DOCSLIB.ORG

Triple Entente Or Unholy Alliance? Triple Entente Or Unholy Alliance?

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Triple Entente Or Unholy Alliance? Triple Entente Or Unholy Alliance? TRIPLE ENTENTE OR UNHOLY ALLIANCE? TRIPLE ENTENTE OR UNHOLY ALLIANCE? OFFICIAL RUSSIAN ATTITUDES TOWARD BRITAIN AND FRANCE, 1906 TO 1914 By FIONA KATHERINE TOMASZEWSKI, M.A. A Thesis Submitted to the School of Graduate Studies In Partial Fulfilment of the Requirements for the Degree Doctor of Philosophy McMaster University © copyright by Fiona Katherine Tomaszewski, June 1992 DOCTOR OF PHILOSOPHY (1992) McMASTER UNIVERSITY (History) Hamilton, Ontario TITLE: Triple Entente or Unholy Alliance? Official Russian Attitudes toward Britain and France, 1906 to 1914. AUTHOR: Fiona K. Tomaszewski, B.A. (McGill University) M.A. (McMaster University) SUPERVISOR: Professor R.H. Johnston NUMBER OF PAGES: viii, 314 ii .... " ABSTRACT Triple Entente or Unholy Alliance? Official Russian Attitudes Toward Britain and France, 1906 to 1914 Fiona Katherine Tomaszewski This dissertation is an examination of official Russian attitudes toward Britain and France from 1906 to 1914, from the inauguration of a constitutional regime in Russia to the outbreak of World War One. In order to illustrate the motivations behind Russian foreign policy making at a critical juncture in the history of Russian autocracy, several groups within the Russian government and bureaucracy are examined, including the Emperor and the Court, the Foreign Ministry and the Ministries of Finance and Trade and Commerce. A wide spectrum of opinions about Russia's Entente partners existed among Russia's rulers. Although ideological apprehensions about partnership with the two western bourgeois constitutional states did bother some officials, (Russian officialdom overwhelmingly accepted this unusual partnership as a matter of necessity. The policy of the Triple Entente -- to preserve the status quo in Europe and to contain Germany -- was accompanied by Stolypin's domestic reform programme, all in an attempt to save the 'ancien regime' in iii Russia. But, as with the domestic reforms, Nicholas II's foreign policy lacked the imagination necessary to halt the precipitous decline of autocratic power in Russia. The severe constraints on Russian power that had resulted from the Russo-Japanese War and the 1905 revolution shaped Russia's dependent relationship with Britain and France. As Russia recovered from the twin disasters of 1905, she began to place more demands on Britain and France and to reassert herself in the international arena. As the international situation became more tense, official Russia became more adamantly committed to the Triple Entente. The thesis illustrates and analyzes at close range how the alliance system in Europe immediately prior to World War One became increasingly rigid and how, as a result, it became one of the major factors in the outbreak of general war. ; iv ACKNOWLEDGMENTS The research and writing of this thesis were made possible by awards from the Social Sciences and Humanities Research Council of Canada and an Ontario Graduate Scholarship. The School of Graduate Studies and the History Department at McMaster University have also been generous in their provision of teaching assistantships and scholarships. Many thanks are due to the unfailingly helpful and courteous staff at Mills Memorial Library, especially the Department of Interlibrary Loans. External Affairs and the Association of Universities and Colleges of Canada made possible a productive research trip to important archives in Moscow and Saint Petersburg. The Moscow Historical­ Archival Institute proved to be a most helpful host institution and their staff were extremely kind and useful in dealing with the bureaucracy of a decaying empire. Many individuals have contributed to this work. Thanks are due to my supervisor Professor R.H. Johnston, who was a patient reader and attentive critic over the years in which this work was born. Professor Alan Cassels' eagle eye and critical intelligence improved the thesis in countless ways. I would like to thank Dr. Wayne Thorpe for the important role he played in the early stage of my doctoral studies and for his worthwhile criticisms of this thesis. My parents started me on the academic path many years ago when as a small child I v watched my mother write her Master's thesis and my father told my sister and me Anglo-Saxon riddles in an attempt to teach us that elephant jokes really did not qualify as true humour. My small son Marcel Aidan's arrival in the world encouraged me to finish when I might have dawdled and his sunny presence since has kept my spirits up. Finally my greatest thanks go to my husband Mirek who has been a constant source of support, encouragement and good humour. Without him this thesis would never have been written. vi TABLE OF CONTENTS Introduction 1 . Chapter One_ 8,1 The Diplomatic Background Chapter Two 28 Ritual and Policy: Seven Official Visits from 1908 to 1914 Chapter Three 68 A Marriage of Convenience: Nicholas II and the Triple Entente Chapter Four 110 The Vanguard of the Entente Policy: Foreign Ministry Attitudes toward Britain and France Chapter Five 181 Reluctant Partners: Russian Officialdom and the Triple Entente Chapter Six 240 The Tsarist Regime and its Image Abroad Conclusion 294 Bibliography 297 vii NOTES AND REFERENCES ABBREVIATIONS AVPR Arkhiv Vneshnei Politiki Rossii (Moscow) BAR Bakmeteff Archive, Columbia University BD British Documents on the Origins of the War, 1898-1914 BD/CP British Documents on Foreign Affairs: Reports and Papers from the Foreign Office Confidential Print DDF Documents Diplomatiques Frangais KA Krasnyi Arkhiv LN Livre Noir OS Old Style Russian Calendar TsGAOR Tsentral'nyi gosudarstvennyi istoricheskii arkhiv Oktiabr'skoi Revoliutsii (Moscow) TsGIA Tsentral'nyi gosudarstvennyi istoricheskii arkhiv (Saint Petersburg) NOTE: Where two dates are given, this refers to the thirteen-day difference between the Russian and European calendars. Normally only one date is used and this refers to the European calendar. viii INTRODUCTION In August 1914 Tsarist Russia, together with two liberal constitutional states, France and Great Britain, went to war against the German and Austro- Hungarian empires. The Triple Entente was one of the more unusual diplomatic partnerships history has seen. The sUbject of this dissertation is the attitudes of the Russian government and bureaucracy toward France and Great Britain from 1906 to the outbreak of war in 1914. The purpose is to contribute to an understanding of this, in some ways, improbable partnership. Many of the contradictions and tensions in late Imperial Russian society as it approached the abyss of World War One are brought into focus; so also is the complex interplay between foreign and domestic policy. The dissertation helps fill a gap in the study of Imperial Russia by focusing on Nicholas II's embattled government and its attempts to survive, as opposed to the more frequently discussed revolutionary movements and opposition parties. 1 1 The following works are some of the relatively few which deal with Imperial Russia's governing classes: D.C.B. Ueven, Russia's Rulers Under the Old Regime (New Haven, 1989); W.B. Lincoln, In the Vanguard of Reform. Russia's Enlightened Bureaucrats 1825-1861 (Dekalb, 1986); M. Raeff, Understanding Imperial Russia (New York, 1984); A.Sinel, The Classroom and the Chancellery: State Educational Reform in Russia under Count Dmitry Tolstoi (Cambridge Mass., 1973); and A.M. Verner, The Crisis of Russian Autocracy. Nicholas II and the 1905 Revolution (Princeton, 1990). 1 2 The approach taken follows the tradition established by D.C.B. Lieven. He argued that in the pre-war years the Russian Imperial government system and other internal political factors influenced Russian foreign policy. He did not conclude, as did Fritz Fischer about Wilhelmine Germany, that the Russian elites sought war to consolidate their power and system of rule at home.2 Dietrich Geyer, in his important study of Russian imperialism, maintained that Russian expansion was an expression of economic weakness not strength, and was caused in part by a compensatory psychological need at least to appear to be a great power.3 He also argued that the Russian political elites had no reason to desire a European war in July 1914, and that they did not seek a preventive war. 4 The conclusions of this present study complement the arguments of Lieven and Geyer. In broad terms, the dissertation is a contribution to the debate on Russia's relations with the West, a subject that extends from the time of Peter the Great to that of Boris Yeltsin. It was not until the eighteenth century that there was a general turning by the Russian state and nobility toward the West 2 D.C.B.Lieven, Russia and the Origins of the First World War (London, 1984), pp.152-154. Fritz Fischer, Germany's War Aims in the First World War (New York, 1967). 3 Dietrich Geyer, Russian Imperialism. The Interaction of Domestic and Foreign Policy. 1860-1914 (New Haven, 1987) p.205. 4 Ibid., p.314. 3 and it was only in the middle of the nineteenth century that the problem of "Russia and Europe" came to absorb the full attention of Russian intellectuals.5 Beginning with Peter the Great and ending with Witte and Stolypin, political leaders and high officials had attempted to use western methods to adapt Russian society to the requirements of the modern world. Many of the intelligentsia, although alienated from the regime and wielding no real power, also ardently desired that Russia should follow the western political path.6 In the Westerner/Slavophile debate, Russia was seen as either unique or as a backward section of Europe, in the latter case "a rung behind on a single evolutionary ladder.,,7 In fact, at the turn of the century, Russia was a "developing society". Capitalism was taking root and the Silver Age of Russian literature was flourishing. In the decades before World War One the debate about Russia's relation to the West appeared to be losing intensity, as she appeared to be catching up with the West.s A study, then, of what Tsarist Russian elites, on the eve of the First World War, actually thought of her 5 C.E.Black, "The Nature of Imperial Russian Society" Slavic Review, (1961) p.574.
Load more

Recommended publications
  • The Great War, 1914–1918
    The Great War, 1914–1918 Previewing Main Ideas SCIENCE AND TECHNOLOGY Advances in weaponry, from improvements to the machine gun and airplane, to the invention of the tank, led to mass devastation during World War I. Geography Which Allied nation could the Central Powers invade only by airplane? ECONOMICS The war affected many European economies. Desperate for resources, the warring governments converted many industries to munitions factories. They also took greater control of the production of goods. Geography According to the map, why might Russia have struggled to obtain resources from its allies? POWER AND AUTHORITY The quest among European nations for greater power played a role in causing World War I. By the turn of the 20th century, relations among these countries had grown increasingly tense. Geography Which alliance may have had the greater challenge, given the geography of the conflict? Why? INTERNET RESOURCES • Interactive Maps Go to classzone.com for: • Interactive Visuals • Research Links • Maps • Interactive Primary Sources • Internet Activities • Test Practice • Primary Sources • Current Events • Chapter Quiz 404 The Great War, 1914–1918 Previewing Main Ideas SCIENCE AND TECHNOLOGY Advances in weaponry, from improvements to the machine gun and airplane, to the invention of the tank, led to mass devastation during World War I. Geography Which Allied nation could the Central Powers invade only by airplane? ECONOMICS The war affected many European economies. Desperate for resources, the warring governments converted many industries to munitions factories. They also took greater control of the production of goods. Geography According to the map, why might Russia have struggled to obtain resources from its allies? POWER AND AUTHORITY The quest among European nations for greater power played a role in causing World War I.
    [Show full text]
  • World War I Concept Learning Outline Objectives
    AP European History: Period 4.1 Teacher’s Edition World War I Concept Learning Outline Objectives I. Long-term causes of World War I 4.1.I.A INT-9 A. Rival alliances: Triple Alliance vs. Triple Entente SP-6/17/18 1. 1871: The balance of power of Europe was upset by the decisive Prussian victory in the Franco-Prussian War and the creation of the German Empire. a. Bismarck thereafter feared French revenge and negotiated treaties to isolate France. b. Bismarck also feared Russia, especially after the Congress of Berlin in 1878 when Russia blamed Germany for not gaining territory in the Balkans. 2. In 1879, the Dual Alliance emerged: Germany and Austria a. Bismarck sought to thwart Russian expansion. b. The Dual Alliance was based on German support for Austria in its struggle with Russia over expansion in the Balkans. c. This became a major feature of European diplomacy until the end of World War I. 3. Triple Alliance, 1881: Italy joined Germany and Austria Italy sought support for its imperialistic ambitions in the Mediterranean and Africa. 4. Russian-German Reinsurance Treaty, 1887 a. It promised the neutrality of both Germany and Russia if either country went to war with another country. b. Kaiser Wilhelm II refused to renew the reinsurance treaty after removing Bismarck in 1890. This can be seen as a huge diplomatic blunder; Russia wanted to renew it but now had no assurances it was safe from a German invasion. France courted Russia; the two became allies. Germany, now out of necessity, developed closer ties to Austria.
    [Show full text]
  • The 1904 Anglo-French Newfoundland Fisheries Convention: Another Look
    RESEARCH NOTES/NOTES DE RECHERCHE The 1904 Anglo-French Newfoundland Fisheries Convention: Another Look THE EXISTING LITERATURE ON ANGLO-FRENCH RELATIONS at the turn of the century, as well as that which specifically addresses the 1904 entente cordiale, for the most part makes only passing mention of the Newfoundland fisheries issue. Understandably, the focus of these accounts tends to be on the changing relations between the great powers, and on the most important aspect of the entente itself, which was the definition of boundaries and spheres of influence in North and West Africa. The exceptions are P.J.V. Rolo's study of the entente, which does recognize the crucial place of the fisheries issue in the context of the overall negotiation, and F.F. Thompson's brief account of the Newfoundland settlement from a colonial perspective in his standard work on the French, or Treaty, Shore question. i This note expands these accounts of the evolution of the 1904 Anglo-French Fisheries Convention, reinforces the view that it was vital to the successful completion of the overall package, and looks at the aftermath. This is not the place to discuss in detail the reasons for Anglo-French rapprochement which culminated in the 1904 entente cordiale. At the risk of oversimplification, one can point to several key factors. The Fashoda incident (1898) demonstrated, in time, to many French politicians that there was no hope of ending the resented British occupation of Egypt and the Nile valley. Confrontation with Britain in Africa was clearly futile, and accommodation potentially advantageous. Increasingly, the parti colonial urged the French government to consider giving up its financial and economic influence in Egypt, recognizing British predominance there, in return for British acceptance of France's ambition to establish a protectorate over Morocco and concessions elsewhere.2 Once this reasoning had been accepted and advanced by the French government, the British government eventually proved willing to respond positively (if carefully).
    [Show full text]
  • CAUSES of WORLD WAR I Objective: Analyze the Causes of World War I
    CAUSES of WORLD WAR I Objective: Analyze the causes of World War I. Do Now: What are some holidays during which people celebrate pride in their national heritage? Causes of World War I - MANIA M ilitarism – policy of building up strong military forces to prepare for war Alliances - agreements between nations to aid and protect one another ationalism – pride in or devotion to one’s Ncountry I mperialism – when one country takes over another country economically and politically Assassination – murder of Austrian Archduke Franz Ferdinand Causes of WWI - Militarism Total Defense Expenditures for the Great Powers [Ger., A-H, It., Fr., Br., Rus.] in millions of £s (British pounds). 1870 1880 1890 1900 1910 1914 94 130 154 268 289 398 1910-1914 Increase in Defense Expenditures France 10% Britain 13% Russia 39% Germany 73% Causes of WWI - Alliances Triple Entente: Triple Alliance: Great Britain Germany France Austria-Hungary Russia Italy Causes of WWI - Nationalism Causes of WWI - Nationalism Pan-Germanism - movement to unify the people of all German speaking countries Germanic Countries Austria * Luxembourg Belgium Netherlands Denmark Norway Iceland Sweden Germany * Switzerland * Liechtenstein United * Kingdom * = German speaking country Causes of WWI - Nationalism Pan-Slavism - movement to unify all of the Slavic people Imperialism: European conquest of Africa Causes of WWI - Imperialism Causes of WWI - Imperialism The “Spark” Causes of WWI - Assassination Austrian Archduke Franz Ferdinand visited the city of Sarajevo in Bosnia – a country that was under the control of Austria. Archduke Franz Ferdinand and his wife Duchess Sophie in Sarajevo, Bosnia, on June 28th, 1914. Causes of WWI - Assassination Austrian Archduke Franz Ferdinand and his wife were killed in Bosnia by a Serbian nationalist who believed that Bosnia should belong to Serbia.
    [Show full text]
  • The Historical Legacy for Contemporary Russian Foreign Policy
    CHAPTER 1 The Historical Legacy for Contemporary Russian Foreign Policy o other country in the world is a global power simply by virtue of geogra- N phy.1 The growth of Russia from an isolated, backward East Slavic principal- ity into a continental Eurasian empire meant that Russian foreign policy had to engage with many of the world’s principal centers of power. A Russian official trying to chart the country’s foreign policy in the 18th century, for instance, would have to be concerned simultaneously about the position and actions of the Manchu Empire in China, the Persian and Ottoman Empires (and their respec- tive vassals and subordinate allies), as well as all of the Great Powers in Europe, including Austria, Prussia, France, Britain, Holland, and Sweden. This geographic reality laid the basis for a Russian tradition of a “multivector” foreign policy, with leaders, at different points, emphasizing the importance of rela- tions with different parts of the world. For instance, during the 17th century, fully half of the departments of the Posolskii Prikaz—the Ambassadors’ Office—of the Muscovite state dealt with Russia’s neighbors to the south and east; in the next cen- tury, three out of the four departments of the College of International Affairs (the successor agency in the imperial government) covered different regions of Europe.2 Russian history thus bequeaths to the current government a variety of options in terms of how to frame the country’s international orientation. To some extent, the choices open to Russia today are rooted in the legacies of past decisions.
    [Show full text]
  • Background Guide, and to Issac and Stasya for Being Great Friends During Our Weird Chicago Summer
    Russian Duma 1917 (DUMA) MUNUC 33 ONLINE 1 Russian Duma 1917 (DUMA) | MUNUC 33 Online TABLE OF CONTENTS ______________________________________________________ CHAIR LETTERS………………………….….………………………….……..….3 ROOM MECHANICS…………………………………………………………… 6 STATEMENT OF THE PROBLEM………………………….……………..…………......9 HISTORY OF THE PROBLEM………………………………………………………….16 ROSTER……………………………………………………….………………………..23 BIBLIOGRAPHY………………………………………………………..…………….. 46 2 Russian Duma 1917 (DUMA) | MUNUC 33 Online CHAIR LETTERS ____________________________________________________ My Fellow Russians, We stand today on the edge of a great crisis. Our nation has never been more divided, more war- stricken, more fearful of the future. Yet, the promise and the greatness of Russia remains undaunted. The Russian Provisional Government can and will overcome these challenges and lead our Motherland into the dawn of a new day. Out of character. To introduce myself, I’m a fourth-year Economics and History double major, currently writing a BA thesis on World War II rationing in the United States. I compete on UChicago’s travel team and I additionally am a CD for our college conference. Besides that, I am the VP of the Delta Kappa Epsilon fraternity, previously a member of an all-men a cappella group and a proud procrastinator. This letter, for example, is about a month late. We decided to run this committee for a multitude of reasons, but I personally think that Russian in 1917 represents such a critical point in history. In an unlikely way, the most autocratic regime on Earth became replaced with a socialist state. The story of this dramatic shift in government and ideology represents, to me, one of the most interesting parts of history: that sometimes facts can be stranger than fiction.
    [Show full text]
  • World War I 1914-1918
    A Significant War Over 16 million people died in WWI and over 20 million were wounded, totaling over 37 million. There are 317 million people in the United States today. That means, that if the casualties from WWI were applied to the United States today, one in every nine people would be dead or wounded. That is how much of an impact this war had on the world, especially Europe, and why it is important to know and understand. World War I What was the correlation between the Age of Imperialism and the outbreak of World War I? Long Term Causes Militarism- Glorifying Military Power Keeping a large standing army prepared for war Arms race for military technology Long Term Causes Nationalism- Deep Devotion to One’s Nation Competition and Rivalry developed between European nations for territory and markets (Example France and Germany- Alsace-Lorraine) Long Term Causes Imperialism- European competition for colonies Quest for colonies often almost led to war Imperialism led to rivalry and mistrust amongst European nations Long Term Causes Alliance System- Designed to keep peace in Europe, instead pushed continent towards war Many Alliances made in secret By 1907 two major alliances: Triple Alliance and Triple Entente The Two Sides Triple Alliance Triple Entente Germany England Austria-Hungary France Italy Russia Central Powers Allied Powers Germany England, France, Austria-Hungary Russia, United Ottoman Empire States, Italy, Serbia, Belgium, Switzerland Game of Allegiance Did it get confusing trying to keep your allegiances
    [Show full text]
  • The Alliance System Before 1900
    How and why did the Alliance System form? L/O – To understand the key features of the alliance system before 1914 Starter – How was the most powerful nation in Europe? Who was second? What is an Alliance? An alliance is an agreement between one or more states to work together. Alliances usually involve making promises to protect the other country against nations who are not in the alliance. These promises are usually made by the signing of treaties. Why were Alliances made? The aim of forming alliances was to achieve collective security – having alliances with other powerful countries deterred your enemies from attacking you. If a country started a war with one nation it would have to fight all its allies as well. Alliances were often made in reaction to national rivalries – when one country felt threatened by another, it often looked to secure friendships with other nations. By 1900, Europe was full of national rivalries. Why were alliances made? There were two main sources of national rivalries: The creation of Germany in 1871 out of the many smaller Germanic states had been opposed by France, resulting in the Franco-Prussian War of 1870–71. The Germans invaded France and forced the French to sign a humiliating peace treaty. This meant that France and Germany hated each other. The Ottoman (Turkish) Empire in Eastern Europe was crumbling. Russia sought to take advantage of this to expand west into the Balkans. Austria-Hungary wanted to prevent Russian expansion. National Rivalries A dinner party The Rise of Germany • By 1900, the Great Powers in Europe were beginning to divide themselves into two separate groups.
    [Show full text]
  • “Splendid Isolation”?
    Crossing Borders: A Multidisciplinary Journal of Undergraduate Scholarship Volume 4 Issue 1 Article 4 2020 Was the German Battlefleet Programme the Main Reason for the End of Britain’s “Splendid Isolation”? Nathan Brewster University of Leeds, [email protected] Follow this and additional works at: https://newprairiepress.org/crossingborders Part of the Diplomatic History Commons, European History Commons, and the Political History Commons This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 License. Recommended Citation Brewster, Nathan (2020) "Was the German Battlefleet Programme the Main Reason for the End of Britain’s “Splendid Isolation”?," Crossing Borders: A Multidisciplinary Journal of Undergraduate Scholarship: Vol. 4: Iss. 1. https://doi.org/10.4148/2373-0978.1069 This Article is brought to you for free and open access by New Prairie Press. It has been accepted for inclusion in Crossing Borders: A Multidisciplinary Journal of Undergraduate Scholarship by an authorized administrator of New Prairie Press. For more information, please contact [email protected]. Was the German Battlefleet Programme the Main Reason for the End of Britain’s “Splendid Isolation”? Abstract This historiographical essay challenges the common historical narrative that Britain left 'splendid isolation' as a result of perceived German aggression - particularly considering Germany's battlefleet programme. Investigating closer Anglo-American ties, the Anglo-Japanese agreement and the Entente Cordiale show that Britain started to abandon an isolationist policy due to its vast, global and often burdensome empire before the German battlefleet started to present itself as a problem. Rather than pinning Britain's alliances at the turn of the twentieth-century on one factor in Europe, this essay investigates the impact the Americas, Africa, Central Asia and the Far East had on Britain's changing international position.
    [Show full text]
  • Anglo-French Relations in Syria: from Entente Cordiale to Sykes-Picot a Thesis Presented to the Faculty of the College of Arts A
    Anglo-French Relations in Syria: From Entente Cordiale to Sykes-Picot A thesis presented to the faculty of the College of Arts and Sciences of Ohio University In partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree Master of Arts James L. Bowman May 2020 © 2020 James L. Bowman. All Rights Reserved. 2 This thesis titled Anglo-French Relations in Syria: From Entente Cordiale to Sykes-Picot by JAMES L. BOWMAN has been approved for the Department of History and the College of Arts and Sciences by Peter John Brobst Associate Professor of History Florenz Plassmann Dean, College of Arts and Sciences 3 Abstract BOWMAN, JAMES L., M.A., May 2020, History Anglo-French Relations in Syria: From Entente Cordiale to Sykes-Picot Director of Thesis: Peter John Brobst Though the Entente Cordiale of 8 April, 1904 addressed several outstanding imperial tensions between the British Empire and the French Third Republic, other imperial disputes remained unresolved in the lead-up to World War I. This thesis explores Anglo-French tensions in Ottoman Syria, from the signing of the Entente to the secret Sykes-Picot Agreement in 1916. Syria proved to be a cause of frictions that brought many buried Anglo-French resentments back to the surface and created new ones. Cultural, strategic, and economic interests were at stake, interests which weighed heavily upon the Entente powers and which could not easily be forgone for the sake of ‘cordiality’. This thesis presents evidence that unresolved Anglo-French tensions in Syria raised serious concerns among officials of both empires as to the larger future of their Entente, and that even after the Entente joined in war against their common enemies, such doubts persisted.
    [Show full text]
  • Conflict and Tension 1894 – 1918
    Conflict and tension 1894 – 1918 Wider world depth study Revision workbook Acklam Grange History department 60 minutes 4 questions to answer. Total of 44 marks. Q1. This source supports …….How do you know? 4 marks Q2.How useful are sources B and C ……..12 marks Q3. Write an account of a crisis………8 marks Q4.The main reason for………was….How far do you agree? 16 marks + 4 SPaG Author: Mrs G Galloway Name: What you need to know Part One – The causes of the First World War The Alliance system including: The Triple Alliance, the Franco – Russian Alliance and the relations between the Entente powers. The crises in Morocco and the Balkans (1905 – 1912) and their effects on international relations. Britain and the challenges to splendid isolation. Kaiser Wilhelm’s aims in foreign policy, including Weltpolitik. Colonial tensions European rearmament, including the Anglo-German naval race. Slav nationalism and relations between Serbia and Austria- Hungary The assassination of Archduke Franz Ferdinand in Sarajevo and its consequences The July crisis Timeline 1870 Franco-Prussian war. France was defeated. Germany as a country was created. Alsace and Lorraine were taken from France. To try and protect Germany from a revenge attack by France Germany entered into an alliance with Austria- Hungary and Italy (Triple Alliance) Early 1900s Anglo-German naval race. 1906 Britain launches the HMS Dreadnought. All countries in Europe also building up their arms 1905 First Moroccan Crisis – led to the humiliation of the Kaiser and the creation of the Triple Entente between Britain, France and Russia. Although not intended as a military alliance Germany felt threatened as it was surrounded by hostile neighbours.
    [Show full text]
  • 38846 Dynastiet Romanov
    NOTER Innledning 1 Marx om zoologi. Bismack om Coburg som Europas stutteri, begge sitert i A. N. Wilson, Vic- toria: A Life (heretter Wilson) 19. Prolog 1 Denne fremstillingen er basert på GARF 601.2.27 Jakov Jurovskijs brev 1920 og 1. februar 1934 pluss ikke-publiserte brev (fem til sammen); dagboken til tsaritsa Aleksandra, juni–juli 1918, oppbevart i GARF 640.1 og utgitt som Last Diary of Tsaritsa Alexander, V. Kozlov og V. Khrustalev (red.) (heretter kalt «Aleksandras dagbok»). Nikolaj IIs dagbok, april–juni 1918, GARF 601.1.217-266 (heretter «ND»). Disse kildene er også oppgitt i Mark D. Steinberg og Vladimir M. Khrustalëv, The Fall of the Romanovs (heretter Fall) 320–366 og også Greg King og Penny Wilson, The Fate of the Romanovs (heretter Fate) 282–317. 2 Tilbud om tronen til Mikhail Romanov er basert på: RGADA 135.111.1.2.1–5, Gramota tsarju Mikhajlu Fedorovitsju, poslannaja v Kostromu s arkhimandritom Feodoritom i bojarinym F. I. Sjeremetevym 2 Marta 1613 (Zemskij Sobors charter til tsar Mikhail Fjodorovitsj angående hans utnevnelse til tronen, 2. mars 1613) RGADA 135.111.1.2.28–44, mars 1613, Gramota ark- hiepiskopa Feodorita i F. I. Sjeremeteva k Zemskomu Soboru (Formell rapport fra Kostroma- delegatene til Zemskij Sobor angående tsar Mikhails samtykke i å bli tsar). Sergei Soloviev, History of Russia (heretter Soloviev) 16.1–15. George Vernadsky, History of Russia (heretter Ver- nadsky) 5.1.278–83. Robert Crummey, Aristocrats and Servitors: The Boyar Elite 1613–89 (her- etter Crummey), 1–28. Michael: Olearius, Travels of Olearius (heretter Olearius) 62, 191, 262, G.
    [Show full text]