bluuebunny/crossref_metadata_2025 huggingface dataset:
Россия “абсорбирует” своих евреев: Имперская колонизация, еврейская политика и бухарские евреи
Authors: Каганович Альберт
Published: October 2015

SUMMARY:
The article by Albert Kaganovich presents results of the research into the history of Bukharan (“Eastern”) Jews in the decades following the incorporation of Central Asia into the Russian empire. Although the Russian administrators arrived in Central Asia with the views of the Jewish people and its “utility” shaped by the policies of the Russian empire towards Russian European Jews, in Central Asia the colonial background and the “oriental” character of the local population neutralized such perceptions of Jews. Exceptionally for the Russian Empire, the Jews of Bukhara received rights and privileges (not limited to Central Asian protectorates) that were not given to other Jews in Russia. Partly explained by the importance of the Jews in Central Asian trade, this development provided for persistent loyalty to the Russian empire on behalf of the Jews of Bukhara. Despite attempts by the military authorities to impose restrictive policies on the Jews of Bukhara and to deport them from Central Asian possessions of Russia and the general worsening of attitudes on behalf of the authorities, the Jews of Bukhara preserved their rights well until the collapse of the Empire and remained loyal to the Russian authorities in Central Asia.
Границы империи как границы модерна. Антиколониальная риторика и теория культурных типов в евразийстве
Authors: Глебов Сергей
Published: October 2015

SUMMARY:
This article explores the doctrine of Eurasinanism as it emerged among Russian émigrés in the 1920s. The author looks at the Eurasianist critique of colonialism in the context of the post-structuralist conception of Orientalism and traces the genealogy of the idea of cultural zones. According to the author, the Eurasianist critique of colonialism was a result of a determined attempt to deny modern Russian nationalism’s division of Russia into metropole and colonies. By proclaiming Russia a specific Eurasian civilization and criticizing Orientalist perceptions of Asian peoples, the Eurasianists drew sharp distinctions between Western colonial empires, which were doomed to dissolution, and Russia (which supposedly had an imperial future).
Simon Dubnov’s Master Narrative: and the Construction of Jewish Collective Memory in the Russian Empire
Authors: Hilbrenner Anke
Published: October 2015

SUMMARY:
Семен Дубнов, автор “Всемирной истории еврейского народа”, является ключевой фигурой для изучения еврейской идентичности в Российской империи. Его собственное восприятие еврейской истории отличалось от доминировавшего в Центральной Европе (и особенно в Германии) “Wissenschaft vom Judentum” и создавало историческую нишу для еврейской национальной идентичности восточноевропейского еврейства. Его взгляд на автономное существование еврейской диаспоры был обусловлен историческим опытом многонациональных империй Восточной Европы. Для Семена Дубнова – историка еврейская национальная идея основывалась, прежде всего, на историческом сознании. Выделяя исторические закономерности в качестве основы для еврейской коллективной памяти, он стремился сформировать национальную идентичность “русских евреев”. Для этого он использовал символический образ еврея как “другого” в Российской империи, но переворачивал его вверх ногами. Его нарратив, таким образом, связан с дискурсом “еврейского вопроса” в России в XIX в. Эту взаимосвязь можно проиллюстрировать той особой ролью, которую играл термин “кагал” (еврейская автономная община в Восточной Европе) в русском дискурсе по “еврейскому вопросу” и в мастер-нарративе Дубнова. Оригинальная интерпретация антисемитского символа кагала Дубновым приобрела структурное значение для еврейской историографии в Восточной Европе и оказала влияние на еврейскую политику в XX в. Таким образом, национальная еврейская историография Дубнова возникла в контексте соперничающих национализмов как форма коллективной интеграции и дискриминации в российской многонациональной империи.
Карелы На Границе Конкурирующих Национальных Проектов: Социо-Экономические Различия Российской и Финляндской Карелий как Фактор Национальной Политики
Authors: Витухновская Марина
Published: October 2015

SUMMARY:
This article aims at analyzing differences between Finnish and Russian Karelia. Karelians have been divided between Russia and Sweden/ Finland since the Middle Ages. Even the inclusion of Finland in the Russian Empire did not lead to the unification of Karelia as Finland was given a special status within the Empire. The realization of the so called “Scandinavian economic miracle” in late 19 th century Finland made the Grand Duchy an important socioeconomic and cultural factor for the emerging Karelian national consciousness. Karelians in Russian Karelia were attracted to the economic center of gravity in Finland, while the imperial authorities were unable to provide measures that would guarantee the economic development of the region. Although the economic expansion of Finland in Karelia was highly efficient, Russian Karelians still remained Orthodox Christians, which pulled them toward Russia. Finally, as a result of multiple factors of development, Karelians were drawn increasingly to specifically Karelian identities rather than joining in Finnish or Russian national projects.
Потускневшее “золото” Русского Зарубежья: Опыт Критического Очерка Новейшей Историографии Межвоенной Европейской Эмиграции
Authors: Мартынюк Игорь
Published: October 2015

SUMMARY:
In his historiographic survey Igor’ Martyniuk focuses on one of the flourishing trends of historical studies in Post Soviet Russia, namely the history and myths of Russian ( rossiiskaia ) emigration after 1917. The author explores the psychological, cultural, and intellectual conditions of post Soviet transition under which the study of emigration boomed and continues to dominate the agenda of the historical profession. Martyniuk analyzes different aspects of historiography of Russian emigration, including the social, intellectual, and political history of émigrés, the study of migration regulations of host countries, the history of Russian and non Russian nationalisms abroad by comparing the state of art in Russian and non Russian (including Western European and American) historical literature. The author observes that the impact of political and intellectual climate emigration studies in post Soviet Russia resulted in a peculiar distribution of themes and interpretations as well as in a descriptive and bibliographic character of early works. The author concludes that the present state of emigrations studies is ripe for methodological innovations, synthetic works, and conceptual discussion on history of the Russian emigration.
“We Are Transnistrians!”: Post-Soviet Identity Management in the Dniester Valley
Authors: Troebst Stefan
Published: October 2015

SUMMARY:
В своей статье Стефан Требст констатирует, что провозглашенная в 1990 году на востоке Республики Молдова сепаратистская Приднестровская Молдавская Республика держится на следующих основаниях: политическая воля региональной элиты, стремящейся к сохранению своей власти и привилегий; экономический потенциал этого высоко индустриального региона; вооруженные силы сепаратистского движения, созданные с помощью Москвы; ряд новых социальных факторов, сформировавшихся за двенадцать лет независимой государственности. Начиная с середины 1990-х гг. стало очевидным наличие еще одного основания – новой приднестровской идентичности, которая возникла в результате региональной политики идентичности, направленной на создание “приднестровского народа”. Требст называет эту политику “политикой истории”, основные категории которой (геополитика, язык, культура и религия) восходят к великорусскому историческому нарративу. Создаваемый новый приднестровский исторический мастер-нарратив начинается с древнейших времен, в то время как культура исторической памяти фиксируется на “героических” первых годах независимости, параллельно создавая куль личности президента Приднестровской Молдавской Республики Игоря Смирнова. Статистические опросы населения и результаты выборов демонстрируют, что относительное большинство населения республики рассматривает себя как приднепровский demos .
Царь И Народ: Популистский Национализм Императора Николая II
Authors: Подболотов Сергей
Published: October 2015

SUMMARY:
In his article Sergei Podbolotov explores the politics and doctrine of the last Russian emperor, Nicholas II, in the context of the history of Russian nationalism. Podbolotov situates the dynastic nationalism of Nicholas II in the continuum of the Russian dynasty’s reaction to the challenge of modernity and modern nationalism, which brought about a hybrid version of völkisch ideology, Romanticism, and monarchism. The author analyzes the relationship among the monarchy, bureaucracy, Russian educated society, and rightwing nationalist parties at the beginning of the twentieth century and traces Nicholas II’s peculiar perception of power and nationhood and its influence on political reforms at the beginning of the 20 th century. Podbolotov argues that the last Russian monarch faced the dilemma of balancing between the pattern of the popular peasant father-tsar and the modern role of the monarch in governing the empire. Nicholas II’s inability to resolve this dilemma serves as an explanation of the particularly devastating political crisis at the end of his rule.
Советский опыт сионизма: Экспорт советской политической культуры в Палестину
Authors: Галили Зива
Published: October 2015

SUMMARY:
This article presents and explains the roots and conditions of Zionism in Soviet Russia of the 1920s and the powerful influence of various elements of the “Soviet context” on members of the Zionist organizations of that time, especially the socialists among them. Ziva Galili argues that there was never a simple process of transplantation. Ideas and practices developed in Russia (themselves frequently an adaptation of ideologies born in the Russian context to the peculiarly Jewish situation) were refracted and modified by the reality of Palestine. Soviet Russia in the 1920s was the scene of intensive Zionist activity. Some three thousand members of these Zionist organizations arrived in Palestine between 1924 and 1931, all of them young people whose formative years were passed in NEP-time Russia. At the heart of the article are the varied ways in which young members of Zionist organizations responded to the conditions of Jewish life and Zionist work in Soviet Russia and to other features of its evolving society and polity. Galili’s interest here is not only in articulated attitudes toward the Soviet system, but in learned habits of work, political and cultural practices, perceptions of the proper interplay between the social and the personal. In conclusion Ziva Galili explains her personal roots and public issues informing this work. For it represents not only a historical investigation into the usual archival and published sources (many of which had been closed in Soviet archives until recent years), but a revisiting by the author of family stories, childhood memories, and the foundational values inculcated in her generation.
The Historical and Ethnographic Construction of Russian Jewry
Authors: Veidlinger Jeffrey
Published: October 2015

SUMMARY:
Статья Джеффри Вейдлингера посвящена различным интерпретациям проблемы российской еврейской идентичности, которые предлагались членами Еврейского историко-этнографического общества между 1908 и 1924 гг. Семен Дубнов и другие петербургские историки (преимущественно любители) пытались осмыслить феномен российского еврейства в пределах существовавших государственных границ Российской империи. В результате они были вынуждены включить в его состав отрицавших раввинистическую традицию караимов, а также другие еврейские неашкеназские общины Средней Азии, Кавказа и Крыма и общины сектантов (например, субботников). В то же время, из состава “российского еврейства” в значительной степени исключались галицийские евреи, несмотря на их тесное культурное родство с евреями российской Черты оседлости, поскольку они проживали по другую сторону государственной границы. Галицийское еврейство, в свою очередь, находилось в центре противоположной интерпретации ашкеназской идентичности, развивавшейся некоторыми профессиональными польскими историками вслед за Майером Балабаном. К 1924 г. обе эти интерпретации уступили место представлению об универсальной еврейской идентичности, сформулированному Львом Штернбергом в соответствии с советскими идеалами.
Границы Советской Бурятской Нации: “Национально-Культурное Строительство” в Бурятии в 1926–1929 гг. в Проектах Национальной Интеллигенции и Национал-Большевиков
Authors: Варнавский Павел
Published: October 2015

SUMMARY:
This article explores different projects aimed at constructing a modern Buriat national identity in the second half of the 1920s. Having won the Civil War with the support or indifference of the local elites, the Bolsheviks granted these elites a degree of autonomy. In the Buriat case, two autonomous regions were organized, one in the framework of the Russian Federation and one in the framework of the Far Eastern Republic. The author argues that despite the autonomy granted to the local elites, the Buriat intelligentsia had a limited impact on the political and economic sphere. Hence it focused on cultural and educational institutions in order to pursue its own project of constructing an ethnic Buriat national consciousness. At the same time, the needs of Communist ideology often took precedence over the local elites’ projects, modifying policies in the sphere of language and culture (regarding the use of a pan-Mongol alphabet). Therefore, the result was the creation of a multiethnic autonomous republic within the RSFSR, which was vertically integrated into structures of Bolshevik control, while displaying a degree of culturally colored nationalism.
Еврейство и Русь на rendez vous межэтнического политеизма: О некоторых примечательных казусах современной историографии еврейского вопроса (на материале раннесредневековой Руси)
Authors: Иоффе Денис
Published: October 2015

SUMMARY:
In the article Denis Eoffe posits the problem of studying “Russian-Jewish” contacts, which is immediately connected to the problem of the antiquity of the Jewish presence in Rus’. Eoffe criticizes the historiographic tradition which denies the existence of Jewish history in pre-Petrine Russia and offers an impressive review of the world historical, archeological, and philological literature dedicated to diverse aspects of that problem. Eoffe believes that the anti-Judaic polemical tradition in Rus’ had to have sources in immediate observations of and communication with real Jews. In this vein, he offers a detailed critique of A. I. Pereswetoff-Murath’ recent book “A Grin without a Cat. Adversus Judaeous’ Texts in the Literature of Medieval Russia 988-1504”. 2 vols. (Lund, 2002). Eoffe debates the author’s main thesis, which consists of a refutation of any imperative to study a real Jewish presence in Rus’ using analyses of the adversus Iudaeous texts. According to Eoffe, such an approach equals denying Jewish presence in Ancient Rus, as well as denying the need to study the role of Jews in ancient Russian cultural, political, and economic history. Eoffe also suggests a range of specific historiographical and methodological criticisms of Pereswetoff’s book. He specifically stresses that Pereswetoff-Murath “does not see any connection between Kievan Jewry of the 10–11 th centuries and the subsequent “Russian Jews”. Eoffe argues that this newest research in fact continues an old historiographic tradition, which turns ancient Russian Jewry into a “figure of silence” or even a “simulacrum of hatred”.
Украинская историография: 1991–2001. Десятилетие перемен
Authors: Грицак Ярослав
Published: October 2015

SUMMARY:
In his article Yaroslav Hrytsak reviews the development of Ukrainian historiography in the past decade after the dissolution of the Soviet Union, situating it in the context of contemporary Ukrainian politics of identity. The author traces early revisions of Marxist-Leninist historiography and official memory in the context of Perestroika, which provided initial impulses for discussion of politically relevant issues of the past. Hrytsak analyzes the establishment of ethno-populist canon of Hrushevsky from early Perestroika on, which was consciously reconstructed and presented as an alternative historiographic model for national history outside of the academic establishment. The author then surveys institutional and intellectual aspects of Ukrainian historiographic development in Ukraine after the dissolution of the Soviet Union, attributing special significance to the influence of Ukrainian diaspora on development in independent Ukraine. Special sections of Hrytsak’s article are devoted to the distribution of topics in Ukrainian historical studies and to methodological debates and trends in historical scholarship. The author pays close attention to the emergence of new academic institutions and those groups of Ukrainian historians, who consciously engaged theoretical issues in an attempt to modernize historical studies and overcome the shortcomings of the ethno-populist canon of Ukrainian history. Welcoming these groups’ contribution to the Ukrainian historical profession, Hrytsak takes a cautious stance towards historians’ seclusion in theory, observing parallels between the historiographic situation in contemporary Ukraine and the historiographic world at large, which is characterized, in the author’s opinion, by a growing gap between empirical historians and those concentrating on methodological revisionism.
Having It Both Ways: Jewish Nation Building and Jewish Assimilation in the Soviet Empire
Authors: Shneer David
Published: October 2015

SUMMARY:
В 1920-е гг. Советский Союз был единственным в мире государством, официально спонсировавшим издательства, писательские союзы, суды, городские советы и школы на идиш. Советский Союз также поддерживал социалистически настроенных еврейских деятелей, стремившихся к созданию новой еврейской культуры для нового типа еврея. Эту группу автор статьи, Дэвид Шниир, называет советской идишистской интеллигенцией. Она выполняла двойную задачу утверждения советской империи в среде советской еврейской нации на официальном советском еврейском языке – идиш, и формирования этой самой советской еврейской нации. Поддерживая новый тип еврейского партикуляризма, Советский Союз, в то же время, создавал идеологически наиболее плодотворную среду для ассимиляции и интеграции евреев, по мере того как они вливались в советскую городскую элиту. В статье прослеживается логика развития этих двух одновременно разворачивавшихся процессов – формирования секуляризованного еврейского национализма и радикальной еврейской ассимиляции – вплоть до начала Второй мировой войны.
“Кто Мы? ” Историографический Выбор: Румынская Нация Или Молдавская Государственность
Authors: Куско Андрей , Таки Виктор
Published: October 2015

SUMMARY:
In their article, which concludes the forum on Moldovian history and history writing, A. Cusco and V. Taki embark on a task of critical reflection on contemporary development of history writing in Moldova in connection with the historiographic legacy of competing national and imperial projects and the politics of identity and general political development after 1991. The authors start their deconstruction of the national and imperial historiographic canons with placing “Bessarabia’s” history in the context of the history of the Russia’s empire collapse, the emergence of the Soviet state and its various transformation, and the shifts that took place in the state’s policies toward the “national question.” Focusing on the Soviet period, Cusco and Taki map the debates about the status of the Moldovian language, in which numerous references to the history of the people and territory occupy a pivotal place. The exhaustion of “indigenization” policies accounts for Romanianization of intelligentsia in the late Soviet period. Focusing on the post-Soviet period, the authors investigate the peculiarities of the reception of Romanian historiographic canons in the post-Soviet Moldova and relate the debates about the historical definition of nationhood to the present day politics’ fluctuations.
Becoming Pontic: “Post-Socialist” Identities, “Transnational” Geography, and the “Native” Land of the Caucasian Greeks
Authors: Popov Anton
Published: October 2015

SUMMARY:
C конца 1980-х годов и, особенно, после развала Советского Союза греки, живущие на Кавказе, стали представлять себя в качестве понтийских греков. В статье, которая посвящена изучению этой “понтийской” идентичности, решается вопрос: какие культурные, политические и экономические процессы способствовали ее формированию в постсоветский период. Автор рассматривает идентичность понтийских греков как современный феномен, возникший в результате комплексной трансформации бывшего советского общества. В то же время, формирование понтийской идентичности / этничности подвержено воздействию глобализации. Понтийские греки считают себя диаспорой и, в то же время, подчеркивают свои исторические права на регион их нынешнего проживания. Автор рисует понтийскую этничность как постоянно оспариваемую и формулируемую категорию.
Российская Империя, Ориентализм и Процессы Формирования Наций в Поволжье
Authors: Миллер Алексей
Published: October 2015

SUMMARY:
Aleksei Miller surveys recent historiography on the Volga-Kama region and places these research trends in the general context of debates about the nature of the Russian empire and “orientalism” in European perspective. The author contends that the history of nation-formation in the region has to be understood in a comparative framework that should include not only a reference to the Western Borderlands, but also the implications of nation-building and pan-movements for adjacent continental empires.
The Jews of Ekaterinoslav in 1905 as Seen from Town Hall: Ethnic Relations on an Imperial Frontier
Authors: Surh Gerald
Published: October 2015

SUMMARY:
В статье Джеральда Сура исследуются отношения между еврейским и нееврейским населением Екатеринослава через призму реакции гласных Городской Думы на октябрьский погром 1905 г. в этом бурно развивавшемся городе на периферии империи, в Новороссии. Опираясь на источники на русском и украинском языках, статья вскрывает уважительные, пусть и не слишком близкие, взаимоотношения между элитой процветавшей еврейской общины, склонной к аккультурации и ассимиляции, и русским купечеством и образованным обществом, которые, очевидно, признавали вклад евреев в экономическую и культурную жизнь города. Сур выдвигает тезис о том, что погром должен быть инкорпорирован в социальную историю города как результат нарушения сложного межэтнического баланса и баланса власти и политического/экономического влияния в имперском городе России начала ХХ века. Настоящая статья предлагает именно такое “прочтение” феномена погрома.
Археология Среднеазиатских Национализмов Les Mots et Les Choses
Authors: Абашин Сергей
Published: October 2015

SUMMARY:
The author explores the “archeology of Central Asian nationalisms” by applying Faucauldian methodology to Russian scholars’ texts on Central Asia. The article surveys a selection of texts written in the last two centuries. First, the author analyzes the text by Filip Efremov, a late 18 th century Russian soldier who spent several years in Bukhara. Efremov describes ethnic diversity of the Central Asian city without stressed references to ethnicity. His classifications of Uzbeks and Bukharians (Tadzhiks) are based on their social status or occupations. Next, the author addresses texts by N. A. Khanykov, a Russian mid-19 th century scholar and diplomat. Unlike Efremov, Khanykov presents a more sophisticated classification of peoples populating Bukhara and makes a clear distinction between Uzbeks and Tadzhiks. Finally, the works by O. A. Sukhareva, Soviet ethographer of 1950s–1970s, are considered. Her analysis, deprived of visibly judgmental connotations, represents a modern stage in the classification of Central Asia nationalities and involves problems of national self-identification of diverse ethnic groups in Bukhara. The author concludes that it is the modern epoch that creates “the ethnic man”.
Западные евреи? Восточные евреи? Аккультурация как парадигма сравнительной истории евреев в Германии и Восточной Европе
Authors: Маурер Труде
Published: October 2015

SUMMARY:
Since the 19 th century the Jews of Western and Eastern Europe have been perceived as different and opposite types, which represented a dynamic development of modernization and assimilation in the first case, and stagnation in the second. However, during the last two decades the overall perception of the historical development of Jewish minorities has changed. Historians are now emphasizing that German Jews did not entirely assimilate into the German culture but rather formed a specific version of it by combining features of traditional Jewish culture and traits of the host culture they lived in (they developed a German-Jewish culture). Recently, historians have demonstrated how particular groups of Jews in East Central and Eastern Europe underwent a similar development. Moreover, the institutions of Jewish autonomy in the Polish-Lithuanian Commonwealth are viewed in a new perspective, and historians point to the resemblance of Jewish and Polish institutions. Discussing new research and the complexities of cultural development in various parts of Eastern Europe, the author suggests a comparative approach in the study of Eastern and Western Jewry, focusing on the processes of acculturation by these minorities in their respective settings. This discussion implies a reconsideration of the predominant paradigm of the study of Jewish experiences in Eastern and Western Europe, which sees these experiences as belonging to different and opposing histories.
Южный и Восточный Фронтир Россиив XVI – XVIII Веках
Authors: Каппелер Андреас
Published: October 2015

SUMMARY:
The concept of the “frontier,” conceived by F.J. Turner for North America and applied to Eurasia by O. Lattimore and others, does not refer to a state border, but to a transitional zone between different geographic, socio-economic, political, religious and cultural spaces. From the15th to 18th centuries, the Russian steppe frontier in the south and southeast was a relatively stable military frontier between the sedentary Christian Russians and the nomadic Muslim Turks and Lamaist Mongols. The frontier was simultaneously a zone of intensive commercial and diplomatic interaction. Only during the 18th and 19th centuries did the steppe frontier become an area of settlement and extraction. Another example, the forest frontier in Siberia, was extractive frontier from the beginning, an area where an economy based on furs and precious metals pushed the frontier rapidly forward. Only its southern sections gradually became a settlement frontier.

On the steppe frontier, Russians and the militarily superior nomads were generally on equal terms through the 18 th century, whereas the Siberian indigenes were quickly subjugated by Russia and had to pay tributes in furs. Along the rivers of the steppe frontier, the military frontier communities of free Cossacks emerged on the forest frontier as trappers. Cossacks, tradesmen and settlers developed a “Siberian mentality” of free, enterprising pioneers. So the famous “Turner thesis” can be applied to Russia, but only to the peripheral regions of the Cossacks and Siberia, and not to Russia as a whole.
Русистика Поверх Границ. Славянские Исследования Японии И Социальные Науки России: Совместные Поиски Выхода Из Изоляции
Authors: Мацузато Кимитака
Published: October 2015

SUMMARY:
The author addresses the situation in humanities and social sciences in the former Soviet Union and Slavic studies in Japan. According to the author, in both cases one can discern the impact of relative self-isolation of scholarly communities. After the dissolution of the Soviet Union new vistas opened for Slavic Studies in Japan due to new economic opportunities and political conditions in the former Soviet republics and a relatively equal starting positions of different Slavic studies schools (especially in political sciences). At the same time, contacts among scholars in the US, Japan and Western Europe have been weakened; the same fate befell contacts among scholars in different CIS republics. As a result, only segments of the former USSR scholarly community have ties with segments of international scholarly communities. The future, according to the author, lies in the desirable and unavoidable emergence of multipolar networks among researchers across national boundaries.
Национальная Репрезентация и Социальные Категории: Пример Политических Беженцев
Authors: Нуарьель Жерар
Published: October 2015

SUMMARY:
The author explores the sociological category of representation, especially as it is visible in national representation and in connection with the history of political refugees. Representation in the modern state, according to the author, acquires a multidimensional character of group mobilization and categorization from above by government authorities. During the July Monarchy in France, the state was thought to be separate from the social sphere and was not interested in defining who was a foreigner and stringently separating them from citizens. According to the law of 1832, only those refugees who were assisted by the state economically were specifically defined as foreigners and proof had to be presented that they were “real” refugees. Social support provided to refugees led to their categorization as such. In post-World War II Europe, refugee became a juridical category defined by international conventions. This universal definition was in conflict with the institutionalized “sovereign people” and its system of social welfare. Using regimes of identification and limiting national welfare programs, modern national states also limit the definition of “refugee” at will. As a result, refugees constitute a social category because they do not participate in the social work that leads to their constitution as a group. They remain, essentially, an object of government policies.
The Invention of “Russianness” in the Late 18 th -Early 19 th Century
Authors: Martin Alexander M.
Published: October 2015

SUMMARY:
На протяжении большей части XVIII века западные идеи лишь поверхностно затрагивали повседневную жизнь большинства россиян. Однако возникающее в начале XIX в. понятие “русскости” начинает формировать основу для институтов, практик, отношений и поведения, которая постепенно утвердилась среди всех слоев общества и оставалась стабильной на протяжении поколений, в некоторых случаях – вплоть до нашего времени. Кристаллизация “русскости” в определенной исторической форме не позволила реализоваться другим стратегиям, заложенным в заимствованных с Запада в XVIII в. представлениях, таким как более определенная ориентация на либеральный капитализм или идея принадлежности к западной цивилизации и общности исторического пути России и Запада. Распространение понятия “русскости”, таким образом, помогло придать большую стабильность и прочность российскому обществу, однако ограничило спектр возможных путей дальнейшего развития страны.
Chinese Migration in the Russian Far East: Perspectives on Border Crossers, Migrants and Refugees
Authors: Bogaevskaya Alesya , Morgan Betty
Published: October 2015

SUMMARY:
Мозаику из более чем семисот отдельных законов, конституционных положений, конкретных политических практик, правил и инструкций, регулирующих процесс миграции и получения гражданства в России, часто описывают как “неэффективную”. Она порождает споры, непонимание и расхождения в общественном мнении по вопросу о намерениях и ожидаемых последствиях китайской миграции на русский Дальний Восток. Упрощенная недавно процедура пересечения российско-китайской границы способствует проникновению тысяч нелегальных китайских иммигрантов в Россию ежегодно. Российское миграционное законодательство не имеет аналогов в мире. Поскольку в прошлом и Китай, и Россия ограничивали и контролировали передвижение рабочей силы, их концепции функционирования рынка рабочей силы развиваются не по общепринятым законам. Авторы настоящей статьи тщательно анализирует эти факторы и на основе проведенного анализа предлагают практические рекомендации, которые должны способствовать установлению более конструктивных отношений в регионе. Они также констатируют, что современные исследователи занимают диаметрально противоположные позиции относительно оценки возможного влияния, цены и результатов существующей в России миграционной политики. В статье разбираются различные исследовательские позиции и факторы миграционной политики на Дальнем Востоке, которые обычно не учитываются в научной литературе по этому вопросу.
Tatar Textbooks – The Next Matrioshka
Authors: Meurs Wim van
Published: October 2015

SUMMARY:
Автор анализирует четыре новых учебных пособия по истории Татарстана. Каждое следующее издание является слегка обновленной версией предыдущего, по сути мало чем отличаясь методологически от историографического канона советских времен (“эффект матрешки”). В основе всех рассмотренных учебников лежит модернизационная парадигма и нерефлексируемая вера в линейный прогресс, при этом совершенно отсутствует понимание того, что нациестроительство само является результатом модернизации, а не примордиалистской данностью.
Amarcord , XX век: Забыть идеологию? (послесловие к публикации интервью с Л. Успенской)
Authors: Герасимов Илья , Могильнер Марина
Published: October 2015

SUMMARY:
The archival section of the present issue features the publication of an interview taken by a sociologist, Sofia Tchuikina, with a Russian émigré, Lidia Uspenskaia (Miagkova). This publication aspires to illustrate the production of memory narrative and the functioning of remembrance in respect to a politically divided period of Russian history and the trauma of individual lives of Russian emigration. Of particular interest in this publication is the fact that Lidia Uspenskaia’s mother was a sister of Boris Savinkov and that the life of Migkov’s family in its Polish period was connected with the activities of Boris Savinkov in anti-Bolshevik organizations. In the interview Lidia Uspenskaia describes her childhood, the life of the family in the context of civil war in left bank Ukraine (with concomitant interethnic and ideologically driven violence), the circumstances of emigration from Soviet Russia and adaptation to life in exile. The narrative extends to the years of World War II, which Uspenskaia spent in France, and visits to the Soviet Union after WWII. The interview portrays the mechanism of redescription and making sense of the traumatic past by obliterating the ideological and political background of the individual life and accentuating personal and private aspects of the past. The publication of the interview is foreworded by Sofia Tchuikina, who places this interview into the overall perspective of the research project of oral history of Russian noble families after the 1917 revolution and the theoretical context of memory and oral history studies. Tchuikina compares the mnemonic techniques of Uspenskaia with other figures of Russian nobility who left or remained in Soviet Russia, uncovers the role of family, social group, religion, and nation as operating tropes of personal memory and connections between personal experience and social and generational representations of the past. Tchuikina concludes with reflections on the role of oral history techniques in developing the sociology of memory. The section closes with an afterword by Ilya Gerasimov and Marina Mogilner, who ponder the relationship between ideology, historicity, and memory. Gerasimov and Mogilner compare the oral interview with a written version of Uspenskaia memoirs and find that the difference of targeted audience (the former being intended for the post-soviet Russian readers, while the latter was written for Russian émigrés and published in Novyi Zhurnal ) and the difference of modus of remembering created a new version of individual memory in the oral interview. The narrative of the past presented in the oral interview lacks cohesion and ready-to-employ tropes of the émigré memoirs because it was construed in an entirely different context. This finding illustrates the need to expand the analytical apparatus of research of historical memory in an “ideological age.”
Конструирование Коллективной Памяти о Холокосте в Украине
Authors: Иванова Елена
Published: October 2015

SUMMARY:
The article examines the process of the emerging of new collective memory about Holocaust in the post-Soviet Ukraine. Ivanova begins with overviewing different theories of collective memory, then she proceeds with the analysis of post-Soviet Ukrainian text-books as important instruments shaping collective memory. Finally, Ivanova presents the results of sociological researches demonstrating students’ knowledge about Holocaust in Har’kiv Jewish school and other institutes of higher learning.
Реконструкция Национальной Истории в Современной Республике Казахстан (На Примере Российско-Казахских Отношений XVIII – XIX вв.)
Authors: Безвиконная Елена
Published: October 2015

SUMMARY:
The article examines trends in post-Soviet Kazakh historiography which have been developed according to the needs of the current Kazakh state. In the post-Soviet sphere, the Kazakh government has felt the need to present itself as the legitimate inheritor of the relatively well-developed Eurasian civilization which was concentrated in the hands of the Khans in the 15 th – 17 th centuries. Incorporated in this new view is a discussion of the period of the inclusion into the Russian Empire which contradicts the thesis formed in the 1950’s which characterizes this inclusion as voluntary. Post Soviet Kazakhstan scholars use the term “colonization” which is viewed as the mechanism of destruction of traditional forms of government, culture, and traditional nomadic society. The high point of modern Kazakh historiography is manifested in the attention paid to popular movements in steppe territories in the 19 th century. The author believes that the attention now given to the national history of the Republic of Kazakhstan is based on the need to refute great-Russian imperial historiography and Soviet internationalism in a push to revive an independent nation.
Основной Вопрос Казаковедения: Российская Историография В Поисках “Древнего” Казачества
Authors: Маркедонов Сергей
Published: October 2015

SUMMARY:
One of the key disputed issues in Cossack history revolves around the origins of the Cossacks. Historically, Cossack self-understanding has shifted as the Cossacks’ social, political, and cultural situation changed. Prior to their incorporation into the structures of the Russian Empire, the Don Cossacks credited their own founding to a territorial grant issued by Ivan the Terrible, the arrival of fugitives from Russia, and an influx of female prisoners from the Ottoman Empire. This founding story was utilized by the Cossacks to argue their right to freely associate with the Muscovite Tsars. It also contributed to the vision of the Cossack land as a place of freedom, a view shared by Russian peasants, revolutionaries, and White guards alike. Cossack views of their past changed as the Russian state turned the Cossacks into a closed military caste and an instrument of state policy. Beginning in the 18th century, the Don Cossacks extended their supposed origins back into history well beyond the 16th century, thus distancing themselves from the rest of Russia. Many Cossack authors invoked a Cossack “national feeling” during the turmoil of the revolution and the Civil War. The neo-Cossack movement in the Russian south that emerged in the late 1980s stresses the so-called “genocide” of the Cossacks, allegedly pursued by Jews and their representatives in the Bolshevik leadership. At the same time, neo-Cossack leaders often utilize the “ancient” version of Cossack origins not shared by Cossacks elsewhere in Russia. The author reviews the two versions (linked to migration and indigenous) of the Cossack origins in historiography, focusing on the issues pertaining to “the Russian reconquista” of the Don region, ancient ethnic components in the origins of the Cossacks, and émigré visions of a separate Cossack “people” as well as on Soviet interpretations of Cossack history.
Babi Yar and the Struggle for Memory, 1944–2004
Authors: Mankoff Jeff
Published: October 2015

SUMMARY:
Статья анализирует трансформацию Бабьего Яра (БЯ) в “место памяти”. Джефф Манкофф начинает свой анализ с ранних этапов складывания контрпамяти о БЯ, опровергавшей и корректировавшей официальный советский нарратив. В контрпамяти о БЯ советские евреи, маргинализированные в официальном советском дискурсе войны и Холокоста, обрели некую основу для поддержания свой коллективной идентичности. При этом автор обращает внимание на тот факт, что на фоне отрицания режимом права евреев на коллективный голос и репрезентацию ключевую роль в становлении контрпамяти вокруг БЯ играли представители нееврейской интеллигенции, такие как Е. Евтушенко и Д. Шостакович. В статье рассматривается созданный ими совместно с другими нееврейскими и еврейскими интеллектуалами и представителями общественности “коллективный мастер-нарратив”, представлявший собой систему текстов и ритуалов коммеморации. Он стал основой общественной (прежде всего, еврейской национальной) мобилизации вокруг памяти о БЯ в 1970–80-е гг.

С конца 1980-х гг., т.е. с концом монополии советской памяти, контрпамять о БЯ изменила свой характер. Если ранее она выражалась в унифицированном мастер-нарративе, противопоставленном официальной памяти, теперь стали формироваться множественные альтернативные версии БЯ как “места памяти” (так, среди самих евреев существуют разногласия по вопросу об адекватных формах коммеморации и репрезентации как самой трагедии БЯ, так и других эпизодов своего прошлого на этой земле). Вокруг БЯ стали создаваться новые памятники, каждый из которых выражает некую версию этого “места памяти”. Часть из них интерпретируется представителями еврейской общественности как новые попытки апроприировать еврейские страдания. Таким образом, с исчезновением оппозиции официальной и контрпамяти, БЯ стал спорным культурным символом, включенным в различные актуальные сегодня проекты идентичности.
Конструирование Мифа о Гражданской Войне и Особенности Коллективного Забывания на Урале в 1917–1922 гг.
Authors: Нарский Игорь
Published: October 2015

SUMMARY:
The author explores ways in which collective memory of the Russian civil war was constructed. In the early 1920s the Soviet state appealed to new images of the past, which later became an inalienable part of the political rhetoric. This appeal was based on the myth of the civil war and revolution as a universal instrument of mass mobilization, regime consolidation, and of manipulation of collective memory and identity. New historical images were translated to the masses through celebrations, street re-naming, recollection campaigns, as well as through a conscious falsification. As a result, a new “mnemo-landscape” emerged. According to the author, mythologizing the past was not exclusively the business of the state, it found a response among the masses and became part of the popular survival technique. The masses utilized the new myths and standards of political rhetoric in their ideological opposition to the state.
“Национализация” Украинского Казачества в XVII–XVIII вв.
Authors: Плохий Сергей
Published: October 2015

SUMMARY:
This essay discusses the construction of early modern political, cultural, and national identity in Ukraine. It begins with a review of 16 th -century accounts that did not clearly define the ethnic or religious identity of the Cossacks. This is followed by a discussion of the attempts of various groups (representatives of the Ukrainian Orthodox hierarchy or Polish elite) to claim Cossackdom as part of their political, religious, or national space. If the Pereiaslav Agreement (1654) laid the foundations of a Little Russian Cossack identity, the Union of Hadiach (1658) may be regarded as the basis for the view of the Cossack-led Ruthenian nation as an equal partner in the Polish-Lithuanian Commonwealth. The Poltava debacle (1709) put an end to the formation of a distinct Cossack-based national identity in the Hetmanate.
Post-Colonialism and Ukrainian History
Authors: Velychenko Stephen
Published: October 2015

SUMMARY:
Стэфен Велыченко анализирует основные идеи и методологические положения постколониализма, и прежде всего – постколониальное литературоведение, которое претендует на роль социальной теории. Терминологию этого влиятельного направления, а также методологию литературоведческой критики он называет сомнительной и неточной. Велыченко настаивает, что нет никаких оснований для изучения истории украинской политической и экономической зависимости с позиций постколониальной теории. Хотя формально Украина может быть сопоставлена со странами “третьего мира”, т.е. с бывшими колониями, гораздо больше оснований сравнивать ее с такими некогда зависимыми европейскими странами, как Ирландия и Греция. Любое государство на том или ином этапе своей истории было зависимым, что совершенно не предполагает применения постколониального метода анализа и интерпретации прошлого этих стран. Данные тезисы Велыченко развивает применительно к Украине и постсоветскому пространству в целом.
Борьба За “Место Памяти” в Империи: История Памятника Основателю Выборга Торгильсу Кнутссону
Authors: Кудрявцева Любовь
Published: October 2015

SUMMARY:
The archival publication presents documents produced by the Finland Senate, the administrative offices of the Grand Duchy of Finland, P. A. Stolypin, as well as selections of articles from the newspapers Novoe Vremia and Finliandskaia gazeta . All these documents concern the local initiative of citizens of Vyborg to construct a monument to Tyrgils Knutsson, the Swedish noble and the founder of the city. The documents proposing the construction of the monument stressed Knutsson’s role as the Christener of Finland, while local Russian press opposed the monument on the grounds of Swedish-Russian historical conflicts in the area. The introduction to the archival publication by L. Kudriavtseva explores the history of the monument, debates surrounding its construction in 1908, as well as today’s situation around it. The introduction provides historical background on Knutsson, as well as places the monument itself in the contemporary stylistic and aesthetic context.