Pub Date : 2023-09-01DOI: 10.1353/kri.2023.a910977
Charles J. Halperin
Land Redemption in Muscovy during the Reign of Ivan IV Charles J. Halperin (bio) The Englishman Giles Fletcher declared in his Of the Russe Commonwealth that no written law existed in Muscovy.1 Daniel Printz, envoy of the Holy Roman Emperor to Muscovy in 1576, made the same assertion.2 Historians know better, but they do not agree on the significance of Muscovite statutory law, which has left fundamental historical questions unresolved. In particular, the question of what kind of property law existed in Muscovy has long occupied historians. Richard Pipes strongly criticized George Weickhardt for claiming that there was private property in Muscovy based solely on statutory law. According to Pipes, Weickhardt omitted "the law as applied in numerous reported case transcripts." Because Russia had weak legal institutions, "the gap between law and life [was] uncommonly wide."3 Weickhardt replied that Pipes was inconsistent in accepting some statutory laws at face value and rejecting others as legal fictions, but even so he conceded: "I will be the first to admit that law as proclaimed nearly always differs from the law as applied." Weickhardt concluded that both statutory and case law had to be taken into account. "While one can certainly find inconsistencies between the statutes and the cases, this is true of every legal system." More [End Page 721] research on the "actual practice" of private property in pre-Petrine Russia was necessary.4 This article examines the relationship between statutory and case law, as both Pipes and Weickhardt recommended, concerning the redemption of property in land. The earliest statutory reference to redemption appeared in the Law Code (Sudebnik) of 1550, followed by additional provisions in 1551 and 1557. I examine case law before the statutory law was issued, compare that statutory law to prior case law, and then compare subsequent case law to statutory law. I try to show that before statutory law was promulgated, case law reflected a widespread practice of redemption in land that accorded unlimited discretion to the seller or donor of land in choosing who could exercise redemption rights; that the statutory law established in 1550–57 strongly deviated from the pre-statutory model, setting restrictions and requirements on redemption that circumscribed the seller's or donor's choices of potential redemptors or even the very existence of the right of redemption for donated land; and that sellers and donors reacted to these newly issued requirements in a very inconsistent manner, obeying some, disobeying others, and to an inexplicably large extent ignoring some fundamental aspects of this legislation. Such a differentiated response by society to government regulation of redemption suggests considerable societal autonomy in this activity. Types of Redemption Nowadays, "redemption" commonly denotes redeeming a coupon or an offer; that type of redemption was unknown in Muscovy. Nor does this redemption have any connection t
{"title":"Land Redemption in Muscovy during the Reign of Ivan IV","authors":"Charles J. Halperin","doi":"10.1353/kri.2023.a910977","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1353/kri.2023.a910977","url":null,"abstract":"Land Redemption in Muscovy during the Reign of Ivan IV Charles J. Halperin (bio) The Englishman Giles Fletcher declared in his Of the Russe Commonwealth that no written law existed in Muscovy.1 Daniel Printz, envoy of the Holy Roman Emperor to Muscovy in 1576, made the same assertion.2 Historians know better, but they do not agree on the significance of Muscovite statutory law, which has left fundamental historical questions unresolved. In particular, the question of what kind of property law existed in Muscovy has long occupied historians. Richard Pipes strongly criticized George Weickhardt for claiming that there was private property in Muscovy based solely on statutory law. According to Pipes, Weickhardt omitted \"the law as applied in numerous reported case transcripts.\" Because Russia had weak legal institutions, \"the gap between law and life [was] uncommonly wide.\"3 Weickhardt replied that Pipes was inconsistent in accepting some statutory laws at face value and rejecting others as legal fictions, but even so he conceded: \"I will be the first to admit that law as proclaimed nearly always differs from the law as applied.\" Weickhardt concluded that both statutory and case law had to be taken into account. \"While one can certainly find inconsistencies between the statutes and the cases, this is true of every legal system.\" More [End Page 721] research on the \"actual practice\" of private property in pre-Petrine Russia was necessary.4 This article examines the relationship between statutory and case law, as both Pipes and Weickhardt recommended, concerning the redemption of property in land. The earliest statutory reference to redemption appeared in the Law Code (Sudebnik) of 1550, followed by additional provisions in 1551 and 1557. I examine case law before the statutory law was issued, compare that statutory law to prior case law, and then compare subsequent case law to statutory law. I try to show that before statutory law was promulgated, case law reflected a widespread practice of redemption in land that accorded unlimited discretion to the seller or donor of land in choosing who could exercise redemption rights; that the statutory law established in 1550–57 strongly deviated from the pre-statutory model, setting restrictions and requirements on redemption that circumscribed the seller's or donor's choices of potential redemptors or even the very existence of the right of redemption for donated land; and that sellers and donors reacted to these newly issued requirements in a very inconsistent manner, obeying some, disobeying others, and to an inexplicably large extent ignoring some fundamental aspects of this legislation. Such a differentiated response by society to government regulation of redemption suggests considerable societal autonomy in this activity. Types of Redemption Nowadays, \"redemption\" commonly denotes redeeming a coupon or an offer; that type of redemption was unknown in Muscovy. Nor does this redemption have any connection t","PeriodicalId":45639,"journal":{"name":"KRITIKA-EXPLORATIONS IN RUSSIAN AND EURASIAN HISTORY","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2023-09-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"135737733","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"历史学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2023-09-01DOI: 10.1353/kri.2023.a910984
Vladislav M. Zubok
An Elusive Consensus Vladislav M. Zubok (bio) I am thankful to Mark Beissinger, Michael David-Fox, and Serhy Yekelchyk for adding their expert voices to the discussion of the Soviet collapse prompted by my book. In his thoughtful review David-Fox calls for a synthesis. It may be a type of wishful thinking, just like Gorbachevian consensus. The demise of a giant empire with such a tragic (and crime-ridden) history will remain a contested subject within the lifetime of our generation, and perhaps the next. Scholarship will remain fractious: some will be interested in socioeconomic, others in economic-political aspects of the story; the adepts of ab imperio ethno-cultural particularisms will never agree with the students of elite politics, and so on. Finally, as the Russian poet Fedor Tiutchev famously wrote, "We cannot fathom all the echoes of our speech." The ongoing discussion on the topic may be the best to which we may aspire. I would like to respond to a few insights proposed by David-Fox. Indeed, what happened to the Soviet Union was not a revolution. At the same time, the spectacular failure of economic reforms, coupled with the progressive demoralization of the elite, created a unique situation that was revolutionary in many respects: ideational, social, economic, political, and in foreign affairs. Mikhail Gorbachev, inspired by his reading of Vladimir Lenin, convinced himself that the chaos he had unleashed would eventually lead to democratic socialism. Initially his vision found mass support in society, yet economic discontent soon rose like a flood. The Soviet leader and his entourage lost the initiative to rival actors who offered different solutions to the unfolding crisis: a national liberation struggle, a return to Europe, liberal democracy, and most fatally the rise of Russia. Those narratives, perhaps fortunately, lacked one component: a violent overthrow of the existing regime and its socioeconomic setup. David-Fox attributes the failure of perestroika to the "blinkered inculcation" (845) of Soviet ideas and belief, the intellectual and cultural [End Page 867] heritage that Gorbachev embodied and shared with millions of his fellow citizens. I would add some caveats. First, among party functionaries in the Russian provinces, Gorbachev seemed to be a rather unique person: a party intellectual stranded in the wrong kettle of fish. Provincial apparatchiks were far too cynical to suffer from blinkered inculcation, although they used the party discourse to promote their careers. The rare exceptions were mostly neo-Stalinists, militarists, and superpower adepts. Without Iurii Andropov, an outlier like Gorbachev would have never made it to the top. Second, the term "inculcation" diminishes the complexity of the origins of the "new thinking," a vague set of principles that Gorbachev proclaimed and promoted. The Marxist-Leninist faith that Gorbachev and many Soviet intellectuals of the 1980s shared was just one iteration of the longer and b
{"title":"An Elusive Consensus","authors":"Vladislav M. Zubok","doi":"10.1353/kri.2023.a910984","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1353/kri.2023.a910984","url":null,"abstract":"An Elusive Consensus Vladislav M. Zubok (bio) I am thankful to Mark Beissinger, Michael David-Fox, and Serhy Yekelchyk for adding their expert voices to the discussion of the Soviet collapse prompted by my book. In his thoughtful review David-Fox calls for a synthesis. It may be a type of wishful thinking, just like Gorbachevian consensus. The demise of a giant empire with such a tragic (and crime-ridden) history will remain a contested subject within the lifetime of our generation, and perhaps the next. Scholarship will remain fractious: some will be interested in socioeconomic, others in economic-political aspects of the story; the adepts of ab imperio ethno-cultural particularisms will never agree with the students of elite politics, and so on. Finally, as the Russian poet Fedor Tiutchev famously wrote, \"We cannot fathom all the echoes of our speech.\" The ongoing discussion on the topic may be the best to which we may aspire. I would like to respond to a few insights proposed by David-Fox. Indeed, what happened to the Soviet Union was not a revolution. At the same time, the spectacular failure of economic reforms, coupled with the progressive demoralization of the elite, created a unique situation that was revolutionary in many respects: ideational, social, economic, political, and in foreign affairs. Mikhail Gorbachev, inspired by his reading of Vladimir Lenin, convinced himself that the chaos he had unleashed would eventually lead to democratic socialism. Initially his vision found mass support in society, yet economic discontent soon rose like a flood. The Soviet leader and his entourage lost the initiative to rival actors who offered different solutions to the unfolding crisis: a national liberation struggle, a return to Europe, liberal democracy, and most fatally the rise of Russia. Those narratives, perhaps fortunately, lacked one component: a violent overthrow of the existing regime and its socioeconomic setup. David-Fox attributes the failure of perestroika to the \"blinkered inculcation\" (845) of Soviet ideas and belief, the intellectual and cultural [End Page 867] heritage that Gorbachev embodied and shared with millions of his fellow citizens. I would add some caveats. First, among party functionaries in the Russian provinces, Gorbachev seemed to be a rather unique person: a party intellectual stranded in the wrong kettle of fish. Provincial apparatchiks were far too cynical to suffer from blinkered inculcation, although they used the party discourse to promote their careers. The rare exceptions were mostly neo-Stalinists, militarists, and superpower adepts. Without Iurii Andropov, an outlier like Gorbachev would have never made it to the top. Second, the term \"inculcation\" diminishes the complexity of the origins of the \"new thinking,\" a vague set of principles that Gorbachev proclaimed and promoted. The Marxist-Leninist faith that Gorbachev and many Soviet intellectuals of the 1980s shared was just one iteration of the longer and b","PeriodicalId":45639,"journal":{"name":"KRITIKA-EXPLORATIONS IN RUSSIAN AND EURASIAN HISTORY","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2023-09-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"135736818","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"历史学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2023-09-01DOI: 10.1353/kri.2023.a910976
{"title":"Interview with Diane Koenker","authors":"","doi":"10.1353/kri.2023.a910976","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1353/kri.2023.a910976","url":null,"abstract":"","PeriodicalId":45639,"journal":{"name":"KRITIKA-EXPLORATIONS IN RUSSIAN AND EURASIAN HISTORY","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2023-09-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"135737506","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"历史学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2023-06-01DOI: 10.1353/kri.2023.a904392
A. Iandolo, Gregory Afinogenov
Philippa Hetherington, Lecturer in Russian and Eurasian History at the School of Slavonic and East European Studies (SSEES) at University College London (UCL), died of cancer at the age of 38 on 5 November 2022. Such an untimely death is unfathomably tragic, but in her years as a historian of imperial Russia and the Soviet Union, Philippa was already able to contribute pathbreaking scholarship to our field and build a vibrant community of researchers and activists. As an Australian-born scholar who studied in the United States and wound up working in Britain, she traversed geographical and disciplinary boundaries in ways that seemed both effortless and necessary. In this memorial, we have tried to honor her legacy by writing a commemoration of her work together with members of this international community, recognizing her strength not just as a creative and original thinker but as a collaborator, colleague, and friend. Philippa’s main scholarly area of focus was the history of gender, sexuality, and international law in the late 19th and early 20th centuries. Her dissertation and first book project (currently being prepared for publication) dealt with the emergence of a transnational moral panic around “white slavery” aimed at restricting the international sex trafficking of women from the Russian Empire and the early Soviet Union, and the codification of this impulse into international law under pressure both from feminist activists and imperial officials in the 1910s and 1920s.1 A militant, committed feminist, Philippa nevertheless remained skeptical of the movement’s tendency—especially, but not exclusively, on the part of its liberal wing—to trust in the carceral state as a partner in the pursuit of gender equality and the protection of women’s rights. As her work
{"title":"Philippa Hetherington (1984–2022)","authors":"A. Iandolo, Gregory Afinogenov","doi":"10.1353/kri.2023.a904392","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1353/kri.2023.a904392","url":null,"abstract":"Philippa Hetherington, Lecturer in Russian and Eurasian History at the School of Slavonic and East European Studies (SSEES) at University College London (UCL), died of cancer at the age of 38 on 5 November 2022. Such an untimely death is unfathomably tragic, but in her years as a historian of imperial Russia and the Soviet Union, Philippa was already able to contribute pathbreaking scholarship to our field and build a vibrant community of researchers and activists. As an Australian-born scholar who studied in the United States and wound up working in Britain, she traversed geographical and disciplinary boundaries in ways that seemed both effortless and necessary. In this memorial, we have tried to honor her legacy by writing a commemoration of her work together with members of this international community, recognizing her strength not just as a creative and original thinker but as a collaborator, colleague, and friend. Philippa’s main scholarly area of focus was the history of gender, sexuality, and international law in the late 19th and early 20th centuries. Her dissertation and first book project (currently being prepared for publication) dealt with the emergence of a transnational moral panic around “white slavery” aimed at restricting the international sex trafficking of women from the Russian Empire and the early Soviet Union, and the codification of this impulse into international law under pressure both from feminist activists and imperial officials in the 1910s and 1920s.1 A militant, committed feminist, Philippa nevertheless remained skeptical of the movement’s tendency—especially, but not exclusively, on the part of its liberal wing—to trust in the carceral state as a partner in the pursuit of gender equality and the protection of women’s rights. As her work","PeriodicalId":45639,"journal":{"name":"KRITIKA-EXPLORATIONS IN RUSSIAN AND EURASIAN HISTORY","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.3,"publicationDate":"2023-06-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"48913343","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"历史学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2023-06-01DOI: 10.1353/kri.2023.a904386
Vladimir Hamed‐Troyansky
In 1968, a Jordanian man, ‘Abbas Mirza, visited Kabardino-Balkaria, a mountainous autonomous republic in Soviet Russia. He was of Kabardian (eastern Circassian) descent, and his ancestors had emigrated to the Ottoman Empire in the late 19th century. He was one of the first overseas Circassians and, indeed, any foreigners who were allowed to enter the North Caucasus since the onset of Soviet rule. Soviet authorities invited his family to visit Kabardino-Balkaria to see for themselves the progress that had been achieved under communism. Mirza did not have the best time on his trip. At some point during the carefully curated Soviet tour, he started asking questions about “the Communists”: “What kind of rights do they have in the Soviet state? Do party members and nonmembers have a similar lifestyle? Are there any Communists who believe in God? What happens to religious people in this country? Do children of party members and of nonmembers get along?”1 Mirza did not receive satisfying answers to his questions. He was then relieved of his cash when someone stole the equivalent of 800 USD in Soviet, Turkish, Syrian, and Jordanian currency, which the man had brought with him. At the end of his less than stellar trip, ‘Abbas Mirza told the Soviet organizers: “I regret deeply that I traveled
{"title":"Welcome, Not Welcome: The North Caucasian Diaspora's Attempted Return to Russia since the 1960s","authors":"Vladimir Hamed‐Troyansky","doi":"10.1353/kri.2023.a904386","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1353/kri.2023.a904386","url":null,"abstract":"In 1968, a Jordanian man, ‘Abbas Mirza, visited Kabardino-Balkaria, a mountainous autonomous republic in Soviet Russia. He was of Kabardian (eastern Circassian) descent, and his ancestors had emigrated to the Ottoman Empire in the late 19th century. He was one of the first overseas Circassians and, indeed, any foreigners who were allowed to enter the North Caucasus since the onset of Soviet rule. Soviet authorities invited his family to visit Kabardino-Balkaria to see for themselves the progress that had been achieved under communism. Mirza did not have the best time on his trip. At some point during the carefully curated Soviet tour, he started asking questions about “the Communists”: “What kind of rights do they have in the Soviet state? Do party members and nonmembers have a similar lifestyle? Are there any Communists who believe in God? What happens to religious people in this country? Do children of party members and of nonmembers get along?”1 Mirza did not receive satisfying answers to his questions. He was then relieved of his cash when someone stole the equivalent of 800 USD in Soviet, Turkish, Syrian, and Jordanian currency, which the man had brought with him. At the end of his less than stellar trip, ‘Abbas Mirza told the Soviet organizers: “I regret deeply that I traveled","PeriodicalId":45639,"journal":{"name":"KRITIKA-EXPLORATIONS IN RUSSIAN AND EURASIAN HISTORY","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.3,"publicationDate":"2023-06-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"44775899","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"历史学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2023-06-01DOI: 10.1353/kri.2023.a904389
Julie Hessler
Historians of the Soviet era have a distinctive relationship to written texts. On the one hand, many texts produced by the Soviet state and its citizens are assumed to be tainted by censorship, self-censorship, and outright falsification. On the other hand, the opening of the archives after the Soviet collapse provided historians with such a rich trove of new or underutilized documents that we have been slow to incorporate nonwritten sources into our research programs. Material culture as a constellation of methods (often informed by anthropology), as a variety of source material, and as a subject of analysis remained to the side of the Soviet field’s preoccupations with politics and empire for many years. It seemed the province of prerevolutionary Russian historians, especially scholars working in a quantitative
{"title":"Telling Russian History through Things","authors":"Julie Hessler","doi":"10.1353/kri.2023.a904389","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1353/kri.2023.a904389","url":null,"abstract":"Historians of the Soviet era have a distinctive relationship to written texts. On the one hand, many texts produced by the Soviet state and its citizens are assumed to be tainted by censorship, self-censorship, and outright falsification. On the other hand, the opening of the archives after the Soviet collapse provided historians with such a rich trove of new or underutilized documents that we have been slow to incorporate nonwritten sources into our research programs. Material culture as a constellation of methods (often informed by anthropology), as a variety of source material, and as a subject of analysis remained to the side of the Soviet field’s preoccupations with politics and empire for many years. It seemed the province of prerevolutionary Russian historians, especially scholars working in a quantitative","PeriodicalId":45639,"journal":{"name":"KRITIKA-EXPLORATIONS IN RUSSIAN AND EURASIAN HISTORY","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.3,"publicationDate":"2023-06-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"46715225","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"历史学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2023-06-01DOI: 10.1353/kri.2023.a904390
E. Pulford
The idea that there are pairs of countries whose identities and geopolitical standings have emerged in dialogue with one another is an appealing one. Be it England and France, Brazil and Argentina, Egypt and Saudi Arabia, or numerous other examples including Russia and China (covered in my own work), various dyads of counterpart, rival, or partner nations appear to have had outsized influence on one another’s sense of place in the world, and only sometimes because of footballing grudges. Among such examples, Russia and Japan seem a decidedly odd couple in the international arena. Anthropologists or social historians would struggle to identify two more different places at the level of culture, politics, or society: aside from having unrelated linguistic and religious traditions, one state promotes a self-image based on continental vastness—a trait the current Russian president has doubled down on by invading Ukraine— while the other, at least today, is identified with the insular particularism of the “island nation” (shimaguni). At a more granular level, each society also approaches institutionalization and formality very differently, something illustrated by the tumultuous recent history of the Sakhalin–Hokkaido passenger ferry, suspended since 2018 amid repeated clashes between incompatible bureaucracies.
{"title":"Japanese Modernity from the Siberian Silo","authors":"E. Pulford","doi":"10.1353/kri.2023.a904390","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1353/kri.2023.a904390","url":null,"abstract":"The idea that there are pairs of countries whose identities and geopolitical standings have emerged in dialogue with one another is an appealing one. Be it England and France, Brazil and Argentina, Egypt and Saudi Arabia, or numerous other examples including Russia and China (covered in my own work), various dyads of counterpart, rival, or partner nations appear to have had outsized influence on one another’s sense of place in the world, and only sometimes because of footballing grudges. Among such examples, Russia and Japan seem a decidedly odd couple in the international arena. Anthropologists or social historians would struggle to identify two more different places at the level of culture, politics, or society: aside from having unrelated linguistic and religious traditions, one state promotes a self-image based on continental vastness—a trait the current Russian president has doubled down on by invading Ukraine— while the other, at least today, is identified with the insular particularism of the “island nation” (shimaguni). At a more granular level, each society also approaches institutionalization and formality very differently, something illustrated by the tumultuous recent history of the Sakhalin–Hokkaido passenger ferry, suspended since 2018 amid repeated clashes between incompatible bureaucracies.","PeriodicalId":45639,"journal":{"name":"KRITIKA-EXPLORATIONS IN RUSSIAN AND EURASIAN HISTORY","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.3,"publicationDate":"2023-06-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"46647158","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"历史学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2023-06-01DOI: 10.1353/kri.2023.a904382
Mikhail Dolbilov, M. Akulov, N. Chernyshova, Vladimir Hamed‐Troyansky, J. Pickett, S. Muminov, Julie Hessler, E. Pulford, Nataliya Kibita, A. Iandolo, Gregory Afinogenov
{"title":"Thinking North-South, and a New Call for Papers","authors":"Mikhail Dolbilov, M. Akulov, N. Chernyshova, Vladimir Hamed‐Troyansky, J. Pickett, S. Muminov, Julie Hessler, E. Pulford, Nataliya Kibita, A. Iandolo, Gregory Afinogenov","doi":"10.1353/kri.2023.a904382","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1353/kri.2023.a904382","url":null,"abstract":"","PeriodicalId":45639,"journal":{"name":"KRITIKA-EXPLORATIONS IN RUSSIAN AND EURASIAN HISTORY","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.3,"publicationDate":"2023-06-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"42925380","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"历史学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2023-06-01DOI: 10.1353/kri.2023.a904387
James B Pickett
So began the Cossack soldier’s debriefing in the year 1859, when he had just made it back to Orenburg after more than a decade of captivity in Central Asia.2 The Russian military in Orenburg had taken a special interest in Gordeev and other former prisoners because they all had extensive, firsthand knowledge of the Central Asian polities Russia would defeat in less than a decade.3 Beyond the military intel about troublesome neighbors, the Russian officer’s interest was also piqued by Gordeev’s narrative about a European prisoner in Central Asia: Giovanni, an Italian watchmaker whose journey into Persian-speaking territories began in Tehran and
{"title":"The Watchmaker: Entangled Histories of Eurasia's 19th Century Viewed through the Prism of a Traveler's Odyssey","authors":"James B Pickett","doi":"10.1353/kri.2023.a904387","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1353/kri.2023.a904387","url":null,"abstract":"So began the Cossack soldier’s debriefing in the year 1859, when he had just made it back to Orenburg after more than a decade of captivity in Central Asia.2 The Russian military in Orenburg had taken a special interest in Gordeev and other former prisoners because they all had extensive, firsthand knowledge of the Central Asian polities Russia would defeat in less than a decade.3 Beyond the military intel about troublesome neighbors, the Russian officer’s interest was also piqued by Gordeev’s narrative about a European prisoner in Central Asia: Giovanni, an Italian watchmaker whose journey into Persian-speaking territories began in Tehran and","PeriodicalId":45639,"journal":{"name":"KRITIKA-EXPLORATIONS IN RUSSIAN AND EURASIAN HISTORY","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.3,"publicationDate":"2023-06-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"44903730","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"历史学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2023-06-01DOI: 10.1353/kri.2023.a904388
S. Muminov
In his 1894 essay “Patriotism and Christianity,” Lev Tolstoi proclaimed, “in all history there is no war which was not hatched by the governments, the governments alone, independent of the interests of the people, to whom war is always pernicious even when successful.”1 The link between empire and war that the great writer emphasized explains, perhaps, the preoccupation with conflict in the histories of Russo-Japanese relations. These accounts have largely followed the ebb and flow of geopolitical rivalry and military confrontation between the two nations. Surveying the period from the mid-19th century unequal treaties that pried open Japan to global trade, to the 1875 Treaty of St. Petersburg that delineated Russian and Japanese spheres of influence in East Asia, to Japan’s earth-shattering victory over Russia in 1905 and the USSR’s revanche 40 years later, historians have tended to portray Russo-Japanese entanglements as one long struggle for domination in East Asia. The Russo-Japanese War, the most fateful of
{"title":"Against Empires and Wars: Exiles, Escapees, Artists, and Communists between Russia and Japan","authors":"S. Muminov","doi":"10.1353/kri.2023.a904388","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1353/kri.2023.a904388","url":null,"abstract":"In his 1894 essay “Patriotism and Christianity,” Lev Tolstoi proclaimed, “in all history there is no war which was not hatched by the governments, the governments alone, independent of the interests of the people, to whom war is always pernicious even when successful.”1 The link between empire and war that the great writer emphasized explains, perhaps, the preoccupation with conflict in the histories of Russo-Japanese relations. These accounts have largely followed the ebb and flow of geopolitical rivalry and military confrontation between the two nations. Surveying the period from the mid-19th century unequal treaties that pried open Japan to global trade, to the 1875 Treaty of St. Petersburg that delineated Russian and Japanese spheres of influence in East Asia, to Japan’s earth-shattering victory over Russia in 1905 and the USSR’s revanche 40 years later, historians have tended to portray Russo-Japanese entanglements as one long struggle for domination in East Asia. The Russo-Japanese War, the most fateful of","PeriodicalId":45639,"journal":{"name":"KRITIKA-EXPLORATIONS IN RUSSIAN AND EURASIAN HISTORY","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.3,"publicationDate":"2023-06-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"41854508","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":3,"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：