The Weakness of the Directory was the main reasons for Napoleons rise to Power. How far do you agree?
The Weakness of the Directory was the main reasons for Napoleon's rise to Power. How far do you agree? On 10th November 1799 the Coup of Brumaire brought about a leader who would bring France's power to the forefront of Europe, a nation feared by all others. The coup was the final of a series of coups between 1797 and 1799. This shows that the Directory was extremely weak which caused Napoleon to rise to power, however there were other reasons as well, such as Napoleon's political connections, his success in wars and his own personal strengths, and the opportunities he creates for himself. The revolution in France was by no means a quick process, taking over ten years before stability was finally regained and Napoleon came to power. During the ten years there were many different types of government all with different ideas, however not one of the governments really affected the peasants, thus the people of France became fed up. Fed up of paying taxes to sort out the massive financial chaos, fed up of paying for pointless wars and so people just didn't care enough to stop Napoleon rising to power, despite warnings about him from Benjamin Constant, who believed he was to self-centred, which through policies in the Napoleonic Code actually turn out to be true. The revolution also created a whole in the army due to many of the military generals who were loyal to the king,
Assess the view that the lives of the peasants in Russia did not improve in the period from 1855 to 1964.
Assess the view that the lives of the peasants in Russia did not improve in the period from 1855 to 1964. When assessing the view that the lives of the peasants did not improve throughout the 1855-1964 period, several key factors must be taken into consideration. These include their living and working conditions, policy towards them, the educational opportunities available to them and the political representation they had under Tsarist and Communist Governments. Once all of these factors have been taken into consideration, it becomes clear that the peasantry did not enjoy a prominent time under Tsarist or Communist Governments, and their lives did not improve in the period. For the majority of the period, living conditions for the average peasant remained uniformly bleak. Prior to 1917, accommodation was often of a low standard as demand outstripped supply following an influx to the cities, such poor living conditions had a detrimental effect on their quality of life which was also evident under the communists, where living conditions remained in an equally bad, if not worse state compared to the Tsars. Despite Khrushchev continuing Stalin's efforts to build more social housing and improve the situation, these were often of poor quality and hastily built. This meant that the peasantry did not see any real increase in living conditions between 1855-1964. In contrast to the
Using these four passages and your own knowledge, assess the view that Napoleons Empire in Europe after 1804 offered little benefit to its subjects.
Adam Appleby Centre No. 39339 Candidate No. 7004 Using these four passages and your own knowledge, assess the view that Napoleon’s Empire in Europe after 1804 offered little benefit to its subjects. Views regarding if Napoleon offered virtuous benefits to the subjects of his Empire are fraught with different view points. Interpretations B and C both agree with the viewpoint that Napoleon offered very little benefit to his subjects, “The ideals of legal equality… social designs”, interpretation. Conversely, interpretations A and D support the opposite idea that being part of the Napoleonic Empire was actually very beneficial to the subjects, “liberated from seigniorial rights”; “Even the downsides such as… for a centralized state”. Taking all interpretations into consideration and actual knowledge of the Napoleonic Empire, it is easy to see that while Napoleon ruled with an iron fist, he did indeed offer several benefits to subjects of his Empire directly or indirectly which both can be seen in Poland by the use of Napoleon in their national hymn of living up to ‘us and Napoleon’ interpretation D. Both interpretations, A and D, show clear disagreement with the view that Napoleon was of little benefit to European subjects after 1804. Firstly interpretation A shows this with “Napoleon saw the Civil Code… the Civil Code everywhere.” This contradicts
The impact of the First World War merely heightened existing social and political tensions which had divided Germany before 1914. How far do you agree with this judgement?
'The impact of the First World War merely heightened existing social and political tensions which had divided Germany before 1914.' How far do you agree with this judgement? Germany's certain tensions politically and socially before 1914 can be seen in forms of the strikes that were taking place to deter the government and the military leaders away from the war, essentially the opposition to go to war. So, this would almost keep the tensions consistent as it was already relatively high. Other political tensions prior to the 1914 mark included the Zabern Affair in 1913 which increased tensions of the Reich as it was a political crisis. However, the tensions could have seen to differ after the war especially with growing opposition. As the Second Reich had a lot of issues already so the 'tensions' themselves were already in full effect and could be seen to only get worse with events such as starting a war that was preventable. Social tensions were as the statement suggests were present before WW1 in Germany. Pressure groups highlighted the divisions and tensions in Germany despite them usually focusing on single issues yet after the economic and social changes they emerged due to these changes. Although, it is seen to be that some social effects just didn't affect the tension in Germany. The 'silent dictatorship' also stemmed tensions as in 1916 Bethmann called off
How successful were the Five- Year Plans in transforming Russian industry in the years to 1941?
How successful were the Five- Year Plans in transforming Russian industry in the years to 1941? By Gabriella Pink Stalin made three five-year plans spanning from 1928 to 1941. He had very different aims for each of the plans and had some very optimistic targets for the achievements of these plans. An over riding theme of each of the plans was industry. Stalin wanted to restore Russia’s hold on industry and make it a great trading power once again. The five year plans were very successful in helping building up the Russian industry. They did this through many ways, each contributing in a different manner. The production of raw materials increased dramatically thought eh five-year plans and industry on a whole became a lot more efficient. This can be seen through statistics that show the production in tonnes. Such materials as; coal, iron and steel, all rose in production quite dramatically. Iron rose from 4.2 million tonnes to 6.2 million tonnes, coal from 29.1 million tonnes to 64.3 million tonnes and steel from 4.0 million tonnes to 5.9 million tonnes. These were huge increases at that time. For an country that was struggling as much as Russia was at that time, it was an achievement. Stalin had many initiatives to achieve a better industry. He put in place a reward scheme for workers if they helped reach the targets that were set. Workers were encouraged to work for
Explain how the effects of the First World War caused the collapse of the Tsarist regime
) Explain how the effects of the First World War caused the collapse of the Tsarist regime (8 marks) There were many causes of the collapse of the Tsarist regime. One of the biggest causes, however, was the First World War, as it had many effects on everyone in Russia, who all blamed the Tsar. The Tsar abdicated in 1917 because he had no control over anyone in Russia. He had no support. This was because everyone in Russia blamed the Tsar for something. They layed all the blame at his feet because he was in charge and was the only person who could change things. One of the main reasons why the 1905 revolution failed was because the Tsar had the support and control of the military. By the time the 1917 revolution had started, the Tsar had lost this support and control. He had no protection. This happened because of the war. Firstly, the army was very poorly equipped, as some men didn't have any boots and only a third of men had rifles. The army also had very incompetent leaders. There is evidence of this in the battles at Tannenberg and the Masurian Lakes. In both of these, the 'huge Russian armies' (Brooman 1994) were wiped out when they should have easily beaten a single German army. The poor leadership combined with the poorly equipped army made Russia suffer many defeats in the war. By 1917, 0.8 million Russian troops had been killed, 4.6 million wounded and 3.3 million
To What Extent was fear of the Gestapo and the SS the main reason why Hitler was able to stay in power after 1933?
To What Extent was fear of the Gestapo and the SS the main reason why Hitler was able to stay in power after 1933? After Hitler was made chancellor in 1933 and Fuhrer after Hindenburg's death, there were a number of factors that secured his status as Fuhrer with many legal and violent methods. His use of the Gestapo and the SS was certainly important to his ability to stay in power after 1933. This was not the only reason why he stayed in power, propaganda, his use of the state and party and social benefits all contributed to him staying as Fuhrer. Of course being leader, Hitler himself was a reason with his personal skills as the leader. Fear of the Gestapo and the SS was a important factor of this but their were certainly other reasons for Hitler's status to be secured. Fear of the Gestapo and the SS was a reason why Hitler stayed in power after 1933 as both organisations' techniques of spreading terror over Germany. This fear would have significantly reduced the number of people and groups standing against the Nazis as everyone knew the consequences for their actions could be severe. There is no doubt that the two organisations had a bad reputation for being very violent towards opposition and people that upset Hitler but it is debatable whether they actually had a huge impact on Hitler's ability to stay in power. The traditional view was that terror was a part of
Why did Mussolini come to Power in 1922? How did Mussolini consolidate his position by 1926?
History L6 HL Written by: Igor Knezevic Why did Mussolini come to Power in 1922? How did Mussolini consolidate his position by 1926? After the unification of Italy in 1870 the country was run by a series of liberal governments. The period between 1870 and 1922 was an era that faced major problems- poverty, unemployment, a lack of national identity and perhaps most significantly of all, the First World War. The Liberal government were extremely ineffective in solving these problems, which caused unrest within the population. There was also a severe lack of unity within the government and a lot of internal political conflict. However, the Liberal government were not only ineffective, they were unpopular. For example, the government attempted to solve the problem of the lack of natural resources and military strength by forming a triple alliance with Germany and Austria-Hungary, who were traditionally Italy's greatest enemy, and the people resented this. This gave rise to unrest among the people, leading to the development of socialism, despite attempts to ban it. All the above points served only to aid Mussolini in his rise to power and the government's weaknesses provided a platform on which his popularity could grow and as editor of a socialist newspaper he was able to influence people's opinions a great deal. The single most
Was it the policies pursued by Henry VIII that caused "the mid-Tudor crisis"?
Was it the policies pursued by Henry VIII that caused "the mid-Tudor crisis"? "The mid-Tudor crisis" is a term often used by historians to describe the reigns of Edward VI (1547-1553) and Mary I (1553-1558). This period can be seen as a crisis, due to the fact that there were so many problems, financial, social, religious and constitutional, all of which led to rebellions, and placed the country in a very unstable position. It is clear that many of the origins of this 'crisis' have their roots in the reign of Henry VIII, especially in his final years, and therefore to an extent his policies were responsible for the 'mid-Tudor crisis'. He left a very difficult legacy to his successors, but it must be remembered that Somerset exacerbated the problems already in existence and Northumberland and Mary then had the difficult task of resolving them. Henry VIII on his own can not be held entirely responsible for the crisis, he was only one contributing factor. There were many underlying social and economic problems which his policies did not cause. Henry's policies relating to the constitutional difficulties can not be held to blame for the crisis. Indeed, during his reign, Cromwell's reforms had actually made the Tudor state more powerful, but "this advantage was weakened by a minority". Before he died in 1547, Henry had attempted to prevent a power struggle by setting up a
Assess the successes and failures of Mussolini's domestic policy.
Assess the successes and failures of Mussolini's domestic policy. Mussolini's primary aim in 1919 when he came into power was to fascitise the Italian nation as a whole, young and old; he wanted his nation to be utterly committed and disciplined towards the new fascist state rather than being passive and going along with everyone else. To achieve this goal, Mussolini set about trying to influence and ultimately change make domestic establishments more 'fascist', that is, to follow the principles of a very right-wing, nationalist totalitarian state in which the 'Duce is always right' and in which the principles of 'Believe, Obey, Fight' are considered paramount. Mussolini attempted to alter Church-state relations, to create the perfect fascist woman, to fascitise the educational system and the youths of Italy, to change Italy's economic and political structure, and to create a nation that would be respected by other nations, by using his strategies of the 'battle for land, grain and births' and by proving the strength of the nation through sporting achievements. However, Mussolini's policies failed to unite the country and fascitise the nation as a whole; his economic polices were disastrous, Italy was fairly weak politically, and women and teenagers failed to be heavily affected by a fascist state; Mussolini did handle the Church-State relations well however but in the
