Work on assignment 25 exam history. Template and plan for a historical essay on history

Sections of the site

Editor's Choice:

Advertising

home - Carr Allen

Task 25 (11 points)

You need to write a historical essay about ONE of the periods in the history of Russia:

1) 1325–1462;

2) 1682–1725;

3) 1924–1953

The essay must:

- indicate at least two events (phenomena, processes) relating to a given period of history;

- name two historical figures whose activities are associated with the indicated events (phenomena, processes), and, using knowledge historical facts, to characterize the role of these personalities in the events (phenomena, processes) of a given period in the history of Russia;

- indicate at least two causal relationships that existed between events (phenomena, processes) within a given period of history.

Using the knowledge of historical facts and (or) the opinions of historians, give one historical assessment of the significance of this period for the history of Russia. In the course of the presentation, it is necessary to use historical terms, concepts related to this period.

In the case when historical events (phenomena, processes) are not indicated or all specified historical events (phenomena, processes) do not belong to the selected period, the answer is rated 0 points (0 points are assigned for each of the criteria K1–K7

Criterion 1. Indication of events (phenomena, processes).

In the case when two events (phenomena, processes) are correctly indicated, 2 points are given.

If one event (phenomenon, process) is correctly indicated - 1 point.

If events (phenomena, processes) are not indicated or indicated incorrectly, then 0 points are given.

Criterion 2. Mention of historical figures and their role in a given period of Russian history.

Scored from 2 to 0 points. In the case when two historical figures are correctly indicated, the role of these personalities in the events (phenomena, processes) of a given period of Russian history is correctly indicated, 2 points are given.

If one or two historical figures are correctly indicated, the role of only one person in the events (phenomena, processes) of a given period of Russian history is correctly indicated, 1 point is given.

If one or two historical figures are correctly indicated, and their role in the events (phenomena, processes) of a given period of Russian history is indicated incorrectly, OR one or two historical figures are correctly indicated, and their role in events (phenomena, processes) of a given period of Russian history is not is specified, OR historical figures are indicated incorrectly, OR historical figures are not indicated, then 0 points are given.

Criterion 3. Causal relationships.

It is estimated from 0 to 2 points.

In the case when two causal relationships that existed between events (phenomena, processes) are correctly indicated, 2 points are given.

If one causal relationship that existed between events (phenomena, processes) is correctly indicated, then 1 point is given.

If the cause-and-effect relationships are incorrect, OR the cause-and-effect relationships are not indicated, then 0 points are given.

Criterion 4. Historical assessment of events .

Estimated from 0 to 1 point.

If a historical assessment of the significance of the period is given based on historical facts and (or) the opinions of historians, then 1 point is given.

If the historical assessment is formulated in a general form or at the level of ordinary ideas, without involving historical facts and (or) the opinions of historians, OR the historical assessment is not given, then 0 points are given.

Criterion 5. Use of historical terms, concepts .

Estimated from 0 to 1 point.

If historical terms and concepts are correctly used in the presentation, then 1 point can be put.

If during the presentation the incorrect use of historical terms, concepts is allowed, OR historical terms, concepts are not used, then 0 points will be given.

Criterion 6. Existence of factual errors .

It is estimated from 0 to 2 points.

According to this criterion, positive points will be given only if at least 4 points are given according to criteria K1-K4.

When evaluating according to the K6 criterion, errors taken into account when scoring according to the K1–K5 criteria are not counted.

If there are no factual errors in the historical essay, then 2 points are given.

If one factual error is made - 1 point. If two or more factual errors are made - 0 points.

Criterion 7. Form of presentation.

1 point according to the K7 criterion can be set only if at least 4 points are given according to the K1-K4 criteria.

If the answer is presented in the form of a historical essay (consistent, coherent presentation of the material), then 1 point is given for it.

If the answer is presented in the form of separate fragmentary provisions - only 0 points.

In total, you can get up to 11 points for the essay.

An example of a historical essay

Let us give an example of a historical essay on the period 1645–1676.

In accordance with the requirements for an essay, let's start with the characteristics of the period (criterion K1).

"1645-1676 - this is the period of the reign of Alexei Mikhailovich Romanov. This king carried out many practical transformations in all spheres of the country's public life, which prepared the basis for the future reforms of Peter I. Let's name some of them. The legislative system of the country was improved, a new set of laws was adopted - the Cathedral Code (1649). In this document, the legal registration of serfdom was fixed. According to him, the search for runaway peasants became indefinite, the peasants became forever the property of the owner, the fixed summers were eliminated. In addition, the Code reflected the process of formation of absolutism. It included a chapter regulating the attitude towards the sovereign and proclaiming the most severe punishments for the slightest offenses against the sovereign and the state. Thus, the adoption of the Council Code significantly strengthened the power of the tsar, strengthened the role of the nobles, preserved and confirmed the significant role of the church in the state.

In accordance with the evaluation criteria, this part of the essay characterizes the first of the required two events (phenomena, processes) and summarizes the development of this event (phenomenon, process) (criterion 1).

In accordance with criterion 2, it is necessary to tell about the historical person associated with the event (phenomenon, process) described earlier, and show the role of this person in this event.

“Alexey Mikhailovich himself took an active part in the preparation of the Cathedral Code. The king watched the work of the cathedral, made his own adjustments to the legislation.

An educator, the “uncle” of the tsar, the head of the government, the boyar B.I., who was close to the tsar, played an important role in the work of the council and in the drafting of legislation. Morozov. Despite the fact that after the Salt Riot of 1648 he was removed from official participation in government, he tacitly continued to play a huge role at the court of Alexei Mikhailovich, including supervising the preparation of the Cathedral Code.

In the essay, it is necessary to mention at least two events (phenomena, processes), so let's consider one more event.

“This historical period also went down in history under the name “schism of the Russian Orthodox Church”. The beginning of the split dates back to 1654, when Patriarch Nikon began reforming the church. Nikon strove for the unification of church rituals, books, holidays, etc. But not all believers were ready to accept the new rules, and so-called Old Believers, or schismatics, arose. Its essence was expressed in disagreement with the new church orders and the desire to adhere to the old, pre-reform rites.

Despite the split, church reforms led to the unification of the Russian Orthodox Church, strengthening the power and role of the church in the country. However, we must not forget that another consequence of the reforms was the separation of believers, which has been preserved for many centuries.

In accordance with criterion 2, it is necessary to write about a historical person associated with the second event (phenomenon, process) described earlier, and show the role of this person in this event, so you should definitely talk about church leaders who participated in the preparation and implementation of reforms.

“The central figures during the period of the church schism were Patriarch Nikon and Archpriest Avvakum. Both were prominent spiritual figures in Russia, both were in the inner circle of Alexei Mikhailovich, both enjoyed great prestige among believers. However, Avvakum did not accept Nikon's desire to take Byzantine books and rituals as a model for the unification of books and rituals, but argued that Russia had its own, Slavic Christian roots, which should have been taken as a model in the reform. Avvakum, by personal example, demonstrated loyalty to his principles, defended adherence to antiquity, laid the foundation for a schismatic movement.

Nikon first established himself as an active reformer, a supporter of the new, the union of church and state. But in the future, his desire to put church power above secular power led to the fact that Alexei Mikhailovich stopped supporting him and even actively spoke out for Nikon's resignation from the patriarchal throne, which happened in 1667. After that, Nikon was sent to northern exile, where he spent the rest of my days."

In accordance with the requirements of criterion 3, causal relationships between events should be established.

“There are undoubtedly causal relationships between these events. Both events - both the adoption of the Council Code and the church reform - were dictated by common reasons: the aggravation of social contradictions in the country, the population's interest in creating clear and precise laws, and the need to strengthen the authority of secular and church authorities.

The consequence of these events was the strengthening of the central government, the strengthening of the influence of the church in the state, the strengthening of the authority of Russia as a whole.

In accordance with criterion 4, a historical assessment of the period should be made based on the facts and opinions of historians.

“Aleksey Mikhailovich ruled for a long period - 31 years. During his reign, many reforms were carried out in almost all spheres of public life. But his reign cannot be unequivocally assessed.

On the one hand, a significant step forward was made in the development of the economy. Elements of capitalist relations began to develop faster in the country, foreign specialists began to be attracted more often, the tax system changed, and a policy of protectionism was pursued. The Cathedral Code became for many decades the main legislation of the country. Significant progress has been made in foreign policy: peace treaties were signed with many countries (for example, the Peace of Cardis in 1661 with Sweden, the Andrusovo truce with Poland in 1667), in 1654 Russia and Ukraine were reunited, the territories of Russia in the East were significantly expanded (research Eastern Siberia Russian pioneers and merchants).

But, on the other hand, it was under Alexei Mikhailovich that serfdom was finally formalized (1649), and the tax burden on the population of the country increased significantly. Many social protests took place (e.g. the Salt Riot of 1648, the Copper Riot of 1662, the first peasant war under the leadership of Stepan Razin 1670–1671 and etc.).

The very figure of Alexei Mikhailovich is also ambiguously assessed by domestic and foreign historians of both the past and the present.

The image of Tsar Alexei Mikhailovich in historiography is rather contradictory. In addition, an assessment of the personality of Alexei Mikhailovich often becomes an attempt to justify the nickname “the quietest” attributed to him. This characteristic quickly became almost the only indisputable assessment of the personal qualities of the ruler.

In the study by S.M. Solovyov "History from ancient times" almost three volumes are devoted to the reign of the tsar, but the author did not consider the personality of the ruler himself fateful for Russian history. If we talk about how Solovyov himself evaluates Alexei Mikhailovich, then the tsar, from his point of view, was distinguished by “kindness” and “gentleness”, like his father, Mikhail Fedorovich.

A more detailed description of the king is given by V.O. Klyuchevsky: “I am ready to see in him a better person Ancient Russia, at least I don’t know another old Russian person who would make a more pleasant impression - but not on the throne. This "best" person, according to Klyuchevsky, was passive and unstable, little able to "defend or carry out anything", "easily lost self-control and gave too much room to his tongue and hands."

From the point of view of S.F. Platonov, Alexei Mikhailovich "was a wonderful and noble, but too soft and indecisive person."

The modern historian Igor Andreev uses this epithet on almost every page and several times in his research. “Undoubtedly, the heroic tragedy is not his genre. The Quietest, he is the Quietest, ”he claims on the first pages of a monograph dedicated to the king. This epithet was able to displace even the name of the king and take his place. Known historical novel about Tsar V. Bahrevsky under the title "The Quietest", a novel by V.Ya. Svetlov "At the Court of the Quietest Emperor".

In general, the era of Alexei Mikhailovich is a period of strengthening absolutism, creating the prerequisites for the reforms of Peter the Great.

Sequencing

In conclusion of our brief overview of the features of working on the new task 25, we want to recommend a short template, using which it is easier to build some sequence of actions for yourself.

___ (required period) is the reign of ___. This king (prince, ruler) carried out many transformations of ___. I will name the most important of them.

Event (phenomenon, process) No. 1 + result.

Event (phenomenon, process) No. 2 + result.

The historical personality associated with this event (phenomenon, process), and its role.

Consider what causal relationships exist between these events (phenomena, processes) during the reign of ___. Both events - ___ and ___ - were dictated by common causes: ___.

The results of these events (that is, their consequence) were ___, ___, ___.

Ruled for a long time - ___ years. His reign cannot be unequivocally assessed.

On the one side, ___.

But in other way, ___.

The figure ___ itself is also ambiguously assessed by domestic and foreign historians of both the past and the present. The image of ___ in historiography is rather contradictory.

The reign of ___ as a whole became the period of ___.

Task 25 (11 points)

You need to write a historical essay about ONE of the periods in the history of Russia:

1) 1325–1462;

2) 1682–1725;

3) 1924–1953

The essay must:

Indicate at least two events (phenomena, processes) relating to a given period of history;

Name two historical personalities whose activities are associated with the indicated events (phenomena, processes), and, using knowledge of historical facts, characterize the role of these personalities in the events (phenomena, processes) of a given period of Russian history;

Indicate at least two causal relationships that existed between events (phenomena, processes) within a given period of history.

Criterion 1. Indication of events (phenomena, processes).

In the case when two events (phenomena, processes) are correctly indicated, 2 points are given.

If one event (phenomenon, process) is correctly indicated - 1 point.

If events (phenomena, processes) are not indicated or indicated incorrectly, then 0 points are given.

Criterion 2. Mention of historical figures and their role in a given period of Russian history.

Criterion 3. Causal relationships.

It is estimated from 0 to 2 points.

In the case when two causal relationships that existed between events (phenomena, processes) are correctly indicated, 2 points are given.

If one causal relationship that existed between events (phenomena, processes) is correctly indicated, then 1 point is given.

If the cause-and-effect relationships are incorrect, OR the cause-and-effect relationships are not indicated, then 0 points are given.

Criterion 4. Historical assessment of events.

Estimated from 0 to 1 point.

If a historical assessment of the significance of the period is given based on historical facts and (or) the opinions of historians, then 1 point is given.

Criterion 5. Use of historical terms, concepts.

Estimated from 0 to 1 point.

If historical terms and concepts are correctly used in the presentation, then 1 point can be put.

If during the presentation the incorrect use of historical terms, concepts is allowed, OR historical terms, concepts are not used, then 0 points will be given.

Criterion 6. Existence of factual errors.

It is estimated from 0 to 2 points.

According to this criterion, positive points will be given only if at least 4 points are given according to criteria K1-K4.

When evaluating according to the K6 criterion, errors taken into account when scoring according to the K1–K5 criteria are not counted.

If there are no factual errors in the historical essay, then 2 points are given.

If one factual error is made - 1 point. If two or more factual errors are made - 0 points.

Criterion 7. Form of presentation.

1 point according to the K7 criterion can be set only if at least 4 points are given according to the K1-K4 criteria.

If the answer is presented in the form of a historical essay (consistent, coherent presentation of the material), then 1 point is given for it.

If the answer is presented in the form of separate fragmentary provisions - only 0 points.

In total, you can get up to 11 points for the essay.

An example of a historical essay

Let us give an example of a historical essay on the period 1645–1676.

In accordance with the requirements for an essay, let's start with the characteristics of the period (criterion K1).

In accordance with criterion 2, it is necessary to tell about the historical person associated with the event (phenomenon, process) described earlier, and show the role of this person in this event.

“Alexey Mikhailovich himself took an active part in the preparation of the Cathedral Code. The king watched the work of the cathedral, made his own adjustments to the legislation.

In the essay, it is necessary to mention at least two events (phenomena, processes), so let's consider one more event.

In accordance with the requirements of criterion 3, causal relationships between events should be established.

The consequence of these events was the strengthening of the central government, the strengthening of the influence of the church in the state, the strengthening of the authority of Russia as a whole.

In accordance with criterion 4, a historical assessment of the period should be made based on the facts and opinions of historians.

“Aleksey Mikhailovich ruled for a long period - 31 years. During his reign, many reforms were carried out in almost all spheres of public life. But his reign cannot be unequivocally assessed.

On the one hand, a significant step forward was made in the development of the economy. Elements of capitalist relations began to develop faster in the country, foreign specialists began to be attracted more often, the tax system changed, and a policy of protectionism was pursued. The Cathedral Code became for many decades the main legislation of the country. Significant successes were achieved in foreign policy: peace treaties were signed with many countries (for example, the Treaty of Cardis in 1661 with Sweden, the Andrusovo truce with Poland in 1667), in 1654 Russia and Ukraine were reunited, the territories of Russia in the East were significantly expanded (studies of Eastern Siberia by Russian pioneers and merchants).

But, on the other hand, it was under Alexei Mikhailovich that serfdom was finally formalized (1649), and the tax burden on the population of the country increased significantly. Many social protests took place (for example, the Salt Riot of 1648, the Copper Riot of 1662, the first peasant war led by Stepan Razin in 1670–1671, etc.).

The very figure of Alexei Mikhailovich is also ambiguously assessed by domestic and foreign historians of both the past and the present.

A more detailed description of the king is given by V.O. Klyuchevsky: “I am ready to see in him the best person of Ancient Russia, at least I don’t know another ancient Russian person who would make a more pleasant impression - but not on the throne.” This "best" person, according to Klyuchevsky, was passive and unstable, little able to "defend or carry out anything", "easily lost self-control and gave too much room to his tongue and hands."

From the point of view of S.F. Platonov, Alexei Mikhailovich "was a wonderful and noble, but too soft and indecisive person."

The modern historian Igor Andreev uses this epithet on almost every page and several times in his research. “Undoubtedly, the heroic tragedy is not his genre. The Quietest, he is the Quietest, ”he claims on the first pages of a monograph dedicated to the king. This epithet was able to displace even the name of the king and take his place. There is a historical novel about Tsar V. Bahrevsky called "The Quietest", a novel by V.Ya. Svetlov "At the Court of the Quietest Emperor".

In general, the era of Alexei Mikhailovich is a period of strengthening absolutism, creating the prerequisites for the reforms of Peter the Great.

Sequencing

In conclusion of our brief overview of the features of working on the new task 25, we want to recommend a short template, using which it is easier to build some sequence of actions for yourself.

___ (required period) is the reign of ___. This king (prince, ruler) carried out many transformations of ___. I will name the most important of them.

Event (phenomenon, process) No. 1 + result.

Event (phenomenon, process) No. 2 + result.

The historical personality associated with this event (phenomenon, process), and its role.

Consider what causal relationships exist between these events (phenomena, processes) during the reign of ___. Both events - ___ and ___ - were dictated by common causes: ___.

The results of these events (that is, their consequence) were ___, ___, ___.

Ruled for a long time - ___ years. His reign cannot be unequivocally assessed.

On the one side, ___.

But in other way, ___.

The figure ___ itself is also ambiguously assessed by domestic and foreign historians of both the past and the present. The image of ___ in historiography is rather contradictory.

The reign of ___ as a whole became the period of ___.

One of the most difficult tasks in the United state exam in history - task number 25, which is also called a historical essay. For this task you can get as many as 11 primary points, therefore, to anyone who claims to high score in the exam in history, you must learn how to write a historical essay.

In task 25, you will be offered a choice of three periods, one of which belongs to the section "Antiquities and the Middle Ages", one to "New History" and one to " recent history". You need to write an essay about one of these periods, strictly considering its chronological framework.

The question of how to write a historical essay in the USE in history almost always arises among graduates who decide to take the USE in history. There are many materials on the network on this topic, however, for verification, most of the essays turn out to be too large in volume, and contain information that is simply impossible to remember. To prepare for an essay on history, knowing the subject well is not enough - you need to actively attend , read historical literature and go to .

Criteria for a historical essay in the USE 2018

So how do you write a good essay? First of all, it is necessary to take into account the criteria that are contained in the exam itself. They are listed below with some explanation. So, in the essay you need:

- indicate at least two significant events (phenomena, processes) related to a given period of history. Depending on the period, such an event can be: a war, a battle, a revolution, the implementation of a policy, the adoption of a particular law, the formation or collapse of a state, the formation of a political movement, etc. The range of historical events is very wide. The main thing is not to make a mistake and choose exactly those events that are included in the time period you have chosen, otherwise they will not be evaluated.

- name two historical figures whose activities are associated with the indicated events (phenomena, processes), and, using knowledge of historical facts, characterize the roles of the persons named by you in these events (phenomena, processes). At the same time, the authors of the USE explain that when characterizing a personality necessary indicate the specific actions of this person (the adoption of a law, the implementation of a policy, the annexation of a particular territory, etc.), which largely influenced the course and / or result of these events (processes, phenomena).

In other words, it is not enough just to name a person (ruler, statesman, cultural or public and political figure) and list his merits. It is necessary to show how exactly this person or her actions influenced the events you indicated and what role she played in the processes you indicated.

- indicate at least two cause-and-effect relationships that characterize the causes of the occurrence of events (phenomena, processes) that occurred in a given period. That is, when characterizing an event, you need not just name it (for example, October Revolution in Russia), but also indicate its causes (for example, the fatigue of the people from the war, the unresolved national conflicts, the decline in the authority of the Provisional Government, etc.). At the same time, in order to better highlight the causal relationships in your text, use the following (and similar) constructions:

1) This was due to a number of reasons, namely ...

2) This led to...

3) (This event) was greatly influenced by ...

4) Causes (events) are ...

6) As a result (of this event), the following changes occurred in ..

7) The result of the transformation was ...

8) (This event) was the beginning ...

- using the knowledge of historical facts and (or) the opinions of historians, evaluate the impact of events (phenomena, processes) of this period on the further history of Russia. In this case, you are asked to enter the period you have chosen in the general historical context, i.e. show how this period influenced the subsequent ones.

"As a result Mongol invasion Russian lands became politically and economically dependent on the Golden Horde, which lasted more than two hundred years and had, according to the historian Karamzin, a decisive influence on the nature of power in the Russian state.

Also an important criterion for a historical essay is appearance text. The test should contain a consistent and coherent presentation of the material, present a full-fledged work, and not fragmentary provisions.

Template and plan for a historical essay on history

When writing a historical essay, we recommend that you adhere to the following template, which will greatly simplify your life and make writing an essay more understandable.

Introduction

In the introduction, write the name of the period (for example, epoch palace coups, Time of Troubles, etc.), indicate the ruler or rulers. In a few words, describe the situation in the country at the beginning of the period; here, also note the main events, phenomena and processes.

Main part
Indicate one of the ones you named in the introduction, historical processes. Using introductory constructions indicate its causes, as well as features of development.
Choose a historical figure who participated in the process you indicated and reveal his role, keeping in mind the criteria for writing. Do not forget to give as many historical facts and dates as possible (but only if you are absolutely sure about them!)
Indicate what led, the event, process or phenomenon you described, as well as how it influenced other events, phenomena or processes.
Repeat steps 1-3 to describe the second historical process.

Conclusion

In conclusion, based on the facts you indicated in the essay, draw a conclusion about the significance of this period for the history of Russia. Indicate how historians assessed this period and / or, based on the facts, give your own assessment of its role in history.

Do not forget to check your essay again after writing for compliance with all criteria!

An example of a historical essay in the exam in the history of 2018

Period 1598-1613 (Time of Troubles)

Late 16th century and early 17th century national history is called the Time of Troubles. At this time, the Russian state had to face political, economic and social crises that brought the country to the brink of collapse.

During this period, one can single out many political figures whose main task was to keep power in their hands in the face of famine, frequent uprisings and foreign intervention. After the death of the last sovereign from the Rurik dynasty, Fyodor Ioannovich, the country was ruled by Boris Godunov (1598-1605), an influential boyar and formerly the closest adviser to Tsar Fyodor, elected by the Zemsky Sobor.

With the beginning of his reign, many historians associate the beginning of the Troubles. The consequences of the oprichnina policy pursued by Ivan IV, as well as the famine of 1601-1603, greatly weakened the economy and caused a wave of discontent among the population, which led to death, robbery and numerous uprisings, for example, the uprising of Khlopok (1603). All of the above events in one way or another contributed to the growth of dissatisfaction with the rule of Boris and the strengthening of his rivals.

The situation worsened with the appearance on the territory of the Russian kingdom of False Dmitry I, who claimed his rights to the throne on behalf of the “miraculously saved” heir Dmitry Ioannovich. Having enlisted the support of part of the peasants, some detachments of Cossacks and boyars, False Dmitry, together with the Polish detachment, managed to gain a foothold in Moscow.

By this time, Boris Godunov had already died, his wife and son were killed as a result of a boyar conspiracy. The reign of the impostor was short-lived and was characterized by a course towards rapprochement with Poland and the implementation of many reforms that were not approved by all segments of the population. The confirmation of the decrees that enslaved the peasants, the wedding according to the Catholic custom - all this undermined the established image of the "correct" king and the hope for a better future under the new sovereign.

Another boyar conspiracy, organized by Vasily Shuisky, one of the most influential boyars, ended the reign of False Dmitry. Russia under Shuisky and the subsequent rule of the boyars (Seven Boyars) faced new peasant unrest (the uprising of Ivan Bolotnikov), as well as Polish-Swedish intervention.

As a result, Russia could not recover after the Time of Troubles for a long time. The first step towards the restoration of Russian statehood was taken in 1613, when Mikhail Fedorovich Romanov was elected and invited to the kingdom at the Zemsky Sobor. The Time of Troubles ended only in 1618 after the signing of the Peace of Stolbovsky with Sweden and the Truce of Deulino with the Commonwealth.

The turmoil of the early 17th century is one of the darkest eras in history Russian state. Numerous crises, instability of power and weakness in the political arena led to foreign invasions and the loss of some territories in the west and northwest of Russia. On the other hand, in the conditions of the Time of Troubles, it turned out that the country was able to withstand occupation, famine and a crisis of power, because in the end the members of the Zemsky Sobor came to a compromise and chose a new sovereign.

The twenty-fifth task of the USE in history is the latest and for many the most difficult task exam. In it, you need to write a historical essay on one of three topics - a certain period of dates, which are presented at the choice of the graduate. For it, you can get a maximum of 11 primary points at once, that is, 35 test points. As a rule, the proposed options for topics relate to three different large periods history - from the 8th to the 17th centuries, from the 17th to the 19th centuries and from the 20th to the beginning of the 21st century. The date indicated in the topic does not always coincide with the years of government or leadership of the country by any historical figure.

There are no requirements for the structure and compositional design of the work, but you need to write a work that meets the provisions specified in the assignment, as well as the criteria for its verification. Let's take a look at them.

Theory and criteria for evaluating essays in the exam in history

Criterion K1 is called “indication of events (phenomena, processes)”, which should refer to the historical period chosen for the composition. If two historical events are correctly indicated, 2 primary points can be obtained; respectively, if only one is true - 1 primary score.

Also, 2 primary points can be obtained by criterion K2 - "historical figures and their role in the indicated events of a given period of history." If 2 persons are named and the role of each of them is indicated, 2 primary points are awarded, and if 1-2 persons are named, but the role is assigned to only one - 1 point. If 1-2 individuals are simply indicated in the text, and nothing is written about their role in the events of the period, the graduate does not receive points for this criterion. It is important to remember that you cannot simply write, for example, "Prince Dmitry Donskoy played an important role in the Battle of Kulikovo" - this is considered general reasoning, also rated at zero points. But if you write something like “Dmitry Donskoy managed to unite the forces of the Russian princes and enlist support from the church; he also showed the talent of a commander, as he was able to determine the most advantageous position for the army and use an ambush regiment. All this played a decisive role during the Battle of Kulikovo”, this will be counted as an indication of the role of the individual in the event.

By criterion K3 the indication of causal relationships between events is checked; for two correctly indicated connections, the graduate receives 2 primary points. It is necessary to clearly state which event was the result of which, for example, "the tax policy pursued by Tsar Alexei Mikhailovich was one of the causes of the Salt Riot." It is impossible to indicate an event related to another historical period as a prerequisite or cause.

Behind criterion K4 you can get 1 primary point. This is possible if you indicate the significance of this historical period for the entire history of the country, based on historical facts or the opinion of historians. That is, you can’t just write “this period was very important for the subsequent history of the country.” But if you specify key events and analyze their role and significance for further history, the answer will be counted. You can also refer to the opinion of a historian or, if you don’t remember the last name, write “according to a number of historians” - but you can only write this way when you are sure that some scientist really expressed such a point of view.

Criterion K5 checks the use of historical terminology in the text. You can get 1 primary point for it. To do this, it is enough to use a term related to history even once in the text, the main thing is to do it in the right context. For example: “In 1597, fixed years were first introduced - the period during which the owners of peasants could file a claim for their return.”

Points for criterion K6 - "The presence of factual errors" - can be obtained only if at least 4 points are received for criteria K1-K4. If there are no actual errors in the work, you can get 2 primary points, if one error is made - 1, and if two or more - 0.

Criterion K7 - "Form of presentation" - also considered by the experts only if, according to the criteria K1-K4, at least 4 points are scored. If the answer is presented in the form of an essay, that is, the material is presented consistently and coherently, the examiner is awarded 1 primary point. If the answer is separate, unrelated positions - 0.

The volume of the essay is not indicated, but it is better not to make it too large and “pour water” - while writing beautiful turns and pretentious text, the correct wording that meets the criteria may be lost. But you also don’t need to write a short, too dry work: it’s better to write an essay of medium length. It is better to start preparing for this task in advance in order to learn how to write essays that meet the criteria for the exam. It is very good to write 1-2 essays every week for different periods, taken from the exam options or just from the bank of tasks, and then hand them over to the teacher or tutor for verification.

Version of the essay in the exam in history

You need to write a historical essay about ONE of the periods in the history of Russia:

1237-1480;
1725-1762;
1953-1964

The essay must:

indicate at least two events (phenomena, processes) relating to a given period of history;
name two historical personalities whose activities are associated with the indicated events (phenomena, processes), and, using knowledge of historical facts, characterize the role of these personalities in the events (phenomena, processes) of a given period of Russian history;
indicate at least two causal relationships that existed between events (phenomena, processes) within a given period of history.

Let's write an essay on the second period. First you need to characterize him - write what he is called in the history of our country, or who was the leader of the country during this period.

1725-1762 - the period known as the "era of palace coups". At this time, 6 monarchs succeeded each other, receiving the throne as a result palace intrigues, often with the participation of the guard.

The first ruler in this period was Catherine 1 - the wife of Peter 1. She ruled from 1725 to 1727. Its main transformation can be called the establishment in 1726 of the Supreme Privy Council, which during its existence (1726-1730) actually decided all state affairs, completely replacing the Senate. After the death of the empress, the grandson of Peter the Great, Peter 2, ascended the throne. At the beginning of his reign, A. Menshikov, the famous statesman, a former favorite of Peter 1, who participated in the Northern War; under Catherine 1, he led the Military Collegium and actually held power in his hands. However, in 1727 he was arrested and sent into exile. In 1730, Peter 2 dies. The reign of Anna Ioannovna begins - the Duchess of Courland, invited to the Russian throne by members of the Supreme Privy Council and signing the Conditions - the conditions for accession to the throne, which greatly limit the powers of the empress. However, soon Anna tore the Conditions, and they became invalid. Then she liquidated the Privy Council, established the Cabinet of Ministers. In 1741, Elizaveta Petrovna, daughter of Peter 1, became empress. Her reign lasted until 1761. Her policy was aimed at strengthening the positions of the nobility and restoring the Petrine order - in particular, she restored the powers of the Senate. During the reign of the empress, the economy of the state was strengthened - this was facilitated by such measures as the abolition of customs duties, the reduction of poll taxes. The spiritual sphere of society also developed - Moscow University and the Academy of Sciences, theaters, and the Academy of Arts were founded. However, after the death of Elizabeth, her nephew Peter 3 began to rule the country, whose short reign was marked by the publication of the Manifesto on the Liberty of the Nobility, which abolished the compulsory service for the nobles. The tsar was not popular because of his dislike of the Russians - for example, he ordered the clergy to wear Lutheran robes and thought about remaking the army along the Prussian model, but the main reason for his unpopularity was that he returned to Prussia all the territories conquered during Seven Years' War. By issuing a manifesto, he wanted to improve his position, but this did not happen, and in 1761 his wife, Empress Catherine II, came to the throne. This event ended the period of palace coups.

The era of palace coups had great importance in the life of the country. During this time it has strengthened serfdom: Catherine 1 forbade peasants to go to the crafts, and by decree of Anna Ioannovna, peasant families were forever attached to factories. Elizaveta Petrovna issued permission for the landowners to exile peasants to Siberia without trial or investigation. The rulers did this in order to strengthen the position of the nobles and landowners, and, consequently, the authority of their power. We must not forget that at that time the international authority of the country was strengthened, access to the Black Sea was obtained. However, some historians (S. M. Solovyov, N. Eidelman, S. V. Platonov) considered this time a “step back”, noting the dominance of foreigners at court as one of the main reasons for this point of view.

Let's look at the work according to the criteria. We indicate much more than two events (criterion K1) - the accession of emperors to the throne, the adoption of decrees ... We also consider the role of several personalities - in most detail such as A. Menshikov and Elizaveta Petrovna (criterion K2). We also indicate causal relationships - for example, talking about the reasons for the unpopularity of Peter 3 and the publication of the Manifesto on the freedom of the nobility, and on the tightening of serfdom in the last paragraph (K3).

We consider the value of the period in the last paragraph, based on facts and citing the opinion of historians - this is criterion K4. Also, we can confidently count on a score according to the K5 criterion - we correctly use historical terminology in our work. We do not make factual errors and consistently express thoughts, thanks to which we get 2 more points - according to criteria K6 and K7.

Read:

Causes of redness of the face and the most effective means of eliminating them Sedna visited a speech therapist and she advised me to do these exercises What to do if you were insulted: methods of punishment Functions, structure, morphology Forget all this nonsense about introverts and extroverts Extroverts or introverts pros and cons