Search

The research aims to study the propaganda of the Russian Empire in Central Asia on the occasion of the 300th anniversary of the Romanov dynasty. In the work, the method of comparative analysis and civilizational approach was used, which made it possible to assess the impact of propaganda narratives on the development of the region. The study found that the jubilee celebrations were an occasion for the build-up of monarchist propaganda. The practical significance of this research lies in its detailed analysis of the mechanisms of monarchist propaganda during the 300th anniversary of the Romanov dynasty in Central Asia. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

This article analyses Russian imperial intervention into Jewish ritual in the late imperial period alongside the rise of a Jewish bureaucracy, imperial legal centralization and expanded state claims in the realms of public order, safety and morality. It explores contestations around Jewish religious rituals, like the new moon blessing, in the context of imperial attempts to define and even ‘correct’ native religion and decide what counts as protected religious behaviour. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The article reveals the views of the outstanding military, statesman and socio-political figure Sultan-Gaza Valikhanov on a wide range of issues of the colonization of Asian spaces by the forces of the Russian Empire. Based on the materials of the anniversary celebrations dedicated to the celebration of the 300th anniversary of the annexation of Siberia to Russia, in the preparation and publication of which G. Valikhanov was directly involved, the main «platforms», channels and ways of broadcasting problematic issues of the incorporation of the eastern outskirts into Russia are identified: the politics of the population, penal colonization, resettlement, enlightenment and education, railway construction. In the course of the study, it was established that the approach chosen by G. Valikhanov to organize the structure of the anniversary edition made it possible to identify the most significant problems that determined the logic of including the eastern outskirts in the general imperial space, and also to present in the final text of the conclusion, according to which the anniversary celebrations dedicated to significant historical events, in particular the annexation of Siberia to Russia, are an effective way of consolidating public and, above all, regional forces, allowing them to show communicative agreement in the discussion of the most pressing Siberian issues by society. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The article focuses on Ilia Chavchavadze's "Letters of a Traveller" and its depiction of walking as a metaphor for national identity within the Russian Empire. Topics include the significance of Chavchavadze's journey as it relates to Georgian nationalism, his use of intertextuality to critique Russian imperial literature, and the symbolic role of walking in contrasting Russian and Georgian cultural narratives.

The Hulu series The Great, an ahistorical satire of the eighteenth-century Russian Empire, set at the courts of Peter III and Catherine II, doubles as a critique of contemporary politics and culture. Created for Anglophone audiences with little knowledge of history, but aware of stereotypes of Russia as a despotic, dysfunctional backwater, the show's appeal rests on the love-hate relationship between Peter the bro-emperor and the "girlboss" empress Catherine, as well as the expectation that Catherine, ultimately, will "have-it-all." This article examines the gender dynamics structuring Peter's and Catherine's narrative arcs and argues that Catherine's trajectory from naïve, self-declared enlightened European princess to skilled, pragmatic ruler undermines Peter's attempt to liberate himself from an outdated model of masculinity. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

This article discusses the impact of the Armenian-Azeri conflict on regional insecurity and a strategic partnership between Turkey and Russia in the South Caucasus. Like the Ottoman and Russian Empires of old, Russia and Turkey continued to have conflicting interests in the region after the end of the Cold War. However, the Russian invasion of Ukraine in 2022 turned this confrontation into a partnership between Moscow and Ankara, as both Russia and Turkey exploited opportunities to expand their control and influence in the region. Lilia Arakelyan and Hanna Kassab argue that Russia and Turkey's prestige-seeking behaviour is based on reciprocated recognition of greatness through cooperation and mutual support. ■ [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The Russian Imperial Baltic Fleet founded by Peter I (the Great) of Russia suffered serious neglect after his death, and Russian grand strategy had to be revised to avoid deploying it in naval combat. During the Seven Years' War, the fleet played a minor, supporting role in coastal cruising and landing troops; its most significant accomplishment was supporting the siege of Kolberg. Upon her accession in 1762, Empress Catherine II (the Great) embraced administrative and training reforms that significantly improved the fleet's operational effectiveness, which was first demonstrated in the Aegean Expedition of 1769-1774. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Copyright of Journal of Modern Turkish History Studies / Cumhuriyet Tarihi Araştırmaları Dergisi (CTAD) is the property of Ataturk Institute for Modern Turkish History and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites or posted to a listserv without the copyright holder's express written permission. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use. This abstract may be abridged. No warranty is given about the accuracy of the copy. Users should refer to the original published version of the material for the full abstract. (Copyright applies to all Abstracts.)

Colonialism can be seen as a historical process, or an ideology. As this article demonstrates, for Canadian Doukhobors, it is also a lived experience. Canadian Doukhobors, or Spirit Wrestlers, are a group of pacifist religious dissenters of mixed ethnic origins who immigrated to Canada from the Russian Empire in 1899. The worldview of the Doukhobors was radically different from the principles on which the colonial government was founded. The goal of this article is to describe the colonial policies directed towards the Doukhobors, their anticolonial struggles, and to consider the implications of the Doukhobor history for contemporary anti-colonial thought in Canada and worldwide. The government subjected Doukhobors to a range of discriminatory actions including cancellation of earlier granted land registries in Saskatchewan, incarcerations for refusal of military service (despite an existing legal exemption), taking away children of some Doukhobors and placing them in a juvenile detention center to force the assimilation. While considering the significance of the Doukhobor struggles against colonialism, the article proposes a new term, 'colonial privilege.' This article is reflexive and sheds a new light on the earlier recorded facts. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Historians of modern Russia have long viewed the abdications of Nicholas II and his younger brother the Grand Duke Michael Aleksandrovich as the culmination of the February Revolution. On 2 March 1917, Nicholas II abdicated for himself and – in contravention of the law of succession – for his 12-year-old son Alexei, leaving the throne to his brother. On 3 March, the Grand Duke renounced the throne pending a decision by the future Constituent Assembly on the form of the post-imperial government. Michael's refusal to become Michael II completed the downfall of Russia's old regime and all but guaranteed the end of its monarchical system. While the circumstances, legal inconsistencies and immediate fallouts of the abdications have been repeatedly addressed in the literature on the February Revolution, scholars have not discussed these historic acts as a deep personal and family drama. This article will offer an overview of the relationship between the Romanov brothers and will suggest that family discord was a contributing, yet completely overlooked, factor that sealed the fate of Russian monarchy in 1917. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Copyright of Studi Piemontesi is the property of Centro Studi Piemontesi and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites or posted to a listserv without the copyright holder's express written permission. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use. This abstract may be abridged. No warranty is given about the accuracy of the copy. Users should refer to the original published version of the material for the full abstract. (Copyright applies to all Abstracts.)

This article looks to the societal and imperial margins to examine attitudes towards social welfare provision in the final decades of the Russian Empire. Drawing on archival material from the Empire's Estliand province (now northern Estonia), the article focuses on the self‐representation of single mothers and official discussions of abandoned children. Society was in flux in the late nineteenth and early twentieth centuries, as rapid industrialisation, urbanisation and rural‐to‐urban migration served to undermine traditional social structures, mentalities and identities. These changes were accompanied by the disruption of the traditional patriarchal gender order, as well shifting ideas about who ought to be responsible for taking care of vulnerable groups. In rural Estliand, Estonian‐speaking unmarried women sought engagement with Russian imperial judicial structures to secure child maintenance. In the early 1900s, anxieties about the social impacts of rapid urbanisation and industrialisation and the development of new currents in philanthropy, meant that care for foundlings and abandoned children became a burning issue in the minds of Estliand's provincial officials. Examining single mothers and child abandonment in Estliand illuminates tensions between empire‐wide and local mechanisms for dealing with social issues, as well as shifting attitudes to gender, the family and charity in light of urbanisation and modernisation. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The possession of a large amount of land property acquired during the Middle Ages had allowed the Russian Orthodox Church to enjoy a quasi-autonomous life, which contradicted the logic of the development of the Russian autocracy. The successive church reforms of the tsars Aleksei Mikhailovich, Peter the Great and Catherine the Great aimed at ensuring the state control over the economic power of the Church, thus breaking with the previous lack of clarity and precision which characterized the nature of the relationships between state and church in Russia. The establishment of the supremacy of temporalia over spiritualia liberated the Church from its traditional duties as “ideological department” of the state. This freedom was used by the Church to address the purely church themes. The second half of the eighteenth century is characterized by the intense theological pursuits of the Russian monastics. Being under the constant pressure of the secular power during the reigning of the Romanov monarchical dynasty, the monasteries have lost their status and ceased to be centers of learning. One of the ways of surviving was the return to a forgotten tradition of hesychasm. But in the Age of Enlightenment new rival mystical traditions were capturing the Russian minds. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Copyright of Kwartalnik Historii Nauki i Techniki is the property of Polska Akademia Nauk, Instytut Historii Nauki and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites or posted to a listserv without the copyright holder's express written permission. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use. This abstract may be abridged. No warranty is given about the accuracy of the copy. Users should refer to the original published version of the material for the full abstract. (Copyright applies to all Abstracts.)

This essay explores John LeDonne’s Forging a Unitary State, a grand synthesis about the formation of the Russian state from 1650 to 1850. While the geopolitical framing of LeDonne’s narrative leaves much to be desired, the competent, painstaking analysis of institutional practices and patronage networks offers a potentially innovative view of Tsarist policy makers’ strategic vision in asserting power over the peripheral, expanding space. The notion of a «unitary state» provides a refreshing starting point that might be developed further, to move beyond the dichotomy of «empire» and «national state» [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

This article examines how the annexation of Austrian (East) Galicia emerged as a distinct political—and ultimately military—mission in St. Petersburg before the First World War. The Russian nationalist project to recover the "lost lands of Rus΄ became an extension of the domestic agenda formulated by Peter Stolypin to promote Russian political and cultural hegemony in the western provinces of the empire. The campaign to liberate Subjugated Rus΄ and defeat "Ukrainian separatism" in Galicia led St. Petersburg to become ever more deeply engaged in the complex borderland politics of the Habsburg empire in the years before the war. By 1914, the idea of Subjugated Rus΄ and "four million persecuted Russians" came to inform the whole of St. Petersburg's understanding of its relations with Vienna and created an expectation that war with Austria-Hungary was inevitable. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The article aims to draw attention to the epidemic situation in the southern Ukrainian lands from the 18th to the beginning of the 20th century and to analyze the activities of port quarantine departments of the Black and Azov Seas during this period. The research employs problem-chronological, comparative-historical, statistical and biographical methods. The analysis is based on the sources from the Regional Archives of the Mykolaiv Region and relevant scientific literature. The study reveals the condition of the epidemic-driven country in the period in question, the activities of quarantine departments at the ports of the Russian Empire, as well as how the state and local authorities fought the infections. Reading from archival sources, the author discusses the level of hygiene on military ships, the methods of fighting epidemics, and people’s reactions to quarantine, especially in the Mykolaiv region at the beginning of the 20th century. The epidemic situation in the southern Ukrainian lands from the 18th to the beginning of the 20th century resulted from an imperfect policy of the Russian Empire – poorly-developed medical, social, and cultural spheres. It should be noted that during this period, infectious diseases often came to Ukrainian lands from the east. Their spread was facilitated by increased urban population, the movement of military contingents, water contamination by municipal and industrial waste, and insufficient knowledge of social and personal hygiene almost until the end of the 19th century. The main method of preventing epidemics was the introduction of quarantine. It meant full isolation of potentially dangerous ships arriving in port, inspecting them and supplying passengers and crew with quarantine measures. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The article focuses on Russian Empire became the strongest part within the triangular context and conquered the Crimean Khanate, and defeated the Ottomans and Persians in several wars during the first quarter of the nineteenth century. It mentions large scale migration within the inter-imperial context and Hundreds of thousands of Sunni Muslims from the Crimea and the Caucasus moved to the Ottoman Empire and Persia. It also mentions semi-colonial dependence of Russian Empire.

Copyright of Historia Contemporanea is the property of Historia Contemporania and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites or posted to a listserv without the copyright holder's express written permission. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use. This abstract may be abridged. No warranty is given about the accuracy of the copy. Users should refer to the original published version of the material for the full abstract. (Copyright applies to all Abstracts.)

In the Polish-Lithuanian Commonwealth, as well as later in those lands belonging to the Russian Empire, miraculous images had supra-confessional cult. One of them was a miraculous image of Our Lord of Chamiary-Bukhavichy, which cult dates back to the second half of the 18th century, when the image was in a private possession. After a dream vision, the image was placed into an Uniate church in Chamiary, when it was quickly acknowledged to be wonder-working. Once at night the image was stolen from the church and later appeared in the Dominican cloister in Bukhavichy. The investigation showed that it was taken from the church by initial owner. After the partition of the Russian Empire, when the Uniate church in Bukhavichy was turned to Orthodoxy, the Orthodox priest claimed the image to have Orthodox origin and had been stolen by the Dominicans. The image, however, remained in Catholic possession and was brought to Kobryn catholic church when the Dominican cloister was closed and turned to an Orthodox church. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Copyright of Res Historica is the property of Maria Curie-Sklodowska University in Lublin and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites or posted to a listserv without the copyright holder's express written permission. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use. This abstract may be abridged. No warranty is given about the accuracy of the copy. Users should refer to the original published version of the material for the full abstract. (Copyright applies to all Abstracts.)

Early Baltic historiography was rather emotional in its presentation of manor-peasant relations in the Baltic provinces during the first decades under Russian rule. No doubt it was influenced by the case of the so-called Rosen Declaration of 1739, an exceptionally wellknown document in which the Livonian nobility justified their harsh and repressive rights over the local peasantry. The article argues that, without a careful contextualization and detailed examination of materials from the archives of central institutions, it is not possible to critically assess or characterize either Livonian serfdom or the Rosen Declaration. The central St Petersburg institution responsible for overseeing the issue of serfdom in the Baltic province was the Justice College for Livland and Estland Affairs. Its archives have survived mainly in Moscow, partly in Tartu and in Helsinki, but have never received the attention they deserve. They show that, up until the reign of Catherine II, the Russian administration showed little interest in serfdom in its provinces ofLivland and Estland. During the 1 730s and 17 40s the rights of the peasants were discussed several times in the Justice College, although only in the context of a concrete complaint or a case. Compared to Otto Fabian Rosen's statement with other similar explanations sent to the capital, Rosen's view was considered quite routine in St Petersburg. All such statements regarding serfdom made by the Baltic provinces were taken seriously by the Justice College for Livland and Estland Affairs. However, this does not mean that Rosen's memorial had any wider legal consequences. The local nobility saw their power over their peasants as something very absolute; but this was not unique to Livonia, being a quite typical attitude for landlords in the East Elbian region. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Prince Nikolay Alexeyevich Orlov (1827–1885) was an aristocrat, a war hero and a prominent diplomat of the Russian Empire who enjoyed a prestigious position from a very young age. In his correspondence with Grand Duke Nicholas Alexandrovich in the early 1860s, Prince Orlov expounded his views on Russian politics, putting forward his liberal outlook of what the empire ought to be. His most crucial proposals were (i) revising Russian foreign policy and redefining imperial borders (which included solving the 'Polish Question'); (ii) adopting federalism with local representative institutions based on a notion of 'legitimate power'; (iii) introducing bottom-up reforms; (iv) abolishing 'backwards practices' (in particular, corporal punishment) and (v) guaranteeing civil rights and equality before the law. Based on letters and other writings that remain vastly under-researched in Russia and practically unknown to English-speaking audiences, I analyse Prince Orlov's correspondence as illustrative of a broader ideological turn to liberal imperialism and contextualise it from Russian and European perspectives. By positing that Russian liberalism was strongly impacted by the successes and shortcomings of the liberal imperialism of the 1860s, I invite the reader to rethink some ideological and chronological boundaries that are routinely taken for granted in discussions regarding liberalism, imperialism and their interconnectedness. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Relict borders may long remain tangible in the field and in people's behaviour. However, in recent times, a process of the deliberate 're-creation' of these borders has developed, with a view to their serving tourist, heritage-related and remembrance functions. The author here illustrates the processes involved by reference to the border once separating the Austro-Hungarian and Russian Empires – as one of those associated with Poland's erasure from the map of Europe for more than a century. Empirical research finds at least five different old check-points now playing the role of tourist attractions. There are three leading themes being loss of independence thanks to the Partitions; the regaining of that independence for Poland (in 1918) and remembrance of the heroes responsible for that; and information regarding local conditioning of border operations and controls, also in the wider context of its significance for everyday life and hence possibilities for the border to be crossed. The overriding premise on which the re-creation of relict border check-points is based is that people should go on recalling negative aspects of the past, and treat them as cautionary tales. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Focusing on the debates in the First and Second State Duma of the Russian Empire, the article argues that the imperial parliament was the site for articulating and developing multiple approaches to political community. Together with the better studied particularistic discourses, which were based on ethno-national, religious, regional, social estate, class and other differences, many deputies of the State Duma, including those who subscribed to particularistic agendas, appealed to an inclusionary Russian political community. The production of this new, modern political community was part of the global trend of political modernization but often departed from the homogenizing and exclusionary logic of nation-building. It relied on the experience of the composite imperial space, with its fluid and overlapping social categories. Two approaches predominated. The integrative approach foregrounded civil equality. It resembled other cases of modern nation-building but still remained attentive to diversity. The composite approach synthesized particularistic discourses with the broadly circulating ideas of autonomy and federation and, relying on the imperial politics of difference, imagined individual groups as the building blocks of a new differentiated political community. Both approaches stressed loyalty to the Russian state but borrowed from aspirational patriotism, seeking to rebuild it on new principles. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

After a short critical reflection on what is understood under anticolonial aesthetics and how it relates to the shift from political decolonization to a more epistemologically and aesthetically oriented decoloniality, the essay focuses on the seldom considered anticolonial and decolonial trajectories originating in the ex- and present colonies of the Russian/Soviet empire and post/neo-imperial Russia. It is analysed how these trajectories intersect with and diverge from the predominantly Anglophone and Francophone postcolonial conceptual and theoretical frames and what role is played in this configuration by the state socialist form of coloniality. Its most negative effects consist in recolonization presented as decolonization and the interrupted genealogies of anticolonial resistance and re-existence. As a result, each new generation has to start from scratch, while anticolonial thinkers and artists become enchanted by western (neo)liberalism presented as the only viable alternative to Russian and local authoritarian regimes. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

In the still highly politicized question of rupture or continuity between the Russian Empire and the Soviet Union, elements of continuity are not hard to find, nor should this be a surprise, since a new state arose in the same geographical space and made use of the economic, intellectual, and demographic resources inherited from the Russian Empire. At the same time, the Soviet Union could not have been more different than the Russian Empire. It rejected a number of key elements of the sociopolitical project that underlay the nationalizing tsarist empire and introduced radically new political and social principles for organizing that space. In particular, the Bolsheviks purposefully engaged in dismantling the tsarist efforts to build a great ethnic-Russian nation to stand at the center of the Russian Empire's nationalities policy. The irreversible disintegration of post-Soviet space into separate nationalizing states became possible only toward the end of the twentieth century. At the same time, the imperial nature of the modern post-Soviet Russian core permits us to say that the imperial logic has survived. This is where we can find an element of inescapable continuity. We present studies of "continuities" and "ruptures" in modern academic discourse and in an updated format, gravitating toward "empirically nuanced" tools for analyzing multiple historical temporalities. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The article draws the attention to the peculiarities of Russian economic performance in the Balkans at the end of the 19th and the beginning of the 20th century. Its activities as a Great Power are retraced in the fields of foreign state loans, investments in industry, trade relations, and transport. They reveal a discrepancy between the political claims of the Russian Empire and its economic influence. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

One of the first references to "Japhetic" languages occurs in this piece which Marr initially delivered as a speech during the defense of his magisterial thesis ("On the question of the tasks of Armenian Studies," 1899). The substance of this work was an in-depth philological exploration of a medieval Armenian collection of fables attributed to the thirteenth-century author Vardan Aygekc'i. Marr published his much-lauded analysis of textual parallels between Arabic and Syriac versions in a three-volume work (Thomas [1957]. The Linguistic Theories of N. Ja. Marr. Berkeley: University of California Press, 4; Brandist [2015]. The Dimensions of Hegemony: Language, Culture and Politics in Revolutionary Russia. Leiden: Brill, 198). This study, with its formidable textual apparatus and show of philological prowess, went on to become an enduring and widely cited classic in its field. The speech was more polemical. In it Marr makes the case for the expansion of Armenian studies by tying his personal scholarly commitments to the political ambitions of the Russian Empire. It is a matter of national prestige given that scholarly work on the Armenian language had previously been the preserve of foreign scholars. Marr accuses Western European scholarship of obscuring the linguistic ties between Armenian and Georgia, of dismissing medieval Armenian literature as derivative, and, in terms that seem to anticipate the Saidian critique of Orientalism, of regarding the peoples of the East as passive and immobile. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

This article focuses on the role played by the author Yehoshua Radler-Feldman, also known as R. Binyamin (1880–1957), in the editing of the journal Hame͑orer and his poetic-political editorial approach that often contradicted the approach of his fellow editor, Yosef Ḥ ayyim Brenner. Brenner is usually described as bearing the burden of publication alone, a view influenced by Brenner's hegemonic status in the sphere of Hebrew literature, as opposed to R. Binyamin's marginality. This exclusive identification of Hame ͑ orer with Brenner illustrates the attempt to depict the development of Modern Hebrew literature as a linear process. This article argues that restoring R. Binyamin to a prominent position in the context of Hame͑orer leaves us with an image of the journal as a site where various poetics competed and where the power relations between these different approaches were crystallized. In order to examine these approaches, this article turns to the cultural and geographical context of London's East End, where they developed at the turn of the century. It describes the reality of Hame͑orer as it emerges from R. Binyamin's perspective and highlights the differences between R. Binyamin's experiences in London and those of Brenner, which were due largely to their different points of origin—the Russian Empire and Habsburgian Galicia via Berlin, respectively. This will serve as a basis for understanding the rift between the two figures, which was simultaneously poetic, religious, and political. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Expansion has been a trait typical of many empires. As they occupied new territories, empires needed to exert control over them, and for this they needed roads. New roads also served to indirectly legitimize imperial rule over subjugated lands, in the eyes of both the local population and other, competing colonial powers. The Russian Empire was no exception, especially in such remote, mountainous regions as Pamir. As soon as Russian rule had been established, the Russian authorities faced the challenge here of 'developing' the road network. Roadbuilding, initiated by the Russians, brought the technological advances of the West to the peoples living in the Pamir Mountains, and accelerated their integration with the rest of the empire, whilst simultaneously legitimizing Russian rule at a local level. Traditional, local trails and Russian-built roads merged into a single network, an imperial mix of communication lines that allowed the Russians to successfully control Pamir. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

What were the meanings of blackness in the Soviet Union? Marxist ideology offered no clear guidance for conceptualizing blackness, and the Russian Empire provided few historical references. But discrimination against people racialized as black was a major problem of the twentieth century that the Soviet Union was unable to ignore. As Soviet institutions and black people from different parts of the African continent and diaspora cultivated political and cultural connections, those connections entailed collisions among multiple ways of conceptualizing difference. Blackness could not easily be translated into Soviet taxonomies, but, propelled by a series of conjunctures in global politics, people never stopped looking for linkages and analogies. Two primary challenges, recurring in different forms over several eras, were: How was the Soviet Union to conceptualize the relationship between the African continent and the diaspora? And how should it relate racial dynamics elsewhere to domestic conditions within its own borders? Drawing on two scholars' original fieldwork and recent scholarship in an emerging field, this article proposes a novel, interactive approach to the historical construction of blackness and Africanness in the USSR. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Copyright of Militärgeschichtliche Zeitschrift is the property of De Gruyter and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites or posted to a listserv without the copyright holder's express written permission. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use. This abstract may be abridged. No warranty is given about the accuracy of the copy. Users should refer to the original published version of the material for the full abstract. (Copyright applies to all Abstracts.)

There has been a rich body of scholarship in recent years that challenges the accepted idea of the spread of nationalist thinking in the late nineteenth and early twentieth centuries by highlighting the flexible, ambiguous, opportunistic or instrumental ways in which the inhabitants of central and eastern Europe engaged with ideas about nationhood. However, so far these discussions of 'national indifference' have not extensively examined the crossovers with flexible and ambivalent attitudes and actions regarding matters of religion, such as oscillating religious commitment, hybrid forms of religiosity and conversion. This article examines cases of conversion and reconversion (apostasy) between Lutheranism and Orthodoxy in the Baltic provinces of the Russian empire in the second half of the nineteenth century, in order to deepen our understanding of how institutionally determined forms of religious ascription often became blurred at the level of everyday activities as people exercised choice over matters of faith for various personal, social and economic reasons. By extending the concept of national indifference through an examination of religious indifference, the cases under consideration elucidate how confession became entangled with ideas about national and imperial belonging in the late nineteenth century. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The article focuses on how does Polish cultural-religious imperialism manifest itself in relation to the people of the Caucasus. It mentions Polish ethnopolitical myth, this place is occupied mainly by Russia and, to a lesser extent, by Muslims and Conflicts involving Russia in the Caucasus explain its presence in both Polish culture and Polish political life. It also mentions Polish narrative about the Muslim East within the Russian Empire and to compare the way individual authors.

Copyright of Acta Universitatis Lodziensis. Folia Luridica is the property of Wydawnictwo Uniwersytetu Lodzkiego and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites or posted to a listserv without the copyright holder's express written permission. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use. This abstract may be abridged. No warranty is given about the accuracy of the copy. Users should refer to the original published version of the material for the full abstract. (Copyright applies to all Abstracts.)

Probing the manner in which Kazakhs attained noble status in the Russian empire, this article explores a neglected aspect of the country's social history. Recognizing that nobility is typically associated with landowning in a feudal order, we explore how this status also found application in the steppe. Based on diverse sources and comparison with other ethnic elites, we regard Kazakh ennoblement not only as a way of recognizing a traditional nomadic aristocracy, but also as a method of creating a new native elite beneficial to Russia's colonial project. We likewise propose that the distinctive character of nomads' pastoral lifeways differentiated the Kazakh nobility from their Russian counterparts and prevented them from making full use of noble privileges. The article thus explores the nature of Russia's social order by interrogating its margins and contemplates both the possibilities and limits of social inclusion for Russia's ethnically and culturally diverse population. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Many collections held by Columbia's Rare Books and Manuscript Library contain precious and little explored visual documentation on the turbulent history of late 19th and 20th century Russia, the Soviet Union, and Eastern Europe. These photographs deal with topics ranging from Russian culture in emigration, the late Romanov dynasty and the Russian imperial military to American travelers and philanthropy in revolutionary Russia and Eastern Europe. The Columbia collections in great part complement those held at the Hoover Institution Archives and the nearby NYPL Slavic collections. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Copyright of Res Historica is the property of Maria Curie-Sklodowska University in Lublin and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites or posted to a listserv without the copyright holder's express written permission. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use. This abstract may be abridged. No warranty is given about the accuracy of the copy. Users should refer to the original published version of the material for the full abstract. (Copyright applies to all Abstracts.)

This article examines the armed fighting that took place in Slutsk, in present-day Belarus, in November and December of 1920, primarily between local forces and the Red Army. In contrast to existing understandings of the insurrection, this article situates the incident within more recent scholarship dedicated to better understanding the post-WWI period, the collapse of the Russian Empire, and experiences at the local level. In doing so, the goals are two-fold: to detangle the story of Slutsk from existing nationalist interpretations and to examine Slutsk as a site witnessing a series of clashes between centers of power and periphery, among different ethno-national groups, soldiers, and ideas. Ultimately, those participating in the Slutsk insurrection sought to resist any outside dominance and control. Though on the surface the insurrection in Slutsk has been interpreted as rather marginal in the longer history of Belarus and the region, the events that occurred manifested as a clash of some of the most critical processes underway in the early to mid-twentieth century. Through Slutsk, this article seeks to better understand the experience of the "periphery" during this time. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Is minority a term applicable to groups in the Russian Empire, as an imperial formation? This article seeks to answer this question by engaging with two others: (1) Was there a term (or terms) that conveyed that idea? And, (2) Was there a historical experience among particular segments of that society with attributes that we may associate with "minorities"? The article proposes that, on the one hand, there can be no minorities unless a majority has itself come into being, and, on the other, that growing association of the state with the Russian people specifically, and the claim that other East Slavs were also Russian despite regional particularities, along with efforts to create a kind of citizenship through institutions that were inclusive of non-Russian peoples, began to constitute such a majority and minorities in Russia. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The author explores how the 1864 ban on Lithuanian books and language by Imperial Russia in response to the second failed uprising of 1863 led to the rise of nationalism that led to Lithuania's independence in 1918. The article's topics include attempts at Russification of the region after its annexation to Russia in 1795 to quell Lithuanian culture, efforts to suppress the Catholic Church in favor of the Russian Orthodox Church, and the use of the Latin alphabet in printing as opposed to Cyrillic script.

The article focuses on Feofan Prokopovyč's tragedokomedija Vladimir is considered an early example of the author's ecclesiastical reform concerns, which he realized in the Russian Empire from 1716 onwards. It mentions Greek roots of Eastern Christianity and presents himself as a loyal representative of Moscow-orientated Orthodoxy. It also mentions disagreed with Hetman Mazepa on the political position of Ukraine at the time and representative of Moscow-orientated Orthodoxy.

This article offers an original interpretation of the famous Russian Emancipation of 1861 as part of a broader imperial process affecting not just Russian serfs but also numerous other categories of unfree people within the Russian Empire over the long nineteenth century. In addition, it links the history of serf reform within Russia to Russian antislavery politics in the international arena, arguing that all these registers—the imperial and the national, the domestic and the foreign—were intimately connected in the Russian emancipation enterprise, thus placing what is typically understood as a Russian national story into a wider intellectual and geographical framework. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]