Pub Date : 2021-07-03DOI: 10.1080/09546545.2021.1984707
J. Nicholson
{"title":"The State Versus The People: Revolutionary Justice in Russia’s Civil War, 1917-1922","authors":"J. Nicholson","doi":"10.1080/09546545.2021.1984707","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1080/09546545.2021.1984707","url":null,"abstract":"","PeriodicalId":42121,"journal":{"name":"Revolutionary Russia","volume":"34 1","pages":"306 - 308"},"PeriodicalIF":0.3,"publicationDate":"2021-07-03","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"43163548","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"历史学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2021-07-03DOI: 10.1080/09546545.2021.1984691
Ian D. Thatcher
{"title":"Peter Alexander Thompson. The Quest for Freedom. A Life of Alexander Kerensky, the Russian Unicorn","authors":"Ian D. Thatcher","doi":"10.1080/09546545.2021.1984691","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1080/09546545.2021.1984691","url":null,"abstract":"","PeriodicalId":42121,"journal":{"name":"Revolutionary Russia","volume":"34 1","pages":"304 - 305"},"PeriodicalIF":0.3,"publicationDate":"2021-07-03","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"46820791","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"历史学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2021-07-03DOI: 10.1080/09546545.2021.1995815
E. Mawdsley
This article discusses the writings of Dr Jonathan D. Smele, in particular his research on the Civil War (or civil wars) fought on the territory of the former Russian Empire. It does this in the context of the development of western historiography since the 1930s. The author of this article worked in the same field for many years and has known Smele since he was a postgraduate at the University of Glasgow. Smele's first major book was Civil War in Siberia, and this article pays particular attention to Smele's view of developments in that region, and to his assessment of the local counter-revolutionary leader, Admiral A. V. Kolchak. The article stresses that Smele's work has latterly included an imaginative overview of the Russian crisis of the first quarter of the twentieth century, with insights into historical contingency. Smele's most recent interpretation takes in a longer period than just the three years after the Bolshevik Revolution of October 1917 and goes back to the 1916 uprising in Turkestan and forward to the suppression of the Bas'machi movement in Central Asia in 1926. It assesses Smele's view that what happened cannot be seen simply as ‘one’ civil war or confined to the years 1917-1921. The article also emphasises Smele's unique contribution to the study of these events, however defined, by providing invaluable and comprehensive reference tools, notably his annotated bibliography and his historical dictionary.
{"title":"Jonathan Smele, Admiral Kolchak and the Civil War","authors":"E. Mawdsley","doi":"10.1080/09546545.2021.1995815","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1080/09546545.2021.1995815","url":null,"abstract":"This article discusses the writings of Dr Jonathan D. Smele, in particular his research on the Civil War (or civil wars) fought on the territory of the former Russian Empire. It does this in the context of the development of western historiography since the 1930s. The author of this article worked in the same field for many years and has known Smele since he was a postgraduate at the University of Glasgow. Smele's first major book was Civil War in Siberia, and this article pays particular attention to Smele's view of developments in that region, and to his assessment of the local counter-revolutionary leader, Admiral A. V. Kolchak. The article stresses that Smele's work has latterly included an imaginative overview of the Russian crisis of the first quarter of the twentieth century, with insights into historical contingency. Smele's most recent interpretation takes in a longer period than just the three years after the Bolshevik Revolution of October 1917 and goes back to the 1916 uprising in Turkestan and forward to the suppression of the Bas'machi movement in Central Asia in 1926. It assesses Smele's view that what happened cannot be seen simply as ‘one’ civil war or confined to the years 1917-1921. The article also emphasises Smele's unique contribution to the study of these events, however defined, by providing invaluable and comprehensive reference tools, notably his annotated bibliography and his historical dictionary.","PeriodicalId":42121,"journal":{"name":"Revolutionary Russia","volume":"34 1","pages":"161 - 174"},"PeriodicalIF":0.3,"publicationDate":"2021-07-03","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"43910961","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"历史学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2021-07-03DOI: 10.1080/09546545.2021.1993658
P. Dukes
Widely considered to be a landmark encyclopaedia for its time, the twelfth and thirteenth editions of The Encyclopaedia Britannica, supplements to the earlier eleventh edition, devote considerable space to the origins and consequences of the Russian Revolution. Incapable of maintaining the objective tone customary for works of reference, several of the contributors caught the essence of the turmoil and its impact across Europe, whether through a liberal or socialist lens. This article charts the evolution of the coverage of Russia in The Encyclopaedia Britannica and highlights how its earlier approach was overwhelmed by war and revolution as pre-war certainties were shaken and undermined.
{"title":"The Russian Revolution in The Encyclopaedia Britannica","authors":"P. Dukes","doi":"10.1080/09546545.2021.1993658","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1080/09546545.2021.1993658","url":null,"abstract":"Widely considered to be a landmark encyclopaedia for its time, the twelfth and thirteenth editions of The Encyclopaedia Britannica, supplements to the earlier eleventh edition, devote considerable space to the origins and consequences of the Russian Revolution. Incapable of maintaining the objective tone customary for works of reference, several of the contributors caught the essence of the turmoil and its impact across Europe, whether through a liberal or socialist lens. This article charts the evolution of the coverage of Russia in The Encyclopaedia Britannica and highlights how its earlier approach was overwhelmed by war and revolution as pre-war certainties were shaken and undermined.","PeriodicalId":42121,"journal":{"name":"Revolutionary Russia","volume":"34 1","pages":"259 - 275"},"PeriodicalIF":0.3,"publicationDate":"2021-07-03","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"42338169","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"历史学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2021-07-03DOI: 10.1080/09546545.2021.1995818
A. Heywood
By defining ‘worker’ to include low-paid white-collar as well as blue-collar staff, and taking a broad definition of industry, this article reveals whereas factory managers increasingly hired blue-collar women during roughly 1895–1914, the situation with women's employment in the railway industry was very different. Railway policy was to restrict numbers tightly and prioritise literate women in certain low-paid mostly white-collar jobs for which men were hard to recruit. Railway policy-makers were influenced by not just enduring patriarchal attitudes, but also military demands together with financial concerns associated with pension rights and retrospective wage increases. At the same time, local labour shortages increasingly forced managers to seek exemptions to the hiring policy or even ignore the restrictions, especially in regions like Central Asia where qualified people of both genders were relatively scarce. The article concludes with some general questions. How typical by that time were the MPS as an employing ministry and state-owned railways as industrial employers? Did hiring policy in state-owned industrial enterprises differ significantly from the private industrial sector? What ishould be understood by the term ‘skilled worker’? And how important are white-collar workers as a category for analysing women's employment in late Tsarist Russia’s industrial economy?
{"title":"Women Workers in Late Imperial Russian Industry: Hiring Policy and Employer Attitudes on the Railways to 1914","authors":"A. Heywood","doi":"10.1080/09546545.2021.1995818","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1080/09546545.2021.1995818","url":null,"abstract":"By defining ‘worker’ to include low-paid white-collar as well as blue-collar staff, and taking a broad definition of industry, this article reveals whereas factory managers increasingly hired blue-collar women during roughly 1895–1914, the situation with women's employment in the railway industry was very different. Railway policy was to restrict numbers tightly and prioritise literate women in certain low-paid mostly white-collar jobs for which men were hard to recruit. Railway policy-makers were influenced by not just enduring patriarchal attitudes, but also military demands together with financial concerns associated with pension rights and retrospective wage increases. At the same time, local labour shortages increasingly forced managers to seek exemptions to the hiring policy or even ignore the restrictions, especially in regions like Central Asia where qualified people of both genders were relatively scarce. The article concludes with some general questions. How typical by that time were the MPS as an employing ministry and state-owned railways as industrial employers? Did hiring policy in state-owned industrial enterprises differ significantly from the private industrial sector? What ishould be understood by the term ‘skilled worker’? And how important are white-collar workers as a category for analysing women's employment in late Tsarist Russia’s industrial economy?","PeriodicalId":42121,"journal":{"name":"Revolutionary Russia","volume":"34 1","pages":"196 - 218"},"PeriodicalIF":0.3,"publicationDate":"2021-07-03","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"48476767","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"历史学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2021-07-03DOI: 10.1080/09546545.2021.1996320
G. Swain
For the first three months of 1918, Soviet Russia and Romania fought a revolutionary war, and yet the two countries were so recently allies in the struggle against the Central Powers. This article explores the question of British support for Romania from Russia as the Bolsheviks took power and efforts to bring this unnecessary – from an Allied perspective – war to an end. Part adventure story, it has a serious subtext.
{"title":"British Adventurers and Revolutionary Russia’s War over Bessarabia","authors":"G. Swain","doi":"10.1080/09546545.2021.1996320","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1080/09546545.2021.1996320","url":null,"abstract":"For the first three months of 1918, Soviet Russia and Romania fought a revolutionary war, and yet the two countries were so recently allies in the struggle against the Central Powers. This article explores the question of British support for Romania from Russia as the Bolsheviks took power and efforts to bring this unnecessary – from an Allied perspective – war to an end. Part adventure story, it has a serious subtext.","PeriodicalId":42121,"journal":{"name":"Revolutionary Russia","volume":"34 1","pages":"219 - 238"},"PeriodicalIF":0.3,"publicationDate":"2021-07-03","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"48711654","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"历史学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2021-07-03DOI: 10.1080/09546545.2021.1995816
Ian D. Thatcher
This special issue of the journal is to mark the retirement of Jonathan ‘Jon’ D. Smele in June 2020 from Queen Mary, University of London. Jon has made fundamental contributions to our general understanding of the Russian Civil War and to our comprehension of the Kolchak regime in Siberia. He has also produced deeply researched reference volumes. These intellectual achievements are discussed in Evan Mawdsley’s article in this issue. Jon is also familiar to the field and to readers of this journal as its editor from 2002–11. Editing a major journal is a large responsibility. Jon stepped naturally into the role, combining patience, attention to detail, and sound scholarly advice. Trusted and valued for his knowledge, Jon’s curiosity and passion for new research made him a wonderful correspondent. Here was an editor who actually read and empathized with the author’s endeavours and could reach his own independent evaluation. There was nothing mechanistic about Jon as editor. Reading a decade of his editorship, the only constant is the commitment to originality. If this meant publishing a single author on a single theme several times over several issues, then so be it. Jon was also receptive to publishing articles by amateur historians and encouraged younger scholars to begin their publication career with Revolutionary Russia. Jon’s respect for the Study Group and for its journal, initially Sbornik and subsequently Revolutionary Russia, is evident from his own articles in the journal, of which there are many, including an account of the first thirty years of the Study Group in a 2005 issue. His penchant for editorial roles also includes being founding co-editor, along with Michael Melancon, of the Bloomsbury History of Modern Russia series. Jon undertook a BA in International History and Politics at the University of Leeds (1977–80). His interest in Russian and Soviet history, and in particular the Russian Civil War, took off when he joined the MPhil in Soviet and East European Studies at the University of Glasgow (1981–83). This course offered instruction in Russian, as well as a host of options covering the history, economics, politics, and international relations of the USSR. It was taught within the Institute of Soviet and East European Studies, famous as the home of the journal Soviet Studies, and for ideological analyses and debates of the Soviet system, most notably between Alec Nove and Hillel Ticktin. It was an exciting intellectual and publishing environment in which Jon focused on historical studies under James ‘Jimmy’ D. White and Evan Mawdsley, writing his MPhil thesis on Kolchak, a topic suggested by Jimmy. Alas, Glasgow did not have the funds to keep Jon on for his PhD. This opportunity arrived through a scholarship that Roger Pethybridge had arranged and advertised. Jon applied, was successful, and began his doctoral research in 1984. The PhD was awarded at the University of Wales (Swansea) in 1991. Whilst still working on his PhD, Jon
{"title":"Introduction","authors":"Ian D. Thatcher","doi":"10.1080/09546545.2021.1995816","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1080/09546545.2021.1995816","url":null,"abstract":"This special issue of the journal is to mark the retirement of Jonathan ‘Jon’ D. Smele in June 2020 from Queen Mary, University of London. Jon has made fundamental contributions to our general understanding of the Russian Civil War and to our comprehension of the Kolchak regime in Siberia. He has also produced deeply researched reference volumes. These intellectual achievements are discussed in Evan Mawdsley’s article in this issue. Jon is also familiar to the field and to readers of this journal as its editor from 2002–11. Editing a major journal is a large responsibility. Jon stepped naturally into the role, combining patience, attention to detail, and sound scholarly advice. Trusted and valued for his knowledge, Jon’s curiosity and passion for new research made him a wonderful correspondent. Here was an editor who actually read and empathized with the author’s endeavours and could reach his own independent evaluation. There was nothing mechanistic about Jon as editor. Reading a decade of his editorship, the only constant is the commitment to originality. If this meant publishing a single author on a single theme several times over several issues, then so be it. Jon was also receptive to publishing articles by amateur historians and encouraged younger scholars to begin their publication career with Revolutionary Russia. Jon’s respect for the Study Group and for its journal, initially Sbornik and subsequently Revolutionary Russia, is evident from his own articles in the journal, of which there are many, including an account of the first thirty years of the Study Group in a 2005 issue. His penchant for editorial roles also includes being founding co-editor, along with Michael Melancon, of the Bloomsbury History of Modern Russia series. Jon undertook a BA in International History and Politics at the University of Leeds (1977–80). His interest in Russian and Soviet history, and in particular the Russian Civil War, took off when he joined the MPhil in Soviet and East European Studies at the University of Glasgow (1981–83). This course offered instruction in Russian, as well as a host of options covering the history, economics, politics, and international relations of the USSR. It was taught within the Institute of Soviet and East European Studies, famous as the home of the journal Soviet Studies, and for ideological analyses and debates of the Soviet system, most notably between Alec Nove and Hillel Ticktin. It was an exciting intellectual and publishing environment in which Jon focused on historical studies under James ‘Jimmy’ D. White and Evan Mawdsley, writing his MPhil thesis on Kolchak, a topic suggested by Jimmy. Alas, Glasgow did not have the funds to keep Jon on for his PhD. This opportunity arrived through a scholarship that Roger Pethybridge had arranged and advertised. Jon applied, was successful, and began his doctoral research in 1984. The PhD was awarded at the University of Wales (Swansea) in 1991. Whilst still working on his PhD, Jon","PeriodicalId":42121,"journal":{"name":"Revolutionary Russia","volume":"34 1","pages":"157 - 160"},"PeriodicalIF":0.3,"publicationDate":"2021-07-03","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"45927955","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"历史学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2021-07-03DOI: 10.1080/09546545.2021.1984695
Alison K. Smith
{"title":"A Modern History of Russian Childhood: From the Late Imperial Period to the Collapse of the Soviet Union","authors":"Alison K. Smith","doi":"10.1080/09546545.2021.1984695","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1080/09546545.2021.1984695","url":null,"abstract":"","PeriodicalId":42121,"journal":{"name":"Revolutionary Russia","volume":"34 1","pages":"296 - 297"},"PeriodicalIF":0.3,"publicationDate":"2021-07-03","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"42758010","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"历史学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2021-07-03DOI: 10.1080/09546545.2021.1984064
Ian D. Thatcher
This article is the first exposition of a projected five-part Menshevik study of social forces in the Russian Revolution of 1905, only four volumes of which appeared in 1907 covering reaction, the proletariat, the peasantry, and the liberal and democratic bourgeoisie. This collective effort marked perhaps the first attempt to present an overall analysis of the revolution from within one perspective, that of the Menshevik variety of Russian Marxism. Despite the centrality of perceptions of revolution to participants and future historians of Russian socialism and of 1905, this project has been largely overlooked. This is to be regretted, for the volumes contain interpretations now familiar on the nature of the 1905 revolution and why it failed. Furthermore, there is continuity between the works and authors of 1907 and the subsequent (1909–14) much more famous Menshevik history of social movements in Russia at the beginning of the twentieth century.
{"title":"The 1905–07 Russian Revolution as a ‘Moment of Truth’: An Overlooked Contribution from Menshevism","authors":"Ian D. Thatcher","doi":"10.1080/09546545.2021.1984064","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1080/09546545.2021.1984064","url":null,"abstract":"This article is the first exposition of a projected five-part Menshevik study of social forces in the Russian Revolution of 1905, only four volumes of which appeared in 1907 covering reaction, the proletariat, the peasantry, and the liberal and democratic bourgeoisie. This collective effort marked perhaps the first attempt to present an overall analysis of the revolution from within one perspective, that of the Menshevik variety of Russian Marxism. Despite the centrality of perceptions of revolution to participants and future historians of Russian socialism and of 1905, this project has been largely overlooked. This is to be regretted, for the volumes contain interpretations now familiar on the nature of the 1905 revolution and why it failed. Furthermore, there is continuity between the works and authors of 1907 and the subsequent (1909–14) much more famous Menshevik history of social movements in Russia at the beginning of the twentieth century.","PeriodicalId":42121,"journal":{"name":"Revolutionary Russia","volume":"34 1","pages":"175 - 195"},"PeriodicalIF":0.3,"publicationDate":"2021-07-03","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"47163816","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"历史学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
京公网安备 11010802042870号
京ICP备2023020795号-1
扫码关注我们
求助内容：
应助结果提醒方式：