Want help with Russian History essays? :)
Scroll to see replies
Original post by crocker710
Stalin was the most successful leader between 1855-1953. How true is this statement?
Difficult question because it is so broad. The simplest way to analyse this is choose 3 themes and see if stalin was the most influential. for example, economy military society. (arguably the most influential in all) and then conclude with your own judgment.
Stalin was the most successful leader between 1855-1953. How true is this statement?
Difficult question because it is so broad. The simplest way to analyse this is choose 3 themes and see if stalin was the most influential. for example, economy military society. (arguably the most influential in all) and then conclude with your own judgment.
Hi again
I'm having difficulty in understanding the concept of a "synoptic essay". How could i writethis essay synoptically? Is looking at each leader individually the wrong way of going about this?
Thanks
I got a question on what was the short term of the peasants on russian society and goverment between 1857-1861. obviously the emacipation of the serfs is teh big one but the question suggests that the peasants actually did things liek revolt but i believed that the emacipation happened because of fear of revolt
Original post by SomethingSpezial
Hi again
I'm having difficulty in understanding the concept of a "synoptic essay". How could i writethis essay synoptically? Is looking at each leader individually the wrong way of going about this?
Thanks
I'm having difficulty in understanding the concept of a "synoptic essay". How could i writethis essay synoptically? Is looking at each leader individually the wrong way of going about this?
Thanks
To be frank, doing it leader-by-leader is the wrong way to answer this essay question synoptically. You need to choose a theme, such as 'economy' and show how, regardless of time-period, it improved. you can show that Stalin did make a huge change to industry, then you can say Nicholas II made a good start with stolypin and Count Witte and then you could say that it all was made possible by Alexander II with the emancipation of the serfs. ( very brief and non-detailed response )
doing it this way avoids you going chronologically and looking at each leader. you do not need to address each leader of the period in every theme, but you must make explicit reference at least once to each. Are you sure your course stops at 1953, and not 1964? because then you may need to include nikita chrushchev in your argument.
how this helped
Tom
Original post by Aizen101
I got a question on what was the short term of the peasants on russian society and goverment between 1857-1861. obviously the emacipation of the serfs is teh big one but the question suggests that the peasants actually did things liek revolt but i believed that the emacipation happened because of fear of revolt
This question makes no sense, sorry
Tom
Original post by crocker710
To be frank, doing it leader-by-leader is the wrong way to answer this essay question synoptically. You need to choose a theme, such as 'economy' and show how, regardless of time-period, it improved. you can show that Stalin did make a huge change to industry, then you can say Nicholas II made a good start with stolypin and Count Witte and then you could say that it all was made possible by Alexander II with the emancipation of the serfs. ( very brief and non-detailed response )
doing it this way avoids you going chronologically and looking at each leader. you do not need to address each leader of the period in every theme, but you must make explicit reference at least once to each. Are you sure your course stops at 1953, and not 1964? because then you may need to include nikita in your argument.
how this helped
Tom
doing it this way avoids you going chronologically and looking at each leader. you do not need to address each leader of the period in every theme, but you must make explicit reference at least once to each. Are you sure your course stops at 1953, and not 1964? because then you may need to include nikita in your argument.
how this helped
Tom
Ok, thats pretty much what I've done. I started it by doing leader to leader but then started again and looked at the economy, social and opposition in categories. I didnt write about how things gradually improved, I basically just compared what each leader did under each category. But yeah, it seems alright.
Yeah the course does go up to 1964, but we've only studied up to Stalin so far, so we weren't supposed to included khrushchev.
Anyway, Cheers mate
Original post by SomethingSpezial
Ok, thats pretty much what I've done. I started it by doing leader to leader but then started again and looked at the economy, social and opposition in categories. I didnt write about how things gradually improved, I basically just compared what each leader did under each category. But yeah, it seems alright.
Yeah the course does go up to 1964, but we've only studied up to Stalin so far, so we weren't supposed to included khrushchev.
Anyway, Cheers mate
Yeah the course does go up to 1964, but we've only studied up to Stalin so far, so we weren't supposed to included khrushchev.
Anyway, Cheers mate
Ok no problem
. just within each theme don't analysis it chronologically it's an easy trap to fall into rank each of the leaders within the theme 1 - x on their importance and then write about them in this order. Even though you've not studied Khrushchev, when it comes to exam time and you look back at the essay's you've done you'll be tempted to not include him in your revision and then you'll definitely be limited on the mark scheme to no higher than a C :/ for not being synoptic. In this question it's really easy to include Khrushchev - he was the least successful, he was outed by the CCCP! and he made little / meaningless changes to the situation. he may have spent a lot of Russia's resources on the space race, but how did that improve the life of the peasant or factory worker? once again with agriculture you can show the although the initial success of the virgin Land Scheme was boasted about, it was a total failure, and a few years later they had to import a large amount of grain from Canada to avoid a famine!
It could be an interesting twist to add a 'worst of this category' leader to the end of your themes, maybe this would be an easy and surefire way to include everyone and avoid approaching it chronologically ?
I hope this has helped
Tom
(edited 13 years ago)
Original post by crocker710
Right; back home from Uni for New Years and so I thought I'd try help a few people out with their Russia essays, as, as sad as it sounds I love History
Post any Questions you have here; I'll try get back to you ASAP, It'll prob. be quicker if you quote me, or quicker still if you inbox me,
fire away!
Post any Questions you have here; I'll try get back to you ASAP, It'll prob. be quicker if you quote me, or quicker still if you inbox me,
fire away!
Hi, I have an exam on Russia 1881-1953, focusing on Russia in revolution and Stalin's Russia coming up soon and was just wondering if you've got any advice on how to strengthen my essays, I feel as though I have the knowledge but do you have any advice on structure or techniques which would help to get top marks. It's for Edexcel if that helps.
Original post by crocker710
Right; back home from Uni for New Years and so I thought I'd try help a few people out with their Russia essays, as, as sad as it sounds I love History
Post any Questions you have here; I'll try get back to you ASAP, It'll prob. be quicker if you quote me, or quicker still if you inbox me,
fire away!
Post any Questions you have here; I'll try get back to you ASAP, It'll prob. be quicker if you quote me, or quicker still if you inbox me,
fire away!
"Assess the view that Stalin was more successful in dealing with opposition than any other ruler in the period 1855-1964"
I have a basic outline of the essay, with paragraphs on the use of the secret police, propaganda, cult of personality. I was going to compare Stalin/the communists with the Tsars throughout each paragraph and analyse who was more successful in using those techniques on opposition.
What do you think? My history teacher is a monster and I'm terrified of messing up!
Thank you so much for creating this thread! I'll be on here everyday! LOL
Assess the view that no Russian ruler in the period 1855 to 1965 succeeded in improving the lives of peasants.
Throughout the period 1855 to 1965, the lives of the peasantry remained essentially unfree. The rural population throughout the period were tied to the state, forced to bare the burden of Russia aiming to become a world power and so were used to support industrialisation and the many wars. The extent of the peasant’s lack of freedom and quality of life were similar between the tsarist government and the communist rule showing agriculture was always subservient to the needs of industry. There are certain periods in which the quality of life for peasants were attempted to be improved such as Stolypins agrarian reform and the emancipation, however the continuity of the period shows that government policies focused on providing sustenance for the expanding urban proletariat and so treating peasants as second class citizens.
Throughout the period, the state bore down heavily upon the rural population to ultimately ‘feed’ Russia’s industrialisation. Reforms such as Collectivisation carried out by Stalin in 1928-41 reflects how the peasant had little freedom and why quality of life was lowered. Collectivisation forced peasants to join collective farms such as the kolkhozy and periods of requisitioning were reinstated. The peasants were hypothetically reduced to pre-revolutionary serfs, without a right to a passport and with severe discipline being instilled on them. The effects of emancipation in 1864 are similar, with freedom still being withheld from the peasants. Peasants were suppressed by redemption payments which lasted 49 years and individualism was not allowed with the introduction of the Mir. Emancipation took place to provide the industrial base that a modern state needed and an attempt to totally free the peasantry would hinder the process.
Throughout the period 1855 to 1965, the lives of the peasantry remained essentially unfree. The rural population throughout the period were tied to the state, forced to bare the burden of Russia aiming to become a world power and so were used to support industrialisation and the many wars. The extent of the peasant’s lack of freedom and quality of life were similar between the tsarist government and the communist rule showing agriculture was always subservient to the needs of industry. There are certain periods in which the quality of life for peasants were attempted to be improved such as Stolypins agrarian reform and the emancipation, however the continuity of the period shows that government policies focused on providing sustenance for the expanding urban proletariat and so treating peasants as second class citizens.
Throughout the period, the state bore down heavily upon the rural population to ultimately ‘feed’ Russia’s industrialisation. Reforms such as Collectivisation carried out by Stalin in 1928-41 reflects how the peasant had little freedom and why quality of life was lowered. Collectivisation forced peasants to join collective farms such as the kolkhozy and periods of requisitioning were reinstated. The peasants were hypothetically reduced to pre-revolutionary serfs, without a right to a passport and with severe discipline being instilled on them. The effects of emancipation in 1864 are similar, with freedom still being withheld from the peasants. Peasants were suppressed by redemption payments which lasted 49 years and individualism was not allowed with the introduction of the Mir. Emancipation took place to provide the industrial base that a modern state needed and an attempt to totally free the peasantry would hinder the process.
Original post by ellie-wellie
"Assess the view that Stalin was more successful in dealing with opposition than any other ruler in the period 1855-1964"
I have a basic outline of the essay, with paragraphs on the use of the secret police, propaganda, cult of personality. I was going to compare Stalin/the communists with the Tsars throughout each paragraph and analyse who was more successful in using those techniques on opposition.
What do you think? My history teacher is a monster and I'm terrified of messing up!
Thank you so much for creating this thread! I'll be on here everyday! LOL
I have a basic outline of the essay, with paragraphs on the use of the secret police, propaganda, cult of personality. I was going to compare Stalin/the communists with the Tsars throughout each paragraph and analyse who was more successful in using those techniques on opposition.
What do you think? My history teacher is a monster and I'm terrified of messing up!
Thank you so much for creating this thread! I'll be on here everyday! LOL
OK
This sounds like a decent outline of an essay. Within each paragraph, try to start with stalin, that way you show clearly you're addressing opposition.
One paragraph I would consider writing is the way each leader dealt with internal opposition. You can use stalin's struggle for power until 1928 to show how once he got power he became ruthless with any form of internal opposition expelling, and holding show trials. You can then say that Nicholas II was successful also at maintaining internal opposition. for example in the 3rd session of the Duma, he flooded it with Royalist sympathisers to ensure that he kept control. You can then show that Khrushchev attempted to remove hardline opposition within the CCCP with destalinisation, but was ultimately unsuccessful as he was removed from power. Furthermore you can then link this to Alexander III who was killed by the People Will.
That's just a brief example how to lay out each paragraph to avoid doing it chronologically. Doing it this way, linking themes within themes ( successful / unsuccessful ) works well for certain essay's and not others, it's your preference,
I hope this has helped, feel free to post back with anything else you need help with,
Tom
Original post by Mathmos
Assess the view that no Russian ruler in the period 1855 to 1965 succeeded in improving the lives of peasants.
Throughout the period 1855 to 1965, the lives of the peasantry remained essentially unfree. The rural population throughout the period were tied to the state, forced to bare the burden of Russia aiming to become a world power and so were used to support industrialisation and the many wars. The extent of the peasant’s lack of freedom and quality of life were similar between the tsarist government and the communist rule showing agriculture was always subservient to the needs of industry. [The Tsarist focus was on agriculture compared to industry.] There are certain periods in which the quality of life for peasants were attempted to be improved such as Stolypins agrarian reform and the emancipation[ of the serfs], however the continuity of the period shows that government policies focused on providing sustenance for the expanding urban proletariat and so treating peasants as second class citizens.
Throughout the period, the state bore down heavily upon the rural population to ultimately ‘feed’ Russia’s industrialisation. Reforms such as Collectivisation carried out by Stalin in 1928-41 reflects how the peasant had little freedom and why quality of life was lowered. Collectivisation forced peasants to join collective farms such as the kolkhozy and periods of requisitioning were reinstated. The peasants were hypothetically reduced to pre-revolutionary serfs, without a right to a passport and with severe discipline being instilled on them. The effects of emancipation in 1864 are similar, with freedom still being withheld from the peasants. Peasants were suppressed by redemption payments which lasted 49 years and individualism was not allowed with the introduction of the Mir. Emancipation took place to provide the industrial base that a modern state needed and an attempt to totally free the peasantry would hinder the process.
Throughout the period 1855 to 1965, the lives of the peasantry remained essentially unfree. The rural population throughout the period were tied to the state, forced to bare the burden of Russia aiming to become a world power and so were used to support industrialisation and the many wars. The extent of the peasant’s lack of freedom and quality of life were similar between the tsarist government and the communist rule showing agriculture was always subservient to the needs of industry. [The Tsarist focus was on agriculture compared to industry.] There are certain periods in which the quality of life for peasants were attempted to be improved such as Stolypins agrarian reform and the emancipation[ of the serfs], however the continuity of the period shows that government policies focused on providing sustenance for the expanding urban proletariat and so treating peasants as second class citizens.
Throughout the period, the state bore down heavily upon the rural population to ultimately ‘feed’ Russia’s industrialisation. Reforms such as Collectivisation carried out by Stalin in 1928-41 reflects how the peasant had little freedom and why quality of life was lowered. Collectivisation forced peasants to join collective farms such as the kolkhozy and periods of requisitioning were reinstated. The peasants were hypothetically reduced to pre-revolutionary serfs, without a right to a passport and with severe discipline being instilled on them. The effects of emancipation in 1864 are similar, with freedom still being withheld from the peasants. Peasants were suppressed by redemption payments which lasted 49 years and individualism was not allowed with the introduction of the Mir. Emancipation took place to provide the industrial base that a modern state needed and an attempt to totally free the peasantry would hinder the process.
I've made a couple of changes to your paragraphs, and I presume you want some help? as you've just copied your essay start :/
This second paragraph is rather jumbled. You've got some good examples, but you need to deploy them with precision. You seem to be lacking a theme within your paragraph, and I find it hard to work out what the rest of your essay will contain?
Try using themes to organise your essay. For example standards of living or rights and freedoms. This should hopefully give your essay some direction and structure, If you want help with something specifically it's probably easier if you ask, rather than making me guess lol,
Tom
Original post by dosvidaniya
Hi, I have an exam on Russia 1881-1953, focusing on Russia in revolution and Stalin's Russia coming up soon and was just wondering if you've got any advice on how to strengthen my essays, I feel as though I have the knowledge but do you have any advice on structure or techniques which would help to get top marks. It's for Edexcel if that helps.
It'll be easier to show you where to strengthen your essays if I've got an example to look at
Tom
Hi,
just did an essay “Out of all the wars that influenced the development of Russian Government, the First World War was the most significant” How far do you agree with this?
Was quite stuck with this one. Have done most of the essay though. Could you take a look please?
Was i right to do Economic, social factors aswell as political?
Thanks Mate
just did an essay “Out of all the wars that influenced the development of Russian Government, the First World War was the most significant” How far do you agree with this?
Was quite stuck with this one. Have done most of the essay though. Could you take a look please?
Was i right to do Economic, social factors aswell as political?
Thanks Mate
(edited 13 years ago)
Plus... too help everyone I just found this on my computer.
Downloaded it from TSR a while ago.
For a quick refresher before the exam, i am going to do this table myself.
Downloaded it from TSR a while ago.
For a quick refresher before the exam, i am going to do this table myself.
Hiya Mathmos, sorry for the delay in responding, I've had a large essay of my own, on a not so interesting topic to complete :'(.
I've taken a look at your essay you've linked above. It's hard to see where you've extended into the communist period? With any synoptical essay you do need to include the 6 different leaders and the provisional government, here you exclude 3 rulers. Secondly this is a hard question to approach, because it's asking you a turning points question with regards to a particular theme, in this case the development of Russian Government.
I would start by identifying the wars in this period
- The Crimean War
- The Russo-Turkish War
- The Russo-Japanese War
- The First World War
- The Civil War
- The Second World War
- The Cold War
With a turning points Question you've got to identify a theme, such as economy, and analyse if the name factor provided the biggest change in this area, compared to other events in the time period. This change does not have to be immediate but it must effect significantly the period in question, i.e small event like change in attitudes = large event later on. However if the effect of the event is large but short lived it's not a turning point.
What I'd do is break each war into themes, then group these together and form paragraphs. For example one theme I'd look into doing with this question is 'rights and freedoms'. You can say that The First World War lead to the freedoms which the provisional government brought, this would be considered large in scale, but not long term, so you could probably dismiss it. Then I'd look at the Crimean War as it led to the emancipation of the serfs giving peasants freedom from the land, but arguably they were still tied to it with redemption payments. Finally I'd look at the Russo-Japanese War as the most significant turning point in rights and freedoms in Russia, as it led to the creation of the duma, and the first legal political parties in 1905. It was the first time power was given to the people, and I'd argue it was the thin edge of the wedge, once it had been set in motion it could not be reversed.
I'd repeat this at least twice, but for a good essay three times and you're on to a winner! If you need anymore help feel free to post again and Ill get back to you quicker this time :P
Tom
I've taken a look at your essay you've linked above. It's hard to see where you've extended into the communist period? With any synoptical essay you do need to include the 6 different leaders and the provisional government, here you exclude 3 rulers. Secondly this is a hard question to approach, because it's asking you a turning points question with regards to a particular theme, in this case the development of Russian Government.
I would start by identifying the wars in this period
- The Crimean War
- The Russo-Turkish War
- The Russo-Japanese War
- The First World War
- The Civil War
- The Second World War
- The Cold War
With a turning points Question you've got to identify a theme, such as economy, and analyse if the name factor provided the biggest change in this area, compared to other events in the time period. This change does not have to be immediate but it must effect significantly the period in question, i.e small event like change in attitudes = large event later on. However if the effect of the event is large but short lived it's not a turning point.
What I'd do is break each war into themes, then group these together and form paragraphs. For example one theme I'd look into doing with this question is 'rights and freedoms'. You can say that The First World War lead to the freedoms which the provisional government brought, this would be considered large in scale, but not long term, so you could probably dismiss it. Then I'd look at the Crimean War as it led to the emancipation of the serfs giving peasants freedom from the land, but arguably they were still tied to it with redemption payments. Finally I'd look at the Russo-Japanese War as the most significant turning point in rights and freedoms in Russia, as it led to the creation of the duma, and the first legal political parties in 1905. It was the first time power was given to the people, and I'd argue it was the thin edge of the wedge, once it had been set in motion it could not be reversed.
I'd repeat this at least twice, but for a good essay three times and you're on to a winner! If you need anymore help feel free to post again and Ill get back to you quicker this time :P
Tom
(edited 13 years ago)
essay "how far do you agree that the struggle for power following lenin's death in 1924 was caused by ideological differences between the contenders for power????
any help would be greatly appreciated.
any help would be greatly appreciated.
Original post by mrs lovett
essay "how far do you agree that the struggle for power following lenin's death in 1924 was caused by ideological differences between the contenders for power????
any help would be greatly appreciated.
any help would be greatly appreciated.
how far do you agree that the struggle for power following lenin's death in 1924 was caused by ideological differences between the contenders for power?
The first thing to do with the essay is to identify what the key part of the question is. Struggle for power between 1924 - 1929 is the part of Russia it wants you to focus on. I would try identify three or four themes which effected the power struggle. Firstly I'd tackle the named theme, Ideological Difference. Firstly I'd look at the ideological differences within the Central Committee. I would compare the 'right leaning' ideology of Stalin with the 'left leaning' of the United Opposition (Trotsky, Kamenev, Zinoviev). I would try and show that different features of the groups such as how Stalin wanted to consolidate Communism in the countries already under their control ( supposedly conservative as the Right Leaning suggests) with the Trotskist view that communism should be spread across the world. I would show how this caused conflict within the Central Committee, and how it led to the subsequent expulsion of Trotsky, and show trials of Kamenev, Zinoviev in 1934.
I would repeat this with such things as the Strong willed individuals (i.e the problems were caused by rivalry rather than ideology), you could say that it was Lenin's legacy and that it was individuals search for power. Sorry these other themes seem a bit vague, but if you work with them It should give you a decent essay,
If you want anymore advice feel free to post again or PM me,
Tom
(edited 13 years ago)
essay 'explain why opposition groups developed 1855-1881' in tsarist russia. i have really no clue what to write and i dont know any reasons 
help would be HUGELY appreciated!!
help would be HUGELY appreciated!!
This thread is amazing, Tom you are a total legend for helping us poor souls out! I answered a practice 30 mark question, which my teacher marked as a high level 4 but if you could offer any advice as to how I could hit band 5 confidently I'd greatly appreciate it! The question was "How far was the Russo-Japanese War of 1904-1905 responsible for the outbreak of the 1905 revolution?"
Thank you
Thank you
Quick Reply
Related discussions
- What Should I pick for my Year 13 History Option
- Evaluate the interpretations
- History coursework
- A-level russian
- Advance higher history - Essay trouble
- Oxford language applicants - 2024 entry
- biology, chemistry and history alevel combination ?
- Russia (1801 - 1917) NEA
- Cambridge Law Application Journey
- alevel history
- A-level History Study Group 2023-2024
- Should I take 5 A-levels?
- How many hours should I spend writing my NEA?
- Oxbridge applicants for modern languages - 2025 entry (applying in 2024)
- A-level History Coursework Subjects
- Asian and Middle Eastern Studies (AMES) at Cambridge
- A level Russian
- Your Supercurriculars for Oxbridge
- A level history without gcse
- Is it a bad idea to learn Russian during A-levels?
Latest
Trending
Last reply 1 day ago
Edexcel A Level History Paper 2 (9HI0 2A-2H) - 7th June 2024 [Exam Chat]Last reply 1 day ago
AQA A Level History Paper 1 (7042/1A-1L) - 23rd May 2024 [Exam Chat]Last reply 1 day ago
AQA A Level History Paper 2 (7042/2A-2T) - 7th June 2024 [Exam Chat]Last reply 3 days ago
Edexcel GCSE HISTORY PAPER 1 (1HI0 10-13) - 15th MAY [Exam Chat]Last reply 3 days ago
Edexcel A Level History Paper 1 (9HI0 1A-1H) - 23rd May 2024 [Exam Chat]Last reply 1 week ago
OCR A-Level HISTORY PAPER 3 (Y301-Y321) - 23rd MAY [Exam Chat]Last reply 2 weeks ago
History Edexcel A level Britain Transformed and USA Conformity and ChallengeLast reply 3 months ago
AQA A-level History USA: Making of a Superpower (7042/1K) - 24 May 2023 [Exam Chat]Last reply 3 months ago
AQA A Level History - Making of Modern Britain(2S) Exam Chat - 9th June 2023Trending
Last reply 1 day ago
Edexcel A Level History Paper 2 (9HI0 2A-2H) - 7th June 2024 [Exam Chat]Last reply 1 day ago
AQA A Level History Paper 1 (7042/1A-1L) - 23rd May 2024 [Exam Chat]Last reply 1 day ago
AQA A Level History Paper 2 (7042/2A-2T) - 7th June 2024 [Exam Chat]Last reply 3 days ago
Edexcel GCSE HISTORY PAPER 1 (1HI0 10-13) - 15th MAY [Exam Chat]Last reply 3 days ago
Edexcel A Level History Paper 1 (9HI0 1A-1H) - 23rd May 2024 [Exam Chat]Last reply 1 week ago
OCR A-Level HISTORY PAPER 3 (Y301-Y321) - 23rd MAY [Exam Chat]Last reply 2 weeks ago
History Edexcel A level Britain Transformed and USA Conformity and ChallengeLast reply 3 months ago
AQA A-level History USA: Making of a Superpower (7042/1K) - 24 May 2023 [Exam Chat]Last reply 3 months ago
AQA A Level History - Making of Modern Britain(2S) Exam Chat - 9th June 2023
