsheviks.

At Level 5 there will be some attempt to evaluate the significance of a number of factors which contributed to the two revolutions.

10 How far do you agree that the main reason for the fall of the Provisional Government was the skill and determination of Lenin in 1917? (Access to History)

You are being asked why the Provisional Government fell and you have to come a decision as to the main cause of its failure.You need to evaluate the significance of Lenin’s contribution in relation to the other factors.

The weakness of the PG: underlying weakness of dual authority with Soviet, weaknesses resulting of the strains of WW1 (these factors are not hugely significant alone: the PG was able to resist the July Days and the failure of the opposition groups demonstrated the disunity of the opposition groups and the Bolsheviks in particular).

What mistakes and misjudgments did the PG make when in power? How did the June Offensive weaken the PG’s authority? How did the PG underestimate peasant grievances? What were the PG’s plans regarding land reform? What sort of background did most of the members of the PG come from, and why would this affect their popularity in rural areas? What mistakes did the PG make during the Kornilov Affair? How did the Bolshevik’s benefit because of Kerensky’s actions rather than Lenin’s?

11

Assess Lenin’s leadership (‘skill and determination’): his call for a second revolution in the April Thesis, his success in creating a party with considerable drive and determination, and his political skills and belief in urgent revolution despite the reservations of Bolsheviks who believed in purer Marxist theory. The power of propaganda, ‘Peace, Bread and land’ and how it appealed to different sections of Russian society. How did he attract peasant support?

Other factors: the radicalization of Russian politics in 1917: what did the PG’s more relaxed laws regarding censorship and political activities have on political activities in Petrograd?

How significant was Trotsky’s ability to organize and manage the actual revolution itself? Was the Bolshevik success due to Lenin or Trotsky?

In your conclusion you need to make a judgment that places Lenin’s role in the fall of the PG in the context of the mistakes of the PG and the strengths of Trotsky’s role. Would Lenin’s skill and determination have counted for anything had the PG’s decisions been better?

Past Exam Question, Jan 2009

11How far was the Provisional Government responsible for its own downfall?

The question is focused on the events leading to the October Revolution, and the extent to which the Provisional Government brought about its own collapse.

The Provisional Government’s refusal to take Russia out of the war, and their inability to tackle the question of land reform, were both major factors in the growth of opposition to their rule.

Many of the domestic and military problems which had led to the fall of the Romanovs had not been tackled.

The nature of dual power, and the hold which the Petrograd Soviet held over the armed forces, also restricted their freedom of action.

12

Mark Scheme:

A simple outline of these points will be marked within Levels 1 and 2, and progression will depend on the range and depth of relevant material. Those who begin to offer a causal analysis will access Level 3, but there may be significant descriptive or narrative material.

At Level 4 there will be an explicit attempt to deal with the role of the Provisional Government and its failings, perhaps with reference to the Kornilov affair and its impact. There may also be some reference to other relevant factors, such as the importance of Lenin’s return in April, the July Days, the widespread breakdown of military discipline, and the role of Lenin and Trotsky in preparing for the October seizure of power.

At Level 5 there will be some attempt to evaluate the record of the Provisional Government, setting this within a broader context of the instability which followed the downfall of the Tsar.

12. How far was the weakness of the Provisional Government the main cause of the successful Bolshevik seizure of power in October 1917? (Phillip Allan Updates)

You need to evaluate the weakness of the PG as the possible main cause against other significant causes of the revolution.

Intro: Briefly describe fall of Tsar, consequent power vacuum, and outline nature of Provisional Government.

Analyse the weakness of the Provisional Government’s legitimacy: fourth Duma, promised elections in November, no support from the people.

Explain consequences of the Provisional Government having to share power

13

with the All Russia Soviet of workers, peasants and soldiers deputies, example Order Number 1 and its consequences.

Analyse composition of Provisional Government: narrow political base. Feb-July Liberals dominated but represented small part of population. Explain which parts of society and political spectrum were not represented and why the Social Revolutionaries and Bolsheviks were forced to seek representation with the All Russia Soviet.

Analyse significance of Provisional Government’s decision to continue fighting in WW1: cost, dis-organisation, poor leadership, failure of June offensive, lack of discipline, desertions.

Assess importance of Kornilov affair: fear of coups from the political right led to the arming of groups from the left, inc. the Bolsheviks.

Analyse Lenin’s and Trotsky’s role in winning power in October 1917. Political leadership of Lenin and military organization of Trotsky as head of military Revolutionary Committee. Use of Soviets, slogans, ideology and personality.

Conclude: had the Provisional Government failed completely? Were the Bolsheviks in the right place at the right time?

Past Exam Question, Jan 201013. How far was Lenin responsible for the Bolsheviks’ growing hold on power in the years 1917 – 24?

The question is focused on the strength of the Bolsheviks from 1917 to 1924, and the extent to which Lenin was responsible for the maintenance of Bolshevik power.

Answers may refer to the impact of Lenin’s return to Russia in April 1917, the April Theses, and the strategy he adopted to overthrow the Provisional Government and seize power. The decrees on peace, land and workers control were popular with many different groups, and the dissolution of the Constituent Assembly in January 1918 further

14

strengthened the Bolsheviks.

Lenin’s role in the civil war may be assessed, including the introduction of War Communism and the use of terror. The crushing of the Kronstadt revolt, the introduction of NEP, and structural developments within the Bolshevik Party, may also be considered.

Other factors which contributed to Bolshevik success include the role of Trotsky during this period, the importance of Brest Litovsk, and the Bolshevik image as patriots fighting foreign intervention during the Civil War.

Mark Scheme:

A simple outline of some of these points will be marked within Levels 1 and 2, and progression will depend on relevance and range of accurate material. Answers which attempt an explanatory focus with some support will access Level 3, though there may be passages of free-standing narrative.

At Level 4 there will be an attempt to analyse a number of factors which contributed to the Bolsheviks’ growing hold on power, though the answer may lack balance.

At Level 5 will be answers which attempt to evaluate a number of relevant factors, and which draw reasoned conclusions on the question.

14 How far was the Bolshevik victory in the Russian Civil War due to the leadership of Lenin and Trotsky? (Phillip Allan Updates)

Briefly outline causes of Bolshevik success.

Lenin’s political leadership: decisive, united Bolsheviks, ruthless with opponents, Created Cheka and Red Terror, explain how this led to secure control of area Bolsheviks controlled during Civil War.

Evaluate the importance of Lenin’s decision to murder the Tsar and his family in the course of the war.

15

Assess the importance of Lenin’s introduction of War Communism in the course of the war. How did the policies of war communism support the Bolshevik war effort? How did the Kronstadt revolt and Tambov peasant uprising change Lenin’s economic policies and how did this ensure the Bolshevik war effort could continue?

Assess Trotsky’s role in the Civil War. Military leadership and planning: Trotsky’s train, use of Bolshevik and tsarist officers.

Assess other causes of Bolshevik victory: how united were the White and Green forces? What were the military strategies of the Bolshevik’s opponents? What were their political aims? How did the geography of Russia affect results and what were the advantages of the area the Bolshevik’s controlled?

In conclusion, evaluate how success in the Civil war was due to Lenin and Trotsky, and how it wasn’t. How do these two categories differ in their significance?

15. How successfully did the New Economic Policy (NEP) deal with the problems it was designed to solve in the period 1921-1924? (Access to History)

You are being asked to make a judgment on the effects of the NEP with the focus on the particular problems it was designed to solve.You need to identify the problems it was designed to solve first, and so you

16

need to identify what the problems caused by war communism were. What were the problems of war communism: explain why low

investment, manpower and hyperinflation caused industrial output under war communism, and why there was low agricultural output and what caused the rural famine of 1921 (Cheka, de-kulakisation, drought).

What were the aims and approaches of the NEP? Retreat from pure state control, partly capitalist, aimed to promote industrial recovery and reduce famine. How did these aims improve industrial output and reduce famine?

To what extent did the NEP improve Russia’ economy by 1924? Ignore any economic problems in 1921 that the NEP was not designed to eradicate. How far did it promote economic recovery? What percentage increases in industrial and agricultural output occurred because of the NEP?

What were the limitations of the NEP? (Nepmen did well but high unemployment).

In your conclusion you need to make a judgment about to what extent the NEP was successful. How divisive an issue was the NEP after Lenin’s death amongst leaders of the Bolshevik Party? Compared to Lenin’s economic aims in 1921: was it successful?

16. To what extent had Lenin created a Socialist society in Russia by the time of his death in 1924? (Phillip Allan Updates)

17

Key question: What had become socialist and what hadn’t by 1924?

Briefly outline Lenin’s socialist aims and ambitions on gaining power in 1917.

Assess role of war communism: 1918 workers control in factories, fall in production, led to war communism. Outline what war communism was and how it was socialist. Treatment of peasantry during Civil War to feed cities, how it led to rural rebellion and famine.

Assess consequences of NEP on how socialist Lenin made Russia. NEP in March 1921. Allowed private business and trade, stopped forcible grain acquisitions: government maintained control of major industry. Assess how socialist economy was under NEP.

Explain how Lenin installed Bolshevik control over politics: dictatorship, Red Terror, use of Cheka, gulags, press censorship, propaganda.

To what extent had Lenin pursued socialism or continued oppressive regime of Tsar?

Conclusion:Evaluate to what extent Lenin had made Russia socialist: how socialist was the economy How socialist was social and political life of Russians. Evaluate significance of Kronstadt revolt in demonstrating how socialist Russia was by 1924. Also, how much impact did Lenin have in the last two years of his life?

18