Exam (elaborations)
Essay 19/20 A* - To what extent did Russia experience both political and economic change in the Tsarist regime 1906-14?
- Institution
- PEARSON (PEARSON)
A* essay written by A* studying at Oxford.
[Show more]
1 review
By: queenofqueens45 • 5 months ago
Content preview
B. To what extent did Russia experience both political and economic change in the Tsarist regime 1906-14?(20 marks)
Teacher comment: 19 /20
WWW: Focus is clear throughout
Criteria used and judgement clear from start Grade: A*
Excellent specific detail included in both para's
EBI: Intro can be a li@le wordy - save that evaluaEon for the main body of the essay / conclusion!
Even though you're arguing (correctly) for the limitaEons to change you sEll need to have a strong argument for there
being change to balance argument
There was some level of political and economic change to the Tsarist regime from 1906-14, however, there
were also areas of continuity that restored the autocratic regime of the Tsar. The political concessions made
by the Tsar to pacify the 1905 Revolution, such as the October Manifesto, led to the significant change of the
creation of an elective body called the Duma. However, throughout the period the Tsar lessened the power of
the Duma which started with the introduction of the Fundamental Laws, reverting the political changes back
to the autocratic rule of the Tsar. Stolypin took charge of many of the political and economic reforms but what
came with increased agricultural reform was political continuity due to Stolypin’s repression and use of the
Okhrana, so despite there being economic reforms they had an autocracy preserving effect on the political
sphere. Stolypin’s policies were also not effective because they were not long term. The economic changes
were short term and did not have a profound effect on the growth of industry or agriculture, therefore, the
reforms were not widespread across social groups (workers and peasants) and did not create significant
change. Overall, Russia did not experience extreme political and economic change and if there was change,
it was ineffective as did not have a lasting effect on the Tsarist regime or those in society.
The first political change was the October Manifesto which led to the creation of the Duma as an elected
assembly that initially held power in making laws. The First Duma, called in April 1906, was a political change
because it was mainly full of left-wing political parties such as the Kadets who had 182 seats. The left wing
Duma was a change from the conservative Tsarist government that had previously made political decisions.
Thus, the actual creation of the Duma introduced a change in the political climate at the time, whereby
political parties could oppose the Tsarist regime. The Duma was a body for criticism of the Tsarist
government and policies, giving the Duma power in social change. Due to the relaxed censorship of the
Press, the debates in the Duma were available as a source of propaganda and their existence increased left-
wing political support among workers and peasants. This is a political change because there was more
criticism of the Tsarist regime which led to increasing opposition to autocracy, a change from the right-wing
view that the Tsar ruled by Divine Right. On the other hand, the Fundamental Laws in 1906 limited the power
of the Duma and shifted most of the power back towards the Tsar. Article 4 in the Fundamental Laws
reinforced the idea of the Tsar’s Divine Right to rule through God and also allowed him to dissolve the Duma.
As a consequence, the Tsar and his ministers such as Stolypin, dissolved the First left-wing Duma in July
1906. The Duma did not legally have to be in session, giving the Tsar the means to make all political decisions
without consulting the Duma, an area of continuity pre-1905 Revolution. Therefore, it can be argued that the
Duma was a short term political change. Additionally, the Tsar rejected most resolutions for land reform or
better social reform put forward by the left-wing Duma, in fact 391 Resolutions were put forward in the first
Duma and only 2 were passed, showing how much the Duma was limited in terms of passing legislation. This
also had a negative impact on economic change because Stolypin found it difficult to pass land reforms to
increase agricultural production due to the highly conservative and right wing Duma. This meant that the
Duma was neither a significant political change nor could they create more economic change. Furthermore,
the political climate did not change a considerable amount by the Duma before 1914. This is evidenced in the
fact that the Vyborg Manifesto failed to gain support from workers and peasants to protest against the Tsar
and after it failed the Okhrana arrested and banned all leaders from entering further Duma elections. Hence,
there was still great support for the Tsar showing that the Duma did not have a significant effect on changing
public political opinions. Hence, it can be argued that the the Duma did not have political or social powers
which allowed autocracy to be restored. Furthermore, there was a change in electoral law in 1907 which
excluded lower classes from voting in the Third Duma elections. As a result, the nobility had the majority of
voting influence whilst the more left-wing peasants and workers had little, despite being the majority of the
population. Although there was a Duma as an elected body, it was limited to the upper classes meaning it
did not present the wider population. Therefore, it can be argued that there was not widespread political
change because only the nobility were significantly effected and given more political power. This makes the
Duma a less impactful political change. In all, at the beginning of the period the creation of the Duma saw
some political change, however, the democratic changes were reversed to be short term and not widespread,
therefore, there was limited political change.
The economic change was spearheaded by Stolypin, who became Chief minister in 1906. He aimed to
increase agricultural production to improve the Russian economy by creating a new social class of richer
The benefits of buying summaries with Stuvia:
Guaranteed quality through customer reviews
Stuvia customers have reviewed more than 700,000 summaries. This how you know that you are buying the best documents.
Quick and easy check-out
You can quickly pay through credit card for the summaries. There is no membership needed.
Focus on what matters
Your fellow students write the study notes themselves, which is why the documents are always reliable and up-to-date. This ensures you quickly get to the core!
Frequently asked questions
What do I get when I buy this document?
You get a PDF, available immediately after your purchase. The purchased document is accessible anytime, anywhere and indefinitely through your profile.
Satisfaction guarantee: how does it work?
Our satisfaction guarantee ensures that you always find a study document that suits you well. You fill out a form, and our customer service team takes care of the rest.
Who am I buying these notes from?
Stuvia is a marketplace, so you are not buying this document from us, but from seller JiyaS. Stuvia facilitates payment to the seller.
Will I be stuck with a subscription?
No, you only buy these notes for £3.99. You're not tied to anything after your purchase.
Can Stuvia be trusted?
4.6 stars on Google & Trustpilot (+1000 reviews)
64438 documents were sold in the last 30 days
Founded in 2010, the go-to place to buy revision notes and other study material for 14 years now