大国的小规模战争:比较视角下的查尔斯·爱德华·考威尔与俄罗斯帝国

S. Malkin
{"title":"大国的小规模战争:比较视角下的查尔斯·爱德华·考威尔与俄罗斯帝国","authors":"S. Malkin","doi":"10.31857/s013038640022926-6","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"In this article the author focuses on the semantic and substantive aspects of the colonial conflict analysis model presented in the work of the British Army Major General Charles Edward Collwell, “Small Wars: Their Principles and Practices”, which became the most notable British treatise on the subject at the turn of the nineteenth and twentieth centuries. A distinctive feature of the work is the comparative approach to the analysis of the British colonial wars fought in the Victorian era. It is established that the Russian case (the annexation of Central Asia and the pacification of the North Caucasus) is a golden thread running through all sections of the work, serving, along with similar examples from French, Spanish, and US history, as a kind of tuning fork for the universal principles of successful small warfare that Callwell laid out in his work. The aim of the paper is to form a more substantive account of the significance of comparative colonialism for British military thinking and the place of the Russian experience in its evolution. The study has shown that “Small Wars” reflected a course towards the normalisation of the Russian Empire within a professional discourse. In addition, the historiography focuses on Callwell's selective approach to the choice of factual material and its place in the evolution of British counterinsurgency. In this article, the author focuses on identifying the reasons for differences in the forms and ways of systematizing the experience of small wars in the colonial and frontier policies of both the Russian and British empires. Particular attention is paid to the circumstances that led to the gradual loss of Callwell's work to its former importance on the eve and after the Great War.","PeriodicalId":82203,"journal":{"name":"Novaia i noveishaia istoriia","volume":"1 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2023-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Small Wars of the Great Powers: Charles Edward Callwell and the Russian Empire in Comparative Perspective\",\"authors\":\"S. Malkin\",\"doi\":\"10.31857/s013038640022926-6\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"In this article the author focuses on the semantic and substantive aspects of the colonial conflict analysis model presented in the work of the British Army Major General Charles Edward Collwell, “Small Wars: Their Principles and Practices”, which became the most notable British treatise on the subject at the turn of the nineteenth and twentieth centuries. A distinctive feature of the work is the comparative approach to the analysis of the British colonial wars fought in the Victorian era. It is established that the Russian case (the annexation of Central Asia and the pacification of the North Caucasus) is a golden thread running through all sections of the work, serving, along with similar examples from French, Spanish, and US history, as a kind of tuning fork for the universal principles of successful small warfare that Callwell laid out in his work. The aim of the paper is to form a more substantive account of the significance of comparative colonialism for British military thinking and the place of the Russian experience in its evolution. The study has shown that “Small Wars” reflected a course towards the normalisation of the Russian Empire within a professional discourse. In addition, the historiography focuses on Callwell's selective approach to the choice of factual material and its place in the evolution of British counterinsurgency. In this article, the author focuses on identifying the reasons for differences in the forms and ways of systematizing the experience of small wars in the colonial and frontier policies of both the Russian and British empires. Particular attention is paid to the circumstances that led to the gradual loss of Callwell's work to its former importance on the eve and after the Great War.\",\"PeriodicalId\":82203,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Novaia i noveishaia istoriia\",\"volume\":\"1 1\",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2023-01-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Novaia i noveishaia istoriia\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.31857/s013038640022926-6\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Novaia i noveishaia istoriia","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.31857/s013038640022926-6","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

在这篇文章中,作者将重点放在英国陆军少将查尔斯·爱德华·科尔韦尔的著作《小规模战争:他们的原则和实践》中提出的殖民地冲突分析模型的语义和实质性方面,这本书成为十九和二十世纪之交英国关于这一主题的最著名的论文。该作品的一个显著特点是用比较的方法来分析维多利亚时代的英国殖民战争。可以确定的是,俄国的案例(吞并中亚和平定北高加索)是贯穿本书所有章节的一条金线,与法国、西班牙和美国历史上的类似例子一起,作为考威尔在他的著作中提出的成功的小规模战争的普遍原则的一种音叉。本文的目的是形成比较殖民主义对英国军事思想的意义和俄罗斯经验在其演变中的地位的更实质性的说明。研究表明,“小规模战争”反映了俄罗斯帝国在专业话语中的正常化进程。此外,本书的史学研究重点是考威尔对事实材料的选择性选择及其在英国平叛演变中的地位。在这篇文章中,作者着重于找出俄罗斯和英国帝国在殖民和边境政策中对小战争经验的系统化的形式和方式的差异的原因。本书特别关注了导致考威尔的作品逐渐丧失其在第一次世界大战前夕和之后的重要性的情况。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
Small Wars of the Great Powers: Charles Edward Callwell and the Russian Empire in Comparative Perspective
In this article the author focuses on the semantic and substantive aspects of the colonial conflict analysis model presented in the work of the British Army Major General Charles Edward Collwell, “Small Wars: Their Principles and Practices”, which became the most notable British treatise on the subject at the turn of the nineteenth and twentieth centuries. A distinctive feature of the work is the comparative approach to the analysis of the British colonial wars fought in the Victorian era. It is established that the Russian case (the annexation of Central Asia and the pacification of the North Caucasus) is a golden thread running through all sections of the work, serving, along with similar examples from French, Spanish, and US history, as a kind of tuning fork for the universal principles of successful small warfare that Callwell laid out in his work. The aim of the paper is to form a more substantive account of the significance of comparative colonialism for British military thinking and the place of the Russian experience in its evolution. The study has shown that “Small Wars” reflected a course towards the normalisation of the Russian Empire within a professional discourse. In addition, the historiography focuses on Callwell's selective approach to the choice of factual material and its place in the evolution of British counterinsurgency. In this article, the author focuses on identifying the reasons for differences in the forms and ways of systematizing the experience of small wars in the colonial and frontier policies of both the Russian and British empires. Particular attention is paid to the circumstances that led to the gradual loss of Callwell's work to its former importance on the eve and after the Great War.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
0.40
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
期刊最新文献
“Two-Faced Janus”: Was Chancellor Alexey Bestuzhev-Ryumin in the Service of the British? “Germany and the Balkan Feud”: The Russian Press Assessment of German Policy During the Two Balkan Wars of 1912–1913 The Egyptian Campaign and the Middle East Heraldic America The Image of Federal Republic of Yugoslavia in the Russian Press During the Sanction Pressure on the Country, 1992–1995
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1