HistoryThe History course consists of two units:

All students study Stuart Britain and the Crisis of Monarchy, 1603–1702

Students have the choice of studying either Revolution and Dictatorship: Russia, 1917-1953

or Democracy and Nazism: Germany, 1918-1945.

At enrolment, you will be asked which option you wish to study.

To help you to make this choice, we have set summer work on both topics. If you are unsure which option to choose, read through the work for both options. This may help you to decide which topic interests you more. However, you only need to complete the work for the option you plan to study.

The Summer Work:

You do not need any prior knowledge of the topic to complete the two tasks set – just use the information in the texts provided.

The first task is designed to show us how well you can use several sources of information (text and film) to identify key strengths and weaknesses of a country, and summarise these clearly.

The second task requires you to read more carefully and answer questions that are more closely focused on the text. This is designed to show us how well you can:

o extract information from a piece of extended writing

o use this information to provide answers to questions

o express your ideas clearly in writing.

Answer the questions for this second task in the spaces provided on the chart.

Russia work Pages 2-11 Write your answers in the tables/ spaces provided on pages 2,6 and 7.

Germany work

Pages 12-21 Write your answers in the tables / spaces provided on pages 15,16 and 17.

1

RUSSIA - TASK 1

Task 1. After reading the information about Russia on pages 3,4, and 5 (and you may also use the video clips) identify three strengths and three weaknesses of Russia prior to WW1.

Russia

Strengths

Weaknesses

• Do you think the leadership of the Tsar was a strength of Russia? Explain.

• How important was its economy in determining Russia’s strength / weakness ?

• How might WW1 affect this country?

2

RUSSIA: background

At the start of the 20th century although Russia could not in any way rival the great industrial economies of western Europe, it was no-longer the agrarian society it had been in the mid 19thcentury.

Russia’s industrial growth in the early twentieth century was concentrated in only a few areas : 1) around St Petersburg, 2) Moscow and it surrounding area, 3) the Donbass area. Vast areas remained

undeveloped. Industrial output had risen, and by 1912 Russia’s industrial output was four-times what it had been in 1890 but it was still producing very little in comparison with other countries – producing only 3% of the worlds’ steel production despite its vast resources in coal, and iron.

By 1910 2.7 million Russians were employed in factories. This was still small

in comparison with the total population of approximately 125 million but showed there had been significant change since 1860. Nearly half of Russia’s industrial workforce worked in factories employing 1,000 men or more. There were very few regulations governing these factories, as the government was reluctant to intervene. Workers were often poorly paid for long hours worked in dangerous conditions. It had only been in the 1890s that the employment of children under 12 was forbidden, and the use of female labour in coalmines banned. Many problems remained like overcrowding in factory barracks, and payment of wages in kind. Strikes were illegal until 1905 but occurred frequently. There was discontent that the wealth generated by the factories was not fairly shared.

3

In 1910 Russia’s population was about 125 million.

A typical village – Russia 1900

4

Tsar Nicholas II

Russia: background

In 1894 Nicholas II became Emperor (Tsar) of Russia.

He belonged to the Romanov family that had ruled Russia since 1613.

He was an autocrat and ruled Russia on his own; choosing ministers and deciding policy. There was no parliament – and only after serious disturbances in 1905 did Nicholas agree to the creation of a State Duma – a parliament. But it had no real power.

Nicholas was determined to maintain his traditional powers - and resisted all attempts at reform

Historians agree that Nicholas II lacked the qualities needed in a Tsar at the start of the century. The historian Hans Rogger wrote:

“ Nicholas had no knowledge of the world or of men, of politics, or government to help him make the difficult and weighty decisions that the Tsar alone must make. The only guiding stars that he recognised were an inherited belief in the moral rightness of autocracy and a religious faith that he was in God’s hands, and his actions were divinely inspired”

One of the main influences on Nicholas was his wife, Alexandra, who was a grand-daughter of Queen Victoria. She believed that the Tsar should rule Russia on his own ( as an autocrat) and encouraged Nicholas to ignore the advice of ministers who advised him to introduce reforms.

He and his family lived in great luxury with no idea of the poverty of ordinary people. Nicholas spent even more time with his family following the birth of his son, Alexei , in 1904, he was a sickly infant and it was uncertain if he would live. He had the inherited condition of haemophilia.

The Tsar had reluctantly granted some reforms in 1905, but soon fell back in to his natural position that autocracy was the best form of government for Russia

Russia: background

The Russian empire was huge and whilst this brought advantages in terms of resources and raw materials within it - its sheer size presented a challenge to the movement of goods and people. Russia lagged behind western Europe and the USA in terms of connecting centres of population together by a national road or rail networks. Decent roads were few and far between. Fewer than one tenth of one per cent of Russian villages had local telephones and no public telephone line connected the Russian empire to the outside world.

Farming methods in many villages were very old fashioned and this was a limiting factor on Russia’s industrial growth as cities could not be fed. Most Russian were peasants farming the land in small farms that were on average 38 acres in size. Agricultural output was held back by the smallness of fields and old-fashioned farming methods that had changed little in 200 years.

Both the industrial workers and the peasants were immensely poor – and this was in great contrast to the wealth of the royal family and nobility

There were political groups that looked to improve the conditions of workers and peasants. The Liberals believed in slow gradual change- and by 1910 had not yet even secured a regular Parliament or got the Tsar to listen, never mind introduced any social legislation. Not surprisingly other political groups believed improvements would only come through “revolution”. The Communist party and the SRs (Social Revolutionaries) believed that only a revolution would redistribute wealth and political power and give the workers and peasants the improved conditions they deserved. These two parties were relatively small in number and banned. The Tsar used his security police, the Okhrana, to crack down on these two groups.

Surprisingly too some peasants in the countryside held very traditional beliefs and were loyal to the Tsar.

Russia - Video linksThis first link is to a programme called “Last of the Czars”. It gives you an excellent idea of the power of the Russian Tsar – The royal family: Nicholas, his wife Alexandra and the problems they faced - the haemophilia of their son. The focus is very much on royalty – but you are introduced to Lenin as well. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v= mYo8SEvnsrM Part 1 ( whole episode useful background)https://www.youtube.com/watch?v= ZQSiLOgFNcg Part 2 ( less useful but from 30 mins 30secs – Russia in Ww1)

5

Russia: Task 2

Revolution and Dictatorship: Russia, 1917-1953

On page 8/9 is a copy of the introduction to a textbook on this topic. It provides an overview of the period you will study. Read the introduction and use it to answer the questions below. Try to put your answers in your own words, rather than copying from the text. The marks for each question are shown on the right.

Question: Marks:1. According to the first sentence of the extract, why could it be argued that the Russian

Revolution of October 1917 was the most important event of the twentieth century?1 mark

2. How did other countries respond to the creation of a Communist state in Russia? 1 mark

3. Which two leaders helped to create and develop the Communist state in Russia in this period?

2 marks

4. Lenin was a follower of the teachings of Karl Marx. What did Marx believe about:

a. How human history developed?

b. How Communism would be achieved?

2 marks

5. Who were the Bolsheviks?

1 mark

6

6. In 1917, Lenin and the Bolsheviks seized power in Russia. How were they able do this? 1 mark

7. After Lenin’s death, Stalin became leader of Russia. How and why did he want to transform Russia?

2 marks

8. List three ways in which Stalin’s policies changed Russia. 3 marks

9. According to Corin and Fiehn (the authors of this textbook), what different roles were played by Lenin and Stalin in this period?

Lenin …

Stalin …

2 marks

10. Read the section on the October Revolution 1917 – Pages 10-11. To what extent do you think Lenin was responsible for the Russian Revolution of October 1917?'( 100 -120 words approx - Use a separate sheet of paper)

5 marks

TOTAL MARKS AVAILABLE: 20 marks

7

8

From:

Communist Russia under Lenin and Stalin, Chris Corin and Terry Fiehn (2004)

9

RUSSIAN REVOLUTION: - Historians have differing views about why the Revolution of October 1917 happened.

The Russian Revolution is often depicted as a revolution of the people – but to what extent was this true?

The Russian Revolution is a pivotal event in modern history. Along with the French Revolution of 1789, the Russian Revolution is one of the most studied, analysed and interpreted of all

revolutions. The events in Russia between 1905 and 1924 have drawn the attention of thousands of historians and millions of students. These events shaped not just the future of Russia, but the future of Europe and the world. Without the Russian Revolution, the 20th century would have taken a radically different course. With no revolution, for example, the outcomes of World War II might have been different and the Cold War, a five-decade-long period of tension and estrangement between Soviet bloc and Western nations, would never have come to pass. The Russian Revolution has given rise to

some significant questions. Was the revolution part of an inevitable process, as Marx himself claimed, or was it a response to conditions in Russia?

To what extent was the October Revolution popularly supported? Was the October Revolution (when the Bolshevik Party came to power), a popular revolution or simply an opportunistic coup?

The Tsarist system of government collapsed in February 1917 and a Provisional Government ruled until October 1917, when the Bolshevik Party, led by Vladimir Lenin, seized power.

1) The Soviet view. The explanation as to why the October Revolution of 1917 happened, given by Soviet historians writing in the years up to 1989, mirror ‘official’ state histories, published by the Communist Party of the Soviet Union (CPSU) in the late 1930s. According to these Soviet histories, the Russian Revolution was orchestrated and led by Lenin and the Bolsheviks, on behalf of the working masses. Lenin and the party acted as the ‘vanguard of the proletariat’, overthrowing a corrupt government while imbuing Russian workers, soldiers and peasants with ‘class consciousness’. The October Revolution was both necessary and inevitable. These historians argue that the working masses wanted change, they had been exploited and oppressed by a narrow ruling class and endured poor working conditions and very low wages. They felt Lenin and the Bolsheviks message was relevant to them as a way of improving their lot, therefore the working masses supported the Bolsheviks helping to cause the October Revolution.

2) The American diplomat and historian George Kennan argued that the Russian Revolution was brought on by modernisation. According to Kennan, decades of economic growth, at

10

the end of the 19th century and start of the 20th, was not matched by social reform or political modernisation. The policies of the Tsar’s economics minister, Witte, during the 1890s kick-started Russian industrialisation, which led to the rapid expansion of two classes: the industrial working class and the professional middle class. Both of these classes had considerable revolutionary potential: the workers sought improved conditions while the middle class demanded greater political representation. The tsarist autocracy was not intelligent enough to foresee these changes or competent and flexible enough to manage them. So in part the character of Nicholas II, Tsar of Russia, 1894-1917 also played a role in the revolution as he wanted his country to become economically stronger but was also determined to stick to autocracy and was not flexible enough to listen to the concerns of Liberal business owners or workers. As a consequence, old problems remained, and the Tsarist system broke down under the strains of World War I.

Theodore von Laue expanded on Kennan’s theory by pointing out that the industrialisation of the 1890s was not a natural or organic process triggered by a changing and modernising society as Russia quite simply did not have a “middle class”. Instead it was a top down initiative pushed forward by Witte (the economics minister) and funded by foreign loans and investment, as the government desperately tried to stop Russia being left behind.

These historians argue that the fall of the Tsarist government in the February Revolution of 1917 did not inevitably mean that Russia would have a Communist Revolution in October 1917, but it did mean there would be considerable and challenging problems facing any new government.

3) The historian Richard Pipes attributes the October Revolution to the actions and manipulations of Lenin. According to Pipes, Lenin was the most significant source of unrest and was little more than a chance-taker who exploited the disorder of 1917 to hijack power.

Pipes and other historians also note that although the Bolsheviks built up support in the workers’ councils in Moscow and Leningrad they were not well supported in the countryside. Most of Russia’s population was peasantry and this group turned to the Social Revolutionary Party (SRs) as the party proposing the revolutionary changes they wanted, such as changes to land ownership. It was therefore not mass support by workers that brought Lenin to power, since most workers were peasants, but Lenin’s own political skill.

11

GERMANY- TASK 1

Task 1. After reading the information about Germany on pages 13,14, and1 5 (and you may also use the video clips) identify three strengths and three weaknesses of Germany prior to WW1.

Germany

Strengths

Weaknesses

• Do you think the leadership of the Kaiser was a strength of Germany? Explain.

• How important was its economy to Germany’s strength/ weakness ?

• How might WW1 affect this country?

GERMANY background

12

Germany’s population in 1910 = 63 million.

By 1910 Germany had the strongest industrial economy in Europe. Its steel production in 1914 was double that of Britain.

Germany’s industrial revolution had happened quickly – what had taken a century in Britain took place in three to four decades in Germany. An efficient agricultural system underpinned these changes and made possible the movement of people to new industrial cities. The investment in technologies and new methods of steel production made it possible to exploit of Germany’s natural resources in the Rhineland. Thousands of rural peasants migrated to the cities in the1870s, '80s, and '90s, to escape agricultural stagnation and rural over-population. In 1871 35 per cent of the German populace lived in cities; by 1910 it was 60 per cent. In 1871 there were eight German towns with more than 100,000 inhabitants; by 1910 the figure stood at 48. Berlin's population was 2 million in 1910.

Germany’s industrial growth was also mirrored in its military strength. By 1910 the carrying capacity of Germany’s fleet was second only to that of Britain (and Britain had had two hundred years of naval dominance, and a large Empire). Germany’s army was also huge – it numbered 2.3 million.

Germany: background.

Germany did not seem to be a country at ease with itself in 1900. The workers who had helped create Germany’s economic transformation were not seeing enough crumbs falling from the plates of the industrial elites and bourgeoisie to keep them content.

As towns and cities grew so the class structure of Germany became

all the more apparent. Different social groups now lived within walking distance or a tram ride of each other. Class hatreds were fuelled by the concentration of affluence alongside extreme poverty.

At the start of the 20th century significant sections within the German workforce were experiencing very poor conditions - multiple sharing of apartments, periodic unemployment, family dependency on female and child labour and increasing crime. Perhaps a third of the workforce experienced unemployment in any one year.

These factors help explain the growth in support for the German Socialist Party (SPD) at the turn of the century. The SPD aimed to improve the conditions of the working man. It had rejected “revolution” as a

13

way to do this and looked to transform society through peaceful political means. The SPD had a strong presence in the Trade Union movement, and workers' colleges, it also organised May Day picnics, social events, youth groups, workers' welfare programmes and self-help savings societies, - helping to build its identity. By 1910 the SPD was the biggest party in the Reichstag (German parliament). The SPD did support the government over the outbreak of war in 1914, because for them this was a war to end absolutist monarchy in imperial Russia and to transform society in Germany. – The SPD envisaged very different outcomes to the war - to those of the Kaiser and the elites.

However, although German cities grew in size, the conditions within them were not necessarily awful. The available statistics tell us that overall standards of living for many German workers improved. Between 1880 and 1914 unemployment rates rarely went above three per cent, and real wages too increased. State sponsored improvements in health care: for example; compulsory immunisation against smallpox in 1874, standardised sanitation, street lighting and park facilities- generally put Germany ahead of her competitors in the field of civic responsibilities to its citizens. It also had a modern and efficient rail-network connecting cities across Germany.

Germany’s state education system also meant it had a well-educated workforce able to adapt to the changes of an industrial economy

Germany’s industrial growth was also mirrored in its military strength. By 1910 the carrying capacity of Germany’s fleet was second only to that of Britain (and Britain had had two hundred years of naval dominance, and a large Empire). Germany’s army was also huge – it numbered 2.3 million.

14

Germany: background

Germany had been united as one country in 1871.

In 1888 Prince Wilhelm, the eldest son of Kaiser Frederick III and Victoria (Queen Victoria’s daughter), became Kaiser Wilhelm II.

Wilhelm loathed parliamentary democracy and ruled as

Germany’s population became more urbanised –

Germany – video links This first link is to a programme called “Kaiser Wilhelm ”. It gives you background about Kaiser Wilhelm’s personality, how he was disabled during birth, and how this and his may have affected him. It also gives an idea of the attitude of the Germany army and aristocracy.https://www.youtube.com/watch?v= JzbCh4c-8vA The First 10-12 mins onlyThere is not one programme that gives all the background, you may also wish to look at.https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_ EVaV9Qqu88 Germany at start of WW1 – 2 min cliphttps://www.youtube.com/watch?v= uJhjuT61oW0 Germany in 1918 5 mins

Germany: Task 2

15

Kaiser Wilhelm II

Germany: background

Germany had been united as one country in 1871.

In 1888 Prince Wilhelm, the eldest son of Kaiser Frederick III and Victoria (Queen Victoria’s daughter), became Kaiser Wilhelm II.

Wilhelm loathed parliamentary democracy and ruled as

From an article in the Daily Telegraph from Sir Edward Grey (British foreign Secretary) in 1908:The German Emperor is ageing me; he is like a battleship with steam up and no rudder,

he will run into something some day and cause a catastrophe. He has the strongest army in the world and the Germans don't like being laughed at and are looking for somebody

on whom to vent their temper and use their strength.

Kaiser Wilhelm II aimed to improve Germany’s status in world affairs. However, due to his impetuous personality, he frequently undermined this aim by making tactless, alarming public statements without consulting his ministers beforehand. He also did much to alienate other Great Powers from Germany by initiating a massive build-up of the German Navy, challenging French control in North Africa and backing the Austrian annexation of Bosnia in 1908.

Democracy and Nazism: Germany, 1918-1945

On page 18/19/ is a copy of the introduction to a textbook on this topic. It provides an overview of the period you will study. Read the introduction and use it to answer the questions below. Try to put your answers in your own words, rather than copying from the text. The marks for each question are shown on the right.

Question: Marks:1. According to the first paragraph of the extract, which one event can be held

responsible for all developments in German history in this period 1918-45?1 mark

2. After the First World War, Germany became a new state. What was the name of this new state?

1 mark

3. Name three threats to this state. 3 marks

4. How and why did the Nazi Party benefit from the Wall Street Crash of October 1929? 2 marks

5. Explain another reason for Hitler’s appointment as German Chancellor. 1 mark

6. When did Hitler become Chancellor of Germany? 1 mark

16

7. What is particularly controversial about the extent of Germany support for the Nazi regime?

1 mark

8. List four of Hitler’s aims for Germany. 4 marks

9. How did the Second World War affect the popularity of the Nazi Party? 1 mark

10 Look at the two views in the chart of Germany’s History ( Page 20-21). To what extent do you think that Hitler’s rise to power happened because of strong cultural beliefs that existed in Germany that made it unsuited to democracy? (100 – 120 words approx.) Use a separate sheet of paper

5 marks

TOTAL MARKS AVAILABLE: 20 marks

17

18

19

20

21