The review provides an analysis of the monograph by T. N. Chernova-Dyoke, dedicated to the history of the formation, development and disappearance of the German-speaking colonies in the North Caucasus. The events till 1941(including deportation) are being studied.
{"title":"Рецензія на книгу Т. М. Чернової-Дьоке «Німецькі поселення на Північному Кавказі Російської імперії».","authors":"Світлана Йосипівна Бобилєва, Наталія Вікторівна Венгер","doi":"10.15421/312013","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.15421/312013","url":null,"abstract":"The review provides an analysis of the monograph by T. N. Chernova-Dyoke, dedicated to the history of the formation, development and disappearance of the German-speaking colonies in the North Caucasus. The events till 1941(including deportation) are being studied.","PeriodicalId":422792,"journal":{"name":"Modern Studies in German History","volume":"39 6","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2021-05-22","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"120907071","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Борис Владимирович Малиновский, Таисия Владимировна Малиновская
The uprising in Zvenigorodka district in the summer of 1918 is one of the largest armed uprisings against the power of hetman P. Skoropadskiy`s Ukrainian State. The purpose of the study is to describe the events associated with its culminating stage, the seizure of Zvenigorodka district center by the rebels, and to establish the sequence and dates of those events on the basis of witnesses’ evidence and the uprising participants. The uprising arose on June 3–5, 1918, in several villages of the area around Zvenigorodka. On June 7, detachments from these villages surrounded Zvenyhorodka and they began to attack it the following day. The city was defended by German military units and Hetmanate`s enforcement forces (about 600 people in total). The rebels were approximately 15000 people according to their command estimation. On June 9, the German garrison capitulated and the rebels completely captured the city. Their leaders expected that the seizure of Zvenigorodka (that was a large settlement and one of the county centers) would provoke unrest in other parts of Ukraine and it would be the beginning of a great uprising against the hetman. When it became clear that this would not happen and that in Zvenigorodka local population was against the rebel, the leaders decided to abandon their further struggle. On June 10 and 11, the rebels left the city. In the morning of June 12, German troops occupied Zvenigorodka again.
{"title":"Повстанцы в Звенигородке, 8–12 июня 1918 года.","authors":"Борис Владимирович Малиновский, Таисия Владимировна Малиновская","doi":"10.15421/311906","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.15421/311906","url":null,"abstract":"The uprising in Zvenigorodka district in the summer of 1918 is one of the largest armed uprisings against the power of hetman P. Skoropadskiy`s Ukrainian State. The purpose of the study is to describe the events associated with its culminating stage, the seizure of Zvenigorodka district center by the rebels, and to establish the sequence and dates of those events on the basis of witnesses’ evidence and the uprising participants. \u0000The uprising arose on June 3–5, 1918, in several villages of the area around Zvenigorodka. On June 7, detachments from these villages surrounded Zvenyhorodka and they began to attack it the following day. The city was defended by German military units and Hetmanate`s enforcement forces (about 600 people in total). The rebels were approximately 15000 people according to their command estimation. On June 9, the German garrison capitulated and the rebels completely captured the city. Their leaders expected that the seizure of Zvenigorodka (that was a large settlement and one of the county centers) would provoke unrest in other parts of Ukraine and it would be the beginning of a great uprising against the hetman. When it became clear that this would not happen and that in Zvenigorodka local population was against the rebel, the leaders decided to abandon their further struggle. On June 10 and 11, the rebels left the city. In the morning of June 12, German troops occupied Zvenigorodka again.","PeriodicalId":422792,"journal":{"name":"Modern Studies in German History","volume":"03 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2019-12-13","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"128219878","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
The article deals with the textbook "History of the class struggle", authored by Belarusian historians Y. Rubin, Z. Hanutin and L. Holmshtok. The textbook was prepared and published at the time when such an academic subject as History was eliminated from schools. Instead, Social Science containing a historical component was introduced The textbook was divided into several major topics: European history of class struggle, Russian history of class struggle, Belarusian history of class struggle, history of class struggle of the Jews in Belarus. According to the textbook, the era of Feudalism was born and developed in the environment of the Germanic tribes. The authors considered that he driving force of the history were trade and trade capital, which explains the enslavement of the peasants, the allocation of the urban patricians, etc. The craft is considered to be a progressive phenomenon of the Feudal period. The authors regard relationships inside the craft between masters and apprentices through the lens of the class struggle. The textbook highlights the main manifestations of class struggle – rebellions, and talks about their cruel suppression. Great geographical discoveries are explained as the result of the trade crisis, which had promoted individual rulers of Europe to invest into the geographical discoveries. In the textbook the information is given schematically, practically there are no personalistics characters whose biographies would be framed into the context of the identified problems. The peculiarity of the textbook is the presence of some plots from sources and fiction related to the topic. Jakiv Rubiv was a well-known historian and teacher in Belarus in the interim between the wars. He worked at the Belarus Academy of Sciences and studied Jewish history and historiography. In the late 1930s he started work at the Belarus History Museum, where he researched the problems of feudalism. At the same time, he was teaching at higher educational institutions of Minsk. During the war, he was evacuated to Osh. After the war, he worked in Dnepropetrovs’k as head of the department of the world history.
{"title":"Образи феодалізму крізь призму класової боротьби: педагогічна спадщина Якова Рубіна","authors":"Альберт Григорович Венгер","doi":"10.15421/311912","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.15421/311912","url":null,"abstract":"The article deals with the textbook \"History of the class struggle\", authored by Belarusian historians Y. Rubin, Z. Hanutin and L. Holmshtok. The textbook was prepared and published at the time when such an academic subject as History was eliminated from schools. Instead, Social Science containing a historical component was introduced The textbook was divided into several major topics: European history of class struggle, Russian history of class struggle, Belarusian history of class struggle, history of class struggle of the Jews in Belarus. According to the textbook, the era of Feudalism was born and developed in the environment of the Germanic tribes. The authors considered that he driving force of the history were trade and trade capital, which explains the enslavement of the peasants, the allocation of the urban patricians, etc. The craft is considered to be a progressive phenomenon of the Feudal period. The authors regard relationships inside the craft between masters and apprentices through the lens of the class struggle. The textbook highlights the main manifestations of class struggle – rebellions, and talks about their cruel suppression. Great geographical discoveries are explained as the result of the trade crisis, which had promoted individual rulers of Europe to invest into the geographical discoveries. \u0000In the textbook the information is given schematically, practically there are no personalistics characters whose biographies would be framed into the context of the identified problems. The peculiarity of the textbook is the presence of some plots from sources and fiction related to the topic. \u0000Jakiv Rubiv was a well-known historian and teacher in Belarus in the interim between the wars. He worked at the Belarus Academy of Sciences and studied Jewish history and historiography. In the late 1930s he started work at the Belarus History Museum, where he researched the problems of feudalism. At the same time, he was teaching at higher educational institutions of Minsk. During the war, he was evacuated to Osh. After the war, he worked in Dnepropetrovs’k as head of the department of the world history.","PeriodicalId":422792,"journal":{"name":"Modern Studies in German History","volume":"216 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2019-12-13","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"122124148","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
The article presents some of the author’s research results that has got while elaboration of the theme “Everyday life in the mirror of conflicts: Germans and their neighbors on the Southern and South-West periphery of the Russian Empire 1861–1914”. The relationship between Germans and Jews is studied in the context of the growing confrontation in Southern cities that resulted in a wave of pogroms. Sources are information provided by the police and court archival funds. The German colonists Ludwig Koenig and Alexandra Kirchner (the resident of Odessa) were involved into Odessa pogrom (1871), in particular. While Koenig with other rioters was arrested by the police, Kirchner led a crowd of rioters to the shop of her Jewish neighbor, whom she had a conflict with. The second part of the article is devoted to the analyses of unty-Jewish violence causes and history in Ak-Kerman at the second half of the 19th and early years of 20th centuries. Akkerman was one of the southern Bessarabia cities, where multiethnic population, including the Jews, grew rapidly. It was one of the reasons of the pogroms in 1865 and 1905. The author uses criminal cases` papers to analyze the reasons of the Germans participation in the civilian squads that had been organized to protect the population and their property in Ackerman and Shabo in 1905.
{"title":"Deutsche und ihre jüdischen Nachbarn auf den ukrainischen Gebieten in der zweiten Hälfte des XIX. Jahrhunderts","authors":"Dmitriy Myeshkov","doi":"10.15421/311902","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.15421/311902","url":null,"abstract":"The article presents some of the author’s research results that has got while elaboration of the theme “Everyday life in the mirror of conflicts: Germans and their neighbors on the Southern and South-West periphery of the Russian Empire 1861–1914”. The relationship between Germans and Jews is studied in the context of the growing confrontation in Southern cities that resulted in a wave of pogroms. Sources are information provided by the police and court archival funds. The German colonists Ludwig Koenig and Alexandra Kirchner (the resident of Odessa) were involved into Odessa pogrom (1871), in particular. While Koenig with other rioters was arrested by the police, Kirchner led a crowd of rioters to the shop of her Jewish neighbor, whom she had a conflict with. \u0000The second part of the article is devoted to the analyses of unty-Jewish violence causes and history in Ak-Kerman at the second half of the 19th and early years of 20th centuries. \u0000Akkerman was one of the southern Bessarabia cities, where multiethnic population, including the Jews, grew rapidly. It was one of the reasons of the pogroms in 1865 and 1905. The author uses criminal cases` papers to analyze the reasons of the Germans participation in the civilian squads that had been organized to protect the population and their property in Ackerman and Shabo in 1905.","PeriodicalId":422792,"journal":{"name":"Modern Studies in German History","volume":"388 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2019-12-13","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"129170986","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
The biography of a first Soviet researcher of the history of the Volyn Germans, Samuel Nickel, is presented and analyzed on the basis of the materials of the archives and judicial investigation. The main focus is made on the circumstances of his arrest, his “crime” investigation and Nickel’s long struggle for his justification, including against the blame about the content of his book «Germans in Volyn». Samuel Nickel came from background of the German colonists of Eastern Volyn. In the early 1920s he joined the Komsomol, that helped him get higher education at the Zhytomyr Institute of Public Education. It was the basis of his rapid career development in the field of education and in the local bodies of Soviet power. In 1927 he became a member of the Communist Party of the Bolsheviks of Ukraine. In 1931–1935 S. Nickel worked in Kharkiv at the important positions in the editions of the German speaking Soviet journals. In 1935 he finished his book about the history of the Volyn Germans and it was published under the title «Die deutschen in Wolhynien» («Germans in Volyn»). In October 1935 he was arrested by NKVD. He was accused of anti-Soviet propaganda and campaigning. A separate point of accusation was against his book «Germans in Volyn». The investigation was not fair, and there was lack of evidences against the author. S. Nickel bravely fought for himself, but in 1936 he was convicted by the court. He was trying to defend his book and his honest name for many years. He was exonerated in 1960.
{"title":"Samuel Nikel as a First Soviet Researcher of the History of Volyn Germans","authors":"M. P. Kostiuk","doi":"10.15421/311812","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.15421/311812","url":null,"abstract":"The biography of a first Soviet researcher of the history of the Volyn Germans, Samuel Nickel, is presented and analyzed on the basis of the materials of the archives and judicial investigation. The main focus is made on the circumstances of his arrest, his “crime” investigation and Nickel’s long struggle for his justification, including against the blame about the content of his book «Germans in Volyn». \u0000Samuel Nickel came from background of the German colonists of Eastern Volyn. In the early 1920s he joined the Komsomol, that helped him get higher education at the Zhytomyr Institute of Public Education. It was the basis of his rapid career development in the field of education and in the local bodies of Soviet power. In 1927 he became a member of the Communist Party of the Bolsheviks of Ukraine. \u0000In 1931–1935 S. Nickel worked in Kharkiv at the important positions in the editions of the German speaking Soviet journals. In 1935 he finished his book about the history of the Volyn Germans and it was published under the title «Die deutschen in Wolhynien» («Germans in Volyn»). \u0000In October 1935 he was arrested by NKVD. He was accused of anti-Soviet propaganda and campaigning. A separate point of accusation was against his book «Germans in Volyn». The investigation was not fair, and there was lack of evidences against the author. S. Nickel bravely fought for himself, but in 1936 he was convicted by the court. He was trying to defend his book and his honest name for many years. He was exonerated in 1960.","PeriodicalId":422792,"journal":{"name":"Modern Studies in German History","volume":"49 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2018-12-10","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"116612431","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Romania’s entry into the First World War was considered by Russian military-political leadership primarily from the point of view of its own military interests, without taking into account possible negative consequences and prospects of Russian-Romanian military cooperation. According to General Headquarters' estimations, Romanian army attacks in Transylvania, together with Thessaloniki Allied army actions, were to restrain considerable enemy forces and thus ensured the success of Russian army attacks. At the same time, in spite of the fiercest battles on the SWF, the enemy succeeded in forming two new armies in Transylvania by creating a qualitative and quantitative advantage against the 1st and the 2nd Romanian armies operating at this region. When in mid-September of 1916 the need for direct military assistance to Romanian army became obvious for General Alekseyev, who was the immediate Russian army commander, he did not have enough will to insist on his decision. Thus, the South-Western Front attack, which had lost its military significance by that time, was continued. As a result, the plan of military aid to Romania, embodied by General Headquarters, was essentially defensive, and included only indirect assistance, in the form of limited 9th Russian Army attacks from Northern Moldova, and a slight strengthening of the Dobrudzhan army. In addition to this, the incorrect assessment of the situation, both by Russian and Romanian military forces, was obvious. A long pause in enemy's activity in the south, caused by waiting for reinforcements, and enemy's activity in the north, instilled confidence that the main attack would come from there. As a result, all Romanian reserves from the South were transferred to the North, while the enemy struck in the South in Dobrudzh. When Russian General Headquarters realized the consequences of Chernovody-Constanza railway loss, it simply could not transfer Russian military reserves in time. Thus, the lack of coherence between Russian and Romanian sides and their allies, the pursuit of each side's selfish interests led to the loss of military initiative by the allies in Romania, which was completely transferred to the enemy.
{"title":"«Dobrudzhan Catastrophy» as a reflection of Russian-Romanian military-political relations in summer–autumn period of 1916.","authors":"V. Soloviov","doi":"10.15421/311807","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.15421/311807","url":null,"abstract":"Romania’s entry into the First World War was considered by Russian military-political leadership primarily from the point of view of its own military interests, without taking into account possible negative consequences and prospects of Russian-Romanian military cooperation. According to General Headquarters' estimations, Romanian army attacks in Transylvania, together with Thessaloniki Allied army actions, were to restrain considerable enemy forces and thus ensured the success of Russian army attacks. \u0000At the same time, in spite of the fiercest battles on the SWF, the enemy succeeded in forming two new armies in Transylvania by creating a qualitative and quantitative advantage against the 1st and the 2nd Romanian armies operating at this region. When in mid-September of 1916 the need for direct military assistance to Romanian army became obvious for General Alekseyev, who was the immediate Russian army commander, he did not have enough will to insist on his decision. Thus, the South-Western Front attack, which had lost its military significance by that time, was continued. As a result, the plan of military aid to Romania, embodied by General Headquarters, was essentially defensive, and included only indirect assistance, in the form of limited 9th Russian Army attacks from Northern Moldova, and a slight strengthening of the Dobrudzhan army. \u0000In addition to this, the incorrect assessment of the situation, both by Russian and Romanian military forces, was obvious. A long pause in enemy's activity in the south, caused by waiting for reinforcements, and enemy's activity in the north, instilled confidence that the main attack would come from there. As a result, all Romanian reserves from the South were transferred to the North, while the enemy struck in the South in Dobrudzh. When Russian General Headquarters realized the consequences of Chernovody-Constanza railway loss, it simply could not transfer Russian military reserves in time. Thus, the lack of coherence between Russian and Romanian sides and their allies, the pursuit of each side's selfish interests led to the loss of military initiative by the allies in Romania, which was completely transferred to the enemy.","PeriodicalId":422792,"journal":{"name":"Modern Studies in German History","volume":"52 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2018-12-10","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"129591761","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
The article analyzes the memories of Y. I. Kirsch, a Russian soldier who got into German captivity, and E. E. Dwinger, a German junior officer who was captured by Russians. The author raises the question of common and distinctive features in the images of the “enemy” created in the memoirs of these memoirists. Transformation in the perception of a military enemy in the experience of captivity is being considered. The issue of reconciliation and finding an understanding with the “enemy” was studied. The author comes to the conclusion that at the time of capturing both Russian and German soldiers had extremely negative images of the “enemy”. These images were constructed by state propaganda, which dehumanized a military enemy. The prisoners of war expected extreme cruelties from the “enemy”, but these expectations were not approved. Extreme experience of captivity focused on the negative aspects of life in Germany and the Russian Empire. This was reflected in the memoirs of Y. I. Kirch and E. E. Dwinger. But both memoirists noted that the “enemy” in the crowd behaved ruthlessly, while on a personal level, he was often ready to help prisoners of war, to show mercy. Despite the negative attitude to the “enemy”, both in Russia and in Germany, there was a cohabitation of prisoners of war with local women. In Germany, ordinary Germans congratulated prisoners of war on its’ end. In Russia with the beginning of the revolution, German prisoners of war received an invitation to join the White Movement. These facts are manifestations of partial reconciliation of prisoners of war with the “enemy”. With regard to the difference in the design of the enemy's image, German memoirs show more cultural reflections on the national character and the mission of the Russians. Memoirs of the Russian on the contrary emphasize the way of life and order that prevailed in the camp for the prisoners of war. The study of the experience of transforming the enemy's image during the First World War is relevant in the context of a modern information confrontation, which inevitably complements military conflicts.
这篇文章分析了被德国俘虏的俄罗斯士兵y·i·基尔希(Y. I. Kirsch)和被俄罗斯俘虏的德国下级军官e·e·德温格(E. E. Dwinger)的记忆。作者提出了这些回忆录作者在回忆录中所塑造的“敌人”形象的共性和独特性的问题。正在考虑在囚禁经历中改变对军事敌人的看法。研究了与“敌人”和解和达成谅解的问题。作者的结论是，在被俘时，俄国和德国士兵对“敌人”的印象都是极其负面的。这些形象是由国家宣传构建的，使一个军事敌人失去人性。战俘们期待着“敌人”的极端残忍，但这些期望并没有得到认可。囚禁的极端经历集中在德国和俄罗斯帝国生活的消极方面。这反映在Y. I. Kirch和E. E. Dwinger的回忆录中。但两位回忆录作者都指出，人群中的“敌人”表现得冷酷无情，而在个人层面上，他经常准备帮助战俘，表现出仁慈。尽管对“敌人”持消极态度，但在俄罗斯和德国，战俘都与当地妇女同居。在德国，普通德国人祝贺战俘结束战争。在俄国，随着革命的开始，德国战俘收到了加入白色运动的邀请。这些事实是战俘与“敌人”部分和解的表现。在敌人形象设计上的差异上，德国回忆录更多地体现了对民族性格和俄国人使命的文化反思。与此相反，俄国人的回忆录强调了战俘集中营里盛行的生活方式和秩序。对第一次世界大战期间改变敌人形象的经验的研究在现代信息对抗的背景下是相关的，这不可避免地补充了军事冲突。
{"title":"Images of the «enemy» by the eyes of prisoners of war from the time of the First World War (according to the memoirs of Yu. I. Kirsch and E. E. Dwinger)","authors":"V. Lavrenko, M. Tkachenko","doi":"10.15421/311804","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.15421/311804","url":null,"abstract":"The article analyzes the memories of Y. I. Kirsch, a Russian soldier who got into German captivity, and E. E. Dwinger, a German junior officer who was captured by Russians. The author raises the question of common and distinctive features in the images of the “enemy” created in the memoirs of these memoirists. Transformation in the perception of a military enemy in the experience of captivity is being considered. The issue of reconciliation and finding an understanding with the “enemy” was studied. \u0000The author comes to the conclusion that at the time of capturing both Russian and German soldiers had extremely negative images of the “enemy”. These images were constructed by state propaganda, which dehumanized a military enemy. The prisoners of war expected extreme cruelties from the “enemy”, but these expectations were not approved. \u0000Extreme experience of captivity focused on the negative aspects of life in Germany and the Russian Empire. This was reflected in the memoirs of Y. I. Kirch and E. E. Dwinger. But both memoirists noted that the “enemy” in the crowd behaved ruthlessly, while on a personal level, he was often ready to help prisoners of war, to show mercy. Despite the negative attitude to the “enemy”, both in Russia and in Germany, there was a cohabitation of prisoners of war with local women. In Germany, ordinary Germans congratulated prisoners of war on its’ end. In Russia with the beginning of the revolution, German prisoners of war received an invitation to join the White Movement. These facts are manifestations of partial reconciliation of prisoners of war with the “enemy”. \u0000With regard to the difference in the design of the enemy's image, German memoirs show more cultural reflections on the national character and the mission of the Russians. Memoirs of the Russian on the contrary emphasize the way of life and order that prevailed in the camp for the prisoners of war. \u0000The study of the experience of transforming the enemy's image during the First World War is relevant in the context of a modern information confrontation, which inevitably complements military conflicts.","PeriodicalId":422792,"journal":{"name":"Modern Studies in German History","volume":"121 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2018-12-10","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"132279966","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
The author presents an emotional analysis of the colonization situation of the first half of the XIXth century and shows the connection between interethnic contacts of the colonization period with the development of so-called “German question” in the Russian Empire. Special attention is paid to the processes of interaction between Slavic (the Ukrainean, Russian) and German-speaking (the Mennonites, the colonist) colonization groups. Under conditions of colonization, inter-ethnic autostereotypes were formed. These ideas about the “others” were kept and saved in the field of collective unconscious and social memory, but under conditions of a conformist (strictly regulated) society, the autostereotypes were neutral and and did not show aggression. . The mobilization of the Russian nation was carried out according to the antagonistic scenario, which caused the formation of the “German question” as one of the theoretical nationalist concepts in the Empire. The ideologists of nationalism used autostereotypes to form anti-German sentiments. The resentment of masses was formed on the basis of negative experience of contacts. The resentment is a a sense of hostility, when the logic recedes, and the chaos of emotions prevails. It was used by supporters of nationalism to rally society around the titular ethnic group, to form emotional communities and to solve problems of eliminating competition with the most stable and successful ethnic groups, including Russian Germans. In the subsequent period, resentment was a psychological motivator of the lower classes group aggressive behavior in the inter-ethnic conflicts.
{"title":"To the problem of the \"German question\" in the Russian Empire prehistory: an emotional analysis of the colonization situation of the first half of the XIXth century","authors":"N. Venger","doi":"10.15421/311802","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.15421/311802","url":null,"abstract":"The author presents an emotional analysis of the colonization situation of the first half of the XIXth century and shows the connection between interethnic contacts of the colonization period with the development of so-called “German question” in the Russian Empire. Special attention is paid to the processes of interaction between Slavic (the Ukrainean, Russian) and German-speaking (the Mennonites, the colonist) colonization groups. Under conditions of colonization, inter-ethnic autostereotypes were formed. These ideas about the “others” were kept and saved in the field of collective unconscious and social memory, but under conditions of a conformist (strictly regulated) society, the autostereotypes were neutral and and did not show aggression. . The mobilization of the Russian nation was carried out according to the antagonistic scenario, which caused the formation of the “German question” as one of the theoretical nationalist concepts in the Empire. The ideologists of nationalism used autostereotypes to form anti-German sentiments. The resentment of masses was formed on the basis of negative experience of contacts. The resentment is a a sense of hostility, when the logic recedes, and the chaos of emotions prevails. It was used by supporters of nationalism to rally society around the titular ethnic group, to form emotional communities and to solve problems of eliminating competition with the most stable and successful ethnic groups, including Russian Germans. In the subsequent period, resentment was a psychological motivator of the lower classes group aggressive behavior in the inter-ethnic conflicts.","PeriodicalId":422792,"journal":{"name":"Modern Studies in German History","volume":"55 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2018-12-10","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"116771697","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
The author presents the results of her research about real location of the “Guardian Committee of Foreign settlers in the South of Russia” building. The house was supposed to be located in Odessa. Having been established 200 years ago, the Committee was responsible for the development of the agricultural colonies on the South of Ukraine. It had to monitor the processes of the foreign settlements setting up and take care of them for more than fifty years. Nevertheless, the complete history of the Committee has not been written yet and the exact location of the building had not been found out before. The author proves that the building of the Guardian Committee is still available. It is considered as a monument of a local architecture; however nobody knows the real historical importance of the house. The building was erected in 1847 – 1848 as a shop that belonged to Valentina Shvendner. Then the house was sold to local authorities and became a main quarter of the Guardian Committee. After the Committee had been canceled the building was mentioned only as a Department of State Domains in the souses. It was forgotten that the Guardian Committee had been in the house before. The author has managed to identify the house using the plan and the architecture draft of it`s front wall made by an architect F. Morandy.
{"title":"The building from which the colonists were guided","authors":"O. Eisfeld","doi":"10.15421/311801","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.15421/311801","url":null,"abstract":"The author presents the results of her research about real location of the “Guardian Committee of Foreign settlers in the South of Russia” building. The house was supposed to be located in Odessa. Having been established 200 years ago, the Committee was responsible for the development of the agricultural colonies on the South of Ukraine. It had to monitor the processes of the foreign settlements setting up and take care of them for more than fifty years. Nevertheless, the complete history of the Committee has not been written yet and the exact location of the building had not been found out before. The author proves that the building of the Guardian Committee is still available. It is considered as a monument of a local architecture; however nobody knows the real historical importance of the house. The building was erected in 1847 – 1848 as a shop that belonged to Valentina Shvendner. Then the house was sold to local authorities and became a main quarter of the Guardian Committee. After the Committee had been canceled the building was mentioned only as a Department of State Domains in the souses. It was forgotten that the Guardian Committee had been in the house before. The author has managed to identify the house using the plan and the architecture draft of it`s front wall made by an architect F. Morandy.","PeriodicalId":422792,"journal":{"name":"Modern Studies in German History","volume":"68 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2018-12-10","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"128024520","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
In this article the biography of M. Yuriev has been analyzed. Yuriev was the head of the World History department of Dnipropetrovsk Institute of Public Education and worked at the University at the beginning of 1930-th. He graduated from Odessa University where he had studied law. His closest relatives emigrated to Europe. He worked in the museum and taught in Dnipropetrovsk University. At the beginning of 1930-th Yuriev headed the World History department. By the time he started working at the University, the most historians prepared before 1917 had been fired from the world history department. In the University there were companies against Ukrainian bourgeois nationalism. Yuriev was also involved in this ideological struggle. He criticized the teachers of the history of Ukraine for the “nationalistic bias”. He criticized them especially at the time of so called “socialist competitions” between the History and Philology Departments. Without having scholarly research works he was involved into the project of writing the history of Dnipropetrovsk plant named after Bolshevik Petrovsky The work of the most authors of this project was considered unsatisfactory. The texts were not printed, but they were seized and destroyed. During the “political cleaning” in 1934 Yuriev was expelled from the consignment and fired. In 1935 he was arrested and accused of Trotskyism. Yuriev was sentenced to 5 years imprisonment. He was sentenced again while serving a sentence in Leningrad region in 1937. The court judged him to capital punishment, in 1937 he was shot. In 1959 he was posthumously rehabilitated.
{"title":"Some Sketches for the Portrait of World History Historian in Dnipropetrovsk: M.O. Yuriev in Procrustean bed of Stalin`s Repressions","authors":"A. Venger","doi":"10.15421/311810","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.15421/311810","url":null,"abstract":"In this article the biography of M. Yuriev has been analyzed. Yuriev was the head of the World History department of Dnipropetrovsk Institute of Public Education and worked at the University at the beginning of 1930-th. He graduated from Odessa University where he had studied law. His closest relatives emigrated to Europe. He worked in the museum and taught in Dnipropetrovsk University. At the beginning of 1930-th Yuriev headed the World History department. By the time he started working at the University, the most historians prepared before 1917 had been fired from the world history department. In the University there were companies against Ukrainian bourgeois nationalism. Yuriev was also involved in this ideological struggle. He criticized the teachers of the history of Ukraine for the “nationalistic bias”. He criticized them especially at the time of so called “socialist competitions” between the History and Philology Departments. Without having scholarly research works he was involved into the project of writing the history of Dnipropetrovsk plant named after Bolshevik Petrovsky The work of the most authors of this project was considered unsatisfactory. The texts were not printed, but they were seized and destroyed. During the “political cleaning” in 1934 Yuriev was expelled from the consignment and fired. In 1935 he was arrested and accused of Trotskyism. Yuriev was sentenced to 5 years imprisonment. He was sentenced again while serving a sentence in Leningrad region in 1937. The court judged him to capital punishment, in 1937 he was shot. In 1959 he was posthumously rehabilitated.","PeriodicalId":422792,"journal":{"name":"Modern Studies in German History","volume":"94 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2018-12-10","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"124605012","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","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：