Was Nicholas II Responsible for His Own Downfall? What can you learn from Source A about the situation in February 1917?
James Taylor 11MA Was Nicholas II Responsible for His Own Downfall? a) What can you learn from Source A about the situation in February 1917? Source A is an extract from Tsaritsa Alexandra's diary from the 25th February 1917. After reading through the source I believe it to be inaccurate and not very reliable. This for a number of reasons, the first sentence reads: 'Young people run and shout that there is no bread, simply to create excitement'. This is very incorrect, the workers weren't demonstrating just to create excitement; the workers wanted the price of bread lowered. Also the source says: 'But all this will pass and become calm if only the Duma will behave itself' The truth is the Duma was behaving itself, and although they wanted to take over the Empire, the Duma in fact had nothing to do with the demonstrations led by the peasants. The Duma was the Russian parliament, which Tsar Nicholas II created in an effort to make himself popular, but he later ignored the Duma and led the country using the army. Source A is inaccurate, although I believe there is a simple explanation. Tsaritsa Alexandra has written in her diary what she believes to be true. As the Tsar's palace is far outside Petrograd, I think the information from the centre of the city must have been altered slightly by the time it reached Tsaritsa Alexandra. As source A is quite inaccurate you
Why was the Treaty of Versailles so in Germany?
"Why was the Treaty of Versaille so in Germany?" The Treaty of Versaille was a document drawn up by the League of Nations, the main influential countries being Britain France and the U.S.A. after the 1st World War. The Treaty restricted what Germany could do with regards to the Economy, the Military, and lands that Germany claimed to own. The Treaty was very strict with the Germans as it was a way of discouraging Germany from attacking and it was also a way for the British, French and American to have a little bit of revenge. One feature of the Treaty that would have made it unpopular was the fact that Germany was made to pay reparations of £6600 million to the countries that they had been at war with and for all the damage caused even that that had been caused by the Allies bombs. This massive bill caused the German economy to go into a stage of Hyper-inflation were the value of one German mark dropped from 4 marks being equivalent to $1 an 1914 to an all time low of 4.2 billion marks being the equivalent to $1 in 1923. This meant that Germany's economical stability was destabilising and Germany couldn't see why they had to pay for all the damage and that the countries that they were forced to give money to were as guilty as they were and therefore should pay as well. The Treaty said that Germany could keep it's army but on the condition that it was restricted to only
What were the consequences of the 1916 Easter rising?
What were the consequences of the 1916 Easter rising? In this essay I will outline the consequences of the 1916 Easter rising all short term long term and immediate. The rising was a symptom of the failure of Home Rule. This led to increased support for militant nationalism. Sinn Fein gained a rise in support. The Dail Eireann was set up and the war of independence was an indirect consequence to the rising. The British government proposed the 26 county free state and it was accepted. There became a nationalist minority in Ulster. The Easter rising left a legacy of anti British feeling. This encouraged generations to continue the fight against British occupation. The big immediate consequence of the Easter rising was the execution of the leaders. This had a huge impact in Ireland. Within four days of the rising Thomas Clarke, Padraig Pearse and Thomas Mc Donagh were executed by firing squad on May the third. Then up to May the twelfth a further twelve leaders were shot including James Connolly. The last rebel to be executed was Roger Casement by hanging on August the third. Overall seventy-five were sentenced to death, and two thousand to imprisonment. This turned public opinion in Ireland against the British government. This created a new wave of anti-British feeling. Nationalist opinion in Ireland was radically changing. Militant Nationalists began to attract sympathy.
Was the treaty of Versailles too harsh on Germany?
Was the treaty of Versailles to harsh on Germany? Yes, I think that the treaty of Versailles was too harsh on the Germans and would make the Germans have a desire for revenge. I think that the treaty could have been a bit softer, but on the other hand at that time the treaty couldn't have been agreed in any other way. When the treaty of Versailles was agreed it had blamed Germany as the country who lost and started the war and there for had to be punished severely. But for the Germans they did not think they were the ones who started the war and nor did they think they had lost the war. The Germans went to the treaty of Versailles expecting to be treated as equals but they were treated the opposite ways because the allies thought they had won the war and were now superior to Germany. So the Germans had no other solution but to sign the treaty. They called the treaty of Versailles a 'Diktat'. The treaty was devastating for Germany it had to surrender their biggest glory, their army. The German army had to be reduced to 100,000 men (all men had to be volunteered) and its navy could only have six battle ships. It wasn't allowed to have armored vehicles, aircraft's and submarines. This was extremely embarrassing for a country of the size of Germany. Germany lost 10? of its land and all it overseas colonies. This meant that 12.5? of Germanys population were now of another
history coursework question 5 the blitz
5. Study all the sources, and use your own knowledge. The impression that the British faced the Blitz with courage and unity is a myth. Use the sources, and your own knowledge, to explain whether you agree with this statement. (14) I disagree to an extent with the statement that Britain faced the Blitz without courage and unity because Britain did remain generally strong and unified as Britain managed to survive the Blitz and continue working even after the Blitz. However, a large amount of the media shown during the Blitz was propaganda which raises a question about how did the public really feel during the Blitz and whether they actually felt unified. The statement can also be compared to Angus Calder's theory where he believed that the unification of Britain during the Blitz was a myth. During World War II, the government set up the Ministry of Information to firstly, censor all newspapers and radios and secondly, to produce propaganda to help 'boost public morale'. These were shown on the radio, in newsreels in the cinema, on posters, in newspapers and in magazines. Examples of this are shown in Sources B and C. In Source B, the image shows an air raid of a Girls School in the East End near the end of the height of the Blitz in 1943. This image was censored which shows how the government was trying to "hide the truth" in order to keep morale high as the image is very
Why did the US decide to adopt the Truman Doctrine?
Why did the US decide to adopt the Truman Doctrine? The government in USA was deeply unhappy with the Communism's expansion to eastern Europe, which seemed to go further and further, threatening the power of capitalism. Traditionally America's policy was based on isolationism, but the threat of Communism expansion made the Americans realise that this was no longer possible if it wanted to have a world, where the dominant ideology would be based on capitalism, and not its opposite, communism. At Yalta it was agreed that each liberated country would have an emergency government set up and then free elections would be held. However, Stalin misunderstood - or as many historians suspect ignored - this and he gave leading positions to Communists in governments in eastern Europe, then held rigged elections and soon Romania, Bulgaria, Hungary, Czechoslovakia and Poland fell under the control of the USSR due to these steps that strengthened the Communist Soviets' control in the government of these countries . This angered very much the Americans, who afraid of a possible continuity of this expansion towards Western Europe (or even worse - a map of the world dominated by the communist ideology) , decided to reject isolationism and try to stop Communism spread out. Relations between the USA and the USSR deteriorated significantly during 1946. Soviet troops after the war still remained
Why did the treaty of versailles provoke widespread hostility among Germans?
"WHY DID THE TREATY OF VERSAILLES PROVOKE WIDESPREAD HOSTILITY AMONG GERMANS? Following the end of the war and the signing of the Treaty of Versailles on the 28th June 1919 the German people reacted badly. Although, it is important to note that the widespread hostility among Germans had also preceded the signing of the treaty. A reason for this hostility, as A.J. Nicholls points out, was that the Germans had always been told they were fighting a defensive war and therefore did not regard themselves as responsible for the disaster, which had befallen Europe. After the terms of the treaty were accepted this reinforced the belief that the German people had been stabbed in the back as the army were seen as undefeated heroes. The Germans would demand for the terms to be modified. As J.W. Hiden stated in his book "The Weimar Republic": "The enforced signature of the treaty confirmed the worst of existing fears and confirmed the need for a more long-term and cautious running campaign to modify the peace terms." In this essay it is necessary to examine the mean reasons why the Treaty of Versailles did provoke such widespread hostility among Germans. Firstly, an important reason why the Treaty of Versailles provoked widespread hostility among Germans was that they felt the treaty was a 'Diktat' forced on them rather than a negotiated settlement. As A.J Nicholls argues, the Germans
How significant a role did Britain play in the war against Germany, 1939-45?
How significant a role did Britain play in the war against Germany, 1939-45? On the 3rd September 1939, Britain declared war on Germany after they invaded Poland because Britain and France had made an agreement to defend Poland from a German attack. Despite this declaration of war, Britain and France did very little to defend Poland and no combat by the French or British took place for nine months to follow. This period of time was nicknamed the 'Phoney War'. In April 1940, the Germans invaded Norway; Britain attempted to defend Norway but after their defeat, Neville Chamberlain, the British Prime Minister was forced to resign; Winston Spencer Churchill was appointed Prime Minister and formed a National Government. On the 10th June 1940, France was invaded and defeated by Italian-German forces; this resulted in Britain being alone against GermanY. Germany came up with a plan to invade Britain called 'Operation Sealion' because Churchill refused to negotiate with the Germans. For this plan to work the German Luftwaffe would have to have air superiority. The Luftwaffe had an advantage over the RAF of 2300 more aircraft overall, but they had an equal number of fighter planes. Also, the fighter planes from Germany could only spend 30 minutes over South-East England before having to return to refuel, this sometimes resulted in Bombers being left behind and then destroyed by
Explain why the US withdrew its forces from the Vietnam War in 1973
Explain why the US withdrew its forces from the Vietnam War in 1973. In the early 1960s, the American president, John F. Kennedy pledged financial and military aid to the struggling South Vietnam. As political unrest grew the support from a war in North Vietnam grew and 1963, and with John Kennedy's assassination in 1963, President Johnson felt that, to keep in with the U.S. foreign policy of containment, he would have to send a vast amount of young soldiers into Vietnam to help fight the rising influence of the Viet Cong. For over ten years, the U.S. pledged thousands of young troops and billions in financial aid until public opinion and guerilla tactics forced the U.S. to withdrawal from Vietnam, claiming that they hadn't been defeated but that they had left in their own right. But in reality, a tiny, lesser economically developed country had successfully defeated a new super power. This was due to many reasons, both short and long-term, such as the political unrest in the U.S., fighting conditions, military tactics and lack of trained unity within the U.S. forces, all of which will be dealt with in this essay. In the mid-1800s, Vietnam was colonized by French forces, which imposed dramatic political and cultural changes on to the country. And though they helped boost the country's economy, fuelled by exports, the French government often ignore calls for self-government
Was Life Better For Germans In 1939 Than in 1933?
Was Life Better For Germans In 1939 Than in 1933? It is quite hard to say in general that the life of Germans improved. For some, life was greatly improved while for others it was not so. One example of great improvement during this time is of the unemployed people. There were six million unemployed people in 1933. The formation of the National Labour Service allowed men to be sent on public works and conservation programmes. Hitler set the unemployed to work on things such as a large amount of motorways (Autobahns), which criss-crossed Germany. Therefore, he helped the Germans who had cars and he also gave many of the unemployed jobs. Hitler also helped the army and the unemployed by introducing conscription. This created a larger army and also gave those men conscripted jobs. Hitler also made more money available for the army. On July the first 1934, the night of the long knives, Hitler eliminated key SA members. This destroyed a potential opponent for the army. The SA were also said to be like thugs so by eliminating them It seemed that he was helping the general people by removing a thuggish group of people and replacing them with a more disciplined group, the SS. Also, most workers did not mind the new Nazi rules that were placed upon them. Although workers lost the right to strike, they had much better pay and conditions. This in turn made the factory owners and
