AP European History February 19 -23 2019

Unit Test on THURSDAY and FRIDAY MC format & LEQ (see below for information) The following week we will start our big unit on Imperialism leading to World War One (This

means you will have to start All Quiet on the Western Front very soon. Some of the material below (The Crimean War) we have actually covered but I pulled it forward

so that it would be in context

MONDAY (Communist Manifesto is due today)

Examine key reforms of Czar Alexander II and conservative resurgence of Czar Alexander III 1830s-1890s (SP-4,7,14,18)

Materials Strategy/Format Ppt lecture-discussion

Student SkillsChronological Reasoning (2,3)Comp/Context (4,5)Crafting Arguments (6)Historical Interpretation (9)

Introduction When we left off with Russia last time the Decemberist revolt had been crushed and Nicholas I had

instituted his aggressive conservative nationalism accelerated under Czar Nicholas I of Russia. Like the Cavour and Bismarck, this czar used nationalism as a rallying point but had no plans for liberalism. His command, “Orthodoxy, autocracy, and nationalism” was clear. His Organic Statute essentially annexing Poland and his aggression toward the Ottoman Empire, led to the Crimean War. In 1855, his death led to the ascension of Alexander II to the throne.

This is a critical and some ways tragic period because if Russian reforms had been followed and up and Czar Alexander II not been assassinated, the direction of Russian history might have been different.

The Period of Russian Reforms The Russian Performance during the Crimean War and the death of Nicholas I (of pneumonia) heralded a

period of somewhat liberal reforms in Russia. His successor, Emperor Alexander II, ascended to the throne, whose reign was a period named by his contemporaries the epoch of Great reforms. The most important reform was the 1861 abolition of serfdom.

The peasant reform of February 19, 1861, was of special importance, because it not only resolved the most painful problem in Russia, but also opened the road for an intensive economic development of the country. From the first years of the reign of Alexander II society began to actively discuss the need for transformations. In numerous political projects and deliberations, which were often distributed in hand-written form, the problem of the abolition of serfdom was put to the fore. This bolstered up the conviction of the emperor that the transformations he was thinking about were really necessary. The abolition of serfdom created a new class of Russian peasants called “kulaks” who managed to attain a small level of wealth and landownership.

Alexander II also realized that the Russians could never advance as long as they were lacking heavy industry. In all European nations, they ranked near the bottom with the Ottoman Empire ahead of them in production. So, to develop the economy he took a cue from the Germans who were subsidizing the development of railroads and other infrastructure. The Russians also capitalized on coal resources to become a major exporter and a steel manufacturer. Of course, this will be hugely important because the nature of industry will be worsening and the same time that it was improving elsewhere. The urban workers though small at first, became the missing piece of the puzzle that made Marx believe that a revolution in Russia was less likely**

Another important reform was the allowance of local government autonomy. These were called zemstovs. This was an important step toward liberalizing the government but was regrettably short-lived. The Czar also initiated civil law reforms similar to the Napoleonic Code.

Not surprisingly given the performance of the Russians during the Crimean War, important military reforms were initiated.

A Turn in the Wrong Direction Alexander's reforms did not satisfy liberals and radicals who wanted a parliamentary democracy and the

freedom of expression that was enjoyed in the United States and most other European states. The reforms in agricultural also disappointed the peasants. In some regions, it took peasants nearly 20 years to obtain their land. Many were forced to pay more than the land was worth and others were given inadequate amounts for their needs.

In 1879, an opposition grouped formed called Land and Liberty split into two factions. The majority of members, who favored a policy of terrorism, established the People's Will.. The terrorist planned to blow up the czars’ train but miscalculated and it destroyed another train instead. An attempt the blow up the Kamenny Bridge in St. Petersburg as the Czar was passing over it was also unsuccessful.

In 1881, The People’s Will now planned to attack the czar in his carriage using bombs. Initially the bombs missed the carriage and instead landed amongst Cossacks guards. The Tsar was unhurt but insisted on getting out of the carriage to check the condition of the injured men. While he was standing with the wounded Cossacks another terrorist, threw his bomb. Alexander was killed instantly.

The Return to Conservatism It would perhaps surprise no one that the new czar would turn away from the liberalism of his predecessor.

After all, this was the pattern of Russian History up to that point. Alexander III continued Nicholas I on process that was known as “russification.” The primary aspect of Russification was to rid Russia of western ideas that Alexander III believed had weakened the nation and reduced its national identity. Alexander wanted to reclaim Russia’s ‘Russian-ness'. To achieve this, he had to remove those people who had imported into Russia alien ideas that were covertly undermining his position and the national identity of Russia itself. Alexander saw no difference in what he wanted for himself and what he wanted for Russia. Russification was not new to Russia. There had been isolated examples of when this was done before. What made Alexander’s policy so different was the intensity of it after 1881 and the attempt to give it some form of academic intellectual backing.

This be carried out by the civil service and then by the governors in the regions who would use the police to carry it out at grass-roots level. Those who opposed this were to be dealt with by the police. The most

central theme to ‘Russification’ was the power of the monarch. Alexander III believed that for this to be unchallenged during his reign, the reforms of Alexander II had to be withdrawn. It was not possible to reverse the emancipation of the serfs but it was possible to reverse the power of the zemstovs (local councils) and under Alexander III, their powers were distinctly curbed and handed to the Ministry of the Interior.

One of the worst features of the 1880-1890s was the start of the pogroms. These racial attacks against Jews in the “pale of civilization” were state sponsored. Eerily like the coming Nazi Holocaust, the Alexander III regime endeavored to divert the attention of the socially and politically discontented masses in another direction, the direction of least resistance. This they did by inciting the ignorant and intimidated lower classes against the defenseless Jews, who, they alleged, were responsible for the misery of the people. The Jews were represented as the exploiters of the people, as leeches, who sucked the blood of the peasant and robbed him of the fruits of his economic activity. The brutal pogroms of 1881-82 were carried out mostly in Ukraine; these atrocities and economic hardship stimulated substantial Jewish emigration from the region to the United States and other countries. In 1903, there was a particularly brutal pogrom in Kishinev (now Chisinau, the capital of Moldova.) More pogroms took place in 1905-06 (during the reign of Nicholas II). The emigration to the United States began in the 1880s as a result of pogroms, but the most intense emigration took place after 1903. Jews also moved to Western Europe, Australia, and South America, but the greatest number immigrated to North America, particularly to the United States

Economic Reforms Even though Alexander III will be wrong-headed to continue russification, he did at least understand that

the economic reforms were needed Perhaps the most important advance was made by Alexander III was his appointment of Sergei Witte to develop the economy. Witte created a blended system relying on old mercantile ideas of heavy tariffs He instituted a gold based economy for the first time and one of the most critical decisions was to encourage western investment in the Russian economy. This did not sit well with all Russians, believing that the wealth would flow out and not into Russia...and as it turns out, they had cause for concern.

Another wise idea that ended up going bad was the construction of the Trans-Siberian Railroad to tie the far east to the rest of Russia. Witte, knowing the lack of capital in Russia, sold bonds to foreign investors with the idea that these bonds could be redeemed in gold once the railroad started profiting…..this led to a cash outflow problem that was never truly remedied.

One aspect of Czar Alexander III that was maintained was the development of military strength. The czar did not pursue a warlike policy however. However, tensions were growing between the new German state and the Russian Empire which would explode into war 20 years later.

ConclusionIn 1894 Alexander III died of kidney disease and was replaced by his son the last Russian Czar, Nicholas II. We will see that the reign of Nicholas II while it started well, will be very turbulent. Next Unit we will look at the 1905 Revolution. It will be a preview of the 1917 event that changed the world.

HomeworkRead for Bell work tomorrow pp: 769 – 770 on Ottoman attempts to reform. There will be no more than 5 questions and it will be timed

TUESDAY Bell work on Ottoman Empire Reforms Explain the reasons for the failed Irish Revolution and the creation of Austria-Hungary (SP-4,7,14,18)

Materials Strategy-FormatBell work questions Review/Lecture-discussion SL.CCR.1

Student SkillsChronological Reasoning (2,3)Comp/Context (4,5)Crafting Arguments (6)

Historical Interpretation (9)

Instructions Complete the bell work 15 minutes Today we will look at two important events of the late 19th century. The Irish rebellion (also the Irish

Question) and how the Habsburgs tried to survive yet another revolution creating the “hyphenated empire” of Austria-Hungary

Introduction

As we have seen over the last few weeks, nationalism was having an incredible impact upon Europe in the 19th century. New nation states were united and sometimes immediately powerful (Italy and Germany). In other cases, the nationalist uprisings were frustrated (Poland and Ireland). And in a few cases, once great empires saw their fortunes begin to crumble (The Ottomans and Habsburg Empires).

At the turn of the century nationalism continued to play an ever increasingly important role. However, there was an important difference. As you saw last week, nation states had to become more responsive to the will of the people after universal male suffrage became common. As a result, political parties grew and were forced to win the favor of the electorate. Sometimes this was through genuine reforms. Yet, on the other hand, mass politics also featured a darker side. Deluding the people became a tool in the arsenal of nation-states. As Machiavelli once told us, sometimes the best way to rally the people is by having their attention turned elsewhere. The end of this week we will start our discussion of imperialism and the impact that it played.

However, today we will take a look at what was going on in Ireland and how the British were finally forced to deal with them. Also, we will essentially bid farewell to the Habsburg Empire (but not yet to the wily Habsburgs just yet). The masters of political zigzagging had one more card left to play.

Ireland at the Turn of the Century

In Britain, politics were really beginning to change. The old Tory Conservatives were still around but the Whig Party, long the platform of the growing middle class had begun to splinter somewhat. Now called the Liberal Party, it was a mixture of old capitalists but also a new faction that would soon become the modern day British Labour Party. This showed the influence of the British working class but also the very real challenge of British Socialists called the Fabians.

Benjamin Disraeli pushed the Tory Faction more in the direction of liberal reforms. This was partly to weaken the power of the Liberal and Fabian Bloc, but also perhaps because it was needed. Key to the reforms. The list was rather impressive for a so-called conservative. After six years in opposition while William Gladstone was Prime Minister, Disraeli and the Tories won the 1874 election. It was the first time since 1841 that the Tories in the Commons had a clear majority. Disraeli now had the opportunity to develop the ideas that he had expressed when he was leader of the Young England group in the 1840s.

Social reforms passed by the Disraeli government included: the Artisans Dwelling Act (1875) which created low cost public housing. The Public Health Act (1875), the Pure Food and Drug Act(1875) largely due to the influence of Edwin Chadwick.

Disraeli also introduced measures to protect workers such as the 1874 Factory Act which was a new restriction on child labor. Disraeli also kept his promise to improve the legal position of trade unions. The Conspiracy Act (1875) allowed peaceful picketing and the Workmen Act (1878) enabled workers to sue employers in the civil courts if they broke legally agreed contracts.

Another important issue was the last real attempt by the House of Lords to block a socially responsive “People’s Budget” Unlike in the 1832 Reform Bill when the king sweetened deals for the Lords to get their support, Edward VII threatened to add so many peerages that he could effectively get a positive vote. The Lords understood that they were beaten. To a large degree the House of Lords played far less of a role from then on. The spate of reforms continued under David Lloyd George, the last Liberal Party Prime Minister, who old age pensions, national health care (that right, Britain did what we still have not), unemployment benefits and workmen’s compensation were all passed by 1914.

The Irish Question Since the Potato famine Ireland had slowly recovered and by the early 20th century, though poor, was

beginning to develop again. However, the political position of Ireland was very contentious. Many in England had long realized that Ireland, to be kept close to the British politically, should be granted self-government. William Gladstone had supported this and twice tried to push through bills (1886 and 1893). Both failed.

To add to the problem, Ireland itself was divided over the issue. The Catholic majority in most cases supported Home Rule or self-government. In the North, the Seven Counties of Ulster who were Protestant from the time of Cromwell, feared losing British support. Therefore, they consistently opposed Home Rule.

Tensions escalated in 1912 when the Westminster Parliament in London passed the Home Rule Bill for Ireland, meaning that Ireland would have its own parliament and could make its own political decisions, to a certain extent of course. Unionists in Ireland strongly opposed Home Rule as they were loyal to Britain and seen the bill as a threat that could lead to a nationalist & Catholic dominated country. Groups such as Sinn Fein, the Irish Republican Brotherhood the Irish volunteers and the Irish citizen army had been formed. The Ulsterites then took this a step further organizing the Royal Ulster Constabulary).

ConclusionIreland was heading fast towards civil war. The eruption of the First World War helped lead Ireland more towards independence from Britain. Unionists answered Britain’s call for the fight against Germany and the 36th Ulster division of the British Army.

The Formation of Austria-Hungary

Literally for centuries the Habsburg dynasties had played a game of divide and conquer to maintain their power. The most polyglot empire in Europe, they constantly dealt with nationalism even before the term was generally used! However, by the late 19th century and really since 1848, that was becoming less possible.

Austria-Hungary was a multi-national empire created by the Ausgleich or compromise of 1867. Before 1867 the Empire had been dominated by the Austrian Germans. After defeat in the Seven Weeks War the Germans within the Habsburg Empire were forced to share power with the other major group in the Empire, the Hungarians.

The Ausgleich placed the Hungarians (Magyars) on an equal footing with the Germans. Each half of the empire had its own government and control of internal affairs in that half. There were three common ministries: war, finance and foreign relations.

It was called the "Dual Monarchy". The Emperor of Austria was also King of Hungary. The Emperor from 1848 until 1916 was Francis Joseph I from the Hapsburg family, the traditional rulers of Austria. Francis Joseph's personal life was very tragic. His brother had been shot during a revolt in Mexico in 1867 (where he had been Emperor ruling for the French). His only son and heir, Rudolf, committed suicide at Mayerling

in a lover's pact in 1889. His wife Elizabeth was assassinated in 1898. His heir and nephew Francis Ferdinand would be assassinated at Sarajevo in 1914, the spark creating World War One.

The arrangement of the Dual Monarchy worked well until 1918 although there were tensions between the two countries. For example, 1903 and 1906 there was a serious dispute over Hungarian demands for increased control over Hungarian units of the army. They wanted to replace German as the language of command in these regiments. In one famous event, when the Hungarians felt that they were not being taken seriously in the Austrian Parliament, they interrupted the proceedings by playing music!

The major factors that kept the Empire together were: 1. Loyalty to the Emperor: Francis Joseph was personally very popular throughout the empire. He was

multi-lingual and spoke nearly all the languages of the Empire. 2. the Catholic religion: - 90% of the population of the Austrian half of the Empire were Catholic and

60% of the Hungarian half were. 3. the civil service and the army, both of which were dominated by Germans.4. mutual suspicion among the subject peoples.

The main ethnic groups in Austria-Hungary

Germans 24% * Croats 5% Magyars (Hungarians) 20% *Serbs 4% *Czechs 13% *Slovaks 4% *Poles 10% *Slovenes 3% *Ruthenians (Ukrainians) 8% Italians 3%.Rumanians 6% * These peoples are Slavic( Source http://www.historyhome.co.uk) Conclusion

HomeworkStart studying the materials below

WEDNESDAY Review Activity on materials for the next unit test Unit Test materials

Materials Strategy/FormatReview matrix Peer Review

Instructions So, do you remember the glory days of your last unit test when you got to complete the MC at home? Ah,

those were the days. Well, now for the first time all year we will do both parts of the Unit test in class (Thursday MC and Essay LEQ essay on Friday)

The MC will be our normal 35-50 or so doc based MC questions The LEQ will allow you to choose from 3-5 prompts (There will be hints presented in class today)

Materials for the Unit1. The Crimean War 1853 – 1856 (only as it pertained to Italy, Russia, Ottomans, France)2. Italian Unification (1830s-1870)3.German Unification/Franco Prussian War 1850s-1871 4.Alexander II and III 5. Failed Revolutions (Ireland and Austria-Hungary)6. Life in the emerging urban society (Chapter 22)

Text materials1. Chapter 22 (all) This was mostly text related questions2. Chapter 23 753-765 (stop at Slavery and Nation Building in the U.S.)3. We will be omitting the Dreyfus affair, the 1905 Russian Revolution, Nationalism and Racism, the Responsive National State, and the German Empire for a later unit (as we get closer to WWI)THURSDAY-FRIDAY

Unit Test materials (see information above)

Materials Strategy/FormatMC scantrons, questions, and essay prompts Assessment and Review

InstructionsThursday, we will do the MC in class and Friday will be the essay section. The essay is obviously hand-written and blue/black ink.

HomeworkNone, take a break and maybe see if you can find a cheap version of All Quiet on the Western Front though it will be the end of March before the review is due.