On the Origin of Russian Academic Degrees (First Half of the Nineteenth Century)
The authors examine historical circumstances which brought about the perception of an academic dissertation as a result of scholarly research and, simultaneously, as a means to advance a civil servant’s career. Unlike those dealing with universities’ socio-political history they are not exclusively interested in legal norms, defense statistics, and personal recollections. The reserachers are also looking to answer the following questions: in the first half of the 19th century, did the defense procedure serve as a form of academic assessment? Or was it just a way to establish an academic hierarchy and promote education? They also seek to understand how the status of a thesis changed over time and how a dissertation became more research-oriented.
History of classical philology and the reception of Greek and Roman antiquity in Moldova (Moldavia, Bessarabia).
The article deals with various historical narratives which can be used as a framework for the Russian-Polish relations during the long XIX century in contemporary historiography, first of all the Russian one. A special attention is paid to the Polish factor in the context of systematic elaboration of the history of Russian empire as well as the identities of the Russian-Polish frontier.
Leo Tolstoy and Max Weber on value neutrality of university research The problem of value neutrality of science is considered on the basis of works by Leo Tolstoy and Max Weber. In the first part of the article, the statements on the value neutrality of scientific knowledge and university teaching by Weber and Tolstoy are made explicit and analyzed in a comparative perspective. In the second part, the central problem of Tolstoy and Weber, that is, a rational choice of the value paradigm, is studied systematically. Differences in their assumptions and conclusions are shown. In the third part, a historical commentary to the context of Tolstoys and Webers works is given. The works are treated as episodes in a wider modern history of the value neutralization of the scientific knowledge and university teaching. The specifics of this process are tightly connected with the fundamental principles of the modern research university (the Humboldtian model of university).
The Revolution of 1905 forced the Russian autocracy to accept the convocation of the State Duma. After the Revolution's defeat, the Duma belonged to a new political system in which the Tsar conserved a very great power. The promulgation of the Law of March 8th 1906 imposed a significant restriction on the budgetary prerogatives of the Duma and allowed the Administration to maintain a real control over the financial field. In the facts, the political confrontation between tsarist power and liberal members of the Parliament did not make possible to engage the needed thorough reform of the structures and management practices of the Russian finances. This paper aims to clarify the stakes and reality of the changes as a result of the Revolution of 1905 and the formation of parliamentarism in the public finances development of the imperial Russia.
Word and Image invokes and honors the scholarly contributions of Gary Marker. Twenty scholars from Russia, the United Kingdom, Italy, Ukraine and the United States examine some of the main themes of Marker’s scholarship on Russia—literacy, education, and printing; gender and politics; the importance of visual sources for historical study; and the intersections of religious and political discourse in Imperial Russia. A biography of Marker, a survey of his scholarship, and a list of his publications complete the volume.
Contributors: Valerie Kivelson, Giovanna Brogi (University of Milan), Christine Ruane (University of Tulsa), Elena Smilianskaia (Higher School of Economics, Moscow), Daniela Steila (University of Turin), Nancy Kollmann (Stanford University), Daniel H. Kaiser (Grinnell College), Maria di Salvo (University of Milan), Cynthia Whittaker (City Univ. of New York), Simon Dixon (University of London), Evgenii Anisimov (St. Petersburg), Alexander Kamenskii (Higher School of Economics, Moscow), Janet Hartley (London School of Economics), Olga Kosheleva (Moscow State University), Maksim Yaremenko (Kyiv), Patrick O'Meara (University of Durham), Roger Bartlett (London), Joseph Bradley (University of Tulsa), Robert Weinberg (Swarthmore College)
Der Band schließt an die aktuelle Imperiumsforschung an und widmet sich dem neuzeitlichen Russland bis in die Gegenwart. Aus kulturwissenschaftlicher Perspektive werden an prägnanten Beispielen Integrationsstrategien untersucht, die die Macht des russischen Imperiums an dessen labilen Peripherien und auf internationaler Ebene sichern sollten. Im Fokus der Studien stehen dabei Symbolpolitiken, Kommunikations- und Erinnerungskulturen. Gleichzeitig wird gezeigt, inwiefern die russische/sowjetische Machtpolitik an ihre Grenzen stieß und welche Formen von Widerständigkeit sich herausbildeten.