This discussion is now closed.
Check out other Related discussions
- History A level question
- History AQA A level help
- Unit Y318: Russia and its Rulers 1855-1964
- A-level History Coursework
- OCR A-Level HISTORY PAPER 3 (Y301-Y321) - 23rd MAY [Exam Chat]
- A level History study buddy A level AQA
- Notes for OCR A-Level History 'Russia and it's rulers'
- Yr 11 to Yr 12 summer transistion
- A-level tips?
- OCR A-level History A Paper 3 - 23rd May 2025 [Exam Chat]
- A-Level History Study Group 2024-25
- betty's summer gyg
- Studying
- A-Level History Study Group | 2025-2026
- Russia and its Rulers
- OCR A-Level HISTORY PAPER 2 (Y201-Y224) - 11th JUNE [Exam Chat]
- YouTube/Podcast recommendations
- vyl's y12 gyg to get into an art degree....
- Revision methods for English Lit, History and Latin A levels
- A-Level Year 12 revison
Russia 1855-1956 OCR
Can anybody give me a quick outline of the national minorities in Russia in this period especially Finland? Just tried to write about them in an essay and it didn't go very well! 
Thank U!!!
Thank U!!!Scroll to see replies
Reply 1
?! i'm doing this and have no idea what u are talking about
sorry:-(
can anyone else help out?
sorry:-(
can anyone else help out?
Reply 2
grace1
?! i'm doing this and have no idea what u are talking about
sorry:-(
can anyone else help out?
sorry:-(
can anyone else help out?
Sorry, I wasn't very clear. I mean the way the different leaders treated the parts of the Empire like Finland and places like that. I know a bit about Russification but apparently this is one of the themes so I thought I should know a bit more. Does anybody have any idea what I'm on about?!
Reply 3
17
Russification meant that it was compulsory to learn Russian no matter what part of Russia you were from and there had to be a united culture etc etc. The Tsars started it off, but it continued under Stalin. They thought that this would make is easier for them to brainwash the masses, and plus if you had revolutionaries talking ideas in a language you couldnt understand you had more problems. Hence the one language etc business.
Hope this helps.
Hope this helps.
Reply 4
Do we actually have to revise Russia, coz our teachers told us not to revise Russia and focus on Germany!? Therefore, I won't revise Russia, seeing I don't really get all the stuff about the tsars anyway!!! :s
Reply 5
17
~*littlestar*~
Do we actually have to revise Russia, coz our teachers told us not to revise Russia and focus on Germany!? Therefore, I won't revise Russia, seeing I don't really get all the stuff about the tsars anyway!!! :s
You won't get a very good grade if you don't revise. Yes, you don't have to know every single detail but you have to have a broad overview of the 100 years.
Reply 6
i'm actually finding Russia ok to revise. Previosly ive jus revised the facts for the exam...go through each leader etc..and i haven't done that well (and its a boring and tedious way to revise). So, i'm doing loads of pass questions and have the mark schemes in front of me to help. It's easier than i thought actually. Going through themes, do past questions...then do the boring facts stuff which will help the essay to sound..errr good. lol
I don't think opposition as a theme will come up cos it was asked jan 2004 and jan 2005.
But obviously revise ya socks of
x
I don't think opposition as a theme will come up cos it was asked jan 2004 and jan 2005.
But obviously revise ya socks of
xReply 7
grace1
I don't think opposition as a theme will come up cos it was asked jan 2004 and jan 2005.
I don't think opposition as a theme will come up cos it was asked jan 2004 and jan 2005.
I know - I'm gutted cos I do best at the opposition questions! Now I'm hoping for a comparison of the leaders. It will probably be something obscure that I haven't thought of though! What about you?
Reply 8
I find comparison ones the hardest:-( so at least there is 3 questions to choose from!
Reply 9
1
iv been writing essays for this unit and i had a mock exam and i got A and i keep getting As but im convinced my teacher is marking wrong (well thats what many people have said, inc an old history teacher) so i was wondering if anyone could like read it if i post it up and gimme some comments n possibly a grade.cheers
Reply 10
P1mP
iv been writing essays for this unit and i had a mock exam and i got A and i keep getting As but im convinced my teacher is marking wrong (well thats what many people have said, inc an old history teacher) so i was wondering if anyone could like read it if i post it up and gimme some comments n possibly a grade.cheers
If you post it, I'd give my opinion on it. I've got a mark scheme for this paper somewhere
Reply 11
1
ok cheers..i shall type it up 2nyt then post it up by 2moro
Reply 12
17
They love a question comparin Tsars and Communists, and unless I'm greatly mistaken, its come up every year since the exams started. Then there are questions on economy, repression, peasants, workers etc
Reply 13
I think peasants with come up, but i quote radiohead 'i might be wrong'
:-D
:-D
Reply 14
Does anyone know what questions have come up recently in this unit? My teachers are useless...! I've got the specimen paper though. Leanne
Reply 15
17
Russia Questions:
June 2002
1 How far do you agree that a study of Russian government 1855-1956 suggests Russia did little more than exchange Romanov Tsars for "Red" Tsars from 1917?
2 In the period 1855-1956, did the Russian peasantry receive better treatment under Tsarist or Communist governments?
3 Trotsky once described war as the "locomotive of history". Can it be argued that change in Russia in the period 1855-1956 was caused only be involvement in wars?
June 2003
1 How far does a study of Russian government 1855-1956 suggest that, following the revolutions of 1917, the Russian people simply exchanged one form of authoritarianism for another?
2 How far did the working class suffer more from Bolshevik rule than Tsarist rule during the period 1855-1956?
3 Was Stalin the most successful ruler of Russia 1855-1956? Explain your answer with reference to rulers of this period.
January 2004
1 How different socially and economically was Tsarist Russia to Communist Russia?
2 Lenin once described Tsarist Russia as "the prison of the peoples". To what extent could that verdict be equally applied to Russia throughout the period 1855-1956?
3 How effective was opposition to governments in Russia throughout the period 1855-1956?
June 2004
1 How far do you agree a study of Russian government 1855-1956 suggest that the Communists were more authoritarian athan the Tsars?
2 Trotsky regarded the peasants as "the pack animal of history". Examine the view that, throughout the period, Russian government regarded the peasants more of an obstacle than a help to the development of the state.
3 How far do you agree that credit for industrialising Russia 1855-1956 can only be given to Stalin?
This may be January 2003, but I have no idea:
1 Faced with a vast and backward empire, Russia's rulers in the period 1855-1956 consistently viewed repression as their most effective tool of government. To what extent do you agree with this judgement?
2 How far did the living and working conditions of the Russian peasants remain uniformly poor throughout the period 1855-1956?
3 Military needs were always the main reason for Russia's economic development. To what extent do you agree with this judgement?
June 2002
1 How far do you agree that a study of Russian government 1855-1956 suggests Russia did little more than exchange Romanov Tsars for "Red" Tsars from 1917?
2 In the period 1855-1956, did the Russian peasantry receive better treatment under Tsarist or Communist governments?
3 Trotsky once described war as the "locomotive of history". Can it be argued that change in Russia in the period 1855-1956 was caused only be involvement in wars?
June 2003
1 How far does a study of Russian government 1855-1956 suggest that, following the revolutions of 1917, the Russian people simply exchanged one form of authoritarianism for another?
2 How far did the working class suffer more from Bolshevik rule than Tsarist rule during the period 1855-1956?
3 Was Stalin the most successful ruler of Russia 1855-1956? Explain your answer with reference to rulers of this period.
January 2004
1 How different socially and economically was Tsarist Russia to Communist Russia?
2 Lenin once described Tsarist Russia as "the prison of the peoples". To what extent could that verdict be equally applied to Russia throughout the period 1855-1956?
3 How effective was opposition to governments in Russia throughout the period 1855-1956?
June 2004
1 How far do you agree a study of Russian government 1855-1956 suggest that the Communists were more authoritarian athan the Tsars?
2 Trotsky regarded the peasants as "the pack animal of history". Examine the view that, throughout the period, Russian government regarded the peasants more of an obstacle than a help to the development of the state.
3 How far do you agree that credit for industrialising Russia 1855-1956 can only be given to Stalin?
This may be January 2003, but I have no idea:
1 Faced with a vast and backward empire, Russia's rulers in the period 1855-1956 consistently viewed repression as their most effective tool of government. To what extent do you agree with this judgement?
2 How far did the living and working conditions of the Russian peasants remain uniformly poor throughout the period 1855-1956?
3 Military needs were always the main reason for Russia's economic development. To what extent do you agree with this judgement?
Reply 16
1
hi..iv typed up my essay and i wonder if y'all can luk at it..ir jackel (u sed u wud chk it out) cheers ppl i jus wanna know wt grade this wud b then i tell u all wt my teacher gave it
How far do you agree the abdication of Nicholas II in 1917 was the most significant turning point in the nature of Russian government 1855-1956?
The period of 1855-1956 saw a great deal of crucial events, which affected either the political, social or economic structure. So, was his abdication as important or did it merely fit in a period of reactions and revolutions which had major implications for the rulers, such as the shift from autocracy to communism.
He abdication of Nicholas II was a major turning point, politically. Aside from the provisional government, the exchange of Nicholas’ throne to Lenin’s saw a shift from autocracy communism. This had a major impact on Russian government, since it broke away from the trend of autocratic rule. This was to have major consequences as it led to mass repression through the civil war, which led to the evolution of Stalin’s despotic reign. However, the transition form autocracy to communism is argued by soviet historians to be inevitable since many were frustrated with Tsarism and seeked alternative rule. For example, the increase in support for the social revolutionaries during Nicholas II’s reign. Therefore, his abdication was merely the catalyst to an inevitable shift in political rule, hence his abdication is not as important as first perceived.
Another turning point in Russian government was the shift in focus from the peasants to the working class. A major difference between the Tsar’s and the Reds was their focus on the social structure of Russia. Between 1856-1917, the issue of the p[peasants had been one which confronted the Tsars. Emancipation was a turning point as it freed the serfs and made the government recognise the importance of the peasants. This trend was followed by Nicholas II who encouraged the creation of a rich peasant class (Kulak). Emancipation edict (1861) was therefore a turning point as it was the first step towards liberation for peasants. However, this was undermined by the hostility expressed towards them after 1917. It is therefore a further turning point, which saw a change in Russian government, which aimed to glorify the working class to adopt socialist ideals. Hence, it can be argued that this was also important because not only did Nicholas II’s abdication radically revise the political rule of Russia, but it also had deeper social consequences, of which the suffering of the peasants stands out.
The accession of Nicholas II from the repressive Alexander III was a remarkable change in Russian government. This is because Alexander II’s autocratic and oppressive regime was countered by Nicholas II’s reformist period. Of importance is the Duma (1906), which was the first step to democracy in Russia. This reform combined with numerous social and economic reforms eg Agrarian reforms revitalized the economy and stifled the growth of opposition. His reign therefore parallels Alexander II’s who also passed many reforms, which stand out in this period eg Zemstva (1864). Kruschev’s short-lived rule also parallels their attempts at reforms and it can be argued that a progressive tend had been set, which was interrupted by Stalin’s lack of reform. Even Lenin mirrored Nicholas II’s attempts at reform by passing the land decree. However, what held these rulers back was their insistence on autocracy. Despite Nicholas II’s contradictions and oppressive measures, his reign was significant as it broke away from his predecessor’s regime, which is described as ‘counter-reformist’ and is thus a significant turning point in Russian government.
IN conclusion, the abdication of Nicholas II was significant, as it totally changed the political structure of Russia. However, this is overshadowed by his remarkable reign which saw a flourish in literature and economic boom. Therefore his accession is the most significant turning point as he also carried on the trend of reform set by Alexander II, but developed even more reform.
How far do you agree the abdication of Nicholas II in 1917 was the most significant turning point in the nature of Russian government 1855-1956?
The period of 1855-1956 saw a great deal of crucial events, which affected either the political, social or economic structure. So, was his abdication as important or did it merely fit in a period of reactions and revolutions which had major implications for the rulers, such as the shift from autocracy to communism.
He abdication of Nicholas II was a major turning point, politically. Aside from the provisional government, the exchange of Nicholas’ throne to Lenin’s saw a shift from autocracy communism. This had a major impact on Russian government, since it broke away from the trend of autocratic rule. This was to have major consequences as it led to mass repression through the civil war, which led to the evolution of Stalin’s despotic reign. However, the transition form autocracy to communism is argued by soviet historians to be inevitable since many were frustrated with Tsarism and seeked alternative rule. For example, the increase in support for the social revolutionaries during Nicholas II’s reign. Therefore, his abdication was merely the catalyst to an inevitable shift in political rule, hence his abdication is not as important as first perceived.
Another turning point in Russian government was the shift in focus from the peasants to the working class. A major difference between the Tsar’s and the Reds was their focus on the social structure of Russia. Between 1856-1917, the issue of the p[peasants had been one which confronted the Tsars. Emancipation was a turning point as it freed the serfs and made the government recognise the importance of the peasants. This trend was followed by Nicholas II who encouraged the creation of a rich peasant class (Kulak). Emancipation edict (1861) was therefore a turning point as it was the first step towards liberation for peasants. However, this was undermined by the hostility expressed towards them after 1917. It is therefore a further turning point, which saw a change in Russian government, which aimed to glorify the working class to adopt socialist ideals. Hence, it can be argued that this was also important because not only did Nicholas II’s abdication radically revise the political rule of Russia, but it also had deeper social consequences, of which the suffering of the peasants stands out.
The accession of Nicholas II from the repressive Alexander III was a remarkable change in Russian government. This is because Alexander II’s autocratic and oppressive regime was countered by Nicholas II’s reformist period. Of importance is the Duma (1906), which was the first step to democracy in Russia. This reform combined with numerous social and economic reforms eg Agrarian reforms revitalized the economy and stifled the growth of opposition. His reign therefore parallels Alexander II’s who also passed many reforms, which stand out in this period eg Zemstva (1864). Kruschev’s short-lived rule also parallels their attempts at reforms and it can be argued that a progressive tend had been set, which was interrupted by Stalin’s lack of reform. Even Lenin mirrored Nicholas II’s attempts at reform by passing the land decree. However, what held these rulers back was their insistence on autocracy. Despite Nicholas II’s contradictions and oppressive measures, his reign was significant as it broke away from his predecessor’s regime, which is described as ‘counter-reformist’ and is thus a significant turning point in Russian government.
IN conclusion, the abdication of Nicholas II was significant, as it totally changed the political structure of Russia. However, this is overshadowed by his remarkable reign which saw a flourish in literature and economic boom. Therefore his accession is the most significant turning point as he also carried on the trend of reform set by Alexander II, but developed even more reform.
Reply 17
From the mark schemes, in every essay i realised key things to mention....
In introduction, be sure to mention continuity during the period but some variation (as in there wasnt much change between tsars and communists but communists were usually more ruthless). Also always mention a turning point, and then an example of the beginning of the period ie 1855, then an example from the end of the period, 1956!....and obviously this should relate to your question.!
good luck
In introduction, be sure to mention continuity during the period but some variation (as in there wasnt much change between tsars and communists but communists were usually more ruthless). Also always mention a turning point, and then an example of the beginning of the period ie 1855, then an example from the end of the period, 1956!....and obviously this should relate to your question.!
good luck
Reply 18
Hey people,
Ive got this Russian themes thing on fri as well. Just wondeirng about whether or not we hav 2 put historiography (historians views) in both essays. COuld ne1 advise me?
Cheers R
Ive got this Russian themes thing on fri as well. Just wondeirng about whether or not we hav 2 put historiography (historians views) in both essays. COuld ne1 advise me?
Cheers R
Reply 19
No you dont need to know any historians views - thats historical investigations. I took the russia paper in january and got an A but i didnt actually learn that much information. Basically i just grouped all the past essays together and for each similar type of essay i learnt what criteria i'd write about. that way you already have a decent structure in the exam and its one less thing to worry about cos (believe me) you will be pushed for time! For example, for a question on say, how the peasantry were treated by tsars/communists or continuity/change id use FROGS
F - freedom of movement
R - rights
O - ownership of land
G - government interference
S - standards of living
i think thats right...it was six months ago after all! Seriously if you learn them like that it will save you soooo much trouble - i still remember that today! Good luck guys hope the questions are ok!! x
F - freedom of movement
R - rights
O - ownership of land
G - government interference
S - standards of living
i think thats right...it was six months ago after all! Seriously if you learn them like that it will save you soooo much trouble - i still remember that today! Good luck guys hope the questions are ok!! x
Related discussions
- History A level question
- History AQA A level help
- Unit Y318: Russia and its Rulers 1855-1964
- A-level History Coursework
- OCR A-Level HISTORY PAPER 3 (Y301-Y321) - 23rd MAY [Exam Chat]
- A level History study buddy A level AQA
- Notes for OCR A-Level History 'Russia and it's rulers'
- Yr 11 to Yr 12 summer transistion
- A-level tips?
- OCR A-level History A Paper 3 - 23rd May 2025 [Exam Chat]
- A-Level History Study Group 2024-25
- betty's summer gyg
- Studying
- A-Level History Study Group | 2025-2026
- Russia and its Rulers
- OCR A-Level HISTORY PAPER 2 (Y201-Y224) - 11th JUNE [Exam Chat]
- YouTube/Podcast recommendations
- vyl's y12 gyg to get into an art degree....
- Revision methods for English Lit, History and Latin A levels
- A-Level Year 12 revison
Latest
Trending
Last reply 6 months ago
OCR A Level History British Period Study Stuarts 2024 questionsPosted 6 months ago
Anyone who studies AQA A-level History The British Empire- advice needed!!Last reply 6 months ago
Edexcel History A-Level Paper 1 2025 (American Dream, Option 1F)Articles for you
How The Student Room is moderated
To keep The Student Room safe for everyone, we moderate posts that are added to the site.
