Romanov Empire Research Articles

Mykhailo Drahomanov’s ideas of parliament

Ukrainian parliamentarism and constitutionalism have a long history. Its brightest episode occurred 100 years ago, in 1917–1921, when the Ukrainian activists tried to cope with the breakup of the Romanov Empire by suggesting various projects of its reconstruction. In this article, I argue that the history of these projects began at least half a century earlier, when a young professor of history at Kiev University, Mykhailo Drahomanov, started to reflect upon future reorganization of the Russian Empire into a parliamentary state. Being an ardent advocate of turning the empire into a representative democracy, Drahomanov still felt uneasy about unapologetic support of parliamentarism. Having embraced Proudhonian idea of anarchy or self-government, he realized that the existence of parliament was not a universal cure for all political ills of the Russian Empire, especially for the main one—extreme state centralization. Hence, his views of political reconstruction of the empire did not necessarily mean transforming it into the Russian Republic. It seems that a reasonable and reasoned monarch, who could turn the empire into a federal state with a wide local self-government, would totally fulfill Drahomanov’s ideas of future Russia. His enormous influence upon the pre-war Ukrainian intellectuals explains why only few of them seriously discussed an idea of Ukrainian state independence in 1917.

The Quest for Stability: British War Aims and Germany, 1914–1918

ABSTRACTBritish war aims concerning Germany developed haphazardly during the Great War of 1914–1918. The vicissitudes of unexpectedly conducting total war–one lasting more than four years–periodically deflected their consideration. Inter-Allied diplomacy and pressures from non-governmental lobbyists from Central–Eastern Europe seeking independent states to succeed the Habsburg, Romanov, and Wilhelmine empires forced reconsideration at crucial moments, for instance, after the advent of the nascent Bolshevik regime in Russia in late 1917 to early 1918. So, too, did British public opinion. Nonetheless, the British government had a clear general strategy: return stability on the European continent. In this context, the prime minister after December 1916, David Lloyd George, became central. Beyond the general aim, however, he wanted to avoid firm commitments over a range of issues touching Germany to give him flexibility in negotiating with the other Allied leaders at the eventual Peace Conference. Thus, less concerned with the minutiae of transforming war aims involving German territorial losses, disarmament, and paying for the war, he looked to make deals that might lack strategic purpose.

ПОДАТКОВІ ОРГАНИ В НАДДНІПРЯНСЬКІЙ УКРАЇНІ В ПОРЕФОРМЕНИЙ ПЕРІОД: СУЧАСНА УКРАЇНСЬКА ІСТОРІОГРАФІЯ

The liberal reforms carried out in the Russian Empire during the 1860's and 1870's markedly affected the financial sector of a gigantic country. They also had their peculiarities on the territory of the provinces inhabited by Ukrainians. Especially significant was the reformation of the tax service, which became more modern and copied the principles and methods of their work from similar structures of Western European states. In the middle of the nineteenth century іn the Dnieper Ukraine there was virtually no special tax authority. These functions were carried out by a number of government institutions, and the state-owned chambers carried out the coordination of their activities at the local provincial level. After the defeat of the Russian Empire in the Crimean War, its government was forced to carry out a series of systemic reforms. One of the directions of the reformation of the Romanov Empire was the reorganization of the sphere of public finances, in particular, of financial management and financial control. Over the past decades, Ukrainian historical science has paid special attention to the functioning of the tax authorities of the empire on the lands of modern Ukraine. In view of this, the article analyzes the contemporary Ukrainian historiography of the question of the functioning of the tax authorities of the Russian Empire in the Dnieper Ukraine in the second half of the nineteenth and early twentieth centuries. The main domestic researches of the activities of those power institutions that performed the functions of tax control in the Ukrainian provinces of the Russian Empire were considered. Particular attention is paid to the works, which highlighted regional features of the work of tax authorities. Perspective directions of further researches of this problem are outlined. The article states that the problems of the activity of tax authorities in the Dnieper Ukraine in the pre-reform period became the subject of the research of many modern Ukrainian scholars. One can even note the fact of formation of scientific schools on the problems of the history of financial policy in Ukraine. This is the Kyiv Historical School of Professor O. Reyent, the Kharkiv School of History and Law of Professor O. Golovko and the Kropyvnytsky School of Economic History of Professor V. Orlyk. However, there remain a number of aspects of the problem that require further in-depth study.

The "German Intrigue" as an Element of the Anti-Ukrainian Campaign: A Case Study of Kyiv's Russian Language Press, 1914-18

World War I proved to be a powerful catalyst for latent national movements on non‑Russian frontiers of the multi-ethnic Romanov Empire. Based on original sources in Kyiv’s Russian language press, this article uncovers the attitude of the Russian media toward Ukrainian national self‑determination in Southwestern Krai, the Empire’s borderland. Particularly, the study investigates the anti-Ukrainian campaign of the alleged “German intrigue.” Prejudice against the Ukrainian “foreign intrigue” originated in the media as a response to Russia’s pre-war controversy with neighbouring Austria‑Hungarian and German empires. During World War I, such prejudice developed into a prominent defamatory technique. This research illustrates how a pre-war concern about a separate Ukrainian identity evolved into full‑scale Russian hostility toward the newly established Ukrainian state by the end of 1918. In essence, the anti-Ukrainian campaign reflected the press’s worldview. Regardless of political affiliations, Russian newspapers unanimously professed state patriotism. Despite the emergence of a mass Ukrainian national movement in 1917, newspapers continued to assert the paradigm of the single all‑Russian nation. In general, this attitude should be evaluated as a historic example of a clash between Russian and Ukrainian national projects.

The Russian Empire and the National Periphery: Between the Theory of Autocracy and Management Practices

This article considers the relations between the Russian Empire and its national peripheries. The authors focus on the deformation of imperial principles of the organisation of power under the influence of the periphery instead of the traditional analysis of imperial methods of incorporating it. The work is based on documents from federal archives and published historical evidence and is structured around three main problems of the Romanov Empire, i. e. first, geography as a hard struggle with distances; second, politics as administrative practice; and third, economy as the price of the peripheries. The article defines the fundamental principle of Russian autocracy regarding the periphery as its desire for political and cultural integration of the periphery into the state. At the same time, the implementation of this principle forced the imperial authorities to seek other mechanisms to integrate outlying territories. The authors conclude that the experience of the Russian Empire demonstrates an inconsistency between state theory and practice. The periphery was not only an object of imperial policy, but also an agent in the development of the empire itself.

The Shift in the Lithuanian Approach towards the Russian Army, 1914–1915

During the Great War, the period 1914 to 1915 was one of the most intense stages of interactionby Lithuanian society with daily life of the war, and at the same time the most active stage inmilitary action in the future Lithuania. While many men were called up into the ranks of theImperial Russian army, most of the remaining population ended up under the military authorities,experienced the requisition of their personal property, and observed (at first in the rear)intense military movements to and fro. This article looks at how the change in the front line,and the successes and failures of the armies of the Romanov Empire, contributed to the changein the image of the Russian army in the Lithuanian discourse. Features of the change arerevealed in the article by analysing both the line taken by the official press during the initialperiod of the Great War, and the assessments of the Russian army that appeared in individualreflections (diaries and memoirs). It asks how the image of the Russian army changed duringthis period, and why. KEY WORDS: First World War, Imperial Russian army, army image, discourse, war propaganda,war representation, war reception.

Административная политика Российской империи в Казахской степи в первой половине XIX в.: поиск новых форм управления

Seizure of lands occupied by Kazakh tribes conducted by the Romanov Empire triggered the need to create adequate structures of the Russian administration to rule the country effectively. The first half of the 19th century witnessed the process of the Russian bureaucratic elite searching for an appropriate management model for the areas inhabited by the Kazakhs. A number of options for the design of the management structure were considered, ranging from the models functioning on the lands inhabited by nomadic tribes to new systems in need of verification. Finally, the process of administrative integration of the Kazakh Steppe finished in the 1860s.

Holy Rollers: Monasteries, Lamas, and the Unseen Transport of Chinese–Russian Trade, 1850–1911

AbstractThis article examines the roles of Mongolian monasteries and lamas in transportation between the Qing Chinese (1636–1911) and Russian Romanov (1613–1917) empires during the latter half of the nineteenth century. A series of treaties between 1858 and 1882 granted Russian subjects the right to trade in Mongolian territories under Qing sovereignty, and the resultant increase of Russian trade across Mongolia provided new wage-earning opportunities. Larger monasteries, with their access to pack animals and laborers, acted as brokers, while for poorer lamas haulage was one of the few sources of paid labor available in Mongolian territories, making working in transportation a strategy of survival for many Mongolian lamas. Mongolian porters provide a window on to how the broad processes of nineteenth-century imperialism in the Qing empire affected labor on the Sino–Russian frontier, and on to how imperialism was experienced in one of the most remote corners of the Qing empire.

Fedorova, Milla. Yankees in Petrograd, Bolsheviks in New York: America and Americans in Russian Literary Perception (review)

SEER, 92, 3, JULY 2014 518 literature does not reduce itself to the principle that ‘we are all the same’, a temptation that Tolstoi’s own polemical pronouncements might tend to affirm. Rather — and this is where the transnational becomes very handy indeed — Foster permits interpretation of Tolstoi as one whose notion of world literature affirms variety and difference rather than confining them to the strenuously concealed margins of a hegemonic view. In the end Foster’s engaging study makes a crucial point: that, far from being a monologist or solipsist or hegemonic universalist, Tolstoi developed an ever more nuanced recognition of the incredibly complex interplay of different influences on which any cultural product must depend. In this sense, Foster captures the slippery Tolstoi of War and Peace who argued so eloquently against viewing an event from one perspective, who claimed that events are created by reciprocal interaction in regard to which no one interaction can pretend to describe the event as a whole. To have returned this magnificently plural Tolstoi to us, as Foster has in lucid and mercifully jargon-free prose, is a substantial achievement. Clemson University Jeff Love Fedorova, Milla. Yankees in Petrograd, Bolsheviks in New York: America and Americans in Russian Literary Perception. Northern Illinois University Press, DeKalb, IL, 2013. xi + 229 pp. Appendices. Notes. Bibliography. Index. $49.00. With brief glimpses backward and forward, this book offers the first indepth study of Russian literary travelogues to America in the crucial years between the twilight of the Romanov empire and the triumph of Stalinism. That description is too narrow, however, to encompass what Fedorova actually addresses. She considers a wide swathe of materials, including fictional, poetic, essayistic and cinematic texts that depict, through Russian eyes, journeys to America and Russian-authored ‘reverse travelogues’ about American characters encountering the Soviet Union. Fedorova’s larger ambition, then, is to analyse what she describes as the Russian ‘American narrative’ in all its genres and with all its invariants and modifications in the context of Russian and Soviet cultural and technological rivalry with the United States. Fedorova’s analysis pursues two modes of approach. First, there is a synchronic account of three stages of development from pre-Revolutionary to early Soviet and Stalin-era travelogues to America. Briefly stated, there is a shift from idealistic populist encounters with an American utopia or dystopia to ideologically-driven depictions of a false paradise and capitalist hell followed later by more nuanced accounts of the United States as an imperfect REVIEWS 519 model society. Each period is epitomised by several prominent writers. The harsh disillusionment of Korolenko and Gor´kii yields to the hyperbolic denunciations of Esenin and Maiakovskii succeeded by the anecdotal and factual cross-country accounts by Pil´niak and Il´f and Petrov. Second, Fedorova launches a diachronic argument that links all three periods within a larger pattern of recurrent motifs and fixed archetypes that is said to constitute Russia’s ‘American narrative’. In this regard, an initial focus on a select set of influential literary travelogues and their dialogic relationship to one another gradually is subsumed within a more mythopoeic construct — namely, a stable Russian ‘chronotype’ of America. The scholarship that informs this study is comprehensive with regard to both primary and secondary sources. With rare exceptions, the primary texts under close scrutiny are not readily available for classroom use nor are they ‘major’ enough to figure in most academic curricula. Fedorova’s discussion lends depth to underappreciated works by Korolenko, Esenin, Pil´niak and Marietta Shaginian; she also draws attention to valuable recent Russian publications on the topic by Etkind (2001) and Arustamova (2009). Along the way, there are some surprising insights such as the differential treatment of blacks and native Americans and the recurrent theme of the ‘arrested voice’ of the monolingual Russian observer who goes unheard and ‘tongueless’ in America. Chapter five provides an interesting addendum with its enriching discussion of cinematic (Kuleshov’s Mr. West) and poetic (Marshak’s Mister Tvister) ‘reverse travelogues’ depicting fictional American travellers in the USSR. The conclusion sketches all too briefly a post-Soviet epilogue in which the Russians’ ‘otherworldly’ image of America persists; a sequel volume would be most...

How insulted religious feelings turned into pogroms: Lithuania in 1900

This article is devoted to a single wave of anti-Jewish violence in Lithuania which spread through northern Lithuania during the first half of the summer of 1900. It claims that specific incidents that took place during the first half of 1900 at Konstantinovo (news of an allegedly kidnapped girl, the so-called Jewish “procession” and a domestic dispute between Jews and the priest's workmen) were among the most important reasons for the pogroms. At the same time, it is clear that there were some more general (structural) changes in this society which facilitated the occurrence of violence (changes in the economy, growing Lithuanian nationalism, antisemitic tendencies, and pogroms in the south of the Romanov empire in the early 1880s, because they established the idea that violence against Jews was somehow legitimate). Peasants in the Panevėžys and Šiauliai districts took up violence against Jews because, as they understood it, an offence had been committed which no one else (especially the authorities) would put right and so Jews would go unpunished. Uncontrolled rumours ruled the mobs. Since Catholic peasant religious sentiments had been affected the most, it was common religious identity that drew people into a temporary community of action. When Jews were beaten in public spaces, the doors and windows of their houses smashed, the Jews were not only being punished for their alleged offences, but being shown the clearly delineated boundaries within the local social hierarchy. In public life, Jews were supposed to submit to the monopoly of power enjoyed by the Catholic community. Thus, this wave of anti-Jewish violence essentially differs from the deadly pogroms that took place in the early twentieth century in other gubernias of the Jewish Pale of Settlement.

Spaces of Entanglement

Spaces of Entanglement Andreas Kappeler (bio) The imperial turn, which for the past 25 years has directed the attention of historians toward empires, may have lost its first impetus, but as the journals Ab Imperio and Kritika as well as recent collective volumes and research projects have shown, it is by no means spent. The collapse of the Soviet Union initially revived interest in Edward Gibbon's question about "the decline and fall" of empires, but "imperiology" has since passed from explaining the breakdown of empires to asking not why they collapsed but how they survived for centuries, how they were organized and structured, and how imperial rule was established and maintained. Scholars have abandoned the metaphor of the "prison of peoples" for a more affirmative position that stresses the relatively peaceful coexistence of diverse peoples and societies under the rule of one dynasty, in contrast to the murderous history of the nation-state. This has led to various comparative projects, monographs, and collective volumes. Studies that examine the Romanov and Ottoman empires include Dominic Lieven's pioneering book as well as comparative projects and collective volumes edited by Alexei Miller, Alfred Rieber, and Kimitaka Matsuzato.1 These and other studies are mostly not comparative in the strict sense, however, but instead juxtapose chapters or articles on each of two or more empires and attempt a comparison only in the introduction and conclusion. Thus the potential of comparative history is far from exhausted. The most recent comparative study is the ambitious and stimulating Empires in World History by Jane Burbank and Frederick Cooper. It encompasses a very long period from the ancient Roman and Chinese empires to the 20th century, including the Ottoman and Romanov empires, and places world history into an imperial framework: "Empires in the nineteenth and twentieth centuries, as in [End Page 477] the sixteenth, existed in relation to each other." Questions of "imperial intersections," competition, and imitation are thus included.2 By adopting this orientation, the work reflects a new trend in "imperiology" that asks about contacts and interactions between empires. This new direction is connected with a trend in historical sciences toward cultural transfers, transnational history, histoire croisée, and shared or entangled history. The first such studies concerned the interactions between the Western maritime empires and between France and Germany; later ones examined those between Germany and Poland and between Germany and Russia (for example, the special issue of Kritika on Germany and Russia in the first half of the 20th century).3 The histoire croisée of the Russians and Ottomans has been neglected so far, despite its importance for both empires. It lasted at least five centuries, longer than the relations Russia had with any other empire. Their interactions were shaped initially by a competition for the heritage of the Byzantine and Mongol empires and by a military, political, and cultural preponderance of the Ottomans. During the 18th century, the balance of power was reversed and the relationship was characterized by numerous wars, most of them ending with Russian victories. One recent publication includes six contributions on the Ottoman Empire, six on the Russian Empire, and one (by Marsha Siefert) comparing communications in both empires. Although the book's title is Comparing Empires, the subtitle is about "encounters and transfers." The interactions concern, however, mainly transfers from Western Europe to the Ottoman and Romanov empires; direct Russo-Ottoman entanglements are treated only sporadically.4 In 2010, the first collective volume devoted to the entangled history of the Russian Empire with other empires was published. It is focused on cultural transfers from the West European empires to Russia, considered here as a European "imperium inter pares." Only two articles touch on the Ottoman dimension. Vladimir Bobrovnikov compares the experiences of Russia in the Caucasus and of France in Algeria—two regions, parts of which had formerly been under Ottoman rule—and looks for interactions between the two colonial powers as well as borrowings from the Ottomans. A case study on Bessarabia [End Page 478] by Andrei Kushko and Victor Taki deals directly with the Russo-Ottoman entanglement in the border region of Bessarabia.5 Whether the Ottoman Empire, too, was an "imperium inter...

The Romanov Empire 1613-1917: Autocracy and Opposition. Brief Histories by Alan Wood (review)

552 SEER, 88, 3, JULY 20I0 womanly virtues seemed to be a decisive force both in history and in revolu tionary struggles against nature and savagery' (p. 215). The final case study is byMichaela Pohl, who draws on both archival and oral history research to reassess how voluntary setders, exiled national populations and indigenous people experienced inter-communal relations and constructed social identities in the Kazakh 'Virgin Lands' (tseliny)in the 1950s and afterwards. In his concluding chapter, Alfred J. Rieber reflects on the volume's core themes, returning, in the lightof the case studies, to questions raised earlier concerning continuity and change, and presenting some intriguing and suggestive ideas on the 'paradoxes' of Russian colonization (p. 267), especially the 'tension between Utopian visions and dystopian results, and the ambiguity of the civilizing mission' (pp. 267-68). This volume isnot a comprehensive history ofRussian colonization (there is littiehere on the eighteenth century, on migrations towards the north or west, on urban settiement, or on non-Russian mobility within the empire), but itsgeographical and chronological scope is still marvellously wide, and it raises many crucial questions and offersa series ofwell-researched, imagina tive and sensitive analyses of settlement in different periods and places. It splendidly achieves itsgoal 'to showcase' (p. 6) the best and most innovative recent scholarship in thisfield. Its studies ofRussian colonization, moreover, encompass many other themes central toRussia's political, economic, social and cultural development. The volume is to be unreservedly recommended to all readers interested inRussian and Eurasian history or in comparative histories of empire, the frontier,migration and settlement. School of History Universityof Nottingham Nick Baron Wood, Alan. The Romanov Empire 1613?1917: Autocracy and Opposition. Brief Histories. Hodder Arnold, London, 2007. xvii + 425 pp. Maps. Figures. Tables. Notes. Select bibliography. Index. ?19.99 (paperback). The Romanov Empire 1613-1917 represents a formidable effort to provide an accurate and well argued account of the history of theRomanov dynasty and the imperial period in Russian history. Wood's well compressed account emphasizes both the period between the reigns ofTsars Mikhail Fedorovich and Nicholas II, but also offersan extensive introduction which encompasses themost importantmoments of early Russian statehood. The book isorganized in twelve chapters. The first two, entided 'Land and Peoples', and 'Kievan, Mongol and earlyMuscovite Russia', present useful statistical data on theRussian state and 'Russianness' in general, with com parisons drawn between present-day and Imperial Russia. This is followed by an attempt, which is repeated regularly throughout this volume, to tackle some of the period stereotypes relating toKievan Rus' and beyond, which features an interesting interpretation of theMongol invasion. Chapters three and four continue the quest, taking the reader through theTime ofTroubles and the election of the firstRomanov Tsar to the reign of Peter theGreat. REVIEWS 553 The description of Peter's reign, along with an account of theTsar's reforms, includes a vivid account of the latter'sEuropean voyages. The next section of three chapters relates solely to the period of 'palace revolutions', itsmonarchs and key figures.Wood concludes his portrayal of the 'revolutionary' period in 1762, focusingmainly on the reigns ofCatherine I, Anna, Elizabeth and Peter III, and then incorporates the coup against Pavel I in 1801 and theDecembrist revolt in 1825.His material covers a wide range of issues, from foreign policy to the economy and society.Highlights of this section areWood's coverage of the reign of Catherine theGreat and his analysis of the anti-autocratic coup against Nicholas I. Chapters eight, nine and ten address the emergence and development of Russian liberal thought against the background of the deeds ofNicholas I, Alexander II and Alexander III. Examining various levels of 'oppression' extant under the rule of the 'Gendarme ofEurope' and Russia's defeat in the Crimean War, Wood moves on to the reforms and transformations brought forward during the reign of Alexander II, presenting us with an intriguing listof possible reasons and preconditions related to the 1861 emancipation of the serfs. The section concludes with a detailed investigation of the rise of revolutionary thought within Russian society in the second half of the nineteenth century,with an emphasis on industrialization, foreign affairs and 'nationalism'. The two concluding chapters represent thefinal two...

Genocide before the Holocaust

There is an appalling symmetry to the many instances of genocide that the late nineteenth- and early twentieth-century world witnessed. In the wake of the breakup of the Hapsburg, Ottoman and Romanov empires, minority populations throughout those lands were persecuted, expelled and eliminated. The reason for the deplorable decimations of communities - Jews in Imperial Russia and Ukraine; Ottoman Assyrians, Armenians and Muslims from the Caucasus and Balkans - was, Cathie Carmichael contends, located in the very roots of the new nation-states arising from the imperial rubble. The question of who should be included in the nation - and which groups were now to be deemed 'suspect' or 'alien' - was one that preoccupied and divided Europe long before the Holocaust. Examining all the major episodes of ethnic cleansing in Europe up until 1941, Carmichael shows how hotbeds of nationalism, racism and developmentalism resulted in devastating manifestations of genocidal ideology. Dramatic, perceptive and poignant, this is the story of disppearing civilizations - precursors to one of humanity's worst atrocities, and part of the legacy of genocide in the modern world. Cathie Carmichael is Senior Lecturer in Modern European History at the University of East Anglia. Her previous books include 'Ethnic Cleansing in the Balkans', 'Language and Nationalism in Europe', and 'Slovenia and the Slovenes'.

Прощание с имперским нарративом?

SUMMARY: Alexander Smolenchuk’s review is devoted to the volume Western Borderlands of the Russian Empire and Alexei Miller’s The Romanov Empire and Nationalism . He engages the representation of the Byelorussian dimension of history in these works. Smolenchuk interprets the appearance of these works both as part of the Russian search for a new identity in a new historical era and as the revision of historiographic conventions of Russian historical writing, which was heretofore predominantly centered on political history. While praising the volumes for their departure from the conventional narrative of Polish-Russian struggle in the western borderlands, Smolenchuk criticizes this new approach for altogether abandoning the notion of national narrative in historical analysis. He disagrees with Alexei Miller’s perspective on national narratives as inherently incapable of capturing the diversity of historical actors and space of historical experience. Focusing on the volume on western borderlands of the Russian Empire, Smolenchuk notes that the history of Byelorussian national movement and process of nation-formation was not appropriately treated in the volume for its alleged underdevelopment. He states that the fact of underdevelopment does not eliminate the necessity to introduce the Byelorussian dimension as part of reconstructing the phenomenon of imperial diversity. Furthermore, Smolenchuk criticizes the volume on several points: for the chronologically broad and uncritical application of the self-descriptive category of Ruthenians with respect to the local population of the borderlands; overestimating the degree of modernity of Polish national identity in the eighteenth and first half of the nineteenth centuries; overlooking the assimilatory practices toward the Byelorussian peasants during the reign of Catherine II; and under-appreciating the persistence of non-ethnic regional identities in the borderlands. In conclusion Smolenchuk contends that the volume failed to incorporate the Byelorussian perspective on the manifold historical experience of western borderlands, for which Byelorussian historians are also to blame, for they are not sufficiently present in international scholarly exchanges and their scholarship is not as advanced and free as the scholarship of their Ukrainian and Lithuanian neighbors.

The Romanov Empire, 1613-1917: autocracy and opposition

The Russian dynasty of the Romanov tsars was born in 1613 during an era of intense civil strife with the coronation of Mikhail Fedorivch Romanov; it was destroyed in the revolutionary turmoil of 1917. In the intervening three centuries the relatively small, land-locked kingdom of Muscovy grew into the world's largest land empire. Yet size was no protection for the dynasty, and throughout the eighteenth and nineteenth centuries there developed a conflicting triangular relationship which had, at its apex, the tsarist autocratic government and, at the other two angles, the separate focuses of mass popular opinion and intellectual dissent. These three elements were in a state of almost continuous tension, mutual antagonism and misunderstanding. As the imperial system of government increased in power, its political, social and economic policies generated the seeds of opposition that eventually led to its distruction. This is the first modern account devoted to an investigation of the Romanov Empire from its inception to its demise. It combines a fascinating study of the personalities and politics of individual autocrats, such as Peter the Great, with an examination of the multifarious challenges to the imperial state the governed and misgoverned.

Католики, мусульмане и иудеи Российской империи в последней четверти XVIII – XX вв по А. К. Тихонов (review)

502 Рецензии/Reviews Darius STALIŪNAS А. К. Тихонов. Католики, мусульмане и иудеи Россий- ской империи в последней чет- верти XVIII – XX вв. Санкт- Петeрбург: Издательство Санкт- Петербургского университета, 2007. 356 pp. ISBN: 978-5-28804293 -5.1 The Soviet period was not a favorable time for the research of the confessional policies of the Russian Empire, not only because atheism was propagated and religiousness was considered to be a sort of a throwback, but also because of the ideology of “a friendship of nations ” that was propagated in the country. Confessional and language policies were not a priority for the Soviet government, because in researching these problems it could have been revealed that a certain “ethnic hierarchy”2 had existed in the Romanov empire, which would have clearly went against the claim about the “eternal” friendship of Russians and other nationalities of other Soviet republics. The national policy of the nineteenth century Imperial Russia was not a priority theme in Western historiography during the Cold War, just as it was not one in the Soviet Union. In order for bigger changes to occur in historiography, the collapse of the Soviet Union and the entire Soviet block was needed, though changes in Western historiography occurred a bit earlier, around the 1970s and beginning of the 1980s, when the Russo-centric approach towards Imperial Russia was rejected . During the last 20 years, the multi-ethnic and multi-confessional character of the Romanov Empire enjoyed such an amount of attention from researchers that sometimes it may appear that during such a short period more books and articles were devoted to this topic than during all the previous years. One of them is the book by Andrei Tikhonov, which discusses the confessional policy of the imperial government from the view of the three largest non-Orthodox confessions – Catholicism, Judaism, and Islam. One may note at once that the book’s author does not even try to 1 Original version was published in: Pinkas. Annual of Culture and History of East European Jewry. Vilnius: Žara, 2008. Vol. II. Pp. 172-180. “Pinkas” is published by the Centre for Studies of the Culture and History of East European Jews (Vilnius, http:// www.jewishstudies.lt). 2 The “ethnic hierarchy” of Imperial Russia has been shrewdly described by Andreas Kappeler: А. Kappeler. Mazepintsy, malorossy, khokhly: ukraintsy v etnicheskoi ierarkhii Rossiiskoi imperii //A. I. Miller, V. F. Reprintsev, B. N. Floria (Eds.). Rossiia – Ukraina: istoriia vzaimootnoshenii. Moscow, 1997. Pp. 125-144. 503 Ab Imperio, 3/2008 Most of the work is based on references to various laws and archival sources, chosen randomly and recounted without any analysis for a length of several pages (as are, incidentally, the quotations from personal letters or diaries or the publications of other researchers, e.g., pp. 7-9). We will focus most of our attention in this review on how Tikhonov interprets the “Jewish Question”, but first we will discuss briefly the description of imperial policy regarding the Catholic Church in this book. This discussion is not consistent, and the subjects chosen are often not the most important, though it could not be otherwise, as the author uses random documents found in the Russian state history archives and makes hardly any use of the available scientific literature . For this reason, we find here strange interpretations, for example the claim that “the most important question of the 1830-1831 Uprising was the defense of Catholicism” (P. 92). The memoirs of Imperial Russia’s Minister of War Dmitrii Miliutin are the basis for the description of the 1863-1864 Uprising and its goals (Pp. 161-162). The author’s main thesis about Russian policy towards Catholicism is not very surprising either: the imperial government did not meddle in the “internal” life of Catholics and other non-Orthodox believers, it just include this book into the existing discourse on multi-confessionalism in Imperial Russia: it is just in the footnotes of the introduction that some works on this topic are mentioned , however their selection is rather haphazard. Just as importantly , the author does not even attempt to argue with the research of other historians and usually simply disregards it (even that mentioned in the footnotes at the beginning of the book). This, by the way, goes not only for Western, but for Russian historiography, as well as...

Mercy, Punishment, and Law: The Qualities of Justice at Township Courts

Mercy is connected both to power and to grace, as Shakespeare and Foucault, as well as historians of England and Russia, remind us. (1) The diminishment or elimination of punishment--assigned by convention, statute law, or judicial procedure--enhances majesty of forgiver. The person, institution, or process that is able to reduce suffering legitimately imposed thereby demonstrates superior moral authority and partakes of divine. The notion that political dominion in early modern Europe, including Russia, was buttressed by sovereign's irregular grants of is accepted generally by scholars. What can an exploration of tell us when we turn to a later period--the reforming Romanov empire--and when we look not just at rulers but at lowly peasant judges? Did power to attenuate legal punishment extend beyond autocrat's dispensations? Was forgiveness expressed in multitudinous judgments made at township courts? Did peasant patriarchs, empowered as judges in Russia's countryside, enhance their personal authority by dispensing mercy? I address these questions by examining sentences and decisions at township courts of central and northern Russia made from 1905 to 1917. I begin by setting out procedures and legal rules applying at township courts. I then look at kinds of sentences judges imposed and at possible ways that judges could respond to particulars of cases. I consider as measures of uniform, impersonal, not necessarily merciful practice promptness with which sentences were fulfilled in different kinds of cases. Carrying out sentences was crucial to functioning of legal system and, at same time, an arena where local authorities might exercise leniency. For a closer look at intersection between local and imperial justice in matter of mercy, I examine how Romanovs' tercentenary amnesty was engaged by township authorities and judges. Finally, I turn to cases heard during World War I, which, in my view, illuminate a kind of systemic humanity--but not a regime of personalized authority--characteristic of Russian peasant judges a half-century after court reforms of 860s. (2) Let me clarify extent and limits of my argument. I do not represent the here as an abstraction, an ideal system, or as a distinctive type of governance, present or absent in Russia. This article does not set autocracy and rule of law in opposition to each other, even though this was how many reformers at time represented their political combat. Instead, I look at imperial law--not the law--in practice, as part of a system of really existing governance, activated in rural areas by individuals who served as officials of their polity. My concern here is with ways local authorities--peasant judges, clerks, township and village leaders--applied laws in sentencing convicted people for a variety of misdemeanors. The discretionary powers of judges over sentences were defined by empire's legislation. Rural judges' mercy was contained within a legal framework and as such did not refer to an overarching justice outside and above legal system. When we turn from Shakespeare's mightiest (3) to mundane, takes on a merely human face and sends a different kind of message to its recipients. Peasant judges' pragmatic adjustments to burdens of rural people's lives may have remained invisible to elite contemporaries, but they nonetheless enhanced authority of legal process in everyday life. To us, an exploration of how judges used their discretionary powers displays realistic legalism practiced in Russian countryside in early 20th century. The Powers of Peasant Judges We turn first to context of peasant jurisprudence. The township courts can be considered most typical--in sense of most used--legal instance of empire. In early 20th century (and before), there were far more township courts than circuit courts or justices of peace and many more cases heard at township courts than at any other instance. …

Culture, Nation and Identity: The Ukrainian-Russian Encounter, 1600-1945 by A. s> Kappeler Z. E. Kohut F. E. Sysyn , M. von Hagen (review)

354 SEER, 82, 2, 2004 of such fine quality dedicated to the history of a European people that even until now largelyremainsan 'unexpected nation' to the West. LucyCavendish College L. V. CHARIPOVA University ofCambridge Kappeler, A., Kohut, Z. E., Sysyn, F. E. and von Hagen, M. (eds). Culture, NationandIdentity: The Ukrainian-Russian Encounter, I600-I945. Canadian Institute of Ukrainian Studies Press, Edmonton and Toronto, 2003. xiv + 382 pp. Notes. $24.95 (paperback). THE above volume collects together the papers from three conferences organizedin New Yorkand Cologne in 1994-95. Most show evidence of more recent revision and readerscan be assuredof a high qualitythroughout. The vast majorityof contributorsalso stickclosely to the general theme. There are sixteen contributions in all. In the first section ('The Early Modern Period'),Viktor Zhivov, David Frick,Zenon Kohut, Hans-Joachim Torke and Frank Sysyn address the complicated interaction of Ruthenian, East Slavic and 'Commonwealth' identities in the two centurieseither side of I654. All provide a rich discussion of rapidly changing identities, pronouns and place names; and are appropriatelycounterfactual rather than teleological . The readeris not subjectedto the assumptionof an existing or eventual Ukrainian identity as manifest destiny. Most also feed off David Frick'sapt comment that 'at least for some of the Ruthenian elite, mental geographies changed more slowly than, and at times in directions somewhat different from, political realities'(p. 20). In parttwo ('The ImperialPeriod'),Olga Andriewsky'sessayon the 'Failure of the "Little Russian Solution"' provides an intriguing foretaste of her forthcoming book. Andreas Kappeler discussesethnic hierarchies;Christine Worobec looks at the Russian and Ukrainian peasantries. Serhy Yekelchyk provides another of his stimulating essays in cultural studies by looking at school history texts in the nineteenth century. Paul Bushkovitchwidens the context: answeringthe question 'Whatis Russia?'by arguingthat the empire's state-centredidentitypolitics meant that even the East Slavic 'ethnic' identity was relatively underdeveloped. George Grabowicz argues that the Kotliarevshchyna embodied more than the burlesque. Its characteristicUkrainian strategycombining subtle imperial subversionand Aesopic self-assertioncan also be found in writersas seemingly 'imperial'(i.e. Soviet)as PavloTychyna. In the third section ('The Twentieth Century'), Oleh Ilnytzkyj gives a provocative analysis of the crucial contest between Russian and Ukrainian 'high cultures'at the turn of the century, and assertsthat 'among Ukrainians, the death of the all-Russian idea, as an idea, occurred long before i99I' (p. 304) as early as the I9IOS in fact. Although Ilnytzkyj cites many Ukrainian Modernists writing convincingly to this effect, this remains an untested proposition at the level of mass social consciousness. Yuri Shapoval writes on 'The GPU-NKVD as an Instrument of Counter-Ukrainization in the I920S and I930s': that is, on the institutionalpluralismwhich allowed one section of the Bolshevik elite to oppose the Ukrainization policy from its REVIEWS 355 inception. Shapoval's Ukrainian colleague StanislavKulchytskydiscussesthe debates surrounding the establishment of the Ukrainian SSR. Dieter Pohl discussesthe differentialimpact German occupation had on Ukrainians and Russians in I941-43; and Mark von Hagen argues the case that the First WorldWardecisivelyaccelerated the maturationof the ethnic question in the Romanov empire. How well does all of this fit together? The declared general theme of the volume is the study of 'the construction, destruction, and reformulation of identities among Russians and Ukrainians of all social origins'; not just as 'Ukrainians'and 'Russians',but as actual or potential bearersof other selves, including past '"all-Russian"and East Slavic identities' (p. ix). A related aim is therefore to demonstrate how the Ukrainian idea has shaped Russian identityjust as much as that of its own targetaudience. As such, the collection succeeds admirably. This is an unusually coherent and always interesting volume, of greatvalue to historiansand studentsof national identityalike. School ofSlavonic andEastEuropean Studies ANDREW WILSON University College London Kokkonen, Jukka. Rajaseutu liikkeessd. Kainuun ja PielisenKadalanasukkaiden kontaktit, Venajan Kagalaan kreivin ajasta sarkasotaan (I650-I7 I2). Bibliotheca Historica, 79. SuomalaisenKirjallisuudenSeura,Helsinki, 2002. 439 pp. Maps. Illustrations. Tables. Notes. Appendices. Bibliography. Index. Priceunknown. THE bordercountrybetween Sweden-Finlandand Russiain the earlymodern period was a thinly populated area, only loosely supervised by central governments on both sides. There were sporadic border markers but the actual frontierwas vague and virtuallyuncontrolled.People and goods moved freelyin both directions,sometimeslegally, sometimesnot, and a considerable trade built up, especially since...

Rajaseutu liikkeessä: Kainuun ja Pielisen Karjalan asukkaiden kontaktit, Venäjän Karjalaan kreivin ajasta sarkasotaan (1650-1712) by Jukka Kokkonen (review)

REVIEWS 355 inception. Shapoval's Ukrainian colleague StanislavKulchytskydiscussesthe debates surrounding the establishment of the Ukrainian SSR. Dieter Pohl discussesthe differentialimpact German occupation had on Ukrainians and Russians in I941-43; and Mark von Hagen argues the case that the First WorldWardecisivelyaccelerated the maturationof the ethnic question in the Romanov empire. How well does all of this fit together? The declared general theme of the volume is the study of 'the construction, destruction, and reformulation of identities among Russians and Ukrainians of all social origins'; not just as 'Ukrainians'and 'Russians',but as actual or potential bearersof other selves, including past '"all-Russian"and East Slavic identities' (p. ix). A related aim is therefore to demonstrate how the Ukrainian idea has shaped Russian identityjust as much as that of its own targetaudience. As such, the collection succeeds admirably. This is an unusually coherent and always interesting volume, of greatvalue to historiansand studentsof national identityalike. School ofSlavonic andEastEuropean Studies ANDREW WILSON University College London Kokkonen, Jukka. Rajaseutu liikkeessd. Kainuun ja PielisenKadalanasukkaiden kontaktit, Venajan Kagalaan kreivin ajasta sarkasotaan (I650-I7 I2). Bibliotheca Historica, 79. SuomalaisenKirjallisuudenSeura,Helsinki, 2002. 439 pp. Maps. Illustrations. Tables. Notes. Appendices. Bibliography. Index. Priceunknown. THE bordercountrybetween Sweden-Finlandand Russiain the earlymodern period was a thinly populated area, only loosely supervised by central governments on both sides. There were sporadic border markers but the actual frontierwas vague and virtuallyuncontrolled.People and goods moved freelyin both directions,sometimeslegally, sometimesnot, and a considerable trade built up, especially since the English and Dutch tradershad opened the northernsea route into Russiaduringthe sixteenthcentury.On the one hand, the Swedish monarchs aspired to get control of this trade: that was the rationalizationforthe endemic warfareaimed atpushingthebordereastwards that culminated in the treaty of Stolbova in I6I 7. After that, except for the briefhostilitiesof the war of I656-58, the borderwas at peace until the Great Northern war began in I 700, and even then truces prevailed until I 712. On the other hand, both governments and the local inhabitants valued the maintenance of peaceful intercourse which greatly improved the living standardsof the inhabitants,and enabled them to pay rentsand taxes on their farmsand on the goods passing through, while relievingboth governments of any need to maintain a militaryestablishmentin such a remote and difficult terrain. Jukka Kokkonen has produced a substantial piece of archive based research, made possible by a considerable survivalof administrativerecords and accounts,combined with evidence drawnfromthe extensivecourtrecords from the Finnish side of the border. It is aimed at exploring four areas of interest:the intercoursebetween the inhabitantsof the two sidesof the border, 356 SEER, 82, 2, 2004 theinstitutions thatdeveloped forpreserving crossborderpeace,evenintimes when the two rulerswere formallyat war, the natureand extent of the legitimate cross-bordertrade, and the developmentof a grey area of technicallyillegal,uncontrolled directtradingbetweenthepeasantsandthe bagmenandpedlarswhopassedthroughthearea.Itwasa standing ambition oftheSwedishmonarchy toconfineallsuchtradetothechartered townsand theirmarkets, whereit couldbe controlled andtaxed,whiletheconstantand successful aimofthepeasants wastoevadesuchcontrols. The first section of Kokkonen'sbook is focusedon the creationand maintenanceof borderpeacein timesof formalwarbetweengovernments. Therewasa wellestablished tradition ofthisontheSwedishside,goingback to the middle ages on its westernborderswith Denmark-Norway. The respectivegovernments soughtto discourageit, but the local communities werebeyondcontroland regularly practisedit. It was duringthe sixteenth centurythatitbegantobe appliedtothefarnorth-eastern border.Intheory, ideologywasunfavourable, sincein officialSwedishpropaganda theRussian wasa barbarous schismatic andregardedas the 'eternalenemy'.Inpractice thisseemsto havebeenoverlooked andtradeandintercourse flourished over the border. This was stimulatedin the later sixteenthcenturyby the establishment of the big SolevetskiiMonasteryon the White Sea, which becameamajorcommercial establishment whosesalttrade,forexample,had a nearmonopolyof supplyto thewholeregion.So, whenhostilities opened betweenthegovernments, thelocalinhabitants wouldsendtrusteddelegates acrossthebordertonegotiate,ineffect,non-aggression pacts,withthefurther guaranteethat if it was knownmilitaryactionwas being contemplated by eitherside,sufficient advancewarningwouldbe givento movepeopleand goodsintosafety.The smoothworkingof thesystemstronglysuggests it was perceivedas servingthe bestinterestsof allparties,so thatherethe central governments too acceptedthepractice.Evenreligionwasnotallowedto get in the way. The inhabitantsof the provincesannexedby Swedenwere Orthodox,butthetreatiesprovidedthattheycouldcontinuetopractisetheir faith,andindeedtheywereforbidden toleave.Despitethedangers ofreligious pollutionandtheencouragement of immigration by Lutherans, the Swedish crownvalueditsnewsubjects aspotentialtax-payers, ratherthanschismatics tobeconverted orexpelled.Thewholepicturepresented byKokkonen seems tosuggesttheforceofpragmatism overofficial policieseveninanageoffaith. The secondpartof the workseeksto describetheworkingof the official crossbordertrade,theestablishment of stapletownsandmarkets, andusing the taxationand courtrecordsit is possibleto give someimpression of the number of tradersand the type and extent of the trade. Some of the consequences aresurprising, forexample,howitdeveloped monetarization in an otherwiseremoteborderarea.Becauseof Russiandemandfor copper currency, ofwhichtheSwedeshadanabundance intheseventeenth century, money accumulated in the area. Court records show...

Between Local and Inter-Imperial: Russian Imperial History in Search of Scope and Paradigm

When the study is finally written of how the history of the Romanov empire as a polyethnic state was investigated at the end of the 20th and the beginning of the 21st centuries, its author will have no trouble identifying the early 1990s as the boundary between two substantially different stages.