Novoselitsa – “An Insignificant Barrier”

IF 0.2 Q2 HISTORY East Central Europe Pub Date : 2021-11-26 DOI:10.30965/18763308-48020002
Philippe Henri Blasen, Andrei Cușco
{"title":"Novoselitsa – “An Insignificant Barrier”","authors":"Philippe Henri Blasen, Andrei Cușco","doi":"10.30965/18763308-48020002","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"\nThis article focuses on Russian Novoselitsa, a small town on the Russian-Austro-Hungarian-Romanian border, which served as the sole border crossing between Russian Bessarabia and Austrian Bukovina. From 1893 it was also an important railway junction between the two empires. Based on diplomatic documents from the Austrian State Archives, the article discusses Austrian officials’ views of ethnoreligious communities in the region, including Bessarabian Romanians, Jews, Russian Old Believers, and Ukrainians. It also examines the activity of the Austro-Hungarian Consular Agency in Russian Novoselitsa (1869–1914). The authors analyze the attitude of the Austrian officials towards ethnoreligious groups, informal practices on the border, and revolutionary unrest. The Novoselitsa case epitomizes the fundamental difference between the supranational Habsburg Empire and the nationalizing Romanov Empire, but also highlights the similarities between the two regimes. It illustrates the notions of “shatterzone of empires” (Bartov and Weitz 2013) and “thick borders”: Novoselitsa, a periphery with regard to both Vienna and St. Petersburg, was a relatively autonomous space and had its own forms of agency, which expanded much beyond the border itself on both sides of the frontier. Cases of corruption and espionage are especially revealing in regard to the uncertainty and confusion specific to the borderlands, which reigned as much at the center as on the periphery. This case study also provides an interesting perspective on everyday life, emphasizing the peculiarities of the Russian and Austro-Hungarian monarchies, as well as the entanglements between the two entities.","PeriodicalId":40651,"journal":{"name":"East Central Europe","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.2000,"publicationDate":"2021-11-26","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"East Central Europe","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.30965/18763308-48020002","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"HISTORY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

This article focuses on Russian Novoselitsa, a small town on the Russian-Austro-Hungarian-Romanian border, which served as the sole border crossing between Russian Bessarabia and Austrian Bukovina. From 1893 it was also an important railway junction between the two empires. Based on diplomatic documents from the Austrian State Archives, the article discusses Austrian officials’ views of ethnoreligious communities in the region, including Bessarabian Romanians, Jews, Russian Old Believers, and Ukrainians. It also examines the activity of the Austro-Hungarian Consular Agency in Russian Novoselitsa (1869–1914). The authors analyze the attitude of the Austrian officials towards ethnoreligious groups, informal practices on the border, and revolutionary unrest. The Novoselitsa case epitomizes the fundamental difference between the supranational Habsburg Empire and the nationalizing Romanov Empire, but also highlights the similarities between the two regimes. It illustrates the notions of “shatterzone of empires” (Bartov and Weitz 2013) and “thick borders”: Novoselitsa, a periphery with regard to both Vienna and St. Petersburg, was a relatively autonomous space and had its own forms of agency, which expanded much beyond the border itself on both sides of the frontier. Cases of corruption and espionage are especially revealing in regard to the uncertainty and confusion specific to the borderlands, which reigned as much at the center as on the periphery. This case study also provides an interesting perspective on everyday life, emphasizing the peculiarities of the Russian and Austro-Hungarian monarchies, as well as the entanglements between the two entities.
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
Novoselitsa–“一个不重要的障碍”
本文关注的是俄罗斯新谢利察,一个位于俄罗斯-奥匈-罗马尼亚边境的小镇,它是俄罗斯比萨拉比亚和奥地利布科维纳之间唯一的过境点。从1893年起,这里也是两个帝国之间的重要铁路枢纽。根据奥地利国家档案馆的外交文件,文章讨论了奥地利官员对该地区民族宗教社区的看法,包括比萨拉比亚罗马尼亚人、犹太人、俄罗斯老信徒和乌克兰人。它还考察了奥匈帝国驻俄罗斯新谢利察领事机构(1869–1914)的活动。作者分析了奥地利官员对民族宗教团体的态度、边境上的非正式做法以及革命动乱。诺沃塞利察案集中体现了超国家的哈布斯堡帝国和国有化的罗曼诺夫帝国之间的根本区别,但也突显了这两个政权之间的相似之处。它说明了“帝国破碎地带”(Bartov和Weitz,2013年)和“厚边界”的概念:新谢利察是维也纳和圣彼得堡的外围地区,是一个相对自治的空间,有自己的机构形式,在边界两侧远远超出了边界本身。腐败和间谍案件尤其揭示了边境地区特有的不确定性和混乱,边境地区既处于中心,也处于外围。本案例研究还提供了一个关于日常生活的有趣视角,强调了俄罗斯和奥匈帝国君主国的特点,以及这两个实体之间的纠葛。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
0.40
自引率
0.00%
发文量
23
期刊最新文献
Liberation, Resettlement, and Looting in Postwar Memoirs from Poland The Psychopathology of Allusion in the Kádár Era (Un)disciplined Patients, (Un)controlled Medical Authority? Balkan Cyberia: Cold War Computing, Bulgarian Modernization, and the Information Age Behind the Iron Curtain, written by Petrov, Victor Feminist Mobilization for Reproductive Rights in State Socialist Hungary
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1