Inter-War Years 1919-1939 - Russia

This is a complicated area to discuss. I think the best approach is taking it country by country and seeing what similarities and differences can be seen throughout different areas. Britain, the US, Russia and Germany along with Italy and Japan faced huge changes after the First World War. This Post will attempt to cover some of the major point for each country to give a basis as to why events took the turn they did. (These are done in no particular order - just how my books are stacked)

RUSSIA

It is important to note that 1917 played host to revolutions in March and October of this year. Although not strictly during the Inter-War period. The first of these revolutions led the way for a Soviet (A council) in Petrograd - the then Capital. This was alongside a Provisional Government set up after the Tsar gave up his throne. The two, the Soviet and the Government tried to get along but this was an uneasy relationship. This eventually led to a fall in the government and so no one centre of power. Hindsight suggests that this was only the start of the revolutionary process. The October Revolution was mostly steered by Bolshevik led workers and peasants, with Lenin being the figurehead.

Historiography of the October Revolution suggests that there are different ways in which this should be viewed. The Soviet View states that this revolution had to take place in order finish the process started in the February Revolution. The liberal school of thought suggest that the Revolution was a coup but it was only successful because the Provisional Government lost all authority. Others suggest that the Revolution was a fight between those in power and workers that was highjacked by the Lenin led Bolsheviks.

Not only were there Revolutions, there was also a civil war!
Simply put, this was between the Reds (The Communists, Bolsheviks) and the Whites (The non-communists). However, the Bolsheviks started fighting peasants and other radical groups. Terror was used by both sides in order to intimidate and savagery was used on both sides. There were foreign powers too - they got involved because of the hate of communism and because they were not paid by Russia for debts.

The Bolsheviks(the Reds) won the War as White leadership was poor and communications were poor between foreign countries involved. The Bolshevik's were willing to compromise and adapt when they needed too which also insured they were on the victorious side.

The impact on Russia after the Civil War was that revolution had been kept. Well that's one view anyway. Another is that the Civil War actually stopped a revolution taking place. In 1918, democracy died in Russia. Lenin stayed in power until 1924, and then Stalin took over (more on that later) with peasants being seen as the enemy to the Bolshevik power.  Secret police had been established and Siberian waste lands became death camps for enemies of the Party.

Walsh-Atkins, P, AS/A-Level 19th and 20th Century European and World History; Exam Revision Notes, (Philip Allan Updates, 2001), pp. 60-61
Key factors in the Bolshevik Victory in the Russian Civil War

• Quality of leadership
• Geographical factors
• Internal lines of communication
• Trotsky and the Red Army
• The flexibility of Lenin,
• Divisions amongst opponents
• The war weariness of the intervening powers
• Russian nationalism
• White incompetence and divisions
• Effective propaganda
• The use of terror
• Autocratic leadership

So...
Lenin was in power between 1917 and 1924. But why and how did Lenin stay in power that long? The Civil War, the Chekah, and the use of terror was able to keep Lenin in power so long. He was swift to get rid of those he considered a threat to his leadership and he was able to keep Communism in the country, leading to the rise of Stalin.


Stalin was able to rise to power by staying under the radar. He was never in a powerful position but he was never underestimated by Lenin. In 1925, he saw Trotsky as a threat and had him taken care of by his growing alliances with other men. He was able to manipulate people in order to get his way. In 1929, he had gotten to the position of dictator of the Soviet Union and had replaced the old guard with his own men whom he had been grooming for several years.  He was able to change the face of the USSR with education, foreign policy and economic policies changing under him. There was a cult of his personality, purges, his Five-Year plan and other such changes that were key features of his reign. He also joined forces with Hitler in the later years of the 1930s.

____________
This is all very complicated and of course I've tried to offer a simplistic version. I think any short animations or the such like would explain this better. I shall look for some at a later date.
A profile of both Stalin and Lenin would be a good opener to the subject and would allow the discussion of the differences between the leaders.
The Civil War could be done as a story board or some kind of role-play, obviously depending on the students.

20th Century International Relations

The blog from now on will deal about matters relating to International matters, specifically concerning the Cold War.

(I tried to get this on another area but me not knowing a thing about this site has no idea how to do it so bare with it! Hopefully it'll be clear what I'm talking about!)

The Black Death 1348

The following is a timeline of the Black Death as found on the BBC Website.

How the plague spread around the British Isles

Most historians are willing to agree that the Black Death killed between 30-45% of the population between 1348-50.

• 1317: Great Famine in England
• May 1337: Declaration of the Hundred Years War by Edward III.
• June 1348: Black Death arrives at Melcombe Regis (Weymouth)
• Aug 1348: Black Death hits Bristol
• Sept 1348: Black Death reaches London
• Oct 1348: Winchester hit - Edendon's 'Voice in Rama' speech
• Jan 1349: Parliament prorogued on account of the plague.
• Jan-Feb 1349: Plague spreads into E. Anglia and the Midlands.
• April 1349: Plague known in Wales.
• May 1349: Halesowen hit.
• 18th June 1349: Ordinance of Labourers.
• July 1349: Plague definitely hits Ireland.
• Autumn 1349: Plague reaches Durham. Scots invade northern England and bring back plague with them.
• Spring 1350: Massive outbreak of plague in Scotland.
• Sept 1350: First pestilence dies out.
• 9th Feb 1351: Statute of Labourers.
• 1361-64: Second Pestilence: 'The Plague of Children'.
• 1367: Birth of Richard II in Bordeau.
• 1368-69: Third Pestilence
• 1371-75: Fourth Pestilence (variously dated 1371 or 1373-5)
• 1381: The Peasant Revolt

The plague returned in a series of periodic local and national epidemics. The plague only finally stopped at the end of the Seventeenth century.

_______________________________________________________

It is believed the type of plague that arrived in Britain during 1348 was the bubonic strand which changed to be the pneumonic strand of the disease. It was quick to spread and was not really understood hence the rapid spread of the disease.  


The spreading of the plague was not helped by unsanitary conditions which were prevalent at the time in big cities. This included throwing human waste outside in the street and not keeping their livestock where they should have been kept. Water from the river was also polluted. In these conditions, it is easy to see how the disease spread so quickly and fiercely. 

The plague originated overseas, coming to England by the ships that were trading. The journey is as shown:

Fleas carrying the plague liked the Rats. The Rats liked the ships. The ships came to England. The Rats came off. The Fleas got bored and found new food. 

The Fleas were spreading the bubonic disease which then changed into the Pnuemonic plague. 

_____________________________________________________

This youtube link I found explains the plague perfectly along with the symptoms and outcomes. 

This Video is just a little fun. 

It is important for students to know that this was a major disaster for the country and that everyone was effected. These videos would be used in line with a discussion about how people caught it and whether there was cure.


Another way that the knowledge can be given to students is through role play. Some one being a rat, a flea etc. 
It might also be a good idea to do some kind of cycle poster to show the process of the spread.

Magna Carta

Holt, J.C., Magna Carta, (2^nd Edition), (Cambridge University Press, 1992)

·         Was a failure – ‘intended as a peace and it provoked war’ pg 1

·         Document of law – ‘ no free man is to be imprisoned, dispossessed, outlawed, exiled, or damaged without lawful judgement of his peers or by the law of the land’ pg 2 – longstanding.

·         The charter failed to produce peace because it was loosely worded and could be interpreted  in many different ways

·         New editions distorted the original text

·         Was called great just because of it’s size – not because it was actually great

·         It was not just law, it was propaganda

Government text as above

·         12^th Century England had no constitution

·         No general system of government – no checks and balance, not rights protected, no defined purposes

·         Operated in a society where privilege was everything

_______________________

There is a copy of the Magna Carta in Lincoln Castle which makes a great trip. You can do the Cathedral and the Castle which is a Motte and Bailey, so this would reinforce most of this unit of study. 

_______________________________________________________

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-essex-14835423
The above is a link to the proposal  of having a public holiday to mark the sealing of the 'Great Charter'

John

Turner, R.V., King John, (Longman, 1995)

·         King John was a loser – pg 1

·         Lost Normandy in 1204, lost a quarrel with the Pope, barons forced him to create a charter of liberties for them, and struggled not to lose his kingdom to an invading Prince = looooooser

·         Lastborn son – uncertain prospects

·         When King, he had the financial implications of his father and brother’s wars and crusades to contend with.

Tyerman, C, Who’s Who in Early Medieval England, (Shepheard-Walwyn, 1996)

·         When in Ireland, he spent all the money that his father had given him

·         When Richard was crusading, John tried to reinforce his position as heir – own court – seemed like a rival government

·         Betrayed his brother when he was in captivity – not good

·         -1204 – loss of Normandy– John was absent, 1204-1213 – amassing funds to recapture his lands. 1215-1216 – final challenge for his throne, civil war and French Invasion.

·         Personally supervised the exchequer

·         Magna Carta – most remembered for yet he did little to help draft it and he moaned about it.

 ____________________________________________

Now, I can't help it. I'm a Disney Fan and had to put this on. I think it would make a great end of lesson, obviously depending on the students and the lesson time. There's other stuff on the net too but this i couldn't resist

Richard I – The Lionheart

More historiography than events.

Tyerman, C, Who’s Who in Early Medieval England, (Shepheard-Walwyn, 1996)

·         The most harmonious and least challenged accession of medieval kings between 1042 and 1272. Pg 250

·         Needed an effective regency when he was off trying to recapture Jerusalem.

·         Was in captivity for one year.

·         Eleanor of Aquitaine was regent

Gillingham, J, Richard I, (Yale University Press, 2002)

Preface

·         Spent only 6 months of his 10 year reign in England

·         Crusades

·         French part of his empire, inherited from his father, was not kept – won by King of France

·         (Looks like a bit of a disaster)

·         Good to study because: ‘No other medieval king of England had so many enemies in so many different parts of the world and was, in consequence, commented upon from so many different and hostile points of view.’ Pg. viii

·         This makes Richard unique

·         Regarded as a model of good kingship

·         Played a vital role in the histories of England, France, Germany, Sicily, Cyprus and the Kingdom of Jerusalem.

Turner, R.V. and Heiser, R.R., The Reign of Richard Lionheart: Ruler of the Angevin Empire, 1189-1199, (Pearson Education Limited, 2000)

·         ‘Presented... [as] a model of kingly virtues because of his military exploits, chivalric courtesy and crusading ardour.’ Pg 1

·         Not necessarily seen by serious historians – different to his contemporaries – different time with different values.

·         Contemporaries see the Third Crusade as ‘the highest goal of the chivalric lord’. Pg 2 –liberation of Christian holy places from the Muslims was seen as amazing to the chroniclers

·         Seen as chivalrous

·         From the seventeenth century, historians have seen Richard as being in the bad-rulers category

·         ‘Richard was an attractive man and a thoroughly bad monarch...War was his one delight, and his only interest in England was as a source of funds for his crusade and his bitter war with Philip Augustus.’ Pg 5

·         Now starting to value him on the value of his own age rather than imposing modern day standards on his reign

________________________________________________________________________________

To teach this I would probably get the students to examine the different points of view of Richard and come up with their own conclusions. This could involve having a picture of Richard on the Board and getting them to talk about it in groups and writing these down.

Angevin king/Angevin Empire

Henry II and Thomas Beckett

 Appleby, J.T., Henry II – The Vanquished King, (G. Bell and Sons, 1962)

   

Formally chancellor and a knight

·         His appointment to archbishop was not much liked by the monks – Becket was secular which was unheard of – only went along with the appointment to please the king

·         Becket undertook all of his good work in the public sphere – no privacy when at court

·         Opposed the King’s plan to increase revenues – the King did not like this – thought ill of him

·         Also opposed the plan for William, Henry’s brother, to marry Countess Warenne – widow of King’s Stephen’s son William – as the William’s were cousins, Thomas would not allow it

·         Thomas held responsible for the death of William as he died of a broken heart

·         Another thing the king did not like was Thomas’s energetic efforts to reclaim all the possessions of the archbishopric. Pg 81

·         Henry decided in favour of the Earl Roger of Clare after the case of his castle was passed to him. Thomas wanted it - the earl said no, I got it from the King.

·         Anger increased over what was thought to be Thomas assuming unlawful power over subjects belonging to the King and ‘encroaching on the King’s prerogatives’ pg 83

·         Thomas refused to change his ways in punishing the King’s subjects

·         Henry made Thomas to take an oath ‘I will observe the customs of the realm in good faith, and, as it is fitting and proper, I will obey you in everything else that is good’. Pg 88

·         THIS DID NOT HAPPEN – Becket refused

·         Thomas went out of his way to defy the King and to irritate him

·         Henry wanted Thomas stripped of his assets

·         Thomas was sentenced to death – with no trial

·         In 1169, monks wanted a reconciliation between Thomas and Henry

·         In 1170, after many attempts at being reconciled and sorted out, Henry’s men who had been excommunicated by Thomas decided to act for the King and kill him. They scalped his first and then they killed him

·         Reginald Fitz Urse, William of tracy, Hugh of Morville and Richard of Breton.

Barlow, F, Thomas Becket, (University of California Press, 1990), Pg 246

·         Not their original aim to kill him – were just going to restrain him and use force if necessary

 _______________________________________________________________________

Probably would teach this with CSI music. I think role playing. Split into groups after doing a story board of 6 points, and act out the story. Could even make it modern day. – i’ve done this – works quite well.