ON THE CENTENNIAL OF THE RUSSIAN REVOLUTION OF 1917
ACHIEVEMENTS AND FAILURES
IN THE STUDY OF THE RUSSIAN REVOLUTION OF 1917
Irina M. Pushkareva
Institute of Russian History, Russian Academy of Sciences
In this analysis of domestic historiography of the 1917 Revolution in Russia, the author highlights the importance of mass popular protests in understanding the causes of this crucial event, while noting that this factor has been unreasonably neglected by Russian historians since the early 1990s. She argues that both the character of the revolution and the chances for a peaceful settlement of conflicts in Russian society depended on the policy of top state authorities, especially from 1916 forward.
1917–2017: LESSONS OF THE CENTURY FOR RUSSIA AND BEYOND
Konstantin N. Lobanov
I. D. Putilin Belgorod Institute of Law,
Ministry of Internal Affairs of the Russian Federation
For most Russians, the year 1917 is primarily connected with the centennial of the February Revolution and the subsequent October events. This is quite logical, as 1917 is justly considered a landmark in modern Russian history, after which both the country and the world could not return to their previous condition and instead followed a new trajectory of social development. Influenced by Russian revolutionary ideas and Russia’s subsequent modernization, many countries reformed their capitalist economies to create welfare states and abandoned authoritarianism and formal democracy, while turning to a more open and diversified system of power and government. They also curtailed their suppression of individual freedoms while giving citizens more opportunities for self-expression. These developments became possible due to a thorough reflection on the Russian experience and its creative interpretation in the economy, state government, and social interactions. The author addresses the following key questions in his article: did Russians themselves manage to reflect on this experience? In other words, did they learn from this experience? In analyzing the crucial events of 1917 and pointing to some later and contemporary parallels, he outlines his stance toward them.
FROM FEBRUARY TO OCTOBER:
A FEW WORDS ABOUT THE REVOLUTIONARY EVENTS OF 1917
Victoria M. Marasanova
P. G. Demidov Yaroslavl State University
This article deals with the revolutionary events in Russia in 1917. The author explores why a revolutionary situation developed in the country and how the democratic February Revolution soon was followed by the Bolshevik coup d’etat in October, paying special attention to interactions between the metropoles and the provinces. Marasanova concludes that the events in Petrograd determined the dynamics of the situation in Russia in 1917, while the province followed the city’s lead. Further, the disobedience of lower army ranks to their officers played a key part in the revolutions.
ABSOLUTISM AND ITS LIMITS.
THE MONARCHY AND THE NOBILITY IN EIGHTEENTH-CENTURY PRUSSIA
Dmitrii V. Sterkhov
N. I. Pirogov Russian National Research Medical University
This article contributes to the ongoing debate about absolutism. Its primary focus is the relationship between the Hohenzollern monarchs and the Prussian nobility in the eighteenth century in terms of absolutism theory. It considers three major factors that set limits on the absolutist intentions of Prussian kings, and identifies regionalism as one of the most important factors. Secondly, it addresses the Prussian military system, which guaranteed the Prussian nobility the leading position in society, while emphasizing that this cannot be viewed entirely as a compromise between the Prussian aristocracy and the crown. Thirdly, it notes that the Prussian nobility never lost its representative rights and privileges. The political and social activity of the Prussian Junkers was centered in minor representative organs such as standing commissions, committees, and credit institutions. While the Prussian example does not invalidate the theory of absolutism, it helps to redefine this concept for Prussian and, by extension, European history.
IMAGINING CHUVASH HISTORICAL TIME:
HISTORICAL CONTINUITIES AND INTELLECTUAL FAILURES
Maksym W. Kyrchanoff
Voronezh State University
The concept of historical time is a focal point in the imagination and invention of national history. Among nations without a tradition of independent statehood, historical time was actualized when these nations became independent actors in historical processes. Nationalists played a special role in inventing historical time in their struggle against more powerful opponents. Beginning in the interwar period, Chuvash nationalists formed their own unique Chuvash concept of historical time. Nationalist-inclined Chuvash intellectuals radically tried to separate Chuvash historical time from Russian collective representations. In contrast, during the latter half of the twentieth century, Chuvash Soviet intellectuals developed a loyal version of historical time integrated into the broader Soviet and Russian historical context. In the post-Soviet period, Chuvash intellectuals revived the earlier national idea of historical time from their interwar predecessors. The current intellectual community of historians in Chuvashia is fragmented into two groups, those who cultivate a national Chuvash version of historical time and those who endorse a pro-Russian version. On the one hand, the general uncertainty of Chuvash historical time has stimulated the rise of historical pessimism. On the other hand, the historical situation provided intellectuals with limited number of opportunities and options for political, social and cultural progress. Therefore, debates about historical time among Chuvash nationalists continue through the present day, while the general trajectories of collective representations about historical time remain unclear.
SCYTHIAN COMPLEXES OF THE BARROWS 5 AND 6 FROM THE «GARDEN» GROUP ON THE LEFT BANK OF THE LOWER DNIESTER
Vitalij S. Sinika,1,2 Sergei D. Lysenko,3 Nikolai P. Теlnov4
1 Scientific Laboratory “Archaeology,” T. G. Shevchenko Pridnestrovian State University
2 Scientific Laboratory of Historiography and Field Methods in Archaeology, Nizhnevartovsk State University
3 Department of Chalcolithic and Bronze Age, Institute of Archaeology, National Academy of Sciences of Ukraine
4 Department of Anсient and Medieval Archaeology, Institute of Cultural Heritage, Academy of Sciences of Moldova
Scythian culture represents one of the most intriguing archaeological phenomena of the early Iron Age in the northern Black Sea region. Burial monuments, or barrows, prevail among the archaeological evidence for Scythian material culture. Their excavation began more than two and a half centuries ago. There are currently more than 5,000 barrows that have been examined in this region. The authors analyze the evidence obtained during the excavation of barrows 5 and 6 from the “Garden” group near the Glinoe village in the Slobodzeia district on the left bank of the Lower Dniester in 2017. Both complexes date from the late fourth to early third centuries BC. These barrows, as well as neighboring ones in this and other cemeteries, demonstrate not only Thracian and Greek influence on the material culture of Scythians of the northwestern Black Sea region, but also the fact that Scythian steppe culture developed continually in the Dniester region throughout the fourth to second centuries BC.
A word to young scholars
MODERNITY, SPACE, AND MEMORY IN EAST GERMANY
Middle Tennessee State University
The author reviews Amnesiopolis: Modernity, Space, and Memory in East Germany (Oxford, 2016) by Eli Rubin.
THE INTERNATIONAL CONFERENCE
“BEYOND THE TRADITIONAL HISTORIOGRAPHY OF EDUCATION IN RUSSIA IN THE LATE SEVENTEENTH THROUGH THE EARLY NINTEENTH CENTURIES”
Zhanar Т. Bekmurzina
National Research University "Higher School of Economics"
NIKOLAI IVANOVICH KOSTOMAROV`S SCHOLARSHIP AS SEEN TWO HUNDRED YEARS AFTER HIS BIRTH (THE ACADEMIC SEMINAR IN KHARKIV)
Iuliia A. Kiseliova, Sergei I. Posokhov
V. N. Karazin Kharkiv National University