paper 3
alex II historiography - good
“with the possible exception of Khrushchev, no other Russian leader did so much to reduce the suffering of the Russian people” (J. N. Westwood)
alex II historiography - bad
failed to address social and economic problems - increased tensions between peasants and aristocrats - contributed to end of tsardom (Pipes)
emancipation decree
1861
alex III reign
1881-1894
alex II reign
1855-1881
duma period
1906-1917
feb 1917 historiography
spontaneous and decentralised movement - did not lead to any significant change - temporary upheaval (Pipes)
fuelled by food shortages and military defeats - significant turning point in russian history - petrograd soviet played a large role in counterbalancing the PG (Westwood)
oct 1917 historiography
bolshevik coup - Lenin is responsible - they took advantage of the political instability - undemocratic + violent - communist dictatorship (Pipes)
led more by radicalised peasants - revolution was delivered from below (Fitzpatrick)
lenin’s ussr historiography
ruthless and power-hungry — disastrous economic policies (Pipes)
genuine commitment to a more equal society - new soviet identity (Fitzpatrick)
reactions to reforms (Alex II)
1870s
ascension of nicholas II
1894
first revolution, creating of duma, october manifesto
1905
feb 1917 revolution
inflation = riots — loss of control of army — unplanned — nicholas II abdicates — PG in charge
oct 1917 revolution
bolshevik coup — storming of Winter Palace — Lenin in charge
war communism, treaty of brest-litovsk
1918
new economic policy
1921
treaty of rapallo (russia + germany)
1922
lenin’s death
1924
J. N. Westwood
british traditionalist historian of modern russia, criticised for neglecting cultural and social factors
alex III historiography (bad)
tried to suppress cultures - russification - weakened zemstvos and reintroduced a diluted form of serfdom - wanted to secure the tsardom at the expense of the population (Westwood)
alex III historiography (good)
highly reactionary - helped stabilise russia after political upheaval - necessary to prevent civil war - missed opportunity to modernise russia (Pipes)
land captains
1889
stolypin
agrarian reforms: increase private peasant land ownership
harsh leader: noose = stolypin’s necktie
tried to provide stability
stolypin historiography
reforms were a step in the right direction - sought to modernise Russia (Pipes)
reactionary figure - wanted to preserve the power of the Tsar - reforms were inadequate (Fitzpatrick)
alex III counter reforms
abolished zemstvos, tightened censorship, improvement in infrastructure (steel, oil)
1905 revolution causes
russo-japanese war, bloody sunday, food shortages
sheila fitzpatrick
revisionist australian social historian — criticised for over-simplifying
richard pipes
conservative american historian, biased against USSR after being polish refugee
nicholas II historiography (good)
tried to modernise russia’s economy and society - “moral politician” (Multatuli [related to Tsar = bias])
nicholas II historiography (bad)
politically incompetent (Pipes)
martin sixsmith (foreign correspondant in ussr)
trotsky was a military genius