Поморские промыслы на Шпицбергене в XVIII — нач. XIX в. Исследование. Документы.
The book is the first collection of documents in Russian historical science covering the practice of organizing navigation and developing the natural resources of the Spitsbergen archipelago in the 18th-early 20th centuries. XIX century. The Russian state and Pomor people are residents of the Russian North. The publication is preceded by a study that examines the most significant aspects of the topic, as well as various problems and approaches to them in domestic and foreign historiography.On the basis of a comprehensive analysis of the sources of different species and their cross-matching, the full picture of the development of Russian crafts in Spitsbergen in the 18th and the beginning of the 19th century was compiled, as far as possible. Archival documents first introduced into scientific circulation, as well as additional materials included in the annexes, will significantly expand the possibilities for further research on the history of the Russian presence in Spitsbergen and, more broadly, Russia's role in the development of the European part of the Arctic, will allow them to be introduced into the international context that is necessary for understanding the history of the development of this Arctic archipelago.
In Russia women in power is a rare phenomenon. However, the 17th century winessed a long rule of women. This article deals with such a phenomenon.
This article analyzes grass-root politics in the Russian Civil War, challenging the traditional assumption that the Bolsheviks with their program of radical revolutionary change enjoyed greater popularity than their White adversaries. On the example of the Northern region, it demonstrates that the local «counter-revolutionary» government commanded considerable sympathies of the provincial population. This popularity was based on the government's ability to supply the population of this non-agricultural province with imported grain, to provide military protection and arms for self-defense. Ultimately, the article strives to explain the outcome of the Civil War not by conflicting ideologies and policies, but by practical circumstances and local factors that on a grass-root level conditioned changing political loyalties.
Agli occhi di molti contemporanei e storici della Guerra civile russa il movimento bianco è stato un affare delle élites dei passati imperi che non avevano capito e accettato la rivoluzione. I bianchi desideravano il ritorno della Russia di un tempo. Ma è davvero andata così? Verso che cosa tendevano in realtà i governi bianchi? In che modo controllarono il territorio e mobilitarono i propri eserciti? Quale fu l’atteggiamento della popolazione nei confronti dei governi bianchi e delle unità di spedizione dell’Intesa che intervennero in loro sostegno? E perché gli abitanti delle regioni russe spesso combatterono insieme ai bianchi contro i bolscevichi? La ricerca di Liudmila G. Novikova, dedicata alla storia della Regione antibolscevica del nord, tenta di rispondere a queste domande: basata su materiali di archivio russi e stranieri, rivolge particolare attenzione ai paradossi politici del movimento bianco e alla lotta dei bianchi in provincia, che in misura significativa determinò il corso e le sorti della Guerra civile russa.
The paper examines social differences in the understanding of the concept of ‘friendship’ in late 18th – early 19th century Russia deployed in the unpublished correspondence of Count Aleksandr Vorontsov, a member of the social elite of the Catherinean Age, and Aleksei D´iakonov, an obscure official who was Vorontsov’s client. While letter exchange was a kind of freemasonic practice, and both correspondents were members of a Masonic lodge, Vorontsov used sentimentalist language and addressed his client as “friend,” trying to erase or at least obscure the social boundaries between them. Social equality, even as a rhetorical formula, was progressively becoming possible between an aristocrat and an educated commoner such as D´iakonov, and it unfolded in rhetorical terms. D´iakonov adopted vis-à-vis his patron an attitude that reflected their respective positions on the hierarchical ladder, thus conforming to the traditional behavior of a Russian official and avoiding Western (Masonic, or sentimentalist) rhetoric of equality.