America are today. We hope our study throws some light on the
problems of modernization and revolution, at least from the stand-
point of the government's role.

In 1965 our research was stimulated when the Witte papers
held at the Archive of Russian and East European History and
Culture at Columbia University were opened to scholars. For our
period the papers added relatively little new and unpublished
material, although a few interesting letters and memoranda were
found. Most of the documents on 1905 and 1906 in the Witte
papers are included in Witte's memoirs ( Witte obviously used the
papers in composing his memoirs), or have been published in
various Soviet collections. The manuscript versions of his memoirs
(one written in St. Petersburg, one in France) are among the
papers, but for our period no significant differences with the pub-
lished Russian version were found (see the introduction by A. L.
Sidorov to the 1960 Soviet reprinting of Witte's memoirs for an
account of how they were compiled and for the history of their
printing).

Throughout the study dates are given in the Old Style, or
Julian, calendar, which was used in Russia until February 1918,
and which in the twentieth century was thirteen days behind the
New Style, or Gregorian, calendar used in the West. Thus the
October Manifesto was dated October 17 in Old Style, October
30 in New Style.

Transliteration from Cyrillic to Roman characters is based on a
modified Library of Congress system (without diacritic marks,
with "v" for "g" in certain masculine and neuter genitive singular
adjectival endings). Proper names have been transliterated accord-
ing to popular usage, e.g., Witte instead of Vitte.

In every respect this study is a joint effort. Although Mehlinger
originally drafted the majority of the chapters, they were then
expanded and revised on the basis of Thompson's research. Chap-
ters one and two are primarily Mehlinger's four and eight primarily
Thompson's, but throughout, each chapter has been revised and
rewritten at various times by both authors. All the main ideas and
conclusions have been discussed and agreed upon by both. Based
on our experience, we find joint authorship a stimulating and
efficient way to work, which should probably be used more often
in American scholarly writing.

-xii-