Pub Date : 2023-01-01DOI: 10.21638/spbu02.2023.216
O. Morozova
The article is a review of the monograph by the St Petersburg historian A. S. Puchenkov “The first year of the Volunteer Army: from the emergence of the Alekseevskaia organization to the formation of the Armed Forces in the South of Russia (November 1917 — December 1918)” (St Petersburg: Vladimir Dal, 2021. 813 p.). The main task of the book is to present the most comprehensive chronology of events. The conclusions of the monograph about the role of key events and figures during the initial stage of the existence of the Volunteer Movement — M. V. Alekseev, A. M. Kaledin, V. V. Shulgin, A. I. Denikin, ataman P. N. Krasnov — are of the greatest interest for the review. This article focuses on the author’s position on debatable issues: on the correctness of choosing the Don as a springboard for gathering the future army; on the consequences of the decisions concerning the directions and goals of the First and Second Kuban campaigns; on the influence of relationships between leaders on the fate of the movement; on the results of military and state building for the first year of the existence of the Volunteer Movement. The review also makes critical remarks regarding the methods of working sources, too heterogeneous and contradictory to be used as a single explanatory basis. The approach of the author of the monograph is also characterized by his selective attitude to the opinions of eyewitnesses, in particular, more favourable to representatives of the mainstream, pro-Denikin, direction of white émigré literature.
这篇文章是对圣彼得堡历史学家a·s·普琴科夫的专著《志愿军的第一年:从阿列克谢耶夫斯卡亚组织的出现到俄罗斯南部武装部队的形成(1917年11月至1918年12月)》(圣彼得堡:弗拉基米尔·达尔出版社，2021年)的评论。813 p)。这本书的主要任务是呈现最全面的事件年表。关于志愿者运动存在初期关键事件和人物的作用的专著的结论- M. V.阿列克谢耶夫，A. M.卡列金，V. V.舒尔金，A. I.邓尼金，ataman P. N. Krasnov -是本次审查的最大兴趣。本文着重阐述了笔者在以下几个有争议的问题上的立场:选择顿河作为集结未来军队的跳板的正确性;关于第一次和第二次库班战役的方向和目标的决定的后果;论领袖关系对运动命运的影响志愿军运动成立第一年的军事和国家建设成果。审查还对工作来源的方法提出了批评意见，这些方法过于混杂和相互矛盾，不能用作单一的解释基础。该专著作者的方法的另一个特点是他对目击者意见的选择性态度，特别是更有利于代表主流，亲邓尼金，白人移徙者文学方向。
{"title":"A Historian in a Military Overcoat of a Volunteer","authors":"O. Morozova","doi":"10.21638/spbu02.2023.216","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.21638/spbu02.2023.216","url":null,"abstract":"The article is a review of the monograph by the St Petersburg historian A. S. Puchenkov “The first year of the Volunteer Army: from the emergence of the Alekseevskaia organization to the formation of the Armed Forces in the South of Russia (November 1917 — December 1918)” (St Petersburg: Vladimir Dal, 2021. 813 p.). The main task of the book is to present the most comprehensive chronology of events. The conclusions of the monograph about the role of key events and figures during the initial stage of the existence of the Volunteer Movement — M. V. Alekseev, A. M. Kaledin, V. V. Shulgin, A. I. Denikin, ataman P. N. Krasnov — are of the greatest interest for the review. This article focuses on the author’s position on debatable issues: on the correctness of choosing the Don as a springboard for gathering the future army; on the consequences of the decisions concerning the directions and goals of the First and Second Kuban campaigns; on the influence of relationships between leaders on the fate of the movement; on the results of military and state building for the first year of the existence of the Volunteer Movement. The review also makes critical remarks regarding the methods of working sources, too heterogeneous and contradictory to be used as a single explanatory basis. The approach of the author of the monograph is also characterized by his selective attitude to the opinions of eyewitnesses, in particular, more favourable to representatives of the mainstream, pro-Denikin, direction of white émigré literature.","PeriodicalId":53995,"journal":{"name":"Vestnik Sankt-Peterburgskogo Universiteta-Istoriya","volume":"73 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.2,"publicationDate":"2023-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"82256432","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}
Pub Date : 2023-01-01DOI: 10.21638/spbu02.2023.106
P. Lizunov
In connection with the recently published monograph on the First World War by the famous historian Irina Potkina “On the eve of the catastrophe. The state and economy of Russia in 1914–1917”, it is appropriate to evaluate a new book and the events that took place a century ago. The First World War is often referred to as “an unknown war” and “unfairly forgotten”, which is hardly true. The publication of scholarly books and articles, documents, memoirs, and fiction about the First World War prove the opposite. Over the past 100 years, the assessments, views and approaches to the study of the First World War have changed, but the interest in it has never faded. It should be acknowledged that there are still many unresearched and poorly studied topics. I. Potkina’s statements about the level of pre-war development and the importance of the Russian stock market and the banking sector cannot be fully accepted. She comes to the conclusion that during the war years, the Russian economy experienced processes similar to those in most European countries. It is hardly indisputable, especially the assertion about the positive results of the regulation of the credit and financial system. The policy of the tsarist government in relation to the exchange and banks contradicts this opinion. It is also difficult to point out the effectiveness of economic policy, especially in 1917. The authorities lost control over the political, economic and social processes in the country. Russia was going through a severe crisis that led to the overthrow of the autocracy.
{"title":"Stock Exchange and Commercial Banks during the First World War","authors":"P. Lizunov","doi":"10.21638/spbu02.2023.106","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.21638/spbu02.2023.106","url":null,"abstract":"In connection with the recently published monograph on the First World War by the famous historian Irina Potkina “On the eve of the catastrophe. The state and economy of Russia in 1914–1917”, it is appropriate to evaluate a new book and the events that took place a century ago. The First World War is often referred to as “an unknown war” and “unfairly forgotten”, which is hardly true. The publication of scholarly books and articles, documents, memoirs, and fiction about the First World War prove the opposite. Over the past 100 years, the assessments, views and approaches to the study of the First World War have changed, but the interest in it has never faded. It should be acknowledged that there are still many unresearched and poorly studied topics. I. Potkina’s statements about the level of pre-war development and the importance of the Russian stock market and the banking sector cannot be fully accepted. She comes to the conclusion that during the war years, the Russian economy experienced processes similar to those in most European countries. It is hardly indisputable, especially the assertion about the positive results of the regulation of the credit and financial system. The policy of the tsarist government in relation to the exchange and banks contradicts this opinion. It is also difficult to point out the effectiveness of economic policy, especially in 1917. The authorities lost control over the political, economic and social processes in the country. Russia was going through a severe crisis that led to the overthrow of the autocracy.","PeriodicalId":53995,"journal":{"name":"Vestnik Sankt-Peterburgskogo Universiteta-Istoriya","volume":"26 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.2,"publicationDate":"2023-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"81483863","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}
Pub Date : 2023-01-01DOI: 10.21638/spbu02.2023.103
N. O. Voskresenskaya
Periods in the life of a country, when it radically changes its civilizational trajectory, cannot but attract the attention of researchers. For the Russian Empire, the First World War turned out to be the zone of such crucial revolutionary turbulence: the empire ceased to exist. What circumstances led to this turn of events? Was the wrong economic policy of the state authorities the main reason for the fall of the monarchy? The issues of state regulation of national economy of Russia during the First World War in the context of possible factors that caused the death of the empire are discussed in the monograph “On the Threshold of the Catastrophe. State and Economy of Russia in 1914–1917” by Irina V. Potkina, Dr. Sci. in History. The logic of the analysis led the scholar to the conclusion that the economic policy of the Provisional Government proved to be destructive for the country. The atmosphere of mutual distrust and suspicion in the Russian society also played an important role. This article continues this theme and shows that some mental and behavioral characteristics of Russian people contributed greatly to the country’s path to the disaster. Some people were involved in illegal activities under the influence of technologies for manipulating public consciousness practiced by opposition political parties. The Bolsheviks, whose activities, from the standpoint of modern Russian legislation, falls under the definition of “extremism”, enjoyed the greatest success. The author of the article concludes that it is necessary to correct the evaluation of historical events in the academic and educational literature.
{"title":"Factors of the Fall of the Russian Empire and their Evaluation in Historical Science","authors":"N. O. Voskresenskaya","doi":"10.21638/spbu02.2023.103","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.21638/spbu02.2023.103","url":null,"abstract":"Periods in the life of a country, when it radically changes its civilizational trajectory, cannot but attract the attention of researchers. For the Russian Empire, the First World War turned out to be the zone of such crucial revolutionary turbulence: the empire ceased to exist. What circumstances led to this turn of events? Was the wrong economic policy of the state authorities the main reason for the fall of the monarchy? The issues of state regulation of national economy of Russia during the First World War in the context of possible factors that caused the death of the empire are discussed in the monograph “On the Threshold of the Catastrophe. State and Economy of Russia in 1914–1917” by Irina V. Potkina, Dr. Sci. in History. The logic of the analysis led the scholar to the conclusion that the economic policy of the Provisional Government proved to be destructive for the country. The atmosphere of mutual distrust and suspicion in the Russian society also played an important role. This article continues this theme and shows that some mental and behavioral characteristics of Russian people contributed greatly to the country’s path to the disaster. Some people were involved in illegal activities under the influence of technologies for manipulating public consciousness practiced by opposition political parties. The Bolsheviks, whose activities, from the standpoint of modern Russian legislation, falls under the definition of “extremism”, enjoyed the greatest success. The author of the article concludes that it is necessary to correct the evaluation of historical events in the academic and educational literature.","PeriodicalId":53995,"journal":{"name":"Vestnik Sankt-Peterburgskogo Universiteta-Istoriya","volume":"60 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.2,"publicationDate":"2023-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"85862118","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}
Pub Date : 2023-01-01DOI: 10.21638/spbu02.2023.111
Oleg V. Anisimov
The article examines the transfer of ideas and practices of constitutionalism from Spain to the Kingdom of the Two Sicilies in 1812–1820. On the basis of dispatches of the Russian envoy in Naples Gustav Stackelberg, the author analyses the features of the revolutionary events of the summer — autumn of 1820. The immediate objects of Count Stackelberg’s observation in Naples were the situation of the Bourbon monarchy and the new constitutional government; their relations with the Carbonari society; relations within the diplomatic corps and among representatives of the great powers. The article also examines texts of constitutional acts that formed the main milestones of the development of constitutionalism in Southern Europe: the Bayonne Statute of 1808, the Cadiz Constitution of 1812, the Sicilian Constitution of 1812, the French Charter of 1814, and the “constitution of Murat” of 1815. An attempt is made to compare the constitutional revolutions in Spain and Italy in 1820–1823: contradictions of domestic politics, the struggle of the Liberal Party and the opposition, support for the army, parliamentary activity, the fight against separatist movements, complications in foreign policy and opposition to the Holy Alliance, the role of Kings Ferdinand VII of Spain and Ferdinand I of Naples in the development of constitutional practice. This approach corresponds to modern trends in the history of the Restoration era, in which the concept of the “liberal international” is tested against Russian diplomatic sources. G. Stackelberg did not just observe the Neapolitan Revolution; he noted obvious parallels with the Spanish Revolution and reported on any attempts of covert contacts of revolutionaries from all over Europe. His political ideal was the French Charter of 1814, the application of which to the Neapolitan political situation he wanted to see in order to avoid the worst consequences of the intervention of the Austrian Empire. The author concludes that the borrowing of the Spanish constitution by the Neapolitans took place within the prepared framework, becoming a logical stage in the development of constitutionalism in countries close to each other not only in spirit, but being for a long time in the orbit of the French revolutionary and Napoleonic despotic influence. The article also shows that Stackelberg modernized the pattern of the era about the “pan-European conspiracy” and created its more moderate version based on his observations of the development of the constitutional revolution in Naples.
{"title":"The House of Bourbon and Сonstitutional Revolutions in Southern Europe","authors":"Oleg V. Anisimov","doi":"10.21638/spbu02.2023.111","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.21638/spbu02.2023.111","url":null,"abstract":"The article examines the transfer of ideas and practices of constitutionalism from Spain to the Kingdom of the Two Sicilies in 1812–1820. On the basis of dispatches of the Russian envoy in Naples Gustav Stackelberg, the author analyses the features of the revolutionary events of the summer — autumn of 1820. The immediate objects of Count Stackelberg’s observation in Naples were the situation of the Bourbon monarchy and the new constitutional government; their relations with the Carbonari society; relations within the diplomatic corps and among representatives of the great powers. The article also examines texts of constitutional acts that formed the main milestones of the development of constitutionalism in Southern Europe: the Bayonne Statute of 1808, the Cadiz Constitution of 1812, the Sicilian Constitution of 1812, the French Charter of 1814, and the “constitution of Murat” of 1815. An attempt is made to compare the constitutional revolutions in Spain and Italy in 1820–1823: contradictions of domestic politics, the struggle of the Liberal Party and the opposition, support for the army, parliamentary activity, the fight against separatist movements, complications in foreign policy and opposition to the Holy Alliance, the role of Kings Ferdinand VII of Spain and Ferdinand I of Naples in the development of constitutional practice. This approach corresponds to modern trends in the history of the Restoration era, in which the concept of the “liberal international” is tested against Russian diplomatic sources. G. Stackelberg did not just observe the Neapolitan Revolution; he noted obvious parallels with the Spanish Revolution and reported on any attempts of covert contacts of revolutionaries from all over Europe. His political ideal was the French Charter of 1814, the application of which to the Neapolitan political situation he wanted to see in order to avoid the worst consequences of the intervention of the Austrian Empire. The author concludes that the borrowing of the Spanish constitution by the Neapolitans took place within the prepared framework, becoming a logical stage in the development of constitutionalism in countries close to each other not only in spirit, but being for a long time in the orbit of the French revolutionary and Napoleonic despotic influence. The article also shows that Stackelberg modernized the pattern of the era about the “pan-European conspiracy” and created its more moderate version based on his observations of the development of the constitutional revolution in Naples.","PeriodicalId":53995,"journal":{"name":"Vestnik Sankt-Peterburgskogo Universiteta-Istoriya","volume":"209 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.2,"publicationDate":"2023-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"86444759","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}
Pub Date : 2023-01-01DOI: 10.21638/spbu02.2023.210
A. Rupasov
This article focuses on Finland’s relations with Turkey in 1940–1944. Although Turkey recognized Finland’s independence as early as 1918 and established diplomatic relations with Finland in 1926, Finland did not have a diplomatic mission in Ankara until 1940. The protracted nature of the relations was mainly determined by the lack of a basis (political or economic) for Finland’s interest in Turkey. A sharply changed situation following the Soviet-Finnish war (1939–1940) and the war in Europe inevitably required additional information for evaluation of the processes taking place. Neutral Turkey could provide such an opportunity even by virtue of the fact that the Finnish diplomatic representative was able to contact with diplomats of both Axis and Western powers (with the British Embassy before relations with Finland were severed by England in 1943). The content of the reports of the Finnish envoy A. A. Yrjö-Koskinen enable to imagine the extremely difficult situation of Turkey, which was under constant political pressure from the opposing sides. From the point of view of the Turkish state and military leadership, the victory of either side in the World War posed a risk to Turkey. In reality, Yrjö-Koskinen’s role as the head of Finland’s diplomatic mission was reduced to collecting somewhat chaotic information about world events, not always accompanied by his own analyses or comments. At the same time, the envoy’s reports to the Finnish Foreign Ministry showed the lack of any evident Turkish interest in the development of relations with Finland.
本文主要讨论1940-1944年芬兰与土耳其的关系。虽然土耳其早在1918年就承认芬兰的独立，并于1926年与芬兰建立外交关系，但芬兰直到1940年才在安卡拉设立外交使团。两国关系的长期性主要是由于芬兰在土耳其的利益缺乏基础(政治或经济)。在苏芬战争(1939-1940)和欧洲战争之后，形势发生了急剧变化，不可避免地需要更多的信息来评估正在发生的进程。芬兰特使A. A. Yrjö-Koskinen报告的内容使人能够想象土耳其处于敌对双方不断施加政治压力的极其困难的局势。从土耳其国家和军事领导人的角度来看，世界大战中任何一方的胜利都对土耳其构成了威胁。在现实中，Yrjö-Koskinen作为芬兰外交使团负责人的角色被简化为收集一些关于世界事件的混乱信息，并不总是伴随着他自己的分析或评论。与此同时，特使向芬兰外交部提交的报告显示，土耳其对发展与芬兰的关系没有任何明显的兴趣。
{"title":"Finnish-Turkish Relations as Reported by Envoy Yrjö-Koskinen","authors":"A. Rupasov","doi":"10.21638/spbu02.2023.210","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.21638/spbu02.2023.210","url":null,"abstract":"This article focuses on Finland’s relations with Turkey in 1940–1944. Although Turkey recognized Finland’s independence as early as 1918 and established diplomatic relations with Finland in 1926, Finland did not have a diplomatic mission in Ankara until 1940. The protracted nature of the relations was mainly determined by the lack of a basis (political or economic) for Finland’s interest in Turkey. A sharply changed situation following the Soviet-Finnish war (1939–1940) and the war in Europe inevitably required additional information for evaluation of the processes taking place. Neutral Turkey could provide such an opportunity even by virtue of the fact that the Finnish diplomatic representative was able to contact with diplomats of both Axis and Western powers (with the British Embassy before relations with Finland were severed by England in 1943). The content of the reports of the Finnish envoy A. A. Yrjö-Koskinen enable to imagine the extremely difficult situation of Turkey, which was under constant political pressure from the opposing sides. From the point of view of the Turkish state and military leadership, the victory of either side in the World War posed a risk to Turkey. In reality, Yrjö-Koskinen’s role as the head of Finland’s diplomatic mission was reduced to collecting somewhat chaotic information about world events, not always accompanied by his own analyses or comments. At the same time, the envoy’s reports to the Finnish Foreign Ministry showed the lack of any evident Turkish interest in the development of relations with Finland.","PeriodicalId":53995,"journal":{"name":"Vestnik Sankt-Peterburgskogo Universiteta-Istoriya","volume":"20 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.2,"publicationDate":"2023-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"79545493","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}
Pub Date : 2023-01-01DOI: 10.21638/spbu02.2023.201
D. Rybin
The great reforms of Alexander II formed a movement of liberal lawyers in the Russian Empire who were seeking ways of modernization of the country’s socio-political system on European models. We propose referring to this group of lawyers as “liberal legalists”. Liberal legalists are understood as an association of liberal dignitaries of the Russian Empire in the second half of the 19th — early 20th centuries, mainly judiciaries and legal scholars. The ideology of legalists can be defined as conservative liberalism, and their ideological inspiration was the famous legal scholar B. N. Chicherin. The movement of liberal legalists has not been studied in historical science, yet this topic seems important for the formation of a holistic and objective picture of the socio-political history of the Russian Empire in the second half of the 19th and early 20th centuries. The degree of participation of legalists in the general conservative-liberal movement of the empire at the turn of the century deserves a separate discussion. This movement encompassed like-minded circles of zemstvo and urban intelligentsia, and part of the middle- and upper-class bourgeoisie. In contrast to the history of the organization of zemstvo unions described in scholarship, the history of legalist activity as a socio-political movement has not been identified or defined. The use of archives of legalist societies, memoirs and diaries of imperial lawyers enables to reconstruct this movement and determine its role in the liberation movement. The use of the problem-based approach and chronological method made it possible to carry out this reconstruction.
{"title":"Ideology of the Movement of Liberal Legalists and the Theory of Conservative Liberalism","authors":"D. Rybin","doi":"10.21638/spbu02.2023.201","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.21638/spbu02.2023.201","url":null,"abstract":"The great reforms of Alexander II formed a movement of liberal lawyers in the Russian Empire who were seeking ways of modernization of the country’s socio-political system on European models. We propose referring to this group of lawyers as “liberal legalists”. Liberal legalists are understood as an association of liberal dignitaries of the Russian Empire in the second half of the 19th — early 20th centuries, mainly judiciaries and legal scholars. The ideology of legalists can be defined as conservative liberalism, and their ideological inspiration was the famous legal scholar B. N. Chicherin. The movement of liberal legalists has not been studied in historical science, yet this topic seems important for the formation of a holistic and objective picture of the socio-political history of the Russian Empire in the second half of the 19th and early 20th centuries. The degree of participation of legalists in the general conservative-liberal movement of the empire at the turn of the century deserves a separate discussion. This movement encompassed like-minded circles of zemstvo and urban intelligentsia, and part of the middle- and upper-class bourgeoisie. In contrast to the history of the organization of zemstvo unions described in scholarship, the history of legalist activity as a socio-political movement has not been identified or defined. The use of archives of legalist societies, memoirs and diaries of imperial lawyers enables to reconstruct this movement and determine its role in the liberation movement. The use of the problem-based approach and chronological method made it possible to carry out this reconstruction.","PeriodicalId":53995,"journal":{"name":"Vestnik Sankt-Peterburgskogo Universiteta-Istoriya","volume":"61 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.2,"publicationDate":"2023-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"74233375","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}
Pub Date : 2023-01-01DOI: 10.21638/spbu02.2023.215
Oleg V. Anisimov
The work by Eileen Kane on the Russian Empire’s experience of regulating the hajj — the Muslim pilgrimage from the Volga region, the Caucasus, and Central Asia to the Middle East — is of interest not only from the perspective of Asian and African studies or the history of religion. It is also, potentially, a comparative study as the author illustrates her observations and conclusions by referring to Russia’s policies towards the Christian populations of the Arab provinces of the Ottoman Empire. E. Kane advances a debatable thesis that Russia provided unofficial support for the hajj undertaken by its subjects. Whereas the patronage of Russian Orthodox pilgrimage was fully in line with Russia’s geopolitical role in the Middle East as well as with the tsarist ideology, open declaration of its interest in an organized hajj was out of the question for the Russian government. The idea of regulating the hajj was consistent with Russia’s need to integrate its Muslim subjects into the empire in order to secure the imperial rule. In the Ottoman Empire, adherents of various religions united under one dynasty and entitled to its consular protection can be viewed from the perspective of comparative historical research and the authorities’ general idea of imperial unity. In this case, the modes of comparison can be the following: the appropriation by the authorities of the traditions of pilgrimage and the hajj; their modernization; controversies in implementing the policies; consular protection; the subjugation of the clergy to the imperial bureaucracy. The profound differences between the two religious cultures, Christianity and Islam, resulted in the differences between Russia’s Muslim and Orthodox presence in the Middle East. In the late 19th century, Orthodox subjects of the tsar upon arriving at the destination of their pilgrimage, were offered the services of the Imperial Orthodox Palestine Society: they could use the accommodation owned by the “Russian Palestine”, and were provided with spiritual guidance by the Russian Orthodox ecclesiastical mission in Jerusalem. Muslim subjects of the tsar did not enjoy the same level of official protection.
{"title":"The Russian Empire as a Regulator of the Hajj and Russian Orthodox Pilgrimage","authors":"Oleg V. Anisimov","doi":"10.21638/spbu02.2023.215","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.21638/spbu02.2023.215","url":null,"abstract":"The work by Eileen Kane on the Russian Empire’s experience of regulating the hajj — the Muslim pilgrimage from the Volga region, the Caucasus, and Central Asia to the Middle East — is of interest not only from the perspective of Asian and African studies or the history of religion. It is also, potentially, a comparative study as the author illustrates her observations and conclusions by referring to Russia’s policies towards the Christian populations of the Arab provinces of the Ottoman Empire. E. Kane advances a debatable thesis that Russia provided unofficial support for the hajj undertaken by its subjects. Whereas the patronage of Russian Orthodox pilgrimage was fully in line with Russia’s geopolitical role in the Middle East as well as with the tsarist ideology, open declaration of its interest in an organized hajj was out of the question for the Russian government. The idea of regulating the hajj was consistent with Russia’s need to integrate its Muslim subjects into the empire in order to secure the imperial rule. In the Ottoman Empire, adherents of various religions united under one dynasty and entitled to its consular protection can be viewed from the perspective of comparative historical research and the authorities’ general idea of imperial unity. In this case, the modes of comparison can be the following: the appropriation by the authorities of the traditions of pilgrimage and the hajj; their modernization; controversies in implementing the policies; consular protection; the subjugation of the clergy to the imperial bureaucracy. The profound differences between the two religious cultures, Christianity and Islam, resulted in the differences between Russia’s Muslim and Orthodox presence in the Middle East. In the late 19th century, Orthodox subjects of the tsar upon arriving at the destination of their pilgrimage, were offered the services of the Imperial Orthodox Palestine Society: they could use the accommodation owned by the “Russian Palestine”, and were provided with spiritual guidance by the Russian Orthodox ecclesiastical mission in Jerusalem. Muslim subjects of the tsar did not enjoy the same level of official protection.","PeriodicalId":53995,"journal":{"name":"Vestnik Sankt-Peterburgskogo Universiteta-Istoriya","volume":"59 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.2,"publicationDate":"2023-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"89160483","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}
Pub Date : 2023-01-01DOI: 10.21638/spbu02.2023.205
Artem V. Latyshev
The article examines the everyday life of the staff of Koltuban filtration camp. It operated from early 1942 to autumn 1943 in the west of the Chkalov (Orenburg) region. Its task was to filter Soviet soldiers who returned from captivity or who had been in the occupied territory. The article describes the identity of the camp commanders, the sources of recruitment of ordinary employees, their number, educational levels and gender composition. In many respects, the camp staff were close to inmates: forced mobilization for service, harsh material conditions, the desire to go to the front. Strict discipline was maintained among minor staff members, but large-scale theft and embezzlement was regularly carried out mainly by middle-ranking management. Everyday contacts between the guards and inmates primarily centred around trade and barter. Cases of aggression and cruelty are not reflected in the documents, neither are close contacts between the staff and the inmates. This article pays special attention to the tensions among the camp administration due to the uncertain status of the filtration camps. The special department not only maintained its independence in filtration but also claimed to play the main role in the management of the entire camp. The prosecutor sought to go beyond the boundaries of his functions. The commissar wanted to solve all issues on an equal footing with the head of the camp and make changes to the regime for inmates, which would turn the filtration camp into a kind of reserve military unit.
{"title":"Everyday Life of the Staff in Koltuban Filtration Camp","authors":"Artem V. Latyshev","doi":"10.21638/spbu02.2023.205","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.21638/spbu02.2023.205","url":null,"abstract":"The article examines the everyday life of the staff of Koltuban filtration camp. It operated from early 1942 to autumn 1943 in the west of the Chkalov (Orenburg) region. Its task was to filter Soviet soldiers who returned from captivity or who had been in the occupied territory. The article describes the identity of the camp commanders, the sources of recruitment of ordinary employees, their number, educational levels and gender composition. In many respects, the camp staff were close to inmates: forced mobilization for service, harsh material conditions, the desire to go to the front. Strict discipline was maintained among minor staff members, but large-scale theft and embezzlement was regularly carried out mainly by middle-ranking management. Everyday contacts between the guards and inmates primarily centred around trade and barter. Cases of aggression and cruelty are not reflected in the documents, neither are close contacts between the staff and the inmates. This article pays special attention to the tensions among the camp administration due to the uncertain status of the filtration camps. The special department not only maintained its independence in filtration but also claimed to play the main role in the management of the entire camp. The prosecutor sought to go beyond the boundaries of his functions. The commissar wanted to solve all issues on an equal footing with the head of the camp and make changes to the regime for inmates, which would turn the filtration camp into a kind of reserve military unit.","PeriodicalId":53995,"journal":{"name":"Vestnik Sankt-Peterburgskogo Universiteta-Istoriya","volume":"86 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.2,"publicationDate":"2023-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"80916742","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}
Pub Date : 2023-01-01DOI: 10.21638/spbu02.2023.206
Aleksei N. Fedorov
The article examines the mechanism, scale and reasons for promoting Leningrad cadres to central and regional bodies in 1946–1949. The prevailing opinion in Russian historiography is that during the first post-war years, hundreds of executives from Leningrad received significant posts in Moscow and different regions of the country thanks to A. A. Kuznetsov. The study of personnel policies of the 1940s reveals that A. A. Kuznetsov, as the head of the Cadre Department of the Central Committee, was responsible for the preparation of issues concerning cadres, but the decisions were made by the Secretariat and Politburo. The country’s top leadership, and especially J. V. Stalin, carefully controlled all key personnel reshuffles, so A. A. Kuznetsov could not freely promote his people. An analysis of the archival documents shows that there was no large-scale expansion of Leningrad cadres in the first post-war years. In 1945–1948, only 20–30 people from Leningrad annually received high positions. In contrast to appointees from other regions, they more often headed obkoms and oblispolkoms, and yet their share in the regional leadership of the USSR was small. The active promotion of Leningrad leaders was primarily due to the fact that many of them had university degrees nd solid managerial experience. The Central Committee tried to overcome the shortage of qualified middle-ranking managers with the help of Leningraders, as well as employees of central and metropolitan departments. For the same reason, some regional leaders were also interested in Leningraders. The promotion of Leningrad cadres continued even when G. M. Malenkov became again responsible for their selection and was stopped only because of the “Leningrad affair”.
{"title":"Promoting Leningrad Cadres in the First Post-War Years","authors":"Aleksei N. Fedorov","doi":"10.21638/spbu02.2023.206","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.21638/spbu02.2023.206","url":null,"abstract":"The article examines the mechanism, scale and reasons for promoting Leningrad cadres to central and regional bodies in 1946–1949. The prevailing opinion in Russian historiography is that during the first post-war years, hundreds of executives from Leningrad received significant posts in Moscow and different regions of the country thanks to A. A. Kuznetsov. The study of personnel policies of the 1940s reveals that A. A. Kuznetsov, as the head of the Cadre Department of the Central Committee, was responsible for the preparation of issues concerning cadres, but the decisions were made by the Secretariat and Politburo. The country’s top leadership, and especially J. V. Stalin, carefully controlled all key personnel reshuffles, so A. A. Kuznetsov could not freely promote his people. An analysis of the archival documents shows that there was no large-scale expansion of Leningrad cadres in the first post-war years. In 1945–1948, only 20–30 people from Leningrad annually received high positions. In contrast to appointees from other regions, they more often headed obkoms and oblispolkoms, and yet their share in the regional leadership of the USSR was small. The active promotion of Leningrad leaders was primarily due to the fact that many of them had university degrees nd solid managerial experience. The Central Committee tried to overcome the shortage of qualified middle-ranking managers with the help of Leningraders, as well as employees of central and metropolitan departments. For the same reason, some regional leaders were also interested in Leningraders. The promotion of Leningrad cadres continued even when G. M. Malenkov became again responsible for their selection and was stopped only because of the “Leningrad affair”.","PeriodicalId":53995,"journal":{"name":"Vestnik Sankt-Peterburgskogo Universiteta-Istoriya","volume":"2 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.2,"publicationDate":"2023-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"87363579","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}
Pub Date : 2023-01-01DOI: 10.21638/spbu02.2023.212
D. Sosnitsky
The article is devoted to the analysis of the complex of monumental sculptures of pre-revolutionary St Petersburg in terms of their influence on the construction of mass ideas about the history of Russia. The list of monuments created and installed in St Petersburg since the beginning of the 18th century until 1917 has been compiled on the basis on the analysis of reference books and researches. The article describes the circumstances of installation of some significant monuments, their interpretation of objects of historical memory (historical figures, events, phenomena). The author also analyses active participation of some emperors (Catherine II, Alexander III, Nicholas II) in the creation of projects for monuments to historical figures and events and their role in the formation of the sculptural appearance of StPetersburg. The study outlines three main groups of monuments and describes the quantitative proportion between them. It identifies the most popular heroes of the Russian history and concludes about the reasons for the popularity of various heroes and plots. The article provides calculations that demonstrate quantitative trends in the installation of monuments during the period in question. The study includes analysis of the press of St Petersburg devoted to the unveiling of some monuments and to expert opinions about the monuments. The article makes conclusions about the reasons for the dominance of monuments to rulers, statesmen, and representatives of the imperial family over other groups and analyses the image of the past formed by the monumental sculpture of St Petersburg in the imperial period.
{"title":"Russian History in the Monumental Sculpture of Pre-Revolutionary Saint Petersburg","authors":"D. Sosnitsky","doi":"10.21638/spbu02.2023.212","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.21638/spbu02.2023.212","url":null,"abstract":"The article is devoted to the analysis of the complex of monumental sculptures of pre-revolutionary St Petersburg in terms of their influence on the construction of mass ideas about the history of Russia. The list of monuments created and installed in St Petersburg since the beginning of the 18th century until 1917 has been compiled on the basis on the analysis of reference books and researches. The article describes the circumstances of installation of some significant monuments, their interpretation of objects of historical memory (historical figures, events, phenomena). The author also analyses active participation of some emperors (Catherine II, Alexander III, Nicholas II) in the creation of projects for monuments to historical figures and events and their role in the formation of the sculptural appearance of StPetersburg. The study outlines three main groups of monuments and describes the quantitative proportion between them. It identifies the most popular heroes of the Russian history and concludes about the reasons for the popularity of various heroes and plots. The article provides calculations that demonstrate quantitative trends in the installation of monuments during the period in question. The study includes analysis of the press of St Petersburg devoted to the unveiling of some monuments and to expert opinions about the monuments. The article makes conclusions about the reasons for the dominance of monuments to rulers, statesmen, and representatives of the imperial family over other groups and analyses the image of the past formed by the monumental sculpture of St Petersburg in the imperial period.","PeriodicalId":53995,"journal":{"name":"Vestnik Sankt-Peterburgskogo Universiteta-Istoriya","volume":"10 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.2,"publicationDate":"2023-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"89943963","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：