Pub Date : 2024-05-14DOI: 10.1134/s1019331624010015
A. S. Ginzburg, N. A. Samoylovskaya
Abstract
In the 1980s, one of the fundamental topics of scientific debate was the discussion of the global consequences of nuclear war. At that time, the hypothesis of “nuclear winter” emerged, in which scientists attempted to analyze the theoretical possibility of a sharp cooling of the Earth after mass fires and find natural analogues of a potential climatic catastrophe. In the following decades, the “nuclear winter” hypothesis went through various stages of criticism and reassessment. In the early 2000s, studies of the problem became regional in nature, focusing mainly on the possible consequences of local nuclear conflicts. In this article, the authors analyze the stages of development of research on the “nuclear winter” hypothesis, focusing on the Russian and American approaches, and conclude that the body of work produced by American and Soviet scientists in 1983–1985 represents the first attempts by the scientific community to conceptualize the problem of responsible nuclear policy.
{"title":"The “Nuclear Winter” Hypothesis and a Responsible Nuclear Policy","authors":"A. S. Ginzburg, N. A. Samoylovskaya","doi":"10.1134/s1019331624010015","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1134/s1019331624010015","url":null,"abstract":"<h3 data-test=\"abstract-sub-heading\">Abstract</h3><p>In the 1980s, one of the fundamental topics of scientific debate was the discussion of the global consequences of nuclear war. At that time, the hypothesis of “nuclear winter” emerged, in which scientists attempted to analyze the theoretical possibility of a sharp cooling of the Earth after mass fires and find natural analogues of a potential climatic catastrophe. In the following decades, the “nuclear winter” hypothesis went through various stages of criticism and reassessment. In the early 2000s, studies of the problem became regional in nature, focusing mainly on the possible consequences of local nuclear conflicts. In this article, the authors analyze the stages of development of research on the “nuclear winter” hypothesis, focusing on the Russian and American approaches, and conclude that the body of work produced by American and Soviet scientists in 1983–1985 represents the first attempts by the scientific community to conceptualize the problem of responsible nuclear policy.</p>","PeriodicalId":56335,"journal":{"name":"Herald of the Russian Academy of Sciences","volume":"19 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.5,"publicationDate":"2024-05-14","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"140933603","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"综合性期刊","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2024-02-27DOI: 10.1134/s1019331623090071
A. I. Narezhnyi
Abstract
Based on the works of a prominent representative of the liberal pro-Western trend in Russian social thought B.N. Chicherin, his views on the causes and unsuccessful for Russia outcome of the Crimean War are examined. The components of the author’s concept are revealed, which were formulated by him in identifying the main trends of European politics in the first half of the 19th century and assessing the political consequences of the formation of the Holy Alliance and the activities of its participants, aimed at preserving the monarchical principle in European countries by any means. Particular attention is paid to Chicherin’s analysis of the reasons for the conservative turn in the foreign and domestic policies of the government of Nicholas I and the author’s substantiation of the thesis that the European choice of Peter I did not guarantee progressive advance in the development of Russia but only opened opportunities, the implementation of which depended on the policy of the imperial authorities. In this context, such features of the system of autocratic governance of the country are considered as the predominance of the personal principle and the lack of opportunities and mechanisms for representatives of society to influence the decisions, which were defined by Chicherin as major factors that contributed to the establishment of a protective course in foreign and domestic policy. The author considers the “European loneliness” of Russia and stagnation in socioeconomic development to be a consequence of this policy, which determined the country’s defeat in the Crimean War, which, however, is considered by Chicherin not only as evidence of the crisis of the existing system but also as an incentive for renewal based on a program in the development of which he actively participated.
{"title":"B.N. Chicherin: The Crimean War as a Reflection of the Crisis of the Russian Empire","authors":"A. I. Narezhnyi","doi":"10.1134/s1019331623090071","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1134/s1019331623090071","url":null,"abstract":"<h3 data-test=\"abstract-sub-heading\">Abstract</h3><p>Based on the works of a prominent representative of the liberal pro-Western trend in Russian social thought B.N. Chicherin, his views on the causes and unsuccessful for Russia outcome of the Crimean War are examined. The components of the author’s concept are revealed, which were formulated by him in identifying the main trends of European politics in the first half of the 19th century and assessing the political consequences of the formation of the Holy Alliance and the activities of its participants, aimed at preserving the monarchical principle in European countries by any means. Particular attention is paid to Chicherin’s analysis of the reasons for the conservative turn in the foreign and domestic policies of the government of Nicholas I and the author’s substantiation of the thesis that the European choice of Peter I did not guarantee progressive advance in the development of Russia but only opened opportunities, the implementation of which depended on the policy of the imperial authorities. In this context, such features of the system of autocratic governance of the country are considered as the predominance of the personal principle and the lack of opportunities and mechanisms for representatives of society to influence the decisions, which were defined by Chicherin as major factors that contributed to the establishment of a protective course in foreign and domestic policy. The author considers the “European loneliness” of Russia and stagnation in socioeconomic development to be a consequence of this policy, which determined the country’s defeat in the Crimean War, which, however, is considered by Chicherin not only as evidence of the crisis of the existing system but also as an incentive for renewal based on a program in the development of which he actively participated.</p>","PeriodicalId":56335,"journal":{"name":"Herald of the Russian Academy of Sciences","volume":"2018 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.5,"publicationDate":"2024-02-27","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"139988029","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"综合性期刊","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2024-02-27DOI: 10.1134/s1019331623090137
T. N. Zhukovskaya
Abstract
The attitude of university intellectuals to the events of the Eastern War of 1853–1856 and the degree of involvement of the university community in helping the front are discussed based on archival sources and published memoirs. Back at the very beginning of the war, military formation training was introduced in higher education institutions and gymnasiums in Russia, and lectures on artillery and fortification began at St. Petersburg University. The memoirs of F.N. Ustryalov and the diary of A.V. Nikitenko convey the reaction of representatives of the “learned class” to the events in the theaters of war, as well as to the forced transformation of the educational process. The materials of the university and departmental records contain information about the size and forms of material assistance of educational institutions to the front, such as collecting donations to the “heroes of Sevastopol” and the widows and families of the victims. According to sources of personal origin, the dynamics of sentiments in the university environment can be traced—from patriotic enthusiasm and readiness of the students to join the army to public pessimism caused by the military defeat of the Russian Empire. Let us add that in the summer and fall of 1854, St. Petersburg and Moscow universities were used as a place to accommodate British sailors captured in the Black Sea, who were considered by Nicholas I as mediators in search of a diplomatic settlement or mitigation of the conflict.
{"title":"Mobilization of Science: St. Petersburg University during the Crimean War","authors":"T. N. Zhukovskaya","doi":"10.1134/s1019331623090137","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1134/s1019331623090137","url":null,"abstract":"<h3 data-test=\"abstract-sub-heading\">Abstract</h3><p>The attitude of university intellectuals to the events of the Eastern War of 1853–1856 and the degree of involvement of the university community in helping the front are discussed based on archival sources and published memoirs. Back at the very beginning of the war, military formation training was introduced in higher education institutions and gymnasiums in Russia, and lectures on artillery and fortification began at St. Petersburg University. The memoirs of F.N. Ustryalov and the diary of A.V. Nikitenko convey the reaction of representatives of the “learned class” to the events in the theaters of war, as well as to the forced transformation of the educational process. The materials of the university and departmental records contain information about the size and forms of material assistance of educational institutions to the front, such as collecting donations to the “heroes of Sevastopol” and the widows and families of the victims. According to sources of personal origin, the dynamics of sentiments in the university environment can be traced—from patriotic enthusiasm and readiness of the students to join the army to public pessimism caused by the military defeat of the Russian Empire. Let us add that in the summer and fall of 1854, St. Petersburg and Moscow universities were used as a place to accommodate British sailors captured in the Black Sea, who were considered by Nicholas I as mediators in search of a diplomatic settlement or mitigation of the conflict.</p>","PeriodicalId":56335,"journal":{"name":"Herald of the Russian Academy of Sciences","volume":"8 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.5,"publicationDate":"2024-02-27","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"140885687","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"综合性期刊","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2024-02-27DOI: 10.1134/s1019331623090083
Yu. A. Naumova
Abstract
The essay looks at the medical services of the Great Powers—Russia, France, and Britain—during the Crimean War 1853–1856, highlighting the unprecedented challenges that these countries had encountered while struggling to save health of their serving ranks during the conflict. Paying special attention to the Russian medical service during the war and its numerous logistical and tactical difficulties in comparison with those of the Allied forces, the essay reexamines the prevailed in historiography and public imagination notion of its total failure which is believed to be one of the major drivers behind the loss in the conflict. The military medical planning and patterns of the medical casualties of all three countries during the war are carefully studied and some general conclusions regarding the impact the Crimean War had on Russian, British and French military medical science, as well as its long-lasting legacy, are drawn at the end.
{"title":"Medical Services of Russia, France, and Britain in the Crimean War, 1853–1856","authors":"Yu. A. Naumova","doi":"10.1134/s1019331623090083","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1134/s1019331623090083","url":null,"abstract":"<h3 data-test=\"abstract-sub-heading\">Abstract</h3><p>The essay looks at the medical services of the Great Powers—Russia, France, and Britain—during the Crimean War 1853–1856, highlighting the unprecedented challenges that these countries had encountered while struggling to save health of their serving ranks during the conflict. Paying special attention to the Russian medical service during the war and its numerous logistical and tactical difficulties in comparison with those of the Allied forces, the essay reexamines the prevailed in historiography and public imagination notion of its total failure which is believed to be one of the major drivers behind the loss in the conflict. The military medical planning and patterns of the medical casualties of all three countries during the war are carefully studied and some general conclusions regarding the impact the Crimean War had on Russian, British and French military medical science, as well as its long-lasting legacy, are drawn at the end.</p>","PeriodicalId":56335,"journal":{"name":"Herald of the Russian Academy of Sciences","volume":"8 1 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.5,"publicationDate":"2024-02-27","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"139987845","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"综合性期刊","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2024-02-27DOI: 10.1134/s1019331623090095
P. K. Romanov
Abstract
The financial structure of the Russian Empire during the Crimean War is examined. The purpose of this article was to study the impact of wartime emergency expenditures on monetary circulation. In this context, special attention is paid to the problems of external and internal fluctuations in the value of the Russian currency and private speculation caused by the war, as well as financial management measures taken to solve existing difficulties. It is concluded that the monetary system, despite serious shocks, withstood the stress of wartime.
{"title":"“The New Crisis”: Russian Monetary Circulation and the Crimean War","authors":"P. K. Romanov","doi":"10.1134/s1019331623090095","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1134/s1019331623090095","url":null,"abstract":"<h3 data-test=\"abstract-sub-heading\">Abstract</h3><p>The financial structure of the Russian Empire during the Crimean War is examined. The purpose of this article was to study the impact of wartime emergency expenditures on monetary circulation. In this context, special attention is paid to the problems of external and internal fluctuations in the value of the Russian currency and private speculation caused by the war, as well as financial management measures taken to solve existing difficulties. It is concluded that the monetary system, despite serious shocks, withstood the stress of wartime.</p>","PeriodicalId":56335,"journal":{"name":"Herald of the Russian Academy of Sciences","volume":"19 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.5,"publicationDate":"2024-02-27","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"140885689","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"综合性期刊","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2024-02-27DOI: 10.1134/s1019331623090113
D. V. Timofeev
Abstract
The main methods and forms of updating the historical memory of the events of 1812–1814 in legislative acts, periodicals, brochures, and books are presented. The complex of historical sources on this issue includes manifestos, rescripts, appeals, and letters of Alexander I, citing which contemporaries demonstrated the similarities between the Patriotic War of 1812 and the Eastern (Crimean) War of 1853–1856; a set of issues of the newspaper Severnaya Pchela (Northern Post) (March 1854); and book editions The General Militia of Russia for the Faith, the Tsar, and the Fatherland and The 40th Anniversary of the Russians’ Entry into Paris on March 19, 1814, directly devoted to the comparison of the events of 1812 and 1853–1856. As a result of a comparative contextual analysis of texts of different origins and genre and stylistic features, three content blocks were identified through which the historical memory of the Patriotic War of 1812 and the foreign campaigns of the Russian army was updated in the public space of the Russian Empire during the Crimean War. The first problem–thematic block is represented by texts the authors of which, using historical analogies, showed the contradictory nature of the alliance of England, France, and Turkey against Russia; the disparity between the figures of Napoleon Bonaparte and Napoleon III; and the “true” goals of the Allies’ participation in the war. The content of the texts conditionally grouped into the second problem–thematic block clearly demonstrates the variety of genres and rhetorical techniques used to justify Russia’s intentions and actions in the comparative retrospective of the two wars. The third problem–thematic block of texts has made it possible to identify the main ways of updating the memory of the conflict that had happened forty years before to show the reader the continuity of generations and the readiness of the entire society to sacrifice themselves to achieve common goals.
{"title":"The Topical Past: Instrumentalization of the Historical Memory of 1812 during the Crimean War of 1853–1856","authors":"D. V. Timofeev","doi":"10.1134/s1019331623090113","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1134/s1019331623090113","url":null,"abstract":"<h3 data-test=\"abstract-sub-heading\">Abstract</h3><p>The main methods and forms of updating the historical memory of the events of 1812–1814 in legislative acts, periodicals, brochures, and books are presented. The complex of historical sources on this issue includes manifestos, rescripts, appeals, and letters of Alexander I, citing which contemporaries demonstrated the similarities between the Patriotic War of 1812 and the Eastern (Crimean) War of 1853–1856; a set of issues of the newspaper <i>Severnaya Pchela</i> (Northern Post) (March 1854); and book editions <i>The General Militia of Russia for the Faith, the Tsar, and the Fatherland</i> and <i>The 40th Anniversary of the Russians’ Entry into Paris on March 19, 1814</i>, directly devoted to the comparison of the events of 1812 and 1853–1856. As a result of a comparative contextual analysis of texts of different origins and genre and stylistic features, three content blocks were identified through which the historical memory of the Patriotic War of 1812 and the foreign campaigns of the Russian army was updated in the public space of the Russian Empire during the Crimean War. The first problem–thematic block is represented by texts the authors of which, using historical analogies, showed the contradictory nature of the alliance of England, France, and Turkey against Russia; the disparity between the figures of Napoleon Bonaparte and Napoleon III; and the “true” goals of the Allies’ participation in the war. The content of the texts conditionally grouped into the second problem–thematic block clearly demonstrates the variety of genres and rhetorical techniques used to justify Russia’s intentions and actions in the comparative retrospective of the two wars. The third problem–thematic block of texts has made it possible to identify the main ways of updating the memory of the conflict that had happened forty years before to show the reader the continuity of generations and the readiness of the entire society to sacrifice themselves to achieve common goals.</p>","PeriodicalId":56335,"journal":{"name":"Herald of the Russian Academy of Sciences","volume":"1 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.5,"publicationDate":"2024-02-27","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"139987980","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"综合性期刊","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2024-02-27DOI: 10.1134/s1019331623090101
A. I. Rupasov
Abstract
The reasons that prompted the Kingdom of Sardinia to join the coalition of England and France during the Crimean War are analyzed. After the defeat in the so-called First War of Liberation (1848–1849), the kingdom’s political influence in Italy was seriously weakened. The urgent need to find allies to confront the Austrian Empire and, in the future, to remove obstacles to the process of unification of Italy, inevitably raised the question of the price of allied obligations assumed in such a case. Participation in the Crimean campaign initially did not guarantee Sardinia-Piedmont’s unconditional achievement of ambitious goals in Italy. However, the possibility of discussing Italian problems after the end of the Crimean War by the great European powers was considered by the head of the Sardinian government, Camillo Benso di Cavour, at least as eliminating the Austrian threat. Sardinia-Piedmont, thanks to its participation in the Crimean War, managed to officially bring the Italian problem to the international diplomatic arena.
摘要 分析了促使撒丁王国在克里米亚战争期间加入英法联军的原因。在所谓的第一次解放战争（1848-1849 年）失败后，撒丁王国在意大利的政治影响力被严重削弱。为了对抗奥地利帝国，并在未来扫除意大利统一进程的障碍，迫切需要寻找盟友，这就不可避免地提出了在这种情况下承担盟国义务的代价问题。参与克里米亚战役最初并不能保证撒丁岛-皮德蒙无条件地实现在意大利的宏伟目标。然而，撒丁政府首脑卡米洛-本索-迪-加富尔（Camillo Benso di Cavour）认为，欧洲列强有可能在克里米亚战争结束后讨论意大利问题，这至少消除了奥地利的威胁。由于参加了克里米亚战争，撒丁岛-皮埃蒙特成功地将意大利问题正式推向了国际外交舞台。
{"title":"The Crimean War and the Kingdom of Sardinia","authors":"A. I. Rupasov","doi":"10.1134/s1019331623090101","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1134/s1019331623090101","url":null,"abstract":"<h3 data-test=\"abstract-sub-heading\">Abstract</h3><p>The reasons that prompted the Kingdom of Sardinia to join the coalition of England and France during the Crimean War are analyzed. After the defeat in the so-called First War of Liberation (1848–1849), the kingdom’s political influence in Italy was seriously weakened. The urgent need to find allies to confront the Austrian Empire and, in the future, to remove obstacles to the process of unification of Italy, inevitably raised the question of the price of allied obligations assumed in such a case. Participation in the Crimean campaign initially did not guarantee Sardinia-Piedmont’s unconditional achievement of ambitious goals in Italy. However, the possibility of discussing Italian problems after the end of the Crimean War by the great European powers was considered by the head of the Sardinian government, Camillo Benso di Cavour, at least as eliminating the Austrian threat. Sardinia-Piedmont, thanks to its participation in the Crimean War, managed to officially bring the Italian problem to the international diplomatic arena.</p>","PeriodicalId":56335,"journal":{"name":"Herald of the Russian Academy of Sciences","volume":"1 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.5,"publicationDate":"2024-02-27","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"139988044","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"综合性期刊","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2024-02-27DOI: 10.1134/s1019331623090125
L. V. Vyskochkov
Abstract
Modern Russian historiography of the Crimean (Eastern) War of 1853–1856 is analyzed with an emphasis on research of the last decade and historiographic reviews of previous periods (V.E. Bagdasaryan, S.G. Tolstoi, V.I. Sheremet, O.V. Pavlenko, S.S. Kurochkin, etc.). In 2013–2014, the 160th anniversary of the beginning of the Crimean War and the defense of Sevastopol was celebrated, and the works of Crimean historians replenished Russian historiography not only de facto but also de jure. Where necessary, references are given to earlier basic works, as well as the latest publications of sources. Apart from the articles published in the period 2014–first half of 2023, about 30 collections of documents, monographs, and dissertation abstracts were published from 2014 through the first half of 2023, covering various aspects of the study of the Crimean War. This historiographical review is structured according to a thematic principle. Studies are consistently analyzed on such topics as the influence of the Eastern question (the dispute over the “Holy Places”) in the diplomatic outbreak of the war; the state of the armed forces of Russia and the European coalition consisting of Great Britain, France, Sardinia (Piedmont), and the Ottoman Empire; military operations in various theaters of war; the role of individual military leaders; the results of the war; public opinion; humanitarian aspects (medicine, charity); the influence of the war on literature and art; and historical memory of the war. The analysis of modern historiography makes it possible to conclude that there is a gradually emerging discourse that the extent of Russia’s defeat in the war was previously significantly exaggerated, that it was not a “catastrophe” for Russia. Despite the admission of defeat, Russia remained a great power and was able to begin reforms and modernization of its entire socioeconomic structure, gradually strengthening its position in the changing world.
{"title":"The Crimean (Eastern) War of 1853–1856 in Modern Russian Historiography","authors":"L. V. Vyskochkov","doi":"10.1134/s1019331623090125","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1134/s1019331623090125","url":null,"abstract":"<h3 data-test=\"abstract-sub-heading\">Abstract</h3><p>Modern Russian historiography of the Crimean (Eastern) War of 1853–1856 is analyzed with an emphasis on research of the last decade and historiographic reviews of previous periods (V.E. Bagdasaryan, S.G. Tolstoi, V.I. Sheremet, O.V. Pavlenko, S.S. Kurochkin, etc.). In 2013–2014, the 160th anniversary of the beginning of the Crimean War and the defense of Sevastopol was celebrated, and the works of Crimean historians replenished Russian historiography not only de facto but also de jure. Where necessary, references are given to earlier basic works, as well as the latest publications of sources. Apart from the articles published in the period 2014–first half of 2023, about 30 collections of documents, monographs, and dissertation abstracts were published from 2014 through the first half of 2023, covering various aspects of the study of the Crimean War. This historiographical review is structured according to a thematic principle. Studies are consistently analyzed on such topics as the influence of the Eastern question (the dispute over the “Holy Places”) in the diplomatic outbreak of the war; the state of the armed forces of Russia and the European coalition consisting of Great Britain, France, Sardinia (Piedmont), and the Ottoman Empire; military operations in various theaters of war; the role of individual military leaders; the results of the war; public opinion; humanitarian aspects (medicine, charity); the influence of the war on literature and art; and historical memory of the war. The analysis of modern historiography makes it possible to conclude that there is a gradually emerging discourse that the extent of Russia’s defeat in the war was previously significantly exaggerated, that it was not a “catastrophe” for Russia. Despite the admission of defeat, Russia remained a great power and was able to begin reforms and modernization of its entire socioeconomic structure, gradually strengthening its position in the changing world.</p>","PeriodicalId":56335,"journal":{"name":"Herald of the Russian Academy of Sciences","volume":"36 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.5,"publicationDate":"2024-02-27","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"140885982","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"综合性期刊","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2024-02-27DOI: 10.1134/s1019331623090034
A. Yu. Fomin
Abstract
An attempt is undertaken to analyze the controversy that unfolded among Russian officers around the results of the Russo–Japanese War. In the context of the stated topic, special attention is paid to the consideration of the discussion participants’ appeals to the experience of the Crimean War and its historical memory. The comparison of these two military conflicts seemed very relevant to contemporaries owing to the similar historical context and their results, disappointing for Russia. However, while the defeat in the Crimean War, according to the ideas established in the historical memory of that time, covered Russian weapons with glory, in the events of the war in the Far East, contemporaries found little reason to console wounded national pride. After all, this time Russia was defeated not by a powerful European coalition but by an Asian country that until recently had not been perceived as an equal subject in international relations. In addition to heroic mythology, the memory of the Crimean War was also closely linked with the subsequent Great Reforms of Emperor Alexander II. The hope for national revival, which was supposed to begin after the humiliating defeat that clearly demonstrated the internal crisis, was the pragmatic political meaning of turning to the memory of the Crimean War for many Russian officers who survived the Russo–Japanese War.
{"title":"Lessons of History: Appealing to the Experience of the Crimean War on the Pages of the Military Press during the Revolutionary Crisis of 1905–1907","authors":"A. Yu. Fomin","doi":"10.1134/s1019331623090034","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1134/s1019331623090034","url":null,"abstract":"<h3 data-test=\"abstract-sub-heading\">Abstract</h3><p>An attempt is undertaken to analyze the controversy that unfolded among Russian officers around the results of the Russo–Japanese War. In the context of the stated topic, special attention is paid to the consideration of the discussion participants’ appeals to the experience of the Crimean War and its historical memory. The comparison of these two military conflicts seemed very relevant to contemporaries owing to the similar historical context and their results, disappointing for Russia. However, while the defeat in the Crimean War, according to the ideas established in the historical memory of that time, covered Russian weapons with glory, in the events of the war in the Far East, contemporaries found little reason to console wounded national pride. After all, this time Russia was defeated not by a powerful European coalition but by an Asian country that until recently had not been perceived as an equal subject in international relations. In addition to heroic mythology, the memory of the Crimean War was also closely linked with the subsequent Great Reforms of Emperor Alexander II. The hope for national revival, which was supposed to begin after the humiliating defeat that clearly demonstrated the internal crisis, was the pragmatic political meaning of turning to the memory of the Crimean War for many Russian officers who survived the Russo–Japanese War.</p>","PeriodicalId":56335,"journal":{"name":"Herald of the Russian Academy of Sciences","volume":"32 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.5,"publicationDate":"2024-02-27","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"139988310","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"综合性期刊","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2024-02-27DOI: 10.1134/s1019331623090046
F. Yılmaz, A. Müderrisoğlu
Abstract
The Crimean War not only affected the Ottoman Empire politically, but also caused it to suffer economically. Although the war originated as an Ottoman-Russian war, there were essentially two sides of the war, Russian and British. France also supported the Ottoman Empire in order to protect both its domestic policy and foreign interests in the face of Russian expansionism. Britain, who adopted a policy of neutrality at the beginning of the war, perceived the Russian advance as a great threat to British interests in the following months and built a foreign policy to preserve the territorial integrity of the Ottomans. For the Ottoman Empire, even if the war was won, it started a great financial collapse. Because the Ottoman Empire had attempted to borrow foreign debt for the first time in its history. The foreign debts borrowed from Britain and France were almost the turning point for the future collapse of the Ottoman finance. On the other hand, when the researches on the Crimean War are examined, it is seen that important works have been revealed in the Turkish literature written on the war in almost the last twenty years. In our study, we will give priority to these works and introduce them briefly, and then we will try to examine the economic collapse caused by the war for the Ottomans in the context of foreign borrowing.
{"title":"Literature Review in Turkish on Crimean War and the Ottomans’ War Finance","authors":"F. Yılmaz, A. Müderrisoğlu","doi":"10.1134/s1019331623090046","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1134/s1019331623090046","url":null,"abstract":"<h3 data-test=\"abstract-sub-heading\">Abstract</h3><p>The Crimean War not only affected the Ottoman Empire politically, but also caused it to suffer economically. Although the war originated as an Ottoman-Russian war, there were essentially two sides of the war, Russian and British. France also supported the Ottoman Empire in order to protect both its domestic policy and foreign interests in the face of Russian expansionism. Britain, who adopted a policy of neutrality at the beginning of the war, perceived the Russian advance as a great threat to British interests in the following months and built a foreign policy to preserve the territorial integrity of the Ottomans. For the Ottoman Empire, even if the war was won, it started a great financial collapse. Because the Ottoman Empire had attempted to borrow foreign debt for the first time in its history. The foreign debts borrowed from Britain and France were almost the turning point for the future collapse of the Ottoman finance. On the other hand, when the researches on the Crimean War are examined, it is seen that important works have been revealed in the Turkish literature written on the war in almost the last twenty years. In our study, we will give priority to these works and introduce them briefly, and then we will try to examine the economic collapse caused by the war for the Ottomans in the context of foreign borrowing.</p>","PeriodicalId":56335,"journal":{"name":"Herald of the Russian Academy of Sciences","volume":"14 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.5,"publicationDate":"2024-02-27","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"140885697","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"综合性期刊","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
扫码关注我们
求助内容：
应助结果提醒方式：
京公网安备 11010802042870号