The Russian Revolution Essay 1 - The Pillars of Autocracy

Potential Questions “The authority of the Tsarist state was never seriously challenged 
in the years before 1905.” How valid is this view? How secure was the Tsar’s hold on power in the years before 1905? Before 1905, opposition groups were unable to effectively 
challenge the authority of the Tsarist state. How valid is this view? What is the shared focus of all 3 questions? What do you think the two sides of the argument would be?

'To the emperor of all Russia belongs the Supreme and unlimited power' Background Autocracy - Tsar Nicholas 
ruled Russia, and there was no 
legal or political controls on his 
power. 'People do not influence events. 
God directs everything and the 
Tsar, as God's anointed, should 
not take advice from anyone' - Tsar Nicholas II Fundamental Law - 'To the emperor of all Russia belongs the Supreme and unlimited 
power'

Read p 4-8 p 2-15 p 202-204 Task 1 Describe how Russia was ruled before 1905. Within this, you should explain what is meant by the term 'autocracy'. Task 2 Explain why ruling Russia was a difficult task. You should include a list of the different political opponents of the Tsar.

The Okhrana Orthodox Church The Army Pillars of Autocracy Russification Weakness of Political Groups Censorship

In black pen, describe what the Okhrana actually did. Read Article 1.docx Article 2.docx p 205 p 124-125 Task 1 In black pen, describe what the Okhrana actually did. Task 2 In green pen, explain why the Okhrana can be considered successful. Task 3 In red pen, explain why the Okhrana can be considered to be a limited 'pillar'.

Evaluation of the Okhrana Which side do you agree with? 'No subject of the Tsar...could sleep securely in his bed in the knowledge that his house would be subject to a search, or he himself to arrest'. Orlando Figes or '....the regime lost the battle to win hearts and minds in the war against terror.' - Iain Lauchlan

In black pen, describe what the Orthodox Church actually did. Read Article 3.docx p 206-207 p4-5 p 9-11 Task 1 In black pen, describe what the Orthodox Church actually did. Task 2 In green pen, explain why the Orthodox Church can be considered successful. Task 3 In red pen, explain why the Orthodox Church can be considered to be a limited 'pillar'.

Evaluation of the Orthodox Church: Which side do you agree with? 'The Church was an essential propaganda weapon and a means of social control'. Orlando Figes or ‘Impoverished, isolated and identified with the autocracy, the clergy commanded neither love nor respect’ - Richard Pipes

In black pen, describe what the army actually did. Article 4.docx Read p 205-206 p4-5 Task 1 In black pen, describe what the army actually did. Task 2 In green pen, explain why the army can be considered successful. Task 3 In red pen, explain why the army can be considered to be a limited 'pillar'.

Evaluation of the army: Which side do you agree with? 'Nothing was closer to the Romanov court or more important to it than the military'. Orlando Figes or ‘The government's treatment of the army provoked growing resentment among Russia's military elite’ - Orlando Figes ‘There were growing tensions between the military - in every rank- and the Romanov regime' - Orlando Figes

In black pen, describe what russification was. Read p 207-208 p39 p12-13 p45-58 Task 1 In black pen, describe what russification was. Task 2 In green pen, explain why russification can be considered successful. Task 3 In red pen, explain why russification can be considered to be a limited 'pillar'.

Evaluation of russification: 'Many of the nationalist leaders saw that their country's interests would be best served by preserving the union with Russia'. Orlando Figes or 'The effect of the russification campaign was to drive the non-Russians into the new anti-Tsarist parties'. Orlando Figes ‘The russification policy cannot be called a success. Importantly, valued friends such as the Finns and the Armenians were alienated.’ - Martin McColgan

In black pen, describe what censorship involved. Read p 206 p13-14 Task 1 In black pen, describe what censorship involved. Task 2 In green pen, explain why censorship can be considered successful. Task 3 In red pen, explain why censorship can be considered to be a limited 'pillar'.

Evaluation of censorship: 'The tsars and their ministers were afraid to let go the reins of power, and the result was...suffocating...censorship which prevailed until 1905.' - Marianna Choldin or 'For all its formidable rules, imperial censorship was not strictly enforced. It was a nuisance, not a barrier, to the free flow of ideas'. Richard Pipes

In black pen, describe political opposition to the Tsar. Read p 204 Task 1 In black pen, describe political opposition to the Tsar. Task 2 In green pen, explain why political opposition can be considered a serious problem. Task 3 In red pen, explain the limitations of political opponents.

Viewpoint 1 The Tsar was secure in power before 1905. The Okhrana and the army could intimidate and suppress opposition effectively. The Orthodox Church and censorship helped to mold what people thought, and russification showed the level of control that Nicholas was able to exert over his enormous empire. As a result, political opponents had little impact on the tsarist state, especially as they were so divided in their aims and methods. Viewpoint 2 The Tsar's reliance on his 'pillars' indicate a regime that was afraid and insecure. As Russians became more urbanised, more educated and more political, the old order of the Orthodox Church, censorship and russification held less and less influence. The very fact that the Tsar felt the need to have the Okhrana, and the frequent deployment of the army, would suggest that in reality, the tsarist state was fundamentally weak, and becoming weaker.

Attachments Article 2.docx Article 1.docx Article 3.docx Article 4.docx