Tsarist Policy Research Articles

The tsarist policy of russification of education and the “unfavorable realities” in Bessarabia (second half of the 19th century)

The article reveals the process of radical transformation of the education system in Bessarabia in the second half of the nineteenth century, as a result of the tightening of the national policy of the Russian Empire and the intensification of the national-cultural Russification of the non-Russian peoples, the attempts of the Czarist authorities to modernize and homogenize the multinational Russian Empire, according to the model of European states. The author highlights two stages of the policy of Russification of education in Bessarabia. The first stage – years 1866-1872 – is characterized by the undermining of Romanian and mixed parochial primary schools (Romanian-Russian), the prohibition of teaching Romanian language at the regional gymnasium, theological seminary, county schools, etc, by creating a Russian primary and secondary education system in Bessarabia. The second stage – years 1873-1900 – is characterized by the attempt to radically transform the linguistic and cultural realities of the Bessarabian villages, causing the exponential growth of the number of Russian schools in rural areas, mass learning of the Russian language by the Romanian peasants in Bessarabia, the imposition of the Russian language not only in state institutions, but also in the privacy of families. The discussions in this regard within the Committee of Ministers of the Russian Empire highlighted the following dilemma: either the application of force to boost the policy of Russification, or the continuation of the policy of gradual Russification.Understanding the impasse that the Russian Empire would have entered, the authorities finally decided to achieve the goals of the policy of russification of the Romanians in Bessarabia, not through repressive methods, but „gradually and without violence”.

The attitude of the tsarist authorities towards railway – consequences for the Polish lands (until 1879). Jan Gottlieb Bloch’s “new” perspective

The article presents and analyses Jan Gottlieb Bloch’s views on the influence of tsarist rule on the development of the railway network in the Polish lands under Russian rule1 (up to 1879). The first part of the study is devoted to showing, in general, the tsars’ changing attitude towards the construction of railways in the Russian Empire. The specifics and conditions of railway construction in the Kingdom of Poland are presented. Bloch’s views and research results on the influence of the Russian authorities on the shape of the railway network in the Polish lands are then presented. Iron road projects submitted to the Russian authorities by domestic and foreign entrepreneurs, which did not receive approval, are listed and described. Thus, a picture emerges of “missed opportunities” – railway lines that would have been built had it not been for the specific policy of the Russian authorities. The conclusions of Bloch’s research do not contradict the common view in the literature on the negative influence of the tsarist authorities on the development of railways in the Polish lands under the Russian partition. Bloch’s research, however, goes a step further – it shows a measurable picture of the losses caused by the tsarist policy of a “railway desert”, particularly referring to Polish lands.

Вопросы завоевания и ликвидации Гарабагского ханства в современной историографии

The article provides a historiographical analysis of the issues of the conquest and dissolution of the Garabagh Khanate in the works of modern researchers. The strategic position of the Garabagh Khanate and the presence of five melikdoms on its territory contributed to the substantiation in modern historiography of the significance of the Garabagh Khanate in Tsarist policy towards the South Caucausus, and the variety of ways to implement Russia’s aggressive plans for the Garabagh Khanate. In the studies, there is a common opinion about the forced signing of the Kurakchay Treaty by the Garabagh ruler. The consideration by the authors of the conditions of the Kurakchay treaty and the dissolution of the Garabagh Khanate became an image of the Russian government’s policy focus. A kind of culmination of the latter was the resettlement policy of tsarism. Ethno-demographic changes in Garabagh as a result of Tsarist resettlement policy, which suggests the strategic importance of this region to Russia, made it possible to observe shared elements in the opinions. There is a general consensus among most researchers regarding the goals of this Policy aimed at increasing the number of Armenians in Garabagh to create a stronghold of Christianity. The works by modern historians considered in the article, in turn, have revealed a new approach to this subject matter, free of opportunistic concepts, and brought to tight the essence of Russias policy in the Garabagh Khanate, that Russia used all methods available to conquer this region and the South Caucasus, which has remained Russia’s center of interest.

ТЕМА КОЛОНИЗАЦИИ В РОМАНЕ КЕДРА МИТРЕЯ «ТЯЖКОЕ ИГО»

This article is devoted to the problem of internal colonization of the north of Udmurtia on the example of Kedra Mitrey’s anti-church novel “Heavy Yoke”. Kedra Mitrey (Dmitry Ivanovitch Korepanov, 1892–1949) depicts the process of Christianization as one of the main instruments in the colonization of the Udmurts in the 19th century. Local residents adopt the skills of land cultivation from Russian settlers. Udmurts and Russians form interethnic families. The Udmurt peasant Dangyr and the Russian priest Ilariy are key characters in the novel. Dangyr has a negative attitude towards the construction of a new second church, since Ilariy uses most of the resources for personal selfish purposes. At the same time, Dangyr is drawn to reading and writing, without renouncing the pagan faith, he is baptized and learns the Russian language at a church school. The author of the novel sympathizes with Dangyr, but the priest Ilariy, conceived as a negative character, begins to reveal himself as a complex and contradictory figure. To fulfill his Orthodox mission, Ilariy learns the Udmurt language, gets acquainted with the faith and customs of the local population, and temporarily exempts baptized peasants from paying taxes. According to Kedra Mitrey, integration into the Russian space is a great boon for the Udmurts, but the tsarist policy, aimed at forcible Christianization and justifying the arbitrariness of local officials, most often turns into evil and becomes a ‘heavy yoke’ for the people.

Repression of Bessarabian Bulgarians by Russian Authorities During World War I (1914–1917)

Based on the original documentary material collected by the author in the National Archives of the Republic of Moldova, an attempt has been made to investigate some unknown aspects of the struggle of Bessarabian Bulgarians against the tsarist policy of assimilation during the First World War. At the beginning of the 20th century, the Bulgarians ranked fifth in terms of population in Bessarabia – a province annexed to the Russian Empire in 1812. In all these years, they preserved their language, culture, and national traditions, transforming the Alexander III Boys’ Gymnasium in Bolgrad into a true centre of national culture. Many Bessarabian Bulgarians played an important role in the history of Bulgaria, holding positions of responsibility in the Bulgarian state. Some of them were the Prime Minister of Bulgaria Aleksandar Malinov, the Minister of War Danail Nikolaev, the Mayor of Sofia Martin Todorov and his brother General Georgi Todorov, and General Ivan Kolev. Despite this fact, and in contradiction with Russian historical mythology about special relations privileged with Bulgarians, the Russian authorities treated them equally with other national minorities, exposing them to forced assimilation, deportations, expulsions, repressions, and arrests of representatives of the Bulgarian national movement in the Russian Empire.

“What Is Permitted to Jupiter Is Not Permitted to an Ox”: Maskilim as a Class Phenomenon

The Haskalah emerged in the eighteenth century under the auspices of modernized Jewish commercial elites. By the late 1860s, however, Russian maskilim started to adopt highly critical positions toward their former patrons, and some toward capitalist relationships in general. This article sheds light on a previously neglected factor in discussions on the economic position of maskilim. It points to the growing gulf between them and their purported commercial patrons, spurred by changing tsarist policy toward Jews. The decision by Alexander II's administration to unofficially appoint moneyed elites to positions of Jewish leadership and grant them exceptional privileges left maskilim without moral and financial support in an increasingly hostile traditional society in the Pale. This led to the further polarization and alienation of maskilim in relation to both the Pale's traditionalists (rabbinic and commercial elites trying to preserve the existing power structures and religious practices) and the Jewish nouveau riche in the imperial cities––and to the rise of a maskilic class identity.

The establishment of the society for the restoration of orthodox christianity in the Caucasus and its activities in the education of the abkhazians

The events of the mid-60s of the 19th century became a turning point for the peoples of the Caucasus in many respects. There are fundamental changes in the socio-political and cultural life of the region. All this was due to both the energetic actions of the Russian government and the changes that took place among the Caucasian peoples. With the inclusion of the Caucasus into the Russian Empire, it became necessary to modify the actions of the autocracy in this region. Using various "levers", tsarism purposefully realized its main tasks in the region - the spread of Orthodoxy in the region and the formation of imperial identity and consciousness among the Caucasian peoples. The most important elements of such a civilizing policy in Russia are the secular school and enlightenment. Abkhazia, located in the northwestern part of the Caucasus, occupies an important strategic position. With the inclusion of Abkhazia into the Russian Empire, tsarism throughout the 19th and early 20th centuries sought to attract, first of all, the local elite into the all-Russian cultural space. The tsarist administration sought to create a strong system of government in the region, which would not have been possible without the involvement of competent officials from among the local population who knew the customs, life, familiar with the local living conditions. The government believed that the Society for the Restoration of Orthodox Christianity in the Caucasus, on which great hopes were pinned, could become the most important instrument of tsarist policy in the Caucasus. This article discusses the formation of the Society for the Restoration of Orthodox Christianity in the Caucasus, as well as some aspects of its activities in the field of education in Abkhazia.

The First Clinic of Surgery in Lithuania and its Founders

The developement of surgery in Vilnius and Lithuania is related to the Vilnius University Clinic of surgery founded in the middle of 1808–1809 academic year, that is more than 200 years ago and it was the first specialized clinical institution of the Grand Duchy of Lithuania. This new chapter at the Faculty of Medicine was orientated to the teaching and training of surgeons and developing their scientific approach to clinical practice. The Clinic of Surgery took over the concept of clinical education from the Clinic of Therapy which was initiated by Johan Peter Frank (1745–1821) and Joseph Frank (1771–1842) 3 years earlier. They were the founders of Vilnius medical Society as well. The concept consisted of the integration of basic theoretical knowledge into clinical skills learning. The basis of clinical training was ward round teaching on patient’s bedside, round the clock duty in the Clinic, continuous observation of patients and taking part in autopsy. Further developments of the Clinic were related to the activities of surgical professors from Western Europe, as well as highly experienced local doctors who immediately started lecturing and operating patients. These were the creators, developers and cherishers of the Clinic: Jacque Briotet (1746–1819), Johan Andreas Lobenwein (1758–1820), Johan Friedrich Niszkowski (1774–1816), Jakób Szymkiewicz (1775–1818), Konstantin Porcijanka (1793–1841). Foundation and successful operation of the surgical clinic signified a higher level in the evolution of Lithuanian clinical medicine. New concept of teaching and scientific approach to the diagnosis and surgical treatment made the clinic comparable to the European innovative medical institutions of the 19th century. The effective activities and future prospects were roughly cut off by Russian tsarist policy in 1832.

Общественно-политическая активность польской шляхты Правобережной Украине в конце XIX – начале ХХ века

The article deals with the socio-political life of the Polish nobility of the Kiev province in the late nineteenth – early twentieth century. After the January Uprising of 1863, a characteristic feature of tsarist policy was the russification of the Polish people in Ukraine, especially the wealthy. From the end of the XIX century begin to create the first political parties and organizations. Large landowners and nobility join these political processes. The Polish social movement of the Right Bank of Ukraine is characterized and activity of the Polish organizations of nationalist, charitable, cultural and educational orientation at the beginning of the XX century is considered.

ПРОДОВОЛЬСТВЕННЫЙ КРИЗИС КАК ФАКТОР СОЦИАЛЬНОГО ПРОТЕСТА ЛЕТОМ – ОСЕНЬЮ 1917 Г. (НА МАТЕРИАЛАХ КОСТРОМСКОЙ ГУБЕРНИИ)

The article examines the problem of the food issue, as one of the main factors in the growth of social tension in the province, in the period from summer to October 1917. The Provisional Government tried to carry out rescue measures, but they were all unsuccessful. Continuing the tsarist policy of requisitioning grain and cattle, the authorities only inflamed public discontent. The mobilization of the male population to the front, as well as the return of the migrant peasants to their native village, created the preconditions for a social explosion. From August 1917, the crisis was transferred from the countryside to the city, where factories and factories began to strike. The provincial authorities are passively reacting to this process, not taking any measures to eliminate the food problem. Ultimately, the broad masses of the people begin to lean towards the opposition parties, which, in their opinion, could solve these pressing issues. Based on materials from periodicals and archival sources, the author shows the growth of popular unrest in the Kostroma Province in the pre-revolutionary period of 1917 and comes to the conclusion that the food crisis played one of the main roles in the October Revolution.

Polish and Lithuanian civil resistance in the painting of the 19th century: Kanutas Ruseckas and Vincentas Smakauskas

Hopes to restore the independent state of Lithuania lasted throughout the 19th century and promoted ideas of civil resistance in Poland and Lithuania. The struggle for independence erupted through the uprisings of 1794, 1830-31, and 1863. While these attempts at armed resistance did not lead to the liberation of Lithuania nor Poland, they demonstrated the undying willingness to regain freedom. The role of artists grew up with the increasing repressions of the tsarist government. Paintings and poems became weapons in the fight against the tsarist policy of Russification. The paper focuses on the works that the painters, Vincentas Smakauskas (1797–1876) and Kanutas Ruseckas (1800–1860), done after the suppressed uprising of 1831. A research hypothesis is a statement that paintings produced in this dramatic period of history embodied secret symbolic meanings and represented ideas of civil resistance.

Pol'skie ssyl'nye glazami sovremennikov (po materialam memuaristiki vtoroj poloviny 1860-h — 1910-h gg.)

The article is devoted to the attitude of Russian society towards the participants in the uprising in the Kingdom of Poland of 1863-1864 in the territory of Western Siberia. Based on a wide range of sources, the author concludes that most of the representatives of Russian society in Siberia were positive about exiled Poles. Local residents gladly took them to the service, the administration also proceeded loyal to the participants in the January uprising. Separately, it is worth noting the representatives of Russian society who were in exile with the Poles. For the most part, these were participants in the populist movement, and, as a result, the intellectual part of Russian society. The Narodniks supported the Polish liberation movement, opposing the policy of tsarism in Poland.

The Mozdok Question during the Ottoman-Russian War of 1768–1774

This article is devoted to the consideration of one of the most important issues in Russian-Kabardian relations in the middle - second half of the eighteenth century. - the “Mozdok issue”, which has become a long-term stumbling block for the interests of the Kabardian nobility and the Russian authorities. The relevance of this article is due to the fact that at present a number of Caucasian experts will introduce it as the starting point of the so-called Caucasian war, considers it the beginning of the “colonial policy of tsarism” in the region. At the same time, many historians consider the construction of the fortress and the consequences of this step of the Russian authorities to be part of the positive integrative processes in the North Caucasus. Thus, this issue is quite controversial in the realities of modern Caucasian studies. The purpose of this article is to study the actual state of the “Mozdok issue”, which developed simultaneously with the construction of the fortress, during the Ottoman-Russian war of 1768 - 1774. As materials for the study, both thematic collections of documents and the scientific works of Russian Caucasian experts were used. The fundamental methodological principles of the research were the principles of historicism and objectivity, the methods - historical-genetic and historical-systemic. An in-depth study of this problem reveals the regional components associated with the traditional sociocultural lifestyle of the highlanders in the period under review, as well as those foreign policy factors that have had a direct impact on the state of the “Mozdok issue” in the dynamics that took place. Documentary sources, as well as differences of opinion among many Caucasian experts indicate the objective priority of the issue in the context of a general analysis of Russian-mountain interaction in a wide chronological range.

Ideology and Historical Concepts: the Evolution of Ideas about the Caucasian War in the XX – XXI Centuries

In the article, the authors attempted to consider changes in the general concept of the Caucasian war during the 20th and beginning of the 21st centuries, depending on the political and ideological attitudes inherent in various historical stages. The key moments of this complex and ambiguous phenomenon are analyzed, which still cause heated discussions in science and society (name, dating, reasons, Caucasian muridism, problems of Muhajirism).It is indicated that historiography of the beginning of the twentieth century, as in the earlier period, did not dispute the legality of the establishment of Russian orders in the region. It is shown that in the Soviet period, the assessment of the movement of highlanders in the East and West Caucasus depended not only on a change in the historical paradigm, but also on a change in the general direction of state policy in the field of ideology (“national liberation struggle against tsarism”, “Shamil is a protege of Sultan Turkey and British colonialists","the struggle against the colonial policy of tsarism and against their own feudal lords"). Attention is drawn to the fact that the collapse of the USSR, the destruction of the Marxist concept of history, the development of national and separatist movements, the beginning of the Islamic revival in the North Caucasus contributed to the beginning of the active process of revising the assessments and events of the Caucasian War, which was the most striking event in the history of many peoples.The article concludes that, despite the abundance of work, scientists have not only yet to illuminate the little-studied aspects of the Caucasian war, but also to give an objective interpretation to many of its stages, based on scientific approaches, and not following political orders for the sake of one or another ideology.

Tsarist Policy in Relation to the Ethnic Regions of Russia in XVI–XIX Centuries

The paper features the policy of the royal government of Russia towards ethnic regions. There are different views on these regions in modern historiography. The ambiguous situation is primarily due to the fact that progressive single-nation states and ethnic regions were studied without taking into account the general historical situation. The present research was based on the assumption that multi-ethnic countries have a great development potential. From the XVI century on, the authorities were aware of the ethnic differences between the Russians and the population of the new territories. However, they did not perceive ethnicity as the main social marker. The social criteria chosen by the authorities included religion, class, and place of residence, i. e. they were of supranational character. The author believes that the heterogeneous policy of Tsarist Russia towards ethnic provinces, lacking as it was, ensured the viability of the state and contributed to the gradual integration of various ethnicities.

PROCESSES OF DISINTEGRATION AND THE CRISIS OF CIVILIZATION IN THE TURKIC WORLD (16-th – 19-th centuries)

Scantily explored problem of crisis and disintegration in the Turkic world of late medieval period is studied in the article. It is necessary to indicate the climatic, economic, geopolitical and other factors of the disintegration of cultural and civilizational space of the Turks to the new time. As a part of the Muslim East, the Turkic world of Eurasia lagged behind in civilization development compared the European countries. The characteristic features of Turkic history of late medieval period are the growth of internal military conflicts, frequent migrations, decline of the economy, increasing disintegration of the Turkic civilization system and isolation of previous connected ethnic communities. There was deep crisis and decline of Eurasian nomadism in a new era. It is determined that Russia and China pursued expansionist policies and supported ethnic separatism of Turkic peoples. Despite present attempts of some scholars to explain Russian colonialism through Frontier Thesis of F.Terner, the policy of Tsarism in the East had serious differences and was reactionary. So mass uprisings against tsarism broke out in the territory of Kazakhstan and other parts of Turkic Eurasia. The authors consider that at the same time the formation of separate ethnic groups and national languages in the late Turkic history partly reflected objective challenges and trends of Global history. In Kazakh historical memory one can see evidences in favor of common Turkic identity.

OLGERD BOCHKOVSKYI: THE ATTITUDE OF THE CZECHS AND TOMÁŠ GARRIGUE MASARYK TO THE UKRAINIAN ISSUE

The author analyzes works of Olgerd Ipolyt Bochkovskyi about such "awakeners" of the Czech national revival as František Palacký, František Ladislav Rieger, Jan Koubek, Karel Havlíček Borovský, Karel Havík Janophiles who were Slavophiles and in individual actions Russophiles, but at the same time really and correctly assessed the Ukrainian issue, for the first time brought it to an international forum. They supported the Ukrainians' language and rights in 1849 in the Austrian post-revolutionary parliament against Polish and Russian fraud, the independence of the Ukrainian people among the Slavs. The "awakeners" were against Russian claims to the Ukrainian Galicia, Bukovina and Transcarpathia, the anti-Ukrainian policy of tsarism, and defended the leading role of Ukraine in the final settlement of inter-Slavic relations. O. Bochkovskyi's journalistic activity in different European magazines is revealed. Special attention is paid to the coverage of the Ukrainian issue, the situation of Galician-Bukovynian Ukrainians, the national development of the Slavic peoples. The ideological influence of the notable Czech scientist, public and political figure Tomáš Garrigue Masaryk on the scientific way of Olgerd Bochkovskyi as a sociologist and nationalist is highlighted. In the works of O. Bochkovskyi, it was emphasized that T. Masaryk, before the war interpreted the Ukrainian question, based primarily on the real content and vitality of the Ukrainian movement. He emphasized the absolute undoubted right of Ukrainians to self-determination and political independence. It is noted that concerning the Ukrainian issue T. Masaryk had mainly political reasons. It is stated that O. Bochkovskyi proved T. Masaryk's warnings against Ukraine's independence during the war by recent history and the adjustment of life. The author singled out tactics and methods of the Czechoslovak liberation action as the top of T. Masaryk's nation-building art, a perfect example for Ukraine in further liberation directions, the guarantee of the future triumph of Ukrainian independence. Keywords: Olgerd Bochkovskyi, Tomáš Masaryk, Ukraine, Ukrainian issue, Ukrainians, Czechs, independence, statehood.

LEGAL POLICY OF THE RUSSIAN EMPIRE RELATING TO THE ROMAN CATHOLIC CHURCH IN THE UKRAINIAN PROVINCES AT THE END OF XVIII – THE FIRST HALF OF ХIХ CENTURY

The article is devoted to the study of the tsarist legal policy aimed at limiting the influence of the Catholic Church on the population of Ukrainian lands and strengthening the position of the Russian Orthodox Church, which supported the autocracy. Attention is drawn to the fact that the starting point in the legislative restriction of the rights of Catholics was in 1794, when Catherine II issued an order declaring Orthodoxy de facto proclaimed state religion. In the summer of 1796 the local authorities obliged the clergy of the Catholic Church to swear allegiance to the Russian Empire. A number of measures were taken to limit the land holdings of Catholic monasteries. It was noted that in a number of royal decrees, the organizational foundations of the management of church establishments, the authority of the archbishop and bishops, monastic overlords, and ordinary monks were regulated in detail. Freedom of movement was restricted for Catholic monks. They were strictly forbidden not only to move from one diocese to another, but also to leave one temporarily without extreme monastic necessity and only with the personal permission of the bishop. The priests were strictly forbidden from touching the sermon on political issues, especially those concerning the Russian government. It is emphasized that during the late 18th - first half of the 20th century. the imperial government has shown a constant desire to limit to a maximum the influence of the Catholic Church on the population of Ukrainian lands, especially those where its supporters made up a large percentage. At the same time, the authorities were not too concerned with the freedom of religion of those subjects whose religious views were different from the official Orthodox ideology of the state. For Tsar, the expediency of Russification consisted in its conformity with the task of ensuring national-state security in its imperial sense. For autocracy, the Catholic denominators saw such a force that could pose a potential threat by distracting from the Orthodox Church those who had once departed from Catholicism, which could give rise in the future to unrest, primarily among the population of the Right Bank. This is, to a large extent, the explanation of the tsarist policy aimed at strengthening the position of the Russian Orthodox Church, which was the pillar of the autocracy, and in the future - to create a mono-religious space in the whole territory of Ukraine.

Cultural-Educational Policy of Tsarism in the Dnipro Ukraine (the second half of the 19th and early 20th century)

The purpose of the article is to analyze the cultural and educational policy of tsarism in the Dnipro region of Ukraine in the second half of the 19th and early 20th centuries clarifying the role and significance of entrepreneurs in this process. In the modern Ukrainian economy there are transformation processes that are aimed at ensuring sustainable development of the country. The Dnieper region of Ukraine plays an important role in this transformation. Culture and education of the population are an important component in the formation of a highly developed industrial society. After the peasant reform – the liquidation of the feudal system, the tsarist government carried out a series of reforms that were supposed to accelerate capitalist transformations. Modernization in the country required raising the level of culture and education of the population. The tsarist government tried to root out Ukrainian culture, mother tongue. According to the census of 1897 in the Russian Empire, the number of illiterates in the Ukrainian provinces amounted to 83.6 %. In schools and high schools only 30% of children studied. In the 60's and 90's, special institutions of higher education were opened in the Dnipro region of Ukraine: in Odesa, Kyiv, Nizhyn, Kharkiv and Katerynoslav. The tsarist government understood the need to open new schools and improve education, but reluctantly allocated resources for the maintenance of schools and gymnasiums. For example, in the Kherson province in 1883, the tsarist government allocated only 2.7 % of the money from the total, while the rest was allocated by zemstvos, organizations and private individuals. Entrepreneurs, intellectuals and private individuals donated significant amounts to education and culture and played a significant role in spreading and supporting culture and education in the Dnipro region of Ukraine.

The Opportunity of a Thousand Years: Chinese Merchant Organizations in the Russian Civil War

The Opportunity of a Thousand YearsChinese Merchant Organizations in the Russian Civil War Yuexin Rachel Lin (bio) Historians have recently begun to engage more systematically with the regional and intercultural dimensions of the Russian Revolution and Civil War. Attention was first focused on Russia’s provinces, where revolutionary processes adapted to local economies, institutions, and structures of power. The revolution’s impact on various ethnic and religious groups—such as Ukrainians, Jews, and Muslims—has also been studied. The Russian Empire’s size, the diversity of its periphery, and its complex relationships with both European and Asian neighbors made non-Russian and cross-border interests impossible to ignore. Such perspectives are gradually making their way into the historiography of the revolution in Siberia and the Russian Far East. For a long time, scholars working on these vast areas have had the difficult task of tracing the general contours of the revolution and Civil War there. Their accounts of White militarists, the Kolchak regime’s misgovernment, and the diplomatic tug-of-war over Allied military intervention have traditionally centered on domestic or Western narratives. Until now, questions of ethnicity and nationality or of Russia’s position in the wider Northeast Asian region have been under-explored.1 Far less has been written about the revolution in the Far East as an Asian phenomenon, in which Russia was but one contender in a territory marked by powerful imperial conflict, and where porous borders led to significant minority populations in Russia itself. Two recent works, Willard Sunderland’s The Baron’s Cloak and Ivan Sablin’s Governing Post-Imperial [End Page 745] Siberia and Mongolia, have broken new ground on this issue, but many aspects of the revolution’s Asian dimension remain undiscovered.2 This gap is especially notable given the proliferation of such research on the late imperial period and in the field of émigré and East Asian studies. Several works have appeared on the transnational aspects of Russia’s colonial projects in the Far East, including David Wolff’s To the Harbin Station, Wolff’s and Stephen Kotkin’s Rediscovering Russia in Asia, and David Schimmelpenninck van der Oye’s Toward the Rising Sun.3 With rare exceptions, however, they usually conclude their narratives in 1917. Histories of Russian emigration to Manchuria, such as those of Olga Bakich and John Stephan, have also focused overwhelmingly on the Russian experience and less on Asian perceptions of émigrés.4 Finally, although the experiences of Chinese, Japanese, and Koreans in the Russian Far East have garnered attention among East Asian and Russian-language scholars, cross-pollination with mainstream Western historiography on the revolution has been limited. The formidable linguistic and cultural barriers to a sensitive study of the Russian Revolution’s trajectory in Northeast Asia only compound the problem. The prerevolutionary situation in eastern Siberia and the Russian Far East is now understood in a fair amount of detail. These territories were situated in a deeply contested frontier zone claimed by—among others—the Russian, Chinese, and Japanese empires. Tsarist policies of colonial consolidation were undertaken with the express purpose of fending off perceived Chinese territorial revisionism and Japanese ambition.5 Ironically, these same developmental policies led to a wave of Asian migration into the region. The Chinese formed [End Page 746] the majority of these migrants, making up 10–12 percent of the population in the Russian Far East in 1910 and a third of the population of Vladivostok in 1916.6 It stoked further fears of a “Yellow Peril,” in which the Chinese (and Japanese) seemed poised to out-compete the Russians demographically and economically. The Chinese, for their part, had lost the far eastern territories to Russia a mere 60 years before 1917, in a process beginning with the signing of the Treaty of Aigun in 1858. Aigun became a key episode in China’s litany of “national humiliation” (国耻, guochi), in which the once-great Qing empire came to offer multiple concessions to other imperial powers. Added to the list of territorial losses were the semicolonial China Eastern Railway zone in Manchuria, under Russian control; Russia’s persistent attempts to block China from accessing the Amur River; the imposition...