Category Archives: Uncategorized

The Decembrist Revolution

Posted on by

The Decembrists failed at their mission (namely to overthrow Nicholas and place Constantine on the throne as tsar) because of poor leadership and a small following. After marching upon Senate Square, the soldiers merely stood there, waiting for orders and additional supporters, both of which never came.

Nicholas handled the uprising swiftly, surrounding Senate Square and eventually opening fire on the crowd, which quickly dissipated. He gathered up the officers involved in the failed revolution and jailed them, sending a clear message to all others who dared to question his legitimacy to the throne.

Most interestingly, Nicholas’s elder brother, Constantine, renounced his claim to the throne in the 1820s, not even five years prior to the tsar’s death. His renunciation, however, was kept secret from the public until after Alexander’s death.

Speculation exists as to why this crucial bit of information was kept from the general public. Was it Alexander’s attempt to quell any potential riots, as the public loved Constantine? Did Alexander plan on announcing Constantine’s renunciation, but just wanted to wait for the right political moment?

Regardless of Alexander’s decision to hide Constantine’s renunciation, the Decembrist Revolution exposed Russia to a glimpse of its future. The Decembrists ideologically opposed the Russian autocracy and sought to establish Western sensibilities within the Russian government. This was the first revolution founded on a dramatic shift of ideas.

 

The Decembrists

Posted on by

The Decembrists were, however unfortunately for themselves, just another group of revolutionaries that failed to make an impact or bring about a change.  They fought to put the rightful heir, Constantine, on the throne, rather than Nicholas. The strange part of the revolution is that Constantine renounced his claim to the throne years before, but Alexander kept this secret from the public until his death.

After the passing of Alexander in December of 1825, a small group of officers and soldiers (numbering about 3000) marched on the palace. Their hope was to overthrow Nicholas, who wasn’t yet fully recognized as the next tsar, and have Constantine take the throne. The Decembrists were quickly and easily defeated by forces loyal to Nicholas, but their actions caused a small amount of other units in South Russia to rebel as well. These units were also stopped quickly.

Despite the ease with which Nicholas defeated the revolt, it needn’t have happened at all. In 1823, Constantine legally denounced his claim to the throne, making Nicholas the next tsar in line. Alexander did not reveal this information, though; rather, it was kept secret from the public until the time of Alexander’s passing.

I think that Alexander kept this information a secret because he expected a revolt to occur upon the public finding out that Constantine would not be his successor. This way, should any group try to make a move to take the throne from Nicholas and put Constantine on it, they would not have had the time to prepare properly. Without having months to prepare a coup d’etat, any conspirators would not have the support, the structure, or the plans to be successful.

Analysis of an “A” Paper

Posted on by
Except for some minor digressions, the author follows all the requirements stipulated in professor Qualls’ rubric. Most importantly, the paper reflects the topic of the research providing detailed and nuanced answers to the “Why?” and “How?” questions posed within the broader subject of the challenge behind bringing order into Russian eighteenth-century society. Why was order a priority?- It was necessary “to strengthen Russia’s international presence and to pacify conflict within and regulate the daily lives of the nobility and townspeople.” How did the Russian reformist monarchs of the eighteenth century cope with this challenging task? – “Peter the Great and Catherine the Great stratified and expanded governmental roles…” From the thesis to the conclusion the main ideas of the paper are clear, logical are therefore easy to follow.       
                The thesis, as well as the topic sentences are certainly controvertible, they can spark up a heated discussion, even an argument. I personally do not agree with parts of the thesis, or some of the statements throughout the paper, but see it as a positive feature, since it presents the position of the author and leads to a fruitful discussion. A simple example is the first topic sentence : “Peter’s solidified the stratification of nobles as part of his greater aim to centralize power throughout Russia.” Contrary to the author’s opinion, The Table of Ranks did not strive “to create harmony within the nobility.” Based on the novel idea of earning the noble status by merit through honorable service, the Table of Ranks was a challenge to nobility. It gave an opportunity to the lower classes to climb the ladder to level eight and above and become part of nobility. Service to the state deserved the highest praise, with Peter the Great being the most dedicated servant to his beloved Russia. So, the Table of Ranks was not about nobility (only levels eight and above out of 14 levels included nobility), or about “harmony within the nobility,” it was about service to the state and stratifying people by merit. This was Peter’s way to bring order into Russian social structure, get a better control of it and thus centralize his power as an absolute monarch.
                I applaud the author’s analysis of Catherine the Great’s statute on provincial administration. I gained a better understanding of this important document through its detailed explanation based on clear references to the primary source.
                

Paper Review

Posted on by

This paper deserves an A because of its cohesive and direct treatment of the question posed to us by Professor Qualls. The author’s direct thesis coupled with paragraphs that are used to support it, all wrapped up in an elegantly written piece show a firm understanding of the prompt, as well as a strong command of the rubric for writing for Professor Qualls.

The author of this paper did a good job of keeping his/her argument direct and straightforward by using information directly related to the points he/she intended to prove in the paper. Citation of specific articles in the Table of Ranks allowed for specific analysis that bolstered the author’s argument, and kept the focus of the exercise on the question asked in the prompt.

Language in any paper plays a significant role, and the way in which the author of this paper manipulated language made reading this paper simple. The introduction and conclusion, while both short, keep a tight focus on the ideas the author wished to convey, an element that is crucial to good writing of history.

The fluidity of the evidence presented shows the author’s meticulous attention to the argument. Each one of his/her paragraphs leads perfectly into the other, an element which makes this paper easy to follow. Oftentimes in longer papers (800 words +) it becomes difficult to follow the argument the author intended to put forward, especially when excessive quotes and paraphrasing are used. The author of this paper seamlessly incorporated quotations and paraphrasing of sources which allowed for the reader to remain focused on the idea being argued rather than filler/other portions of the essay that don’t directly relate to the thesis.

Finally, this paper shows a strong grasp of grammar and punctuation, an often overlooked aspect of writing a history paper. The ability to command the English language in a manner which makes ones writing both easily understandable and easily read is a fundamental necessity for a writer of history, and having read this essay, it is clear to me that the author has embraced and nearly mastered this skill.

Argument for an A

Posted on by

I think that there are several reasons as to why this paper received an A, the first of which being the thesis statement. Professor Qualls has always talked about how our thesis statements should be concise and should ask a specific question that can be debated. This statement does exactly that by specifying that the author believes that Catherine and Peter changed the role of the government in order to strengthen it. On top of the clear pointed meaning behind the thesis, the paper also strictly follows the thesis. It doesnt deviate or get of track with the facts and information presented throughout the paper.

Another contributing factor to this paper receiving an A are the conclusions that have been drawn from the primary sources. All of the points in this paper have been backed up with evidence from the primary documents that we have read from Catherine and Peter. These points, in turn, have been grouped together so that the overall point of the paper is solidified, rather than being all over the place causing confusion.

I think another reason this paper deserves an A is also the language and word choice that was used throughout the paper. Rather than trying to cram tons of big exotic words into their argument, the author used wording that helped their argument rather than harming it. By choosing relatively simple, yet effective language, the author was able to enforce their argument without choking the reader with it.

Lastly, the author draws conclusions from the documents that are not obviously apparent from reading the sources individually. For instance, at one point it is stated that by creating the Table of Ranks, Peter put into paper his desire to become a more Western nation. While this desire is not obvious in a first read of the Table of Ranks, the author follows through and explains their point, talking about how Peter created the Table in order to form a more Western style military as the West’s militaries were significantly more effective.

In all, I think that this paper received an A because it followed all of Professor Qualls’ basic guidelines of writing papers. The thesis was concise and to the point, the points in the paper closely followed the thesis, the language was well chosen, and the author drew significant conclusions from the primary sources from which they were able to write a thoroughly convincing paper.

 

Essay Review

Posted on by

This essay is worth an A grade primarily because of its strong thesis statement, which aided that paper in many related ways. The thesis addresses the prompt of the essay  accurately by addressing not only the how of the reforms – “…stratified and expanded government roles” – but also the why – “… in order to strengthen Russia’’s international presence and to pacify conflict within and regulate the daily lives of the nobility and townspeople.” The rubric states that in an A paper the thesis is always kept in focus, and in this paper everything revolves around it just as it should.

The thesis also sets the essay up to be organized in a way that is clear and logical to the reader. Each topic sentence harkens back to a certain aspect of the thesis, pairing a ruler with their specific reforms and the reason for that reform. The essay is set up starting with analysis of Peter’s goal to centralize power, then goes on to talk about his desire to strengthen Russia’s military. The focus then switches to Catherine, starting with a comparison between her reforms and Peters and then going on to talk about her own goals of decentralization and control over the population through ranking. The transition paragraph between the analysis of Peter and Catherine is useful for reader to understand how the later paragraphs relate to the first, allowing the author of the essay to avoid having to talk about both rulers throughout and clutter up the essay.

The paper also follows all of the guidelines found in the “Tips on Writing for Me” resource. Besides following the basic formatting and grammar rules, the author also demonstrates an ability to achieve the more complicated goals set. The quotes used throughout the essay are only used when the benefit the argument the most, or are being closely analyzed. They are also always introduced in a way that makes the transition fluid and natural. It does not wear out any particular phrases, and utilizes a variety of sentences structures in composing the argument. The writing of the essay is also very concise: it says only what is needs to in order to get its point across clearly, be that analysis or examples, and nothing extraneous.

Essay Analysis

Posted on by

This essay certainly warranted an A grade for a myriad of reasons. Primarily, the paper deserved its grade because it followed not only the Writing Rubric, but also adhered to the “Tips for Writing For Me”  document. More specifically however, I believe that the greatest strengths of this paper lie with the author’s effective thesis statement, his or her logical organization, the literary and grammatical aspects, and the topic sentences for each paragraph.

Regarding the introduction, several important factors serve to establish not only the author’s thesis statement and argument, but also provide enough context to adequately enable an uninformed but intelligent reader to understand the material. A good thesis statement keeps focus, and is organized and logical. This thesis was of “A” material because it not only clearly stated what the author would discuss, but was arguable and complex, not simplistic.

Regarding organization, the author followed a chronological format for this paper, and it worked perfectly. Rather than simply stating information, the author was able to craft his or her paper into a story that flowed extremely well.  Furthermore, the author was extremely consistent in the format of each individual paragraph, starting first with a strong topic sentence, followed by a brief description of the document, and then the subsequent analysis. The author always concluded each paragraph by reiterating the initial idea stated in the topic sentence. The author didn’t rely to heavily on quotes, and instead uses them briefly to further support her argument (listed succinctly in the topic sentence). This organization helps the reader to stay focused and organized.

The varied sentence structure ensured that the paper was never boring to read at any point. Grammatically, there are no noticeable errors that would distract a reader or prevent a reader from understanding the information. Furthermore, the author cites everything in a consistent, thorough manner. What I think I appreciated the most however regarding grammar and literary aspects, was the author’s voice. The confidence in the writing is evident, and creates an extremely strong paper. One could not tell the difference between the information derived from the primary source itself, from the author’s subsequent inferences because the language was consistently assertive.

The final strength I noticed in this paper was the author’s topic sentences for each paragraph. They were easily identifiable, and clearly related back to the original thesis statement. As a writing tutor, I notice that oftentimes, I will forget what the writer’s thesis statement is, for lack of effective topic sentences to remind me. This was certainly not the case with this writer. The examples within the paragraph could be tied back to the topic sentence, and subsequently the thesis statement, thus demonstrating that the author never lost focus once throughout the assignment.

It is obviously clear why this paper deserved the grade it received. The essay serves as a perfect example of what other writers should strive for with this type of assignment. Fantastic job, and congratulations!

Document Analysis 2 Review

Posted on by

The document analysis we read merits an A grade because of its clear and sophisticated thesis, organized paragraphs, and useful corporation of evidence. The thesis, “Peter the Great and Catherine the Great stratified and expanded governmental roles in order to strengthen Russia’s international presence and to pacify conflict within and regulate the daily lives of the nobility and townspeople,” is specific and clear. While this thesis does answer the prompt, it focuses on one particular aspect of the readings: the stratification and ranking of Russian citizens. By narrowing in on one theme in the readings, the paper is able to develop fully its ideas, instead of spreading itself too thin.

Furthermore, the body paragraphs in the paper are organized very well. Each paragraph starts off with a topic sentence which introduces the mini argument within the paragraph. For instance, the second paragraph begins, “This new system also
spoke to Peter’s desire for Westernization, especially his imitating of
European militaries to strengthen Russia’s own armed forces.” With this sentence, the reader understand that the following paragraph will explain that Peter’s desire for Westernization influenced some of his military reforms. The paper then offers an example, article 15 of the Table of Ranks, to support this argument. The paragraph continues by rephrasing that quotation before explaining how it connects to Peter’s larger goal of Westernization. The paragraph concludes with a strong closing sentence.

The organization is also clear in between paragraphs. The paper moves logically from Peter’s reforms to Catherine’s. Moreover, it tries to both show the connections between the two monarchs’ reforms, such as in the third body paragraph, and highlight the disparities between the two, such as in the fourth and fifth body paragraphs.

The paper also uses evidence well. In paraphrasing or quoting the documents once or twice per paragraph, it gives enough evidence without letting the evidence overwhelm the reader. Also, the paper does not quote incessantly; it only quotes when it needs to. However, it still uses evidence by paraphrasing the documents. For example, the fourth body paragraph paraphrases a section in the Charter to the Towns: “The first guild, for instance, was for those with wealth between ten thousand and fifty thousand rubles, whereas members of the third guild possessed between one thousand and five thousand rubles.” Instead of quoting, the author paraphrases here to draw attention to the evidence it needs.

Finally, the paper is free of grammatical errors, and the language is (for the most part) concise and clear. The paper meets the qualifications for an A grade which Professor Qualls has expressed.

Fascism

Posted on by

3 Points

1) Fascism denies the necessity and possibility of perpetual peace. It believes that human nature inevitably leads to conflict and thus war. Also, war is the time when the noble are separated from the weak and cowardly. War helps expand the empire of the fascist state.

2) Fascism provides the strength and order that socialism in the 18th century lacked. Mussolini identifies Marxism as the problem in Europe and proves fascism as the solution. It would provide the strong leadership needed in Europe.  Fascism also opposed the class struggle and discrimination based on class.

3) Fascism best represents the tendencies and aspirations of the people. It gives the people the necessary freedoms and no more. Democracy gives too much freedom to the people and lacks a strong unified leadership. The majority does not guide the nation in the proper direction, but a fascist government does.

2 Questions

1) Is fascism really what Europe needed after the previous era of socialism?

2) How and why did fascism when put in practice contribute to World War II?

1 Interesting Observation

1) Fascism’s original meaning was twisted by the horrors of WWII. In America, the meaning of fascism has been further distorted by the media. When people call President Obama  a fascist, it’s clear that the meaning has been almost completely lost.

Benito Mussolini’s Fascism

Posted on by

Thee Points:

Politics: Mussolini states that Fascism is the exact opposite of Socialism/Communism.  This is due to Fascism’s core roots in “holiness and in heroism”.  Additionally, Fascism completely deviates away from the “whole complex system of democratic ideology, and repudiates it, whether in its theoretical premises or in its practical application.”  Also, it refuses to recognize the majority as the main force behind the directing of society.

Economics: The economics of Fascism revolve around the fact that it is the opposite of Communism. The acts of Fascists are not driven by an economic motive.  This also means that materialism is not important.  Additionally, there is a vehement rejection of any ‘class-war’.

Colonization:  Fascism wields a strong desire to expand beyond its own borders and “is an essential manifestation of vitality”.  Mussolini states that their expanding influence will help the aspirations of the people and will join in Italy’s rise “again after many centuries of abasement and foreign servitude.”

Questions:  How did Italy’s fostering of Fascism allow it to spread to other European nations, most notably Germany?  Did Fascism cause concern in other nations and how did they react to it?

Observation:  I found it incredibly interesting that Mussolini was a editor for a socialist newspaper before becoming Fascist, the exact opposite of socialist.