Industrialisation And Social Change 1881-1904 24 Mark Questions

Question 1

How successful were Russian governments in promoting economic change and modernisation between 1891 and 1905?

Answer 1

Line of argument: the government were very successful in economic terms when comparing to the situation prior to 1891, however, this development was highly detrimental to social conditions which lessens the purity/extent of this success 
Success:
-Fast growing economy
-New railways, use of resources 
-Industrial workers increased 
-New investments in Russia 
Limitations:
-Burden on peasants, famine 
-Grain still main export 
-Not much railway for size of country and too expensive for peasants 
-Poor urban conditions 
Conclusion:
Impressive statistics hide the poor conditions, not successful in this way

Question 2

How successful was Witte in transforming the Russian economy?

Answer 2

Line of argument: despite some limitations and failures, the transformation and improvement of economy under Witte was very successful 
Successful:
-Russian industry grew rapidly 
-Railways
-New exports 
Not successful:
-Drained finances 
-Dependant on foreign loans 
-Lighter industry and agriculture neglected, not fully transformed

Question 3

To what extent had Russia become industrialised by 1904?

Answer 3

Definition: to be industrialised, Russia would have to have industry as the main source of capital, effective transport links to enhance this and an effective workforce
Line of argument: Russia had made efforts towards industrialisation but cannot be classed as fully industrialised due to the underdevelopment in certain areas and the poor conditions that limited successfully industrial work
Was:
-New railways
-Increased number of factories and output of materials
-Number of industrial workers increased and peasants free to move to towns
Was not:
-Limited railways for size of country
-Too expensive to use for most peasants, exacerbated by lack of technical training/education and poor conditions, not effective work force
-Agriculture still a large source of capital, plus investment of foreign loans was crucial
Conclusion:
In conclusion, Russia was moving towards industrialisation by 1904 but was not fully there due to social problems and limited output/transport links

Question 4

How important was the backwardness of agriculture in contributing to the weakness of the Russian economy 1881-1913?

Answer 4

Comparative structure
Line of argument: the backwardness in agriculture was a long-term, often underlying factor in the weakness of Russian economy, however, although it was important in contributing to it, other factors were also important so it was not the greatest factor.
Why it was important:
-Inefficient machinery/methods
-Restricted output
Other factors:
-Lack of internally sourced capital
-Poor transport links
-Lack of education and poor urban conditions
Conclusion:
In conclusion, all factors contributed and the agricultural problems are not the most significant factor

Question 5

How important was an increase in grain exports for the industrialisation of Russia between 1881 and 1904?

Answer 5

Comparative structure:
Line of argument: an increase in grain export was significantly important for the industrialisation of Russia, however, when considering its historical reliance on agriculture, the increase in newer industry was more important for the industrialisation of Russia.
Was important:
-Suggests an improvement in primitive/inefficient methods
-Helped with revenue
Other factors:
-Railways
-Factories
-Foreign investment and the work of individuals
Conclusion:
In conclusion, the increase in grain production coincided with other factors that contributed to the industrialisation of Russia but cannot be argued to be the most important when considering the significance of the others

Question 6

To what extent was the construction of the railway network the primary factor in Russia’s economic development by 1904?

Answer 6

Comparative structure
Line of argument: the construction of the railways was, arguably, the primary factor in Russia's economic development by 1904 as it provided the possibility for the other developments to occur and therefore increased the impact/significance of other factors 
Was: 
-Opened Russia's interior 
-Relocated workforce 
-Greater status and income 
Other factors:
-Emancipation of serfs 
-Work of individuals 
-Foreign investment 
Conclusion: 
In conclusion, the development of factories etc would not have been as possible without the railways, which had large benefits to industrialisation

Question 7

How far did Russian economic development of 1894-1904 transform society?

Answer 7

Definition: transformation of society would involve better/improved economic, political and social conditions
Line of argument: there was an improvement in the economic conditions, and, to some extent, the political conditions, however, the social conditions stayed the same and in some cases deteriorated so it cannot be classed as a successful transformation
Did transform:
-Industrialisation increased capital
-Peasants could earn regular wages
-Land purchase
Did not transform:
-Bad urban conditions and rural famine
-Limited power to local government
-Economic circumstances of peasants did not always improve
Conclusion: overall not successful in transforming social and political aspects of society

Question 8

How far was the personality of Nicholas II responsible for the instability in Russia by 1904?

Answer 8

Comparative structure 
Line of argument: the personality of Nicholas II was responsible for a degree of the instability in Russia by 1904, however, other circumstances were exacerbated by this, making it seem a more crucial factor than it perhaps was. 
Was:
-Autocratic beliefs
-Detached
-Lack of reform 
Other factors: 
-Population increase 
-Social conditions 
-Rural problems 
Conclusion: although it can be argued that the tsars personality created these problems, it is more convincing that the other problems were underlying and came to be emphasised/made worse by the tsars personality, not fully responsible/most important

Question 9

How successful was the tsarist regime in overcoming opposition in the years 1863-1894?

Answer 9

Definition: successfully overcoming opposition would involve reducing the threat from opposition and repressing direct opposition, whilst maintaining a significant degree of support. 
Line of argument: despite many attempts to overcome opposition during these years, the repression was unsuccessful as it served the opposite result and increased social and political tensions, leading to oppression and ultimately, assassination 
Successful:
-Maintained peasant support 
-Third Section activities 
-Reduced power of the zemstva 
Not successful: 
-Groups undermined the government 
-Underground circles 
-Alexander II assassinated 
Conclusion: 
Not successful during these years but did maintain level of support

Question 10

How far did the intelligentsia/liberals pose a serious threat to the tsarist regime between 1881-1904?

Answer 10

Definition: a serious threat would risk the autocracy of the tsar and have mass support
Line of argument: whilst the influence of the intelligentsia/liberals grew during this period, they did not pose a serious threat as tsarist autocracy was maintained and they did not achieve large scale support
Serious:
-‘Young Russia’
-Influence of socialist intellectual thinkers
-Zemstva
Not serious:
-Lack of support from peasants
-Tsar refused demands for central body to coordinate Zemstva
-Tsar maintained position
Conclusion:
Their influence was strong, however their numbers/support were not enough to constitute a serious threat