Extended Response Scaffold

Political Thesis

Cause

Autocratic rule

Harsh Suppression of Political Opposition 

Effect 

Widespread anger 

Increased resistance

Political Expand

• Tsar Nicholas II held absolute power and rejected political reform, continuing the Romanov tradition of autocracy.
  
  

• Free speech, protests, and opposition parties were banned, and dissenters were punished harshly.
  
  

• The Okhrana (secret police) used violence, censorship, surveillance, and exile to suppress critics of the regime.
  
  

• These repressive measures created widespread public anger and alienation from the regime.
  
  

• Revolutionary groups like the Bolsheviks and Social Revolutionaries gained support by promising change.
  
  

• Marxist ideas, especially among the Bolsheviks, gained traction as more citizens lost faith in the Tsar’s willingness or ability to reform.

Political Evidence 1

1905 Bloody Sunday

“The revolution has begun” - Georgy Gapon”

• Bloody sunday massacre: peaceful protesters marched to Winter Palace to request reforms, but soldiers opened fire, killing hundreds

Political Evidence 1 Evaluation

• The massacre shattered the public’s image of Nicholas II as the “Little Father” who cared for his people.
  
  

• Georgy Gapon’s quote, “The revolution has begun,” symbolised a turning point - loyal subjects began to see the Tsar as an enemy.
  
  

• Showed the regime’s willingness to use violence against unarmed citizens → exposed the harsh reality of political repression.
  
  

• Public trust in the Tsar greatly declined; many no longer believed peaceful reform was possible.
  
  

• Sparked widespread anger and motivated more people to join revolutionary and opposition groups.
  
  

• Highlighted the hypocrisy of autocracy: preaching care and unity, yet responding to peaceful protest with brutality.

Political Evidence 2

• Evidence 2 - October Manifesto

  The Tsar’s manifesto promised freedoms such as conscience, speech, assembly, and association, but these rights were often limited or ignored in practice.

  
  

  • The OM was a government document created by TN2, promising liberties including freedom of speech, assembly and creation of a legislative Duma.

  • Despite the promises, TN2 retained power to dissolve the Duma and veto laws, maintaining control

Political Evidence 2 Evaluation

• Although the October Manifesto promised freedoms and created the Duma, Nicholas II kept ultimate control by reserving the power to dissolve it anytime.
  
  

• When the First and Second Dumas pushed for more radical changes, Nicholas quickly dissolved them, showing he would not share real power.
  
  

• The manifesto gave a false impression of reform, which increased public distrust in the regime.
  
  

• Many Russians saw the reforms as ineffective and insincere, leading to ongoing political unrest.
  
  

• The failure to deliver genuine political change strengthened opposition groups and resistance to Romanov rule.

Economic Thesis

Cause

Poor working conditions

Widespread Famine

Effect 

Rise of revolutionary groups

Deepened economic resentment

Economic Expand

• Rapid industrialisation under TN2 led to long hours, unsafe working conditions, and low wages for industrial workers, causing strikes and growing unrest.

  • Projects like the Trans-Siberian Railway symbolized industrial progress but diverted resources and did not improve workers' living conditions.
    
    

• Despite the abolition of serfdom in 1861, peasants still faced heavy redemption payments, limited access to quality land, and were tied to inefficient communal farming systems.
  
  

• These conditions kept rural poverty widespread, and few peasants saw any benefit from industrial progress.
  
  

• The economic divide between the wealthy elite and the working poor continued to grow, fuelling resentment and deepening social and economic tensions.
  
  

• Economic hardship became a driving force for workers and peasants to support revolutionary groups that promised fairer conditions and redistribution of wealth.

Economic Evidence 1

• Evidence 1 - Low workers pay

  Early 1900s, workers received ~1 rouble /day, ($27 aud), workers lived in rooms w/ 16+ ppl

  In the early 1900s, workers received ~1 rouble per day for their work (equivalent to around $27 aud). (unable to afford basic necessities) 

  • 16 workers per dorms (lack of sanitation -> disease, low morale)

  • Wages did not match rising cost of living 

  • Industrialisation brought profit to elites, and worsened peasant poverty

  • Economic gains not shared fairly 

  • Highlights growing economic inequality

Economic Evidence 1 Evaluation

• Low wages showed the regime’s neglect of the working class despite industrial growth.
  
  

• Economic policies focused on increasing production, ignoring workers’ welfare and safety.
  
  

• Poor living and working conditions lowered morale and increased dissatisfaction.
  
  

• This neglect pushed workers to support revolutionary groups promising economic reforms.
  
  

• Nicholas II’s failure to improve conditions caused the Romanovs to lose support from the key economic class powering the country.

Economic Evidence 2

• Evidence 2 - Famine

  From 1881-92 Russia faced a Famine that killed 400k+
  

  • 1891–92 famine killed 400k+ people under Alexander III. Had lasting effects into Nicholas II’s reign. The regime's decision to continue exporting grain during the famine exposed deep economic mismanagement, leading to long-term resentment and loss of faith in the monarchy that persisted into TN2’s rule.

  • From 1881-92 Russia faced a large scale famine, killing 400k+ people

  • The government had a poor response, continuing to export grain while people starved, which sparked outrage

  • Decision revealed regime’s economic priorities (profit and global rep > wellbeing of ppl)

  • Famine exposed failures in economic policy and crisis response

  • Rise of revolutionary groups seeking to address economic injustice

Economic Evidence 2 Evaluation

• The famine highlighted extreme economic inequality and neglect of the majority peasant population.
  
  

• The government’s choice to export grain instead of feeding starving people showed misplaced priorities—profit over people’s lives.
  
  

• This failure damaged public trust in the regime’s ability to manage crises effectively.
  
  

• The famine sparked outrage and increased support for revolutionary groups aiming to fix economic injustice.
  
  

• Long-term resentment from famine effects weakened loyalty to the monarchy during Nicholas II’s reign.

Social Thesis

Cause

Neglect of peasant welfare

Elevated privileges of the notability

Effect 

Intensified resentment and class divisions

Increased peasant support for change

Social Expand

• Peasants made up the majority of the Russian population but lived in poverty with little access to land or opportunity.
  
  

• In contrast, the nobility and upper classes held wealth, political influence, and lived comfortably, creating a stark social divide.
  
  

• This imbalance led to growing frustration and resentment among the lower classes, especially peasants, who felt ignored and powerless.
  
  

• Russia’s rigid social structure made upward mobility difficult, preventing meaningful reform and trapping the majority in poor conditions.
  
  

• The Russian Orthodox Church (and its moral authority) reinforced loyalty to the Tsar and the existing hierarchy, discouraging dissent and helping to preserve the unequal status quo.
  
  

• Over time, this inequality fuelled class divisions and increased support for social change among the peasantry and lower classes

Social Evidence 1

• Evidence 1 - Peasants made up 82%

  1897 census: 82% of the population were peasants
  

  • 1897 census: 82% of the population were peasants.

  • Most Russians were peasants who lived in poor conditions w/ limited rights

  • Although serfdom had been abolished in 1861, most peasants remained tied to communal land and were burdened by redemption payments, keeping them in poverty and reinforcing their social inferiority.

  • Despite large numbers, peasants lacked political power and faced poor living standards

Social Evidence 1 Evaluate

• The large peasant population made social inequality a key cause of unrest.
  
  

• Nicholas II’s neglect of peasants pushed them to oppose the regime and demand reforms.
  
  

• Many peasants supported revolutionary groups like the Socialist Revolutionaries who promised change.
  
  

• The regime’s failure to improve peasants’ conditions increased social tensions and weakened its legitimacy.
  
  

• Growing unrest among peasants threatened the stability of Romanov rule.

Social Evidence 2

• Evidence 2 - Notability Power

  “the notability’s social powers were enhanced in return for an acceptance of autocracy"

  • The nobility’s social and political power was strengthened as they supported Nicholas II’s autocratic rule.

  • The Romanovs relied on notability to keep control

    • Granted them privileges in exchange for loyalty

  • Increased the gap between elite and poor, reinforcing social inequality

Social Evidence 2 Evaluate

• The alliance with the nobility increased social tensions and resentment from the lower classes.
  
  

• By favoring the nobility, the regime ignored the grievances of the majority, fueling opposition.
  
  

• This favoritism widened the gap between elites and peasants, reinforcing social inequality.
  
  

• The regime’s bias damaged its support and trust among most Russians.
  
  

• Social inequality under Nicholas II contributed to the growing dissatisfaction with the Romanov regime.