Institution: European University at St. Petersburg, Department of History




Скачать 65.65 Kb.
НазваниеInstitution: European University at St. Petersburg, Department of History
Дата публикации02.09.2013
Размер65.65 Kb.
ТипДокументы
uchebilka.ru > История > Документы
*Imperial Legacies in Current Russian Politics*?

Institution: European University at St. Petersburg, Department of History

Course (graduate, optional):

The Russian Empire’s Borderlands: State, Nationalism and Religion 

Lecturer: Mikhail Dolbilov

14 weeks, 56 hours – lectures and seminars

The aim of this course is to discuss the dynamic and uninterrupted processes of the empire building under the Romanov dynasty’s rule from Peter the Great to the First World War within the general problem of multiethnic and multiconfessional composition of the Russian empire. Formative of the course is the constructivist urge to differentiate between the political, cultural and ideological frameworks of the Russian imperial state and those of a nation-state and to show a shifting character of the empire’s center–periphery balance.

More specifically, the course aims to:

- highlight the key and, paradoxically, central place of the imperial borderlands in political, administrative, spatial and representational structures of the empire;

- analyze the role of borderlands as a leading laboratory of imperial statesmanship, experimental sites for reform and, most of all, arenas of the bitter contests between competing national projects;

- reconstruct various interactions between the state policies of assimilation and acculturation, the evolution of loyalty and allegiance patterns, and the shaping of ethno-cultural, ethno-confessional and national identities under the imperial rule;

- highlight both alliance and tension between the imperial state and the Russian nationalism in its secular and religious (based on the Russian Greek Orthodoxy) versions;

- offer several glimpses of the comparative analysis of imperial institutions, policies, and mentalities, as well as inter-imperial influences;

- give a notion of interdisciplinary (history, ethnology, cultural and nationalism studies, anthropology of religion) examination of political processes in the empire.

The course does not claim to elaborate a detailed, local-focused history of each of the selected borderlands. Rather, it presents the situational approach to the borderlands as a window on empire-wide issues, a nexus of broader problems of policy-making and administration. In this sense, the “borderland” emerges also as an analytical tool of understanding the peculiarities of empire and empireness. 

Learning outcomes:

By the end of this course, students should be able to:

- critically assess contemporary booming literature on empires, distinguishing methodologically valid works;

- apply interpretive and discriminating skills by analyzing different types of primary sources – analytical memoranda by imperial administrators, private correspondence of national activists etc. – representative of clashing “truths” and ideologies about a certain national problem;

- discern and criticize persistent (especially in the post-Soviet states) elements of the nation-centered and teleological history narrative depicting pre-nationalist phenomena through the prism of a later or today’s nation(s);

- develop a culture of impartial, tolerant and (self-)critical thinking about national and religious problems from the distant and not so much distant past. 
 

In the curriculum of the EU’s Department of History, this course corresponds with the faculty’s interest in the comparative approaches in studying the Russian past as well as fresh trends in the political and cultural history. The course contributes to common efforts to incorporate the latest international history-writing achievements into the graduate curriculum. 

The course consists of 14 lectures and 14 seminars combined with other forms of group work and individual presentations. Both lectures and seminars are distributed evenly between the weekly topics. As a rule, the lecture comes first, structuring and setting the tone for the whole discussion, systematically presenting the most influential, original or thought-provoking scholars’ viewpoints, arguments and concepts, problematizing what seems to be commonplaces of historical knowledge and alerting students to an echo of the nationalistic vocabulary and sentiments even in professional history writing about the subject in question.

Seminar discussions are to concentrate on mandatory readings of the week and engage students in closer examination of particular subject matters, for example polemical pieces representing competing methodologies and approaches. Such method as student debate is applied to promote critical reflection on the themes overloaded with implications of exclusive nation-building projects contesting.  

Assessment:

Seminar participation and presentation: 25 % of the final grade. Students are expected to be present at all lectures and seminars and share, in a creative and systematic way, their thoughts and remarks on the mandatory readings. One special seminar presentation is required in which the student offers the results of an in-depth individual analysis of an assigned reading or set of readings.

Midterm exam: 25 %. The in-class exam consists of five short-answer questions, concerning the material lectured and discussed in the first part of the course, and one longer-essay question.

Final essay (15 to 20 pages long, with a bibliography no less than 10 items): 50 %. The essay can address a particular history case – a bureaucratic memoranda, a consequential newspaper article, a nationalist manifestation etc. – that has been successively discussed by a range of historians over a long period of time. Placing such a case in the context of broader present-day discussions on empire and nationalism, the essay-writer in a concise fashion traces and explains meaningful changes in understanding general phenomena represented by the case. Another option is to discuss a case of this or that structural issue (e.g. the triangle “imperial authorities – a ‘strong’ non-Russian minority elite – a majority of lower-class population officially qualified by the state as Russian”) common to several borderland regions of the empire but embodied in a variety of constellations of ethnic groups, confessions and individual actors. The essay-writer should summarize the respective arguments of recent studies and assess the degree of applicability of the conclusions specifically concerning a single region to a better contextualization of imperial policies toward others.

Students should make effective use of the secondary literature in at least two languages – Russian and English, critically reflect on, and choose between, diverging schools and approaches and be grounding their own standpoint always having in mind a variety of perspectives on this subject by different historical actors.

Essay draft proposals are to be submitted to the instructor before the end of the 10th week and are to be discussed in the classroom during the 12th, 13th and 14th weeks. 

Course content and readings 

Week 1. The Russian Empire: Dynamics of Territorial Expansion and Change in Ethnic and Confessional Composition 

Theories and definitions of empire. Maritime and contiguous/land-based empires – is this analytical opposition still applicable to understanding the Russian empire? Empire: essence and process; empire and empireness/empirehood. Self-descriptions of empire. The problem of the Russian empire’s “birth”. Driving forces behind the Russian empire’s geopolitics; core area and frontiers; “client states and societies”; the issue of intentionality of the imperial expansion (the question of “grand strategy”). When did the Russian empire become really multiethnic and multiconfessional? Ethnicity and confession – their intermingling in the empire. 

LeDonne, John, ^ The Grand Strategy of the Russian Empire, 1650-1831 (Oxford&NY: Oxford University Press, 2004), 3-12, 15-38, 61-81.

Rieber, Alfred, “Struggle over the Borderlands,” in Starr, F.S., ed. The Legacy of History in Russsia and the New States of Eurasia (NY&London, 1994), 61-89.

Beissinger, Mark, “Situating Empire”

&

idem. Переосмысление империи после распада Советского Союза // Ab Imperio. 2005. No. 3. С. 89-95, 35-88.

Миллер А. История Российской империи в поисках масштаба и парадигмы // Миллер А. Империя Романовых и национализм: Эссе по методологии исторического исследования. М., 2006. С. 13-53.

Recommended: Hosking, Geoffrey, Russia: People and Empire, 1552-1917 (Cambridge, 1997), 3-41.

Recommended: LeDonne, John, The Russian Empire and the World, 1700-1917. The Geopolitics of Expansion and Containment (Oxford&NY: Oxford University Press, 1997), 1-20.

Recommended: Becker, Seymour, “Russia and the Concept of Empire”, Ab Imperio no. 3-4 (2001), 329-342. 
 

Weeks 2-3. Imperial Patterns of Authority and Loyalty. Administration of the Imperial Borderlands. Empire as a “Confessional State” 

Why borderlands? The role of borderlands in the imperial elite’s formation and practices of governance. What was being a privileged subject of the emperor like? Cooptation of local elites into the imperial nobility. Indirect rule and bureaucratic unification. Administration of borderlands; viceroys (namestniki), governors general, their relationship to the offices of emperor and minister. Imperial state and faith; confessions as a kind of imperial corporations; clergies and spiritual authorities as state-recognized elites and extensions of imperial administration. Limits and an aspiritual character of the empire’s religious tolerance. 

Lieven, Dominic, ^ Empire. The Russian Empire and Its Rivals (London: John Murray, 2000), 201-230, 262-287.

Velychenko, Stephen, “Identities, Loyalties and Service in Imperial Russia. Who Administered the Borderlands?” Russian Review 54: 2 (1995), 188-208.

Crews, Robert, “Empire and the Confessional State: Islam and Religious Politics in Nineteenth-Century Russia,” American Historical Review 108: 1 (2003), 50-67.

Каппелер А. Россия – многонациональная империя. Возникновение, история, распад. М., 2000. C. 86-123.

Recommended: Мацузато К. Генерал-губернаторства в Российской империи: От этнического к пространственному подходу // Новая имперская история постсоветского пространства / Сост., ред. И.В. Герасимов и др. Казань, 2004. С. 427-458. 

Week 4. Elite-Based Mode of Governing: The Baltic Region and the Grand Duchy of Finland

Annexation of Livland, Estland, Kurland and Finland; the formation of the Grand Duchy of Finland in the context of geopolitics and domestic policies. Russian aristocratic clans as agents of the imperial order and the particularistic regime of the Baltic administration in the 18th century. Attempts of constitutional reforms under Alexander I and the Grand Duchy’s legal status within the empire. Emergence of nationalistic sentiments in Finland; early nationalists as beneficiaries of the populist trends in imperial policies. Tensions between imperial state and local aristocratic elites in the Baltics in the age of nationalism; Latvian and Estonian projects of nation-building and Lutheran church’s contribution to them. Political confrontation in the Grand Duchy in late 19th and early 20th centuries. Imperial regime of borderland particularism as an umbrella for indigenous nation-building processes. 

Thaden, Edward, Russia’s Western Borderlands, 1710-1870 (Princeton, 1984), 5-31, 81-113, 201-230.

LeDonne, John, “Frontier Governors General 1772-1825. I. The Western Frontier,” Jahrbücher für Geschichte Osteuropas no. 1 (1999), 56-81.

Андреева Н.С. Прибалтийские губернии в административной системе Российской империи начала ХХ в. // Пространство власти: Исторический опыт России и вызовы современности / Ред. Б.В. Ананьич, С.И. Барзилов. М., 2001. С. 217-234.

Новикова И.Н. Особое государство или провинция империи: проблема государственно-правового статуса Финляндии в российско-финляндских отношениях XIX века // Пространство власти: Исторический опыт России и вызовы современности / Ред. Б.В. Ананьич, С.И. Барзилов. М., 2001. С. 264-287.

Recommended: Whelan, Heide, Adapting to Modernity. Family, Caste and Capitalism among the Baltic German Nobility (Böhlau Verlag: Köln, 1999), 209-231. 
 

Week 5. The Partitions of the Polish-Lithuanian Commonwealth (Rzeczpospolita) and the Emergence of a Polish-influenced Periphery within the Empire 

The system of Russian protectorate over the Rzeczpospolita since Peter the Great. The “Polish question” and its complex ties to diplomatic and military issues in Eastern and Central Europe in mid-18th century. Was the “partitioning” solution predetermined by the Russian imperial priorities under Catherine II? Benefits and disadvantages of partitions of the Rzeczpospolita to the Russian empire; the problem of ratio between territory and the empire’s administrative and assimilatory potential. Ideological legitimization of partitions. Napoleonic wars and the formation of the Kingdom of Poland; its Constitutional Charter of 1815. A “Polish empire” emerging within the Russian empire as a consequence of the “indirect rule” regime. 

Wandycz, Piotr, The Lands of Partitioned Poland, 1795-1918 (Seattle and London: University of Washington Press, 1984), 3-42.

Западные окраины Российской империи / Ред. М. Долбилов, А. Миллер. М., 2006. С. 35-80.

Стегний П.В. Разделы Польши и дипломатия Екатерины II. 1772. 1793. 1795. М., 2002. С. 129-176, 258-337, 308-405, 583-595, 609-619.

Recommended: Plokhy, Serhii, The Origins of the Slavic Nations: Premodern Identities in Russia, Ukraine, and Belarus (Cambridge University Press, 2006), 299-353. 

Weeks 6-7. Nationalism and Empire: the 1830 and 1863 Insurrections on the Western Periphery and New Meanings of Russification

The problem of conceptualization: The November (1830) and January (1863) insurrections – both Polish and non-Polish. The alliance between the imperial authorities and Polonophone elites undermined and broken down. Insurrections as a powerful factor behind the Romanov dynasty’s “nationalization”. The 1861 abolition of serfdom and the rise of nationalist thinking in Russia: a nationalizing effect of the “Great Reforms” under Alexander II. The imperial elite’s turn to populism: discourse and administrative practice; the myth of peasantry as the repository of Russianness on the Western periphery. Imperial approaches to shaping ethnic and confessional identities; the differentiation between the Kindgom of Poland and the Western region (Zapadnyi krai) based on how the territory of the Russian nation was imagined. The clash between Orthodoxy and Roman Catholicism; anti-Polish and anti-Catholic phobias in Russia. Impact of the empire’s de-Polonizing policies on the “third” nation-building projects in the region: Ukrainians, Belarusians, Lithuanians. The “Polish question” as a shared experience of the Romanovs, Habsburgs and Hohenzollerns and part of the regulative mechanism of their interrelationship. 

Weeks, Theodore, ^ Nation and State in Late Imperial Russia. Nationalism and Russification on the Western Frontier, 1863-1914 (DeKalb: Northern Illinois University Press, 1996), 3-18, 44-109.

Maiorova, Olga, “War as Peace: The Trope of War in Russian Nationalist Discourse during the Polish Uprising of 1863,” Kritika: Explorations in Russian and Eurasian History 6: 3 (2005), 501-534.

Миллер А. Русификация или русификации? // Миллер А. Империя Романовых и национализм: Эссе по методологии исторического исследования. М., 2006. С. 54-77.

Западные окраины Российской империи / Ред. М. Долбилов, А. Миллер. М., 2006. С. 96-176, 209-252.

Dolbilov, Mikhail, “Russian Nationalism and the Nineteenth-Century Policy of Russification in the Russian Empire’s Western Region,” in: Kimitaka Matsuzato, ed. Imperiology: From Empirical Knowledge to Discussing the Russian Empire (Sapporo: Slavic Research Center at Hokkaido University, 2007), 141-158.

(http://src-home.slav.hokudai.ac.jp/coe21/publish/no13_ses/07_dolbilov.pdf)

Глембоцкий Х. Александр Гильфердинг и славянофильские проекты изменения национально-культурной идентичности на западных окраинах Российской империи // Ab Imperio. 2005. No. 2. С. 135-166.

Горизонтов Л.Е. Парадоксы имперской политики. Поляки в России и русские в Польше (XIX - начало XX в.). М., 1999. С. 37-69, 100-153.

Staliunas, Darius, “Did the Government Seek to Russify Lithuanians and Poles in the Northwest Region after the Uprising of 1863-64?”, Kritika: Explorations in Russian and Eurasian History 5: 2 (2004), 273-289.

Recommended: Hosking, Geoffrey. Russia: People and Empire, 1552-1917 (Cambridge, 1997), 367-397.
^

Week 8. The “Ukrainian Question”: A Test for the Empire’s Assimilatory Potential


Prehistory of the “Ukrainian question” in the Russian empire; early Ruthenian/proto-Ukrainian identities, the legacy and memory of Cossackdom and the Hetmanate. The origins and evolution of the “tripartite Russian nation” narrative and conception. Ukrainian/Little Russian (malorossiiskii) identity as a local version of being Russian. “Ukrainophilism”. The “Ukrainian question” as discussed in the bureaucracy and society in the “Great Reforms” era; different projects of assimilation. The role of the 1863 and 1876 language prohibitions by the authorities in the shaping of modern Ukrainian self-identities. The Russian empire as a (relatively) poor assimilator. Historicizing the “Ukrainian question” as a model for the non-teleological paradigm of studying the Russian empire. 

Miller, Aleksei, ^ The Ukrainian Question. The Russian Empire and Nationalism in the 19th century (Budapest&NY: CEU Press, 2003), 1-30, 76-153.

Горизонтов Л.Е. “Большая русская нация” в имперской и национальной стратегии самодержавия // Пространство власти: Исторический опыт России и вызовы современности / Ред. Б.В. Ананьич, С.И. Барзилов. М., 2001. С. 129-150.

Миллер А.И. “Украинский вопрос” в политике властей и русском общественном мнении (вторая половина XIX в.). СПб, 2000. С. 8-50, 63-152, 173-181, 240-244.

Вульпиус Р. Языковая политика в Российской империи и украинский перевод Библии (1860-1906) // Ab Imperio. 2005. No. 2. С. 191-224.

Recommended: Kohut, Zenon, Russian Centralism and Ukrainian Autonomy: Imperial Absorption of the Hetmanate, 1760s-1830s (Cambridge, MA, 1988), 24-64, 191-236, 299-305.

Recommended: Plokhy, Serhii, The Origins of the Slavic Nations: Premodern Identities in Russia, Ukraine, and Belarus (Cambridge University Press, 2006), 203-249, 316-353. 

Week 9. Politics of Jewish Identities in the Russian Empire: Assimilation, Acculturation and Segregation 

Partitions of the Rzeczpospolita and the incorporation of Jews into the Russian empire. The Pale of Settlement. “Selective integration” as the predominant imperial approach to the “Jewish question”; Judaism in the hierarchy of the state-recognized confessions; state-sponsored education as a presumed means of Jewish acculturation to Russia. Segregationist trends in late 19th and early 20th centuries. Cultural origins of Russian Judeophopbia. Pogroms and the government’s attitude toward them. Judeophobia and modern antisemitism in imperial Russia. Interconnections between the “Jewish question” and other ethnoconfessional issues of the borderland agenda. 

Клиер Дж. Д. Россия собирает своих евреев. Происхождение еврейского вопроса в России: 1772-1825. М., 2000. С. 95-194.

Klier, John, Imperial Russia’s Jewish Question, 1855-1881 (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1995), 1-11, 102-143, 385-416.

Nathans, Benjamin, Beyond the Pale. The Jewish Encounter with Late Imperial Russia (Berkeley: University of California Press, 2002), 69-79, 231-239, 367-381.

Recommended: Натанс Б. Русско-еврейская встреча // Ab Imperio. 2003. № 4. С. 21-40.

Recommended: Клиер Дж. Д. Почему российские евреи не были Kaisertreu? // Ab Imperio. 2003. No. 4. С. 41-58. 
^

Week 10. Volga – Ural Region: an “Inner” Borderland


 

The Volga – Kama region as a multiethnic part of the imagined Russian “national territory”. Ways of integration from Ivan the Terrible to late 19th century. Orthodox missions in the context of the mission civilisatrice efforts. Changes in imperial attitudes toward Islam under Catherine II; the establishment of a “church for Islam”. The national knot of the region in the 19th century: imperial authorities and Russian nationalism vis-à-vis the Tatar nation-building potential. The “Il’minsky system”: Russian Orthodox mission in indigenous languages. Imperial criteria of Russian success in assimilating non-Russians. Fears of pan-Islamism and pan-Turkism on the eve of the 1917 revolution. 

Geraci, Robert, ^ Window on the East: National and Imperial Identities in Late Tsarist Russia (Cornell University Press: Ithaca, 2001), 15-115.

Werth, Paul, At the Margins of Orthodoxy: Mission, Governance, and Confessional Politics in Russia’s Volga – Kama Region, 1827-1905 (Cornell University Press: Ithaca, 2002), 124-146.

Crews, Robert, For Prophet and Tsar: Islam and Empire in Russia and Central Asia (Harvard University Press, 2006), 31-91.

Джераси Р. Этнические меньшинства, этнография и русская национальная идентичность перед лицом суда: Мултанское дело 1892-1896 гг. // Российская империя в зарубежной историографии. Работы последних лет: Антология. М., 2005.

Кэмпбелл Е. Мусульманский вопрос в России: история обсуждения проблемы // Исторические записки. № 4 (122). М., 2001. С. 132-157.

Recommended: Джераси Р. Культурная судьба империи под вопросом: мусульманский Восток в российской этнографии XIX в. // Новая имперская история постсоветского пространства / Сост., ред. И.В. Герасимов и др. Казань, 2004. С. 271-306.

Recommended: Geraci, Window on the East, 264-308.
^

Weeks 11-12. The Russian Version of Orientalism: Imperial Rule in the North Caucasus. Turkestan: One More Borderland or an Imperial Colony?


 

Gradual advancement of the Russian empire into the North Caucasus and Transcaucasus; the geopolitical role of the “Georgian pull”. Administrative, military and social practices of Russian adaptation to the Caucasus vs. discursive Orientalization of the Caucasian region and inhabitants. The Great “Caucasian War”. Russian Islamophobia in the Caucasus. Ethnoconfessional experiments of the last half of the 19th century: fostering cultural and linguistic nativism of North Caucasian peoples, attempts of Orthodox mission. Imperial state and ethnographic expertise. The long-lasting impact of the social and administrative reforms in the North Caucasus under Alexander II.

Imperial motives behind the annexation of Central Asia: geopolitics, symbolic prestige, economic prospects. The Turkestan governor-generalship: the empire’s region with the least share of Russians and Christians. Civilisation through secularization: the project of “ignoring Islam” and its eventual failure. Post-Enlightenment shifts in the imperial hierarchy of social reliability: new perspectives on nomadic and sedentary populations. Experiments with constructing modern ethnic identities. Anticipating the Soviets: imperial service in Turkestan as an invitation to pioneering social and cultural transformations.  

Jersild, Austin, Orientalism and Empire: North Caucasus Mountain Peoples and the Georgian Frontier, 1845–1917 (Montreal: McGill-Queen’s University Press, 2002), 3-58, 126-144.

                                             /    .  . .            ,  . .      .  ., 2007.  . 88-135, 155-184, 250-268.

         .                        :                  «       »        //                       .                     .       , 2000.  . 163-194.

Crews, Robert, For Prophet and Tsar: Islam and Empire in Russia and Central Asia (Harvard University Press, 2006), 241-349.

Brower, Daniel, Turkestan and the Fate of the Russian Empire (London: RoutledgeCurzon, 2003), 57-125.

Абашин С.Н. В.П. Наливкин: «…будет то, что неизбежно должно  
быть; и то, что неизбежно должно быть, уже не может не быть…».  
Кризис ориентализма  в Российской империи? //                 .                         :   .   .     , 2005.

Recommended:              . .                             :       ,      ,        .                                                         .  ., 2002. . 16-53, 98-174.

Recommended: Layton, Susan, Russian Literature and Empire: Conquest of the Caucasus from Pushkin to Tolstoy (Cambridge University Press, 1994), 175-211.

Recommended: Brower, Daniel and Layton, Susan, “Liberation through Captivity. Nikolai Shipov’s Adventures in the Imperial Borderlands,” Kritika: Explorations in Russian and Eurasian History 6: 2 (2005), 259-279.

Recommended: Khalid, Adeeb, The Politics of Muslim Cultural Reform: Jadidism in Central Asia (Berkeley: University of California Press, 1998), 45-79, 114-154. 

Week 13. Symbolic Geography of the Russian Empire 

Spatial imagination of imperial officials and Russian nationalists. Fluid distribution of symbolic roles between regions: the cases of Western region, Crimea, the Amur region (Far East). The imagined territory of the Russian nation as compared with the empire: exclusions within the empire, additions beyond its borders (Eastern Galicia).  

Miller, Aleksei, “The Empire and the Nation in the Imagination of Russian Nationalism,” in: Miller and Alfred J. Rieber, eds. ^ Imperial Rule (Budapest&New York: CEU Press, 2004), 9-26.

Bassin, Mark. Imperial Visions. Nationalist Imagination and Geographical Expansion in the Russian Far East, 1840-1865 (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1999), 45-57, 102-135, 139-173.

Зорин А. Эдем в Тавриде. «Крымский миф» в русской культуре 1780-1790-х годов // Зорин А. Кормя двуглавого орла… Литература и государственная идеология в России в последней трети XVIII – первой трети XIX в. М., 2001. С. 95-122.

Recommended: Ремнев А.В. Россия Дальнего Востока: Имперская география власти XIX – начала ХХ веков. Омск, 2004. C. 199-223, 439-469.

Recommended: Бассин М. Россия между Европой и Азией: Идеологическое конструирование географического пространства // Российская империя в зарубежной историографии. Работы последних лет: Антология. М., 2005.

Recommended: Schimmelpenninck van der Oye, David, Toward the Rising Sun: Russian Ideologies of Empire and the Path to War with Japan (DeKalb, Ill., 2001), 24-60. 
 

Week 14. The Russian Empire in World War I: Experimenting with Nationalism on the Eve of Collapse  

The “national card” in the Russian, Austrian and German military efforts. The Russian defeats in 1914-15 and appearance of a new vision of the empire’s Western periphery: the case of Poland. Debates about the post-war forms of Polish autonomy. The forced abolition of the Pale of Settlement and persecutions of Jewish population. Unexpected enemy aliens: the case of Russian Germans. Policies in occupied Eastern Galicia and Northern Bukovina: again imposing Russianness through Orthodoxy. New guises of Russian nationalism in political debates. Was the collapse of four contiguous empires inevitable in early 20th century? 

Lohr, Eric. ^ Nationalizing the Russian Empire. The Campaign against Enemy Aliens during World War I (Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press, 2003).

Gatrell, Peter. A Whole Empire Walking: Refugees in Russia during World War I (Bloomington: Indiana University Press, 1999), 1-30, 141-170.

Будницкий О.В. Российские евреи между белыми и красными. М., 2006. С. 125-169.

Хаген М. Великая война и искусственное усиление этнического самосознания в Российской империи // Россия и Первая мировая война. М., 1999. С. 385-406.

Recommended: Бахтурина А.Ю. Окраины Российской империи: государственное управление и национальная политика в годы Первой мировой войны (1914-1917 гг.). М., 2004. C. 52-63, 117-207.

Recommended: Fuller, William, The Foe Within: Fantasies of Treason and the End of Imperial Russia (Cornell UP, 2006).

Добавить документ в свой блог или на сайт

Похожие:

Institution: European University at St. Petersburg, Department of History iconInto university partnerships (великобритания)
Университеты-партнеры: University of East Anglia, University of Exeter, Newcastle University, Manchester University, Manchester Metropolitan...

Institution: European University at St. Petersburg, Department of History iconDepartment of education and science of ukraine dz „lugansk national...

Institution: European University at St. Petersburg, Department of History iconDepartment of education and science of ukraine dz „lugansk national...

Institution: European University at St. Petersburg, Department of History iconDepartment of education and science of ukraine dz „lugansk national...

Institution: European University at St. Petersburg, Department of History iconEuropean University
Европейский Университет является одной из ведущих бизнес школ в мире и имеет международную сеть кампусов, основные из которых расположены...

Institution: European University at St. Petersburg, Department of History iconПодборка режимов эффективного освещения, используемых в мировой практике...
Разработчики: Department of Animal Husbandry, University of Bristol, School of Veterinary Science, Landgford House Landgford. Bristol....

Institution: European University at St. Petersburg, Department of History iconЛетняя школа по немецкому и европейскому праву в Мюнхене Окончательный срок подачи заявок
Юридический факультет Университета им. Людвига Максимилиана в Мюнхене открывает интенсивный курс по немецкому и европейскому праву...

Institution: European University at St. Petersburg, Department of History iconName of the module: History of physics
Х century. Scientific revolution of end ХІХ – to beginning of ХХ centuries. Main directions and discoveries of modern physics. History...

Institution: European University at St. Petersburg, Department of History iconКурсы kfi kharkov Department: Fashion Management
Харькове – новый беспрецедентный проект! В течении четырех уикендов студенты Kiev Fashion Institute Kharkov department получают 12...

Institution: European University at St. Petersburg, Department of History iconCambridge Gardens Hastings College / University of Brighton /Bath University Страна
Школа: eac language school hastings (Гастингс ) 1,5 часа от Лондона, южное побережье

Вы можете разместить ссылку на наш сайт:
Школьные материалы


При копировании материала укажите ссылку © 2013
контакты
uchebilka.ru
Главная страница


<