This article analyzes how approaches and methods of the anthropology of time are applied to the Iberian and Latin-American university studies. Though Hispanic scholars interpreted and discussed European and North-American works on anthropology of time, they came to analysis of temporal structures and age rates of academic life basing on regional and national traditions of university studies. The article observes both peculiarity of approaches in various research centers (e.g. Spanish research group «History of culture and universities Alsonso IX» and Mexican Institute of university and education studies) and problems of discipline organization of studies (i.e. separation of history of universities and history of education). University time is studied in bound of various research guidelines, i.e. history of symbolic spatial and temporal categories, history of everyday practices and their regulation, history of rituals. Hispanic sholars analyze problem of academic age-ing in prosopographic studies and in investigations dedicated to collective memory and gaps of continuity. Methods of anthropology of time are also applied to the research of the youth as constructed subject of university social and political life.
The article is the author’s contribution to the discussion of contemporary Russian philosophers, historians and social anthropologists on the role of Russia in the mental construction of Orient as the Other by different European intellectuals and politicians at the age of colonial empires. He examines the history of the European concepts of Orient (Orientalism), transfers of colonial knowledge between Russia and other colonial empires, the relationship between Orientology and and Orientalism in Russia, the influence of these metanarratives on Russia’s own Orientalizing Orient. The focus is made on intellectual consequences of deconstruction of Orientalist discourse in postcolonial (and post-Soviet) studies In addition, the author analyzes contemporary heuristic potential of this concept, as well as today’s academic discussion on the relationship of Orientalism and Oriental studies.
At the turn of the 19th‐20th centuries, scientists focused on the procedure of the dissertation research’s scientific verifications and created expert forms for assessing the quality of scientific work. One of these procedural forms became peer review. During this period, it acquired the status of a compulsory appraisal examination of the quality of scientific works, and, at the same time, it became a certain ritual practice. Gradually, reviews of dissertations began to encompass accepted scientific criteria, principles of the structure of scientific work. In this article, the author identifies the process of registration of these academic conventions and answers the question what is scientific research in the opinion of scientists at the turn of the 19th‐20th centuries. For this goal a discursive analysis was carried out of the reviews for dissertations during the period. Until now, researchers have rarely formulated such tasks in relation to documents on the conferment of academic ranks of the second half of the 19th–early 20th centuries. The research shows that in the process of reviewing and evaluating the text, scientists broadcast the ongoing processes of formulating academic norms and the meaning of basic research principles.
The article focuses on women’s biographies and the narratives of Soviet women-Ostarbeiter. The experience of deportation, forced labor and everyday life is reconstructed on the basis of biographical interviews with women deported for forced labor from the occupied territories, women in military service who were taken prisoner, as well as women who were forced to work during the occupation. The subject of verbalization in the collection of interviews is the pre-war period, the forced labor of children and women at work and in the countryside, silent stories of sexuality, the nature of communication and emotions in the labor camp, the dilemmas of survival in the occupation, stigmatization of Ostarbeiters at home upon the return. The article describes the typology of the reconstructed biographical strategies of the Ostarbeiter women with the help of which they tried to normalize their life path and the narrative ways of verbalizing it.
The article is devoted to military service of K.P. von Kaufman, famous Russian statesman of the second half of the 19th century, during the first stage of his career in 1840s–1850s. This period of his biography had not been studied in details until now. Meanwhile, just during his service in the Caucasus and participation in the Crimean War, Kaufman gained his first experience of relations with oriental peoples and states as the soldier and diplomat. That experience was very important for him later, when he had became a Governor-General of Turkestan Region (1867–1882). Valuable source of information on the “Caucasian” period of life and activity of K.P. von Kaufman are the memoirs of his contemporaries who served with him. In contrast to official documents (such as orders, service records, etc.) these notes contains details on Kaufman’s service, and much information about his talents and abilities, the personal features reflected during his “conquer and organization” of Turkestan.
Article provides arguments that the Byzantine-Orthodox tradition, taken over by Old Russia, entered in a conflict with the “ethnic” definition of “Russianness”; a hypothesis has been set, that in this respect Russia’s (and Byzantium’s) experience differed substantially from the experience of “Latin” Europe.
The author of the article analyzes conditions of formation and process of designing of language for the Russian Art Studies at the end of XVIII – the first third of the XIX century. By means of this language of an assessment and the description idea of specifics of national (Russian) art was created in the XIX century. Still in research literature the main source of art criticism concepts was revealed in French-language letters of D.A. Golitsyn devoted to the Parisian exhibitions and modern works of art. These messages were studied in the Russian Academy of Arts and used for creation of textbooks according to the theory of art. In given article process of enrichment of this apprehended language by concepts of the German romanticism (Gothold Lessing and Johann Joachim Winckelmann), and also medico-topographical researches of the Russian Empire is analyzed. These two sources allowed the founder of the first art criticism magazine V. Grigorovich to formulate orders to artists on national subject, to form culture of vision of the audience and to prove existence in "the world of art" of "the Russian school".
This article presents an attempt to analyze some of medico-biological arguments in the descriptions of the urban life in the 18th- and the early 19th-century Russian Empire based on the travelogues of Prussian physician J.J. Lerche and British naturalist E.D. Clarke. The choice of such perusal optics of the travel literature is led by attention to the consequences of medicalization processes, which took place in European countries of the Enlightenment. Being based on the examples of urban space descriptions made by naturalists, the author reveals how medical and biological ideas together with political and social conceptions formed a way of imperial development representation and identification of opportunities for territorial and cultural transformations of the country. Thus, as a physician in Russian service, Lerche explored the natural characteristics of territories visited that allowed him to pay attention to closeness of little-known environment of Caspian towns to the Eastern landscapes as well as to conclude the potential to overcome local diseases and to acclimatize here for newcomers. Well-educated Clarke travelling as a tutor used the observations over the natural, sanitary and hygienic conditions of Moscovites’ life to establish the invariability of “barbarian” and “slave” conditions of Russians as well as their inherent “talent of imitation”.
The article traces the evolution of age criteria applied by the Soviet Academy of Sciences and the Moscow State University in their personnel policy during the post-war decades. Drawing on documents deposited in the Archives of the Academy of Sciences and in the Central State-own Archives of the City of Moscow, the study shows that these criteria changed significantly over time. In the late 1940s and throughout the 1950s, there appears to have been no articulated preference in terms of age, but high importance was attached to scholars’ ‘experience’ which was associated with ‘old generation.’ Those belonging to the younger generation were mostly treated as minors of sorts who had to be ‘brought up’ even if they were post-graduate students in their twenties or even thirties. Gradually, from the early 1960s on, organizational forms were introduced that made it possible to more fully use the intellectual potential of ‘young scholars’ without changing their place in the personnel hierarchy: the so-called “young scholars’ councils”, “young scholars’ competitions”, and “creative youth groups”. In the second half of the 1980s, after ‘rejuvenation’ in the party and state apparatus was proclaimed, the personnel policy of the Academy of Sciences changed, adopting the notions of "aging" (as a synonym for "obsolescence") and "rejuvenation". As part of the reform of the Academy of Sciences, it was prescribed annually to recruit a certain percentage of "young specialists" in order to "address new and topical issues", whereas scholars who had passed a certain age line were to be fired. From now on, it was no longer ‘experience’ but ‘youth’ that was expected to provide for better performance of Soviet academia.
The article focuses on the project of local administration known as the ‘governor program’ of Alexander I. It was implemented in the interior provinces of the Russian Empire in 1819. The project intended to unify the system of governorgeneral mediation, and it was dismantled at the start of Nicholas I’s rule. Using the fundamental idea of the project, the Emperor wanted to re-organize administration of Russian governorates. The study of Governors’ documentation (1828, 1837, 1842, 1853), its contents, and gendarme’s reports allows us to reconstruct the imperial regional policy, based on the specificity of administrating separate regions of the Russian Empire.
The article is devoted to the problem of using memories on the tragedy of Alexander Becovich-Cherkasskiy expedition (1717) in relations between the Russian Empire and Khivan Khanate in the 18th–19th century. The author analyses the ways of using the motive of expedition death to make decisions on different issues of the Russian-Khivan relations and Russian policy in Central Asia. Russian politicians and diplomats, military leaders and merchants remembered the expedition death and referred to A. Bekovich experience. For a long time reminiscence of the expedition was saved in Khiva, and its rulers were trying to make amends to for the Russian authorities (fearing the revenge) or, on the contrary, used it as instrument of pressure on Russian diplomats. To a certain extent the motive of A. Bekovich death was also used by other Central Asian states which tried to influence the Russian-Khivan relations. The author concludes that a memory on A. Bekovich expedition in the second half of the 19th century was an effective instrument to form specific directions of the Russian policy in Central Asia.
In 2017 the second edition of the monograph of the historian A.V. Ganin “Everyday Life of the General Staff Officers under Lenin and Trotsky” was published. This book is the result of the long standing research done by Ganin. The book was highly appreciated by specialists. The proposed review gives an analysis of the positive aspects and weak points of the monograph. The research of Ganin is based on a variety of sources from Russian and foreign archives. The author analyzes a choice of the conflict side that the General Staff officers had to make, their service and everyday life. He also pays attention to opponents of the General Staff officers in the red camp, and the system of officers training formed by Bolsheviks. This book contains the most reasonable evaluations of the role of General Staff officers in the Civil War in Russia presented in modern historiography. The author seeks to find multifactor explanations for the choice and fate of General Staff officers in the Civil War. However, the book contains some weak points. In particular, the review remarks on an unconvincing appeal to the patriotic motives for officers to enter the Red Army, controversial statements on good recordkeeping of the Reds and the absence of a political position of S.S. Kamenev. Among the weak points there are indicated also the unresolved issue of the “everyday life” concept, sometimes too extended quotations from sources and unsatisfying references list.